Not really your just comparing it to android set it alone 60hrz is the same frame rate our eyes see in so it's actually better for eye strain mind you it's not like it makes the phone worse and if you want the 120hrz because of the peer pressure then go for the pro
@@jph.j5183 If you can afford an Iphone I'm pretty sure you're using a PC monitor that has above 120hz. Use that iPhone side by side with the said monitor (A common situation in 2024) you will definitely hurt your eyes.
@@jph.j5183the copium. It looks terrible for moving text content once you notice it. It's total trash for the price. If it was a $400 maybe acceptable, but it's premium prices for budget bin parts.
@@jph.j5183 Stop justifying trash. I've been using a 13 pro max for 2 years now and before that a 250 dollar 120 hertz android phone again 250. I have done the experiment of lowering the frame rate and true enough it looked and felt like trash. Only Apple again only Apple is that company that sells an 800 dollar phone with 60 hertz in 2024 and comments like yours is what Apple needs to keep selling a trashy 60 in this modern time.
I would go with the Samsung after buying the iPhone 16 I like the iPhone but I just feel a little bit thaken advantage of buying it over the Samsung. I don't like the fact that I can't switch my sim card out when I want, I hate that I get charged for apps that are free on Android, I don't think its smooth at all with the screen being 60hrz, and the biggest thing is that it takes me 2 or 3 more taps to do the same things I want to do on an android phone and the gestures are not the same in every app. It's a very frustrating phone to use. For the money I would get a Samsung, no question.
Always been an iphone user but for the first time i bought a samsung s24 exynos version and its better then iphone believe me you will feel and say it when you use it. that 60hz on IP 16 will cost Apple a lot of money, almost every other mobile phone has 120hz, I don't understand Apple, it's just weak.
I have an iPhone with 60hz, it's just fine . I own an android with variable refresh rate too. The 60 hz doesn't trouble me at all . I've even set past android devices to 60 hz , my eyes seem to prefer 60 hz
One is android, the other is not. There we are. I need android as some apps are only there, importrant small format, reliability and responsiveness - galaxy s series does it all
Won't buy any phone without user replaceable battery. My Xcover6 Pro I most always turn down the refresh rate from 120 to 60 hz to further preserve battery.
I think the biggest issue is that most phones, even budget ones, have 120z, the iphone 16 is like $1,000 usd after tax where I live, and they can't give their customers such a basic feature? it feels almost insulting
It's outdated and shouldn't be sold on a phone upwards of $1400 AUD, it's an industry standard that hasn't been met by Apple on their lower tier phones in the 16 line up which is absurd given that even budget phones under $400 AUD have this feature. So no it's not just a way for people to bash Apple as it is egregious in Q3 2024 release for a phone costing that much to not have a feature that improves user experience greatly. Additionally, it has been proven that even thought they have displays capable of running 120hz, they decide to cap it to 80hz while doing fast movements which is the epitome of retarded as the whole point of having a high refresh rate is to have a smoother experience whilst doing sudden or fast movements on screen. Simply they're doing anti-consumer practises and shoudn't be supported for that reason in my opinion, this also doesn't apply to just Apple as Samsung, Google, Vivo, Sony, etc all have aspects that don't benefit the consumer and favour profit over user experience.
Easy choice, and then I'll let you decide which is better.
As an iphone user, 60 hertz is just trash in 2024.
Not really your just comparing it to android set it alone 60hrz is the same frame rate our eyes see in so it's actually better for eye strain mind you it's not like it makes the phone worse and if you want the 120hrz because of the peer pressure then go for the pro
@@jph.j5183 you are actually the least tech savvy person I have EVER seen in my life
Try 120hz before saying bullshit like this
@@jph.j5183 If you can afford an Iphone I'm pretty sure you're using a PC monitor that has above 120hz. Use that iPhone side by side with the said monitor (A common situation in 2024) you will definitely hurt your eyes.
@@jph.j5183the copium. It looks terrible for moving text content once you notice it. It's total trash for the price. If it was a $400 maybe acceptable, but it's premium prices for budget bin parts.
