Campfire Audio of Portland, Oregon is not, on the face of it, the most likely company to start competing in the portable USB headphone amp/DAC market. After all, this is a company that revels in doing things its own way, and with a product like this, there’s little scope for individualism.
So the Relay is an unremarkable-looking device by the company’s standards, but it’s certainly compact and well-made enough to compete. Between its AKM 4493 SEQ DAC chip with wide file and resolution compatibility, and its choice of balanced or unbalanced analog outputs, though, it’s specified to a high standard, too. Its basic user interface doesn’t give any indication of the resolution of the file that’s playing, though, which looks a bit remedial against its most obvious and most capable rivals.
In action, the Relay is a revealing, organized, nicely unified listen, one that’s endlessly forthright for better or for worse. Its upfront nature suits some recordings much more than it suits others, it must be said, and while there’s always a market for a hefty dose of sonic excitement it’s not the sort of attitude that automatically lends itself to long listening sessions.
One of the best portable DACs around? Maybe more 'best of the rest', but certainly one to consider if you can road test it first.
Oh, it's red and no mistake (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Campfire Audio Relay review: Price and release date
Release date: July 2025
Price: $229 / £229 / AU$399
The Campfire Audio Relay USB headphone amp/DAC is on sale now, and in the company's native United States it costs $229. In the United Kingdom it's £229, while in Australia it goes for AU$399.
Of course, it’s not as if the Relay is your only choice. We’ve heard and enjoyed alternatives from the likes of Audioquest, Helm and iFi lately, so the Campfire Audio has some stiff competition.
Campfire Audio Relay review: Features
AKM 4493 SEQ DAC
Balanced and unbalanced outputs
DSD and PCM 32bit/768kHz
Products such as this tend to have quite a restricted feature-set. And while this is also true of the Relay, what it’s got is right on the money.
Digital audio information comes in via the USB-C 2.0 slot on the top of the device. From there it’s delivered to an AKM 4493 SEQ DAC chipset that Campfire Audio alighted on for its “analog warmth” and “incredible tonality”. It’s capable of dealing with DSD and PCM content of up to 32bit/768kHz resolution, which really should be plenty.
Once the AKM has converted it, the analog information is output via one of two low-noise, high-output drivers – one feeds a single-ended 3.5mm output, the other a 4.4mm balanced alternative, both of which are on the bottom of the Relay.
Features score: 5 / 5
Note the 'wings' (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Campfire Audio Relay review: Design
57 x 23 x 10mm (HxWxD)
Aluminum casework
Only one finish available
In an admirable show of restraint, Campfire Audio has delivered a portable USB headphone amp/DAC that’s identifiably a portable USB headphone amp/DAC. It can’t have been easy – remember, this is a company that takes every opportunity to go to town where the design of its products is concerned.
About the Relay's only flourish is a little bit of angularity and asymmetry to the anodized aluminum casework. Campfire Audio provides a microfiber cloth and padded pouch to keep the finish in tip-top condition.
The casework itself is a usefully tidy 57 x 23 x 10mm (HxWxD)and the rear panel (which is made of plastic) features a little window affording a glimpse of the AKM DAC chip.
Design score: 4.5 / 5
Everything in its right place… (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Campfire Audio review: Sound quality
Forward, direct presentation
Good tonal balance
Endlessly upfront audio balance can be fatiguing
Connected to an Apple MacBook Pro via USB-C and with a pair of Sennheiser IE900 IEMs inserted to the 4.4mm output, the Campfire Audio Relay proves – not especially surprisingly – to offer a considerable improvement over the audio performance the laptop can muster by itself. In some ways, the upgrade is quite dramatic.
A 24bit/96kHz FLAC file of My Crud Princess by No Joy delivered by the Tidal app illustrates the point explicitly. The Relay is a forward, very positive listen that’s able to reveal a lot of detail in the recording – it has a good facility for giving even the more transient, fleeting occurrences the correct amount of weighting and puts them into convincing context. Its presentation is reasonably spacious (though its direct character means there’s not the greatest amount of ‘front/back’ space on the otherwise well-defined soundstage), and it ensures every element gets the sort of elbow room it needs in order to express itself.
The tonal balance is judicious, even if Campfire Audio’s suggestion that it’s “incredible” is stretching things a bit. Frequency response, too, is very nicely judged. From the top of the frequency range down to the bottom, the Relay is even-handed and plays no favorites. Low-frequency stuff is deep and solid, with good shape to bass sounds and sufficient control to attack that momentum levels are high and rhythms are described naturalistically.
The impressive control of attack and decay applies throughout the frequency range, in fact, which allows the Relay to present recordings of all types in a convincingly unified manner. It’s especially adept through the midrange, where voices in particular are packed with information regarding character and attitude as well as tone and texture. Problems, such as they are, stem from the Campfire Audio’s default attitude of drive, attack and endless positivity. This direct and unequivocal nature is quite exciting on first acquaintance, and undeniably so when you’re listening to something like Da Funk by Daft Punk, but over time it’s a stance that can become quite wearying.
‘A good time all the time,’ can take its toll, and the Relay’s inability to relax or even ease back just a little, even when playing something as pastoral as Peter Broderick’s And It’s Alright, means you’re likely to become fatigued sooner rather than later.
Sound quality score: 4 / 5
The bulk of my testing was done with the Sennheiser IE900 or the Austrian Audio 'The Composer' (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Campfire Audio review: Usability & setup
Wide compatibility with source players…
Although earlier Windows devices will require a driver
Rudimentary user interface
On the front panel there’s a company logo that glows red when the Relay is operating, and blinks in a shade of lilac when any changes are made via the control buttons.
There’s one button on the right edge of the Relay - it deals with ‘play/pause’, ‘skip forwards/backwards’ and can toggle between ‘high gain’ and ‘low gain’. Two buttons on the left edge handle ‘volume up’ and ‘volume down’ - press and hold both at the same time and the device begins to cycle through its six different filter settings.
Campfire Audio recommends filter #5 (super slow roll-off) for optimal performance, which does rather make me wonder what the point of the other five settings is. It also recommends setting the volume of your source device to ‘maximum’ and then using the Relay to control volume – it has 60 volume increments, so you shouldn’t have too much difficulty getting to exactly the output level you’d like.
The company includes a 6cm length of braided, branded USB-C to USB-C cable to connect the Relay to your laptop or smartphone. The Relay is compatible with Windows, Mac OS, Android and iOS devices, though Windows 7/8 will require a driver to be downloaded.
