Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The Studio Display shares a panel with the MSI MPG 271KRAW16


Worth noting that these (and the LG with the same panel) aren’t shipping yet.


Even the new one in this post?


Yes. That MSI monitor was unveiled at CES 2026, alongside several other monitors that use the same panel, such as the LG 27GM950-B.


That's pretty good. I think the sales of monitors have become slow overall, so now they can focus on higher-end stuff to make some money even if it's for niche products at first.

I just saw a brand new display for 70 bucks at a store the other day; the margins must be extremely low.


I just want to know who's naming these things, it's been like this forever.

Why can't it be something simple?


> Why can't it be something simple?

Because monitors aren't simple. There are dozens of axes along which they can be scaled.

They have resolution (1080p FHD, 1440p QHD, 4K, 5K, 6K, 8K), aspect ratio (16:9, 8:5, 4:3, 3:2, 21:9, 32:9), refresh rate (60 Hz, 75 Hz, 120 Hz, 144 Hz, 165 Hz, 240 Hz, 360 Hz, 480 Hz, 1 kHz, and of course adaptive refresh rate tech including G-Sync), colour quality (depth and accuracy), contrast ratios for HDR, panel technology (LCD-TN, LCD-IPS, LCD-VA, OLED, QD-OLED, WOLED, and now RGB stripe OLED), backlight technology (CCFL, edge-lit LED, miniLED, microLED), connectivity (HDMI/DP, USB-B, USB-C, DP alt mode, Thunderbolt, 3.5 mm, and KVMs).

It's very hard to stuff all this information in one neat model number.

On the consumer's part it makes sense to understand these features and what is necessary for one's use case, filter monitors by said features, and note down the model numbers that satisfy the requirements.


But they make it like this. They also have the power of simplifying their offers.


Simplifying their offerings for the sake of the model number doesn't make any sense. Simplifying their offerings for other reasons might make sense, but the companies themselves would be the best judge of whether or not it makes sense for them.


I feel like they do it deliberately, so that you can’t easily research their products and find if they are out of date. They can sell you a monitor from 2012 as if it’s brand new, because you have no idea what it is.


So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop as a $5000 premium display?


> So apple is just selling generic white labelled slop

There are only ~5 flat-panel manufacturers worldwide: AU Optronics, Innolux, LG Display, Samsung Display, Sharp Display, and recently BOE Display. Apple has to use one of these, even for its bespoke, notched, curved iPhone/iPad displays.

This new 5K 2304-zone panel was developed by LG Display, and is not 'generic white-labelled slop' by any means. It is an extremely good panel in its own right, probably the bleeding edge of LCD technology today achieving top-notch responsiveness, contrast, and colour depth and accuracy.

That MSI monitor will probably retail for ~£800 as will the Asus and LG equivalents, which is not a trivial amount for a monitor. Apple just marked it up 3×, as they are prone to do for anything.


The Apple monitor will likely have better speakers, and I'm not even sure the others will have microphones at all. Apple also does a better job with color accuracy/consistency, at least historically. There's still a sizeable markup, but it's not entirely for nothing.

Back in the day (~15 years ago), when 4K monitors were unheard of and even Apple's high-end displays were still 1440p, you could get a bottom-dollar monitor using one of their panels (e.g. Yamakasi Catleap Q270) for about a third of the price. However, it came with no amenities, a single connector (dual-link DVI only), a questionably legal power cable, and no built-in scaling. The vendors, presumably to prevent refunds, even asked for your graphics card model before selling it to you, because it wouldn't work with low-end cards. Oh, and there were very few in the U.S., so you were typically getting them shipped straight from abroad, customs duties and all.

We've definitely come a long way.


Apple monitors are one of those things that are absolutely worth buying on release, but every month after that they get a worse and worse value.

After a few years, the "cheap ones" have usually caught up, if you're willing to do the research.


I disagree, the software and excellent integration in the ecosystem has always differentiated Apple and even years later models from ASUS are still headaches when it comes to everything outside the panel. Its like when gamers used to compare Apple spec by spec (ie. CPU, RAM, Disk) and valued all the software they provide at $0.

These days they still value software at $0 but the specs have become quite competitive and many times exceed what the rest of the market offers.


Sure, all I'm pointing out is the prices don't go down - so that you might as well buy as soon as they're released and get the most value.

Whereas with their laptops and almost everything else you might as well wait if you can, next year's is gonna be better and/or cheaper.


there is another differences between Apple monitors vs the rest. - standard and peak brightness[1]. All of them are less bright, than Apple's monitors. I'd really wanna know why.

MSI - 1400 nits, LG - 1250 nits, Apple - 2000 nits. That's peak brightness, standard brightness isn't even mentioned, except for Apple one. Is it just cooling or something more?

[1] https://www.ipsmonitor.com/news/msis-mpg-271kraw16-is-a-firs...


Those are down to backlight technology, which (usually) is independent of the LCD panel itself. With LCDs, though, it's a fine line as extremely bright backlights can lead to bad bloom.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: