Why is Apple still sticking with 60Hz displays on iPhones?

It’s honestly hard to understand that Apple is still putting 60Hz displays on iPhones, especially when a $250 Xiaomi has a 120Hz display and feels way smoother than my new iPhone.

It seems like Apple is the only company still pretending that higher refresh rates are a ‘Pro’ feature, even though many budget Android phones already have them. It’s not because of hardware limitations—it’s more about pushing customers to buy the Pro models.

At this point, it doesn’t make sense that a flagship iPhone still comes with a 60Hz display. If a $300 Samsung can do it, why can’t Apple do the same with their $1000 phone?

People still buy it, so it must not be that big of a deal to many people. Why switch to a better Android option if the iPhone still works for them?

Ash said:
People still buy it, so it must not be that big of a deal to many people. Why switch to a better Android option if the iPhone still works for them?

I think most people don’t care about the refresh rate. They just want the newest iPhone, and sometimes the cheapest one. Only people really into tech notice these things.

@Niko
Tech enthusiasts often forget that the average person just looks at basic features like screen size or price. Many don’t even know what refresh rate is.

Chan said:
@Niko
Tech enthusiasts often forget that the average person just looks at basic features like screen size or price. Many don’t even know what refresh rate is.

I think if I take the time to explain it to people around me, they will notice. It’s like when I had to explain OLED back in the day.

I get it, but the iPhone 16 base model is $800, not $1000. Still, there’s no reason why they haven’t updated it to at least 75Hz or 90Hz. The Pro models have to stand out somehow, I guess.

Your dad’s Xiaomi might cost $250, but it’s not just about the display. How does it compare in terms of processing power, camera, and build quality? If you only care about the display, why not just get the Xiaomi?

Which $1000 iPhone has a 60Hz display? The iPhone 16 Pro is $1000 and has a 120Hz screen.

Kelley said:
Which $1000 iPhone has a 60Hz display? The iPhone 16 Pro is $1000 and has a 120Hz screen.

I think the iPhone 16 Plus is $1000.

Yeah, we know. It should have changed by iPhone 17. But at this point, what more can we say about it?

Are we really having this discussion again?

Morgan said:
Are we really having this discussion again?

If you don’t like it, just switch to another brand. Posting about it every time isn’t going to change anything.

Morgan said:
Are we really having this discussion again?

I get the point, but it’s kind of a pointless topic to keep bringing up.

Apple probably doesn’t want to add higher refresh rates to the regular iPhones to keep the Pro models standing out.

Base iPhones aren’t really flagship phones. But yeah, they should have bumped it to at least 90Hz this year.

Remember when they took so long to switch to USB-C?

I don’t get the hype around high refresh rates. Most movies and shows are 24fps. If you’re into gaming, just go for the Pro models. Simple.

They should at least go for 90Hz next gen or people should stop buying. But honestly, iPhone users probably don’t even care. It’s not an excuse, just reality.

I tried both displays in the Apple Store and didn’t notice a huge difference, even though I’m picky about these things.

Rowan said:
I tried both displays in the Apple Store and didn’t notice a huge difference, even though I’m picky about these things.

That’s the thing. Some people don’t notice it, but I can immediately feel the difference. 60Hz just feels off on a touchscreen device.