Usability & setup score: 4/5
This white light (for aptX Lossless) was oddly hard to come by when using sources able to handle it… (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Campfire Audio Relay review: Value
This is a lot of money for not much stuff, it’s true, but the effect this minimal amount of stuff can have on the music you’re listening to can be quite profound.
Value score: 4/5
Note the new 'rails' on the casework to help with cooling (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
Should you buy Campfire Audio Relay?
Buy it if...
You have an ordinary laptop or smartphone The Relay will turn it into a viable source of music.
You own some half-decent headphones… …especially if they have a 4.4mm balanced connection option. The Campfire Audio will absolutely help make the most of them.
You like an upbeat kind of sound There’s a perkiness and a forwardness to the Relay’s interpretation of music that's bordering on the relentless.
Don't buy it if...
Your iOS device has a Lightning connector Campfire Audio says, “Lightning connection features a power-limiting mechanism that restricts the performance of your Relay.”
You’re interested in knowing the resolution of the file you’re listening to You can find out, of course, but only by looking at your source player. The Relay won’t tell you.
You’re no Henry Ford You can have any colour of Campfire Audio Relay you like as long as it’s black.
Campfire Audio Relay review: Also consider
Helm Audio Bolt The Helm is not quite as impressively specified as the Relay, but it’s a very effective little device nevertheless. And it’s usefully cheaper than the Campfire Audio. Read our in-depth Helm Audio Bolt review to learn more
iFi GO Link Max More affordable still is the iFi GO Link Max, and on a pound-for-pound basis it remains the best USB headphone amp/DAC around. iFi knows exactly what’s what where products like this are concerned. Read our full iFi GO Link Max review
iFi makes strong design choices and you love to see it (Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)
How I tested the Campfire Audio Relay review:
Various headphones
Various audio file types and sizes
Various sources of music
I didn’t use it all day every day, but I kept the Campfire Audio Relay connected to either my FiiO M15S Digital Audio Player or my Apple MacBook Pro for well over a week, which is more than enough time to establish what it’s capable of.
I listened to lots of different types of music, in various file types and of lots of different resolutions, and I listened both indoors and outdoors.
I used expensive IEMs via the 4.4mm balanced output and absolutely bog-standard over-ear headphones connected to the 3.5mm unbalanced output.
I started this test not overly taken with the colour scheme of this phone, although I did really like the textured surface on the back as well as the overall aesthetic. It was more the brown, gold and black colour scheme; however, I was pleased to see that alongside this colour profile, there is also a pure black version, which looks amazing.
As I looked through the specifications, it came with all the usual rugged credentials, which is great to see, meaning that I could drop and submerge the phone in water as I pleased. Whatever the conditions, I could be sure that the phone would survive, making it a great option for use in the field on photographic projects.
The only issue is that this is the middle of summer, and outside temperatures are topping 30 °C, so there are few puddles to drop the phone into. I did my best to drop the phone, finding what was left of a stream of stream in order to test just how waterproof it was, alongside the usual performance test using various Google applications, media creation and games to test out the full spectrum of uses for the mobile phone.
From the outset, it was apparent that for general use, this phone was perfectly optimised. What I really liked was the large screen, which had a decent brightness up to 900 nits, meaning that even in the abnormally bright conditions we have here in the UK at present, scrolling through documents and reading content online was possible. Whilst the screen is reflective, that brightness just cuts through the reflections enough to easily make out what is on screen.
I also found the 5G connection was good and robust, and whilst most of the test was carried out on a 4G connection, popping up to the local town of Salisbury proved that it could cope with good, fast network connections, providing decent transfer rates and speeds.
Call clarity also seemed good. Even when used out in the New Forest, where there was little to no signal, voice calls came through clearly, and I was impressed by the clarity of the small internal speaker.
That speaker proved to be exceptionally good for watching back media and listening to music, although it isn't quite the quality of a decent consumer smartphone.
One area that suffered slightly was gaming, as highlighted by the benchmarking results. Through all of the 3DMark benchmarks, including Steel Nomad, Wild Life and Sling Shot, frame rates were slightly reduced compared with more expensive models with many of the more intensive games highlighting the mid performance GPU. Need for Speed: Asphalt ran absolutely fine; however, if you want to play Call of Duty, this might not be the best option for you.
For the most part, performance was excellent. One area that really stood out was the cameras, which were lower in megapixels compared with many rugged smartphones that top out at 200 million pixels. Here, the 64 million-pixel Sony-backed camera produced excellent results, far better than I would usually expect. Crossing over to video, the clarity of the visuals was equally impressive.
The audio quality of the video recordings varied greatly depending on whether you were recording with the rear or front camera. Oddly, filming with the rear camera captured far better vocals than when using the front-facing selfie camera.
Overall, after using this phone for a few weeks, I was generally impressed by the overall performance - it's up there with the best rugged phones I've used. As long as you are thinking about using this for work situations where a standard consumer phone would struggle due to the physical demands placed on them, or alternatively it's a great option for adventuring.
I'm also seeing with major online retailers including Amazon.com for $230 at time of review, and £230 on Amazon.co.uk.
Value: 4 / 5
(Image credit: Alastair Jennings)
Ulefone Armor X16 Pro: Design
(Image credit: Alastair Jennings)
Specifications
CPU: MediaTek Dimensity 6300 Graphics: Mali-G57 MC2 RAM: Up to 16 GB (plus 8 GB extended virtual) Storage: 256 GB ROM, microSD up to 2 TB Ports: USB-C (33 W), dual-SIM slot, Waterproof-plugged ports for charging/audio Connectivity: 5 G, dual-SIM, IR blaster, NFC & Google Pay Audio: Mono speaker (rugged) + front camera microphone Camera: Rear 64 MP (Sony IMX682, f/1.9), 25 MP night vision (Sony IMX550), 2 MP macro; Front: 16 MP Samsung Size: 173.78 × 83.4 × 17.95 mm Weight: 394.5 g OS: Android 15 with Google Gemini AI assistant, AI Recorder, Widevine L1 Accessories: 33 W charger included, optional rugged case/holster/mounts available
The design of the Ulefone Armor X16 Pro really stands out, with its textured back, brown and gold accents, and an aesthetic that is also available in pure black. It gives a slightly sci-fi-inspired and decidedly rugged look inline many other rugged smartphones on the market.
I have to say, this particular phone feels a lot more comfortable in the hands. Although it’s still quite wide and large, it is a decent proportion for most people’s grip.
The weight is also well balanced considering the size of the internal battery and the robustness of the device, which makes it far more usable than many of its larger alternatives.
In terms of size and weight, measuring 173.78 × 83.4 × 17.95 mm, it can easily slip into a jacket or pocket without adding too much bulk. Considering it weighs 394.5 g, it isn’t overly heavy either.
