this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2026
11 points (92.3% liked)

Apple

20293 readers
222 users here now

Welcome

to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!

Rules:
  1. No NSFW Content
  2. No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
  3. No Ads / Spamming
    Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread

Lemmy Code of Conduct

Communities of Interest:

Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple

Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode

Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ElcaineVolta@kbin.melroy.org 13 points 4 weeks ago

paying a premium for less is very apple-coded

[–] ashx64@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I don't really mind. 90hz is my sweet spot. It feels smooth enough and I'm not unnecessarily taxing my hardware for comparatively little improvements.

The only valid complaint I see is that 120hz is a little more versatile because it divisible by 24 and 30, while 90hz is only divisible by 30. So not as good for content that runs at 24fps. But even then, I still don't mind, I don't notice any presentation issues.

[–] Romkslrqusz@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

unnecessarily taxing my hardware

What?

[–] WereCat@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

I think he meant that the Apple tax is higher for the HW if it had higher refresh rate

[–] ashx64@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

More frames = more GPU usage = more power usage = more noise (if you have a fan).

I'm just saying that 90hz is a sweet spot for me. Sure, I can feel that higher refresh rates are smoother, but 90hz is simply enough for me.