@@jph.j5183 Stop justifying trash. I've been using a 13 pro max for 2 years now and before that a 250 dollar 120 hertz android phone again 250. I have done the experiment of lowering the frame rate and true enough it looked and felt like trash. Only Apple again only Apple is that company that sells an 800 dollar phone with 60 hertz in 2024 and comments like yours is what Apple needs to keep selling a trashy 60 in this modern time.
I would go with the Samsung after buying the iPhone 16 I like the iPhone but I just feel a little bit thaken advantage of buying it over the Samsung. I don't like the fact that I can't switch my sim card out when I want, I hate that I get charged for apps that are free on Android, I don't think its smooth at all with the screen being 60hrz, and the biggest thing is that it takes me 2 or 3 more taps to do the same things I want to do on an android phone and the gestures are not the same in every app. It's a very frustrating phone to use. For the money I would get a Samsung, no question.
I agree with the 60Hz dilemma-it's odd that Apple left it out on a device priced above $700.
Always been an iphone user but for the first time i bought a samsung s24 exynos version and its better then iphone believe me you will feel and say it when you use it.
that 60hz on IP 16 will cost Apple a lot of money, almost every other mobile phone has 120hz, I don't understand Apple, it's just weak.
4:31 this is a lie. Its just as good even in benchmarks. Just using previous exynos to define the new one
I have the 16 Plus and the S24 Plus, prefer the 16 Plus because of iOS and not fond of One UI.
Click bait
I have the iPhone 16 plus in black with 256gb the 60hrz doesn’t bother me at all. I have great battery life, great cameras, and a big screen.
I have an iPhone with 60hz, it's just fine . I own an android with variable refresh rate too. The 60 hz doesn't trouble me at all . I've even set past android devices to 60 hz , my eyes seem to prefer 60 hz
S24 telephoto can be used as macro lens
One is android, the other is not. There we are. I need android as some apps are only there, importrant small format, reliability and responsiveness - galaxy s series does it all
using samsung s21 snapdragon. same amoled same 120z same stereo speaker lol
Won't buy any phone without user replaceable battery.
My Xcover6 Pro I most always turn down the refresh rate from 120 to 60 hz to further preserve battery.
its an easy choice. if you really like ios or in the ecosystem go for the iphone 16. else get the s24
new sub good review
the comparison is not correct, you have to wait for the s25 to come out, and then the differences were much bigger
isht should make their screen 90hz,
S24 win
iOS is very smooth but 60hz is boring
Even its original counterpart, the 15, was much better than this garbage. There's no need to even compare it to the 16.
Lol. No 60hz, no telephoto, Usb 2.0, less screen brightness
Yeah iphones are trash compared to samsung, I agree
goddamn this video is hard to watch.
Please dont use the name of God in vain
@kevinbrandon1856 lmao 😂 wtf are you talking about.. also
Learn what vain means
Is 60hz vs. 120hz really that big of a deal on iPhones? Or is it just a way of bashing Apple?
60hz doesn’t feel fluid, even sluggish sometimes. In 2024 on an expensive phone 120hz is a must.
I think the biggest issue is that most phones, even budget ones, have 120z, the iphone 16 is like $1,000 usd after tax where I live, and they can't give their customers such a basic feature? it feels almost insulting
It's outdated and shouldn't be sold on a phone upwards of $1400 AUD, it's an industry standard that hasn't been met by Apple on their lower tier phones in the 16 line up which is absurd given that even budget phones under $400 AUD have this feature. So no it's not just a way for people to bash Apple as it is egregious in Q3 2024 release for a phone costing that much to not have a feature that improves user experience greatly. Additionally, it has been proven that even thought they have displays capable of running 120hz, they decide to cap it to 80hz while doing fast movements which is the epitome of retarded as the whole point of having a high refresh rate is to have a smoother experience whilst doing sudden or fast movements on screen. Simply they're doing anti-consumer practises and shoudn't be supported for that reason in my opinion, this also doesn't apply to just Apple as Samsung, Google, Vivo, Sony, etc all have aspects that don't benefit the consumer and favour profit over user experience.
For a cell phone with a small battery, 60 is what is needed
Ya people turning off the 120 on the iPhones bc it’s too much maybe for iPads like the mini was about to buy but