On the front, the phone is dominated by the large 6.56-inch screen with a 120 Hz refresh rate. Integrated into the screen is the selfie camera, which offers a 16 million-pixel sensor, perfect for video calls and vlogs.
On the back, the octagon-shaped cluster of cameras features a 64 million-pixel main camera, a 25 million-pixel night camera and a 2 million-pixel macro camera. There’s also a built-in LED flash, which is handy when camping, as well as a standard camera light.
One of the main features of any rugged smartphone is its rugged credentials, and the phone offers IP69K, IP68 and MIL-STD-810H certification, meaning that it is waterproof, dustproof and drop proof, as tested in this review.
It’s also nice to see that outputs such as the 3.5 mm headphone socket and USB-C data/charging port are both covered with secure rubber flaps.
On the left-hand side of the handset, as you look at the screen, there is a TF/SIM card slot with space for two SIMs and a microSD card to expand storage. Below this is a customisable button that you can assign to different apps. Over on the right-hand side are the volume toggle, power button and biometric fingerprint recognition button. That’s all, keeping it nice and simple.
Design: 5 / 5
Ulefone Armor X16 Pro: Features
(Image credit: Alastair Jennings)
The Armor X16 Pro sits at the entry level of rugged smartphones, yet despite that, it packs in plenty of features to suit most people looking for a phone that can survive more than a standard consumer unit.
Some of the key features highlighted by Ulefone for this smartphone include a dedicated flashlight, which is great if you’re working outdoors and need a torch to throw a decent spread of light.
Powering the phone is a 10,360 mAh battery that offers 33 W fast charging and 5 W reverse charging, so not only does it power the phone, but it can also give other devices a boost.
Inside there’s a MediaTek Dimensity 6300 eight-core CPU with a 6 nm advanced process and clock speed of up to 2.4 GHz, including Cortex-A76 gaming cores. This is partnered with a Mali-G57 MC2 GPU. There’s also up to 16 GB of RAM, 8 GB on board and a further 8 GB accessible through dynamic RAM.
For storage, there’s 256 GB of ROM, which can be expanded up to 2 TB using a separately purchased microSD card.
On the back of the phone is the octagon design cluster of cameras detailed in the Build and Handling section, offering decent quality far beyond most other smartphones of this type.
Dominating the front of the phone is the 6.56-inch IPS display with a 720 × 1612 resolution, 120 Hz refresh rate and 910 nits of brightness. This is protected by Gorilla Glass 5, which in testing proved to be exceptionally tough.
Tying all the hardware together is Android 15. The version on this phone is relatively lightweight, so it’s not bogged down by proprietary apps, and also features the latest Google Gemini, so you can use the phone’s AI potential, including the AI Recorder, which is a handy additional feature.
Surprisingly this phone is also Widevine L1 certified, meaning it has full digital rights management certification, enabling you to stream higher quality from major providers such as Disney+ and Netflix. For an entry-level rugged smartphone, the visuals and audio quality are surprisingly good.
Features: 3.5 / 5
Ulefone Armor X16 Pro: Performance
(Image credit: Alastair Jennings)
Getting started with the smartphone, the first thing I did was check the reception quality. Putting it side-by-side against an iPhone 15 Pro on the Vodafone network, the Armor X16 Pro actually proved to have better reception with four bars over the iPhone’s three.
When it came to browsing the internet, where the iPhone 15 Pro was slow to respond, page load speed on the Armor X16 Pro was relatively fast.
Using both 4G and 5G networks, the Armor X16 Pro proved to be exceptionally robust. Making voice calls demonstrated how clear the audio quality was, both from my perspective and to my caller, clear and crisp in both directions.
Starting with basic performance tests, I opened Google Docs and reviewed this part written document. It was easy to read through the text on the bright, clear screen. While the resolution is lower than I’ve come to expect from many smartphones, the text was still very clear and readable.
One thing I noted was that as you scroll, the quality of the screen stands out. With plenty of adjustment over brightness, tone and clarity, it offers exceptional viewing for a phone at this level.
Exploring the options and settings, I was impressed with the ease of use and the speed with which the phone navigated Android 15’s menus. The MediaTek Dimensity 6300 CPU provided plenty of performance for general use.
Pushing performance further, I used Lightroom to adjust images I had taken during a work outing. The clarity of the images was impressive, and unlike some phones I’ve used in the past that struggle when applying effects, the Armor X16 Pro handled it with relative ease. The screen clarity also made the adjustments easier.
Using CapCut to quickly edit video content shot with the phone, I was again impressed with the speed. Although CapCut is highly optimised for mobile, some phones still struggle. For basic edits, the phone handled 1080p video without issue. Pushing to 4K and adding graphics, the phone began to slow down, and the limits of its processing power became apparent.
Gaming performance followed a similar pattern. Need for Speed: Asphalt ran perfectly smoothly, but Asphalt 9: Legends, Call of Duty Mobile, and PUBG Mobile all began to drop in graphics quality. This was reflected in the 3DMark scores, Steel Nomad Light: 145, Wild Life: 4,137, and Sling Shot: 3,657.
While these scores aren’t particularly high, they are in line with most rugged smartphones. What gives this phone a slight edge is its exceptionally high read speed of 1,246 MB per second.
Benchmarks
Disk Speed Test Read: 1246 MB/s Disk Speed Test Write: 347 MB/s Geekbench CPU Single: 731 Geekbench CPU Multi: 1975 Geekbench GPU: 1401 3D Mark Steel Nomad Lite: 145 3D Mark Wildlife: 1373 3D Mark Slingshot: 3657
Performance: 4 / 5
(Image credit: Alastair Jennings)
Ulefone Armor X16 Pro: Final verdict
(Image credit: Alastair Jennings)
After using the phone solidly for a few weeks, I’ve been really impressed, firstly by the build quality and the comfort of using this phone. It is far more usable and ergonomic than many other rugged smartphones.
Secondly, the battery life was exceptional for the size and weight. At the start of the test, I charged it to 100%, and after three weeks it had only dropped to 25%, highlighting just how robust that internal battery is, although I wasn’t in full use all the time.
Overall, the battery performance was excellent, and the fact that I could reverse charge my iPhone using the 5 W reverse charging feature was very handy.
The standout features for me were the cameras. I wasn’t expecting the clarity of images that the 64 million-pixel main camera produced. The stills were great, and the video capture was equally impressive. Coupled with some wireless mics, it’s a great option if you need to capture video out in the field, perfectly suitable for most social media platforms.
When editing media using CapCut or Lightroom, I was impressed by the performance of this mobile phone. Considering that it’s at the entry level of the rugged phone market, it performs surprisingly well.
