Apple recently announced some new iPhones — perhaps you’ve already heard? The iPhone 16 family is upon us, and it’s an interesting mix of expected and surprise upgrades. The regular iPhone 16 has a fresh new design, the Camera Control button is fascinating, and there’s a welcome spec bump with Apple’s latest A18 chip.
However, one aspect of the iPhone 16 didn’t change at all — and it’s an important one. For all of the upgrades and new features on the iPhone 16, the display remains nearly identical to the one on the iPhone 15. Unfortunately, that means another year of a 60Hz refresh rate.
Another year, another 60Hz display
The first iPhone with a 120Hz display was the iPhone 13 Pro, released in 2021. At the time, we had already had years of Android phones with 90Hz and 120Hz screens, so Apple was already trailing behind. Still, it was nice to finally have an iPhone without a 60Hz display.
Unfortunately, while 120Hz screens have continued to be on all of the new Pro iPhones each year, the baseline iPhone has yet to see the feature. That means the iPhone 13, iPhone 14, iPhone 15, and now the iPhone 16 are all stuck with a 60Hz screen.
When your smartphone has a faster refresh rate, it means that the screen is refreshing whatever is on the display at a faster pace. A smartphone screen with a 60Hz refresh rate refreshes 60 times per second, while a 120Hz screen refreshes 120 times per second.
This is most noticeable when scrolling through an app or playing a game, or with other animations/movements happening on your screen. The faster your refresh rate, the smoother and more fluid everything looks. It’s a significant difference that’s difficult to explain or show on video, but is very noticeable in person. A phone with a 120Hz refresh rate looks buttery smooth, while a 60Hz refresh rate looks slow and choppy. It’s not unusable, but it’s a noticeably worse user experience — and a pretty significant one at that.
A fast refresh rate is not a Pro feature
If it were an industry standard that only $1,000-plus smartphones got 120Hz displays, I’d be happy to give Apple a pass and not have this conversation. But the problem is that things couldn’t be further from the truth.
Take a look at the Android smartphone landscape today, and it’s almost more difficult to find a phone with a 60Hz screen instead of a 120Hz one — regardless of the price. The Google Pixel 9 — a $799 phone and the closest direct competitor to the iPhone 16 — has a 120Hz screen. The Moto G Stylus 5G (2024), a $400 budget phone, also has a 120Hz screen. Hell, even the CMF Phone 1, which costs 199 British pounds (a little over $260), has a 120Hz screen.
These are just a few examples, but this is largely the case across the board for Android phones in 2024. You may see some really cheap phones step down to a lower refresh rate, but even then, it’s more likely to be 90Hz instead of 60Hz.
Yet, for whatever reason, Apple hasn’t gotten the memo that 120Hz displays are a table stakes smartphone feature these days. The $799 iPhone 16 and $899 iPhone 16 Plus tie you down with a 60Hz screen. To get an iPhone with a 120Hz panel, you still have to get one of the Pro models — either the $999 iPhone 16 Pro or the $1,199 iPhone 16 Pro Max.
If Samsung, Google, or any other Android smartphone maker tried to get away with this, there would be an outrage. But because this has been the norm for the iPhone for so long, Apple will almost certainly get a pass — as undeserved as it may be.
This needs to change
Does an outdated 60Hz display mean you shouldn’t consider buying the iPhone 16 or 16 Plus? For most people, probably not. The 60Hz screens on the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Plus were annoying, but we still ultimately recommended the phones in our reviews.
I am looking forward to spending more time with the iPhone 16, particularly with its Camera Control button and new design. I just wish it had the modern screen it deserves — and you should, too. A 60Hz screen may not be the end of the world, but it is an unreasonable spec for a phone of this caliber in 2024. You deserve better, and Apple should do better.
Source Agencies