At the end of the test, having submerged the phone in water, dropped it from a height and tested it in the field, I’m surprised at how inexpensive this rugged smartphone is. While graphics performance and for that matter the screen resolution is at the lower end of the scale, for Google Docs and multimedia content, it works absolutely fine.
If you’re looking for a decent rugged smartphone for work and you don’t want to spend too much, then this is a great option. Likewise, if you’re heading off on an adventure, and need a solid phone with good battery life that’s isn't too heavy then again this also an ideal solution.
What really makes it stand out for me is the quality of the camera. While it can’t rival premium smartphones, it’s still decent enough to satisfy most people who want to take great images. The Armor X16 Pro is one of the best-performing budget rugged smartphones out there today.
Should I buy a Ulefone Armor X16 Pro?
Value
Excellent value for money and a great option if you need a simple, rugged smartphone.
4.5
Design
Stylish design with a textured surface that makes this one of the most comfortable rugged smartphones to hold.
4
Features
Decent range of features, with the camera and battery life being the standout.
3.5
Performance
Considering the entry-level price tag, this phone packs a decent amount of power for day-to-day tasks.
4
Overalls
Excellent rugged smartphone that provides power for everyday use, but is limited for higher-end gaming.
4
Buy it if...
You want a great option for working outdoors
The price, build quality, and the fact that it can stand up to all sorts of conditions make this a cheap and well-balanced option for anyone working outdoors.
You want a tough backup phone
The large capacity battery in a relatively small and lightweight form makes this a superb option to take as a main or backup phone if you’re heading off on an adventure.
Don't buy it if...
You need a phone for gaming.
While you can play many games at moderate quality, if you want to play anything that relies heavily on graphics processing, you should consider another option.
You need something small and lightweight.
While in this review I’ve said this is a small and relatively lightweight rugged smartphone, compared with general consumer phones, it is still larger and more bulky.
Night Always Comes sees Kirby do a complete 180 from the new Marvel movie, but just like Sue Storm’s brush with Galactus it’s similarly far from perfect. This time, Kirby plays Lynette, a former sex worker turned bread factory staffer, desperately trying to keep her dilapidated home as a roof over her family’s heads. When her mom blows their $25,000 downpayment on a car, Lynette embarks on an unhinged mission to raise all the money in one night, before local enforcement repossesses the house.
I know what you’re thinking. Night Always Comes has the potential to be heartpounding, gut-wrenching, slick and commanding in such a dynamic storyline. But this is only half true thanks to a complicated plot that doesn’t know whether it’s coming or going.
This is particularly frustrating because the subjects being explored are such a vulnerable, authentic window into the realities of life in America when you’re living paycheck to paycheck, and the new Netflix movie effortlessly enthuses real-life inspiration points to hammer that point home.
But on the fictional end, the drama often goes too far. As we delve further into the new film, we see Kirby dust off her Mission: Impossible movie training and dropkick more nefarious men than I’ve ever seen be taken down in one small-town setting. This leads us to an ending scene that’s so bonkers, I couldn’t suspend enough belief to buy that it was something that would actually happen. It’s these jarring changes in tone and narrative speed that make a plot already hard to understand that little bit more challenging.
I still haven’t made my mind up on Night Always Comes, but I’ve fallen back in love with Julia Fox
Julia Fox as Gladys in Night Always Comes. (Image credit: Netflix)
Okay, let’s get straight to it. While Night Always Comes is no doubt Vanessa Kirby’s best performance of the year so far (more on that later), I couldn’t help but be the most charmed by Julia Fox’s Gloria. She’s an old friend of Lynette’s who owes her $3,000, willingly letting her into her apartment in the middle of the night before refusing to stay in one place because her “car is here”.
It’s the sort of flamboyant chaos we’ve naturally come to associate with Fox (remember Uncut Gems?), but she plays it with such conviction that you forget how much talent she has buried away under those killer looks. Fox herself bears so much weight in terms of her cultural capital, so I hope fans and the industry re-recognize a woman who genuinely knows what to do with the craft she’s chosen.
Then there’s Kirby. Teetering across a delicate balance of misplaced confidence and a complete mental breakdown, Lynette has us in the palm of her hand as she desperately clings to a life she doesn’t even want in the first place. Her backstory is well fleshed out, and it makes sense for her logical patterns to be as archaic as they end up being. Kirby’s emotional range is what really sells it, though, digging as deep as a woman has to when she’s acting out in pure panicked desperation.
Performances aside, the Netflix movie has built its foundations on sand
While I really appreciate the honesty of living in modern-day America and easily falling into an unsavory way of living, I have a lot of issues with Night Always Comes’ plot. I can buy one chaotic caper happening, such as Lynette beating a bunch of men to a pulp when she takes a stolen safe to be broken into, but four or five in a row? That’s just getting absurd. This also contradicts the safety of Lynette’s older brother Kenny (Zack Gottsagen) who has Down’s Syndrome, and is the bulk of the reason why Lynette is fighting so hard to keep the house. She eventually puts him in grave danger, but as much as the move shows Lynette’s slippery slope of inner morality, I cannot buy that an entire nightclub’s worth of people would equally throw Kenny under the metaphorical bus, too.
The more people Lynette meets to try and steal, barter and plead for her cash, the more you forget how she knows them, what their significance is and how she hasn’t magically run out of avenues to try. It’s a headscratcher and a bleak one at that, which is just as much of a blessing as it is a curse. There’s no foot off the pedal, meaning Lynette’s wild antics and desperation chug along at a constant pace without any letup. That’s exhausting for anyone, and I think it eventually does a disservice to the overall impact of her story.
As much as I enjoyed pretending to punch anyone who crossed Lynette’s path with a bad attitude, Night Always Comes ultimately has us sitting on the fence. With an almost equal amount of good and bad, it’s perhaps an ironic microcosm of life itself, only I wish I had Julia Fox strutting around sassing me in mine.
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is an HEDT workstation processor built for an extremely specific — and extremely demanding — audience.
Nothing about this chip is ‘mainstream’, including the fact that just about every enthusiast consumer processor available right now will mostly outperform this chip in most workloads that 95% of users will run on their computers, and they will do so at a minuscule fraction of the Threadripper 9980X’s price.
There is part of me that wants to slag this processor as overpowered, overengineered, and overpriced—except I can’t. With 64 full-fat performance cores, 128 threads, a base clock of 3.2GHz, and the ability to push far beyond that under controlled thermal conditions, this chip feels like its sole purpose is to blow through Cinebench R23’s multi-core benchmark and shame every other chip that tries to do the same.
(Image credit: AMD)
I would say that this is a ridiculous waste of time, energy, and resources, but the thing about Cinebench R23, as well as all the other multi-core benchmarks that this chip leaves defeated in its wake, is that there are professionals out there who need exactly this kind of power from a processor, and no other consideration really matters.
Database administrators, IT managers dealing with web servers, machine learning researchers and developers, 3D designers of every kind, and high-end video productions are among those who will look at the multi-core performance of this chip and see past the bar on a graph stretching well past every other chip in the test group and see the hours of work saved every week with a processor specifically designed to break up their workloads into as many as 128 individual processing threads to be worked through in parallel.
That definitely isn’t everyone, and the incredible parallel processing power available with the Threadripper 9980X comes at a cost. To keep those 64 cores from setting your workstation on fire under load, per-core clock speeds start nearly a full GHz lower than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X, which means that single-core or lightly-threaded processing power suffers somewhat, though the 9980X can still hold its own at a system and productivity-minded processor, and its TSMC N4P/N6 architecture does translate into some solid responsiveness.
With eight compute dies under the lid and 256MB of L3 cache, there are a lot of interconnects between all that discrete silicon, and communication between all those parts introduces latency as well, though it isn't debilitating.
(Image credit: AMD)
What's more, at $4,999 / £4,499.99 / AU$8,399, this is a very expensive processor. It’s not the most expensive HEDT chip on the market, that’d be the 96-core Threadripper Pro 9995WX at nearly three times the price of the 9980X, but it’s still not a CPU you buy because you ‘want the best.’
You buy it because your workflow would bring even the best processors on the consumer market to their knees. This is the kind of chip you slap into a workstation because you need to render the 12-second Gargantua approach sequence from Interstellar in a matter of days rather than weeks, and not because you want to play Cyberpunk 2077 at the highest framerate possible. For the former, it’s an outstanding, special-use processor. Not at all for the latter.
(Image credit: Gigabyte)
Then there’s the matter of platform requirements. You’ll need a TRX50 motherboard, which isn’t just more expensive—it’s physically larger, requires more robust power delivery, and usually comes loaded with workstation-focused features that add to the price.
You’ll also need to spend a lot of money on cooling, because under full multi-core load, the 9980X can pull upwards of 350W from the socket, so a 360mm AIO cooler is the absolute rock-bottom, bare minimum cooling solution you can use to keep this chip from throttling, and there aren't many that fit this chip out there.
And believe me, having sat next to the open-air test bench running high-intensity multi-threaded workloads on the 9980X, this thing pumps out an enormous amount of heat, so plan your workstation environment accordingly.
(Image credit: AMD)
All that said, if you’re the kind of user who spends whole workdays in Premiere Pro, Houdini, or TensorFlow, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is a dream, but you do have to really ask yourself if you need this much focused power for your particular situation.
I love multi-threaded programming and working on asynchronous processes when developing my own software tools, but in no universe would I ever be able to fully utilize all 64 cores on this processor unless I was actively trying to, and I don't work with anything nearly that complex.
If your workflow is even moderately mixed, or gaming is even a quarter of your use case, this chip delivers diminishing returns that will make you regret investing so much into it, especially when the significantly cheaper Threadripper 9970X is ideal for those situations at half the cost.
How much does it cost? $4,999.99 / £4,499.99 / AU$8,399
When is it available? It is available now
Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is available now in the US, UK, and Australia for $4,999.99 / £4,499.99 / AU$8,399.
While not 'cheap' by any means, if you're seriously looking at buying this processor, you're not window shopping. You know you need it, and it will either make back the money you spent on it in relatively short order, or it is a processor you have to have for academic or scientific research, and it's simply the price paid for progress.
It should be noted, though, that while the Threadripper 9980X's multi-core performance is second only to the high-end Threadripper Pro 9000-series chips, the Threadripper 9970X's multicore performance is actually not that far behind the 9980X's, and it costs half the price of this chip.
If you're wincing at the price tag of the 9980X, but you really do need something like this for your workflow, give the 9970X a long look and see if it's a better fit for your needs.
Value: 3 / 5
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X: Specs & Features
(Image credit: AMD)
64-cores/128-threads chew through multi-core workloads
Slower clock speeds than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
256MB L3 cache
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X specs
Socket
sTR5 (TRX50)
Architecture
AMD Zen 5
Cores
64
Threads
128
Base Clock
3.2GHz
Boost Clock
5.4GHz
L3 Cache
256MB
PCIe Lanes
Up to 80 PCIe 5.0
Memory Support
Up to 1TB Quad-channel DDR5‑6400 ECC
TDP
350W
tjMax
95℃
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is built on AMD’s Zen 5 architecture, an MCM design featuring TSMC’s N4P process for the compute dies and its N6 process for the I/O die, all tied together using AMD’s Infinity Fabric interconnect. Each of the eight CCDs contributes eight cores and 16 threads to the massive 64-core, 128-thread chip, supported by a staggering 256MB of L3 cache. This is particularly ideal for keeping large datasets close to the cores and minimizing memory latency in heavy workloads.
The base clock speeds sit at 3.2GHz, with boost frequencies climbing up to 5.4GHz under lightly threaded tasks, depending on cooling and power headroom. The processor is fully unlocked for overclocking, although thermal and power constraints will make manual tuning challenging without extreme cooling solutions. Out of the box, this processor is pulling 350W, so you’ll likely need more than a 360mm AIO to cool this properly if you push it even modestly.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Memory support is another standout. The 9980X works with up to 1TB of DDR5-6400 ECC RAM across quad-channel configurations, a 1,200MT/s increase over the last-generation Threadripper line.
I/O capabilities have also gotten a significant boost. Now, you can utilize up to 80 PCIe 5.0 lanes, meaning you can run multiple GPUs, storage arrays, and capture or networking cards without lane-sharing bottlenecks.
As with previous Threadrippers, there’s no integrated GPU, but that’s expected. Power consumption is rated at an extremely high 350W TDP, and the physical chip uses the sTRX5 socket, meaning it requires a TRX50-series motherboard. These boards are large, expensive, and purpose-built for heavy-duty computing.
Specs & features: 4.5 / 5
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X: Installation & test setup
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X installation is much more involved than you might be used to if you've only ever used consumer-grade motherboards that seat a standard desktop CPU.
The Threadripper 9980X uses AMD’s sTR5 socket, which is physically longer and more delicate, and so requires a specific installation procedure.
Included with the 9980X is a torque-limiting wrench that you'll need to ensure even pressure across the heat spreader, which for this chip is a vital step for both thermal performance and long-term reliability.
I highly recommend watching some installation videos on YouTube after you've read over the installation instructions before you attempt to install this processor, since slacking on proper installation can create uneven contact with the socket or even damaged pins on the TRX50 motherboard. You've spent a lot of money on this chip, so definitely make sure you don't wreck the whole thing on the installation step.
For testing the chip, I used the ASUS Pro WS TRX50-SAGE motherboard together with an Nvidia RTX 5090 GPU, 128GB (4 x 32GB) G.Skill G5 Series DDR5-6400 ECC memory, along with a Crucial T705 PCIe 5.0 SSD as my primary system drive. Cooling was handled by a Silverstone XE360-TR5 AIO cooler, and power was supplied by a Thermaltake Toughpower PF3 1050W Platinum PSU, and a fresh install of Windows 11.
This configuration is more or less what an enthusiast HEDT rig or professional Windows workstation would look like, and it definitely outclasses what you'll find in all but the most tricked-out gaming PC, so it's a solid representative system for carrying out my testing.
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X: Performance
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Best-in-class multi-core performance
Slower clocks mean it can lose out to the Threadripper 9970X in key workloads
Gaming performance is unimpressive
The performance of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9800X ends up being a somewhat mixed bag for all of the reasons I've already gone over, but now that we're at the 'take-a-look-at-the-actual-numbers' stage, hopefully you'll see what I mean.
Across most workloads I tested, the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X can't keep up with the 9970X, falling behind some Ryzen 9 desktop chips, and even losing a couple of times to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. This is especially true when it comes to single-core performance and gaming, where the Threadripper 9980X just isn't competitive at all with any of the consumer-grade enthusiast processors I tested.
First, the single-core performance of the 9980X consistently loses out to not just the Threadripper 9970X, but it gets roughed up pretty bad by pretty much all the high-end Ryzen 9 and Ryzen 7 9000-series processors. Ultimately, it just doesn't have the base clock speed to sustain enough performance to compete in focused, application-specific tasks.
This difference across all single-core tests is about 3% slower than the 9970X (which isn't terrible), but about 10% slower than the Ryzen 9 9950X (which is at least bad, if not quite terrible).
However, when we look at the 9980X's multi-core performance, things flip rather drastically. At first, it looks like more of the same with Geekbench 6, where the 9980X only outperforms the 9970X by about 4% (though it does beat out third-place finisher, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, by about 36%).
Once we hit the Cinebench tests, though, it's over for everyone else. In Cinebench R23, the 9980X's score of 115,098 is about 51% better than the 9970X's 76,136 score, and an increadible 173.4% better than the third-place finisher, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, which scored a relatively measly 42,098.
In Cinebench R24, it's more or less the same, with the 9980X finishing 56% better than the 9970X's multi-core score and nearly 168% better than the third-best performer, the Core Ultra 9 285K.
Across all multi-core tests, the 9980X comes in about 36% better than the 9970X and about 106% better than the Core Ultra 9 285K, with the rest of the Ryzen 9 and 7 chips falling even further behind.
In whole system performance, as measured in CrossMark, the Threadripper 9980X does pretty well in terms of overall performance, though it comes in about 125 points behind the 9970X (or about 5%). That's still better than the Ryzen 9s and Ryzen 7s, though. It falls behind quite a bit in productivity workloads, coming in second to last, just ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D.
In terms of responsiveness, it's well ahead of the Ryzen 9 and Ryzen 7 chips, as well as Intel's flagship desktop processor, coming in second only to the 9970X.
Creative workloads are one of the areas where the 9980X shines like the powerhouse chip it is, notching substantial wins in Blender Benchmark 4.3, V-ray 6, and PugetBench for Creators Adobe Premiere.
Over all workloads, the 9980X chalked up a roughly 30% better performance than the 9970X, and that's taking the geomean of all the creative benchmark results, something that really undersells how dominating the 9980X's Blender Benchmark and V-Ray 6 CPU performance is (about 71% and 65% better than the 9970X). If I just averaged all the scores to give some of these tests more weight, the 9980X comes in about 50% better than the 9970X across creative workloads, with every other chip far, far behind.
Where the 9980X really fails is in terms of gaming performance, so PC gaming enthusiasts out there who want a Threadripper 9980X as a flex, you'd be doing yourself a massive disservice.
On average, across all the games tested, the 9980X had the worst gaming performance both in terms of average FPS and 1% FPS. The 9970X did marginally better, but the consumer-grade Ryzen chips and even the Core Ultra 9 285K are far better suited for gaming than either of the Threadripper 9000-series chips, but expecially compared to the 9980X.
This poor gaming performance also extends into game AI, largely because game logic is a largely single-core task that can't easily be disaggregated across multiple threads.
Independent NPC actors might benefit from multithreading in games, of course, but if that was the case, the 9980X should have done better simulating a full in-game year of Stellaris gameplay with 42 AI empires on a huge map, exactly the kind of asynchronous agent logic processing multithreading might have helped.
Unfortunately, the 9980X came in dead last in that test, only being able to finish the year in about 55.72 seconds, which would extrapolate to 393 in-game days in one minute. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D finished the year in about 44.75 seconds, which translates to about 489 days simulated in one minute.
In the end, all of this is to say that the 9980X isn't going to be awful at gaming, especially if you have one of the best graphics cards like the Nvidia RTX 5090 and crank up the settings so that the frame rate bottleneck moves from CPU to GPU.
Moving on to the more physical aspects of performance, the thermal and power consumption of the 9980X are what you would expect from a 350W TDP chip. I can assure you, the 9980X uses up every last watt of headroom its TDP will allow, ranging from 54.515W when idle all the way up to 349.623W peak power draw under 100% load.
Surprisingly, this did not directly translate into the chip overheating, and its temperatures ranged from 41℃ to 75℃ at its peak with a 360mm AIO cooler.
As you can see above, the real strength of this chip is in its multi-core performance. It's general system performance is decent and it's a pretty responsive chip, but you don't buy a 64-core Threadripper to try and max out your single-core clock speed for better FPS in games, you use it to chew through asynchronous workflows as fast as possible. The Threadripper 9980X is all about throughput, and in this regard, it's in a class all its own.
Normally, I take the geomean all of the different performance scores to arrive at a final score that accounts for some tests having very large numbers as their results compared to other tests (Cinebench R23 and R24's single and multi-core scores being a prime example).
However, when I do that, in the case of the 9980X, I all but erase the dominating results that make this chip what it is in the one workflow category it is designed to excel at.
As such, I've done something different and included both the aggregate geometric mean of all the chips' scores as well as a straight average. This allows you to appreciate how much the multi-core performance of the 9980X skews the results when the scores are averaged normally.
The 9980X is in an effective geometric tie with the Ryzen 9 9950X3D and only a little bit ahead of the rest of the processors I tested in the end. But give the 9980X the proper weight of its multi-core performance with a straight average, and the 9980X runs away with it, beating out the 9970X by about 30% and the Intel Core Ultra 9 and AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D by about 87%.
Taking all of those scores and looking at them in terms of performance-for-price, however, and the 9980X does not fair very well, coming in dead last in terms of value for your money. At least at first glance.
Given how this processor is designed for a very specific (and often lucrative) kind of work, I don't really think that the standard value metric I'd use with other products is applicable.
Yes, this chip is expensive, but if you're the kind of professional who would benefit from the 9980X's multi-core prowess, you're likely to make that money back fairly quickly just from speeding up your workflow and this chip will pay for itself in very short order.
Performance: 5 / 5
Should you buy the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X?
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X Scorecard
Value
This chip is very expensive, but for those who are seriously looking to buy it, money probably isn't the biggest concern here.
3 / 5
Specs & features
The 9980X has some impressive workstation-friendly specs, like a huge capacity for PCIe 5.0 I/O and faster 6400MT/s DDR5 ECC memory. The only shame is that it's base clock speeds aren't higher.
4.5 / 5
Performance
While there are some areas of weakness in terms of the 9980X's performance, this chip is built around one thing: chewing through multi-core workflows, and in that, it's a spectacular success.
5 / 5
Final Score
The 9980X is a very particular chip that is not going to be great for everybody, but if you're the type of person who needs this kind of chip for work, only the high-end Threadripper Pro 9000-series chips can best the 9980X.
4.17 / 5
Buy the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X if...
Your work will benefit greatly from improved multi-core performance The only real reason to buy this chip is its absolutely dominant multi-core performance. Nothing else is really in the same league as the 9980X in this regard, so if your workflow will benefit substantially from this kind of processing, this is the chip you need.
Don't buy it if...
You don't need the absolute fastest multi-core performance you can afford If better multi-core performance isn't your number one priority for upgrading your workstation to speed up your workflow, then you will be better off with the Threadripper 9970X, which is much more balanced as well as cheaper.
Also consider
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X The Ryzen Threadripper 9970X is no slouch when it comes to multi-core performance and is second only to the 9980X in my testing, but offers a better performance and price balance.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K If you're not hellbent on setting Cinebench R23 records your multi-core performance on a HEDT workstation, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is pretty good for these kinds of workloads without costing a fortune.
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D If you're looking to get the best processor for your enthusiast gaming, streaming, or prosumer content creation workstation, in most cases, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D will be more than enough for your needs at a fraction of the price.
I spent about two weeks testing the Threadripper 9980X
I used it for content creation, gaming, and intensive office productivity
I put the chip through my standard suite of CPU benchmark tests
I used the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X for about two weeks in my day-to-day work PC, using it for content creation for work, CPU experimentation and stress testing, and general productivity.
I didn't spend a whole lot of time gaming with this chip, as it definitely isn't its intended use case, and it was obvious early on that this wasn't a great gaming chip.
I used my standard CPU testing suite to stress the 9980X under load, including running custom scripts to maintain the highest CPU utilization possible for hours at a time to stress the chip's multi-core performance. For benchmarks, I focused most of my attention on benchmarks like V-Ray 6, Handbrake 1.9, Cinebench R23 and R24, as well as PugetBench for Creators Adobe Premiere.
I've tested dozens of processors for hundreds of hours over my time here at TechRadar, so I know my way around a processor and a testbench to push a chip to its limits to evaluate its quality and value, and I bring that expertise to bear with every review I do.
The very first time I booted up Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S on Nintendo Switch 2, I had to look up a list of what had actually been changed.
This is a port of one of my favorite puzzle games ever, the original Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 from 2020 - a title that I’ve sunk more than a hundred hours into across PC, PlayStation 5, and Nintendo Switch. Still, the tweaks present in this new version are so slight that even I struggled to see them at first.
Review info
Platform reviewed: Nintendo Switch 2 Available on: Nintendo Switch 2 Release date: June 5, 2025
You’re basically getting a single new mode here: the co-op Puyo Tetris Double Mode which features fast 2v2 battles. It’s a fun way to play for sure, but it’s not a necessary addition in a game that is already overflowing with content. If you own the Nintendo Switch 2 Camera accessory, you have the option of showing your face as you play too - another ultimately superfluous extra.
There’s also support for the mouse controls of the Joy-Con 2, though they’re disappointingly awkward to use. Playing Tetris or Puyo Puyo with a cursor is considerably slower than button inputs, making matches more fiddly thus putting you at a clear disadvantage.
At least GameShare is well implemented, giving you an easy way to play with friends on either Nintendo Switch or Nintendo Switch 2.
Bursting at the seams
(Image credit: Sega)
The original version of Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 offers so many modes that it’s almost hard to keep track of them, so here’s quick run-down of the most significant ones so you know what you’re in for before I get into the new stuff:
Versus - a traditional competitive match of either Puyo Puyo or Tetris
Big Bang - clear a board of existing pieces faster than your opponent
Party - competitive Puyo Puyo or Tetris with special items added in
Skill Battle - play Puyo Puyo or Tetris as a character with special skills and items
Fusion - Puyos and Tetris pieces fall at the same time
Swap - Swap between Puyo Puyo and Tetris every 25 seconds
These can either be played solo against bots or as part of a robust online offering that’s complete with a basic competitive ranking system.
This is on top of loads of unique challenge modes, a detailed ‘Lessons’ tutorial mode, and a full-on RPG style single-player campaign with cute artwork and fully voiced dialogue scenes packed with charming moments.
This all results in what is without a doubt one of the most comprehensive and content-rich puzzle games of all time. Seriously, after more than a hundred hours, there are still some modes that I’ve barely touched.
Mix and match
(Image credit: Sega)
Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S adds just one new mode, available as an option when you select the Versus mode. It splits four players into two teams of two, with each team sharing their own board.
It’s nothing particularly wild in comparison to the modes found in the base game, but still very entertaining as you desperately try to coordinate placing pieces with your partner in high-speed matches. As good as it is, however, it sits in a sea of other excellent modes so doesn't justify much of the $39.99 / £34.99 asking price.
Best bit
(Image credit: Sega)
The game has a wide range of colorful characters that you can play as, including some crossovers like Sonic the Hedgehog. The artwork for all of them looks great and there are plenty of voice acted lines as you play.
The same is true of the new mouse controls, which allow you to browse the menus with a cursor or drag the Joy-Con 2 around to position falling pieces on the board.
The latter implementation is awkward though, proving significantly slower than just using the buttons, so it’s something that anybody would probably never want to use. The Nintendo Switch 2 Camera support is lackluster too, simply allowing you to show your face in matches instead of the usual character portrait.
GameShare is great at least, and, in my testing, proved impressively responsive when I paired my Nintendo Switch 2 up with my Nintendo Switch Lite. If this all was sold as a $9.99 / £9.99 or so Nintendo Switch 2 Edition upgrade rather than a more pricey standalone release, then I could see this feature alone being well worth the cost.
Ghost town
(Image credit: Sega)
In the graphics department, things haven’t changed as much as you might think. Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 was already a great looking game on Nintendo Switch and, while the picture quality of Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S is a smidge sharper, it’s not a noticeable upgrade unless you directly compare the images side by side.
Loading times seem extremely similar too, which is to say that they’re still good but not substantially improved.
This apparent lack of technical differences leaves me wondering why Sega has made the baffling choice to split multiplayer matchmaking pools between Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 and Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S.
Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 still has a very active online scene, even after all these years, so you can reliably find matches at almost any time. Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S, on the other hand, seems deserted after just a few weeks.
I have managed to get into a couple of games here and there, but waiting times are significantly longer than the original game. It’s a huge shame and means that existing Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 owners have no real reason to splash out for this release, as it comes at the cost of online play.
If you’ve never experienced Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 before, then the purchase is a bit more justifiable. You’re still getting a great game here at the end of the day with hundreds of hours of quality puzzle action and a handful of new features designed to take advantage of the capabilities of your brand new console.
This is technically the most definitive version of the game so far, so it’s not a bad starting point if you’re a newcomer.
Should I play Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S?
Play it if…
You’ve never tried Puyo Puyo Tetris If you’re completely new to the Puyo Puyo Tetris series, then Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S isn’t a bad place to start. It’s the most complete version of Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 yet thanks to its new mode and additional features.View Deal
You’re scrambling for a great puzzle game Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S is still a fantastic puzzle game. It has heaps of content for both solo and online players, plus local play options if you’re looking for something to bring to a party or family gathering.View Deal
Don’t play it if…
You already own the original version If you already own Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 on Nintendo Switch, then it’s hard to justify Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S. If you desperately want to try the new mode, make sure to wait for a steep discount.View Deal
You want something that makes better use of mouse controls The mouse controls in Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S are a let down. If you want a title that makes better use of the Joy-Con 2 hardware feature, try something like Drag x Drive.View Deal
Accessibility features
Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S doesn’t feature any dedicated accessibility settings. It has a limited settings menu, with options like turning off auto save, disabling controller vibration, and tweaking the language. The game is fully voice acted, but subtitles are still featured throughout.
How I reviewed Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S
I played just under five hours of Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S on Nintendo Switch 2, having played a significant amount more of the original Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 on Nintendo Switch, PC, and PS5.
During my time with the game, I compared my experience with that of the original release, making careful note of any differences. I endeavored to test every one of the new features, plus the new mode extensively.
It’s official: direct drive PC racing wheels have entered the affordable mainstream. While the prices of your groceries continue to skyrocket, simultaneously, sim racing hardware manufacturers have found a way to package high-quality, high-torque bundles together for south of $1,000, and newcomer Nacon introduces a new level of build quality and construction materials in that sub-$1,000 price point with its debut Revosim bundle.
The wheelbase can exert up to 9Nm of torque (translation: loads), which is notably more than the Thrustmaster T598, the no-brainer entry-level direct drive wheel. It’s cheaper than Moza’s R9 bundle while offering very similar build quality. It’s also more affordable than most variations of Fanatec’s CSL DD 8Nm bundles, and while Fanatec generally has the edge with the wheels it produces, Nacon’s pedals are superior to the ones Fanatec bundles in its sub-$1,000 CSL packages and it includes a strong and sturdy quick-release mechanism.
All that talk of prices and rival offerings is abstracting the headline news, though: driving feels good with this bundle. Although it’s still missing some default force feedback profiles and control assignment schemes in some titles (like F1 24, for example), there’s power and articulation right out of the box, with no need to tweak alpha values in the accompanying software.
And in the likes of Rennsport, Assetto Corsa Evo, The Crew Motorfest, and Le Mans Ultimate, which support it natively already, it feels right as soon as you hit the track. Extras like the phone mount attachment and swappable button fronts with custom stickers are also a very impressive value-add.
There’s a caveat: while it’s a fantastic option to add to a sim racing cockpit, it’s wholly impractical for desktop use. The pedals move around on the floor and will tip over when you hit the brake, and the desktop clamps protrude so far below the desk that they’re bound to hit your knees.
It’s for Playseat setups only, but in that context, Nacon’s bundled together a winning combo of powerful wheelbase, nicely finished wheel with customizable buttons, and smart and solid pedals with adjustable load cells so you can adjust the required stamping force to taste.
(Image credit: Future)
Nacon Revosim: Price and availability
List price: $799.99 / £699.99 (around AU$1,435)
Priced higher than Thrustmaster’s T598 but lower than Moza and Fanatec 8Nm and 9Nm bundles
Considering features and quality, it hits the price sweet spot
Price is a huge factor in this bundle. Nacon’s hit a really competitive point while adding extra features like a phone mount and customizable buttons, and with no signs of having cut corners on construction materials. Plastic is not prevalent in this bundle, and all the weighty, brushed aluminum used throughout is impressive for the price.
Thrustmaster’s T598 is the chief rival, since it’s currently the best affordable DD wheel bundle on the market, but Moza’s R5 and R9 bundles, along with Fanatec’s various CSL DD bundle configurations, are also in similar price territory.
Nacon Revosim: Specs
Price
$799.99 / £699.99 (around AU$1,435)
Weight
52.9lb / 24kg
Peak torque
9Nm
Features
Direct drive, customizable button covers, quick release wheel, two-pedal base, phone mount attachment
Connection type
USB-A
Compatibility
PC
Software
Revosim Software
(Image credit: Future)
Nacon Revosim: Design & features
Great finish quality on wheel and pedals
Wheelbase looks like Fanatec or Moza’s designs
Customizable details
The simplest terms you can use to appraise the design of a piece of sim racing hardware are these: does it look like it came out of a racing car, and does it feel like you’re driving a racing car when you use it? You don’t see RGB light zones on sim wheels for that reason. It’s supposed to immerse you in a virtual cockpit.
I’m really impressed by how well Nacon has managed to nail this aesthetic with its debut sim racing product. The wheelbase is compact and no-frills like Moza and Fanatec’s direct drive servos, but the wheel, quick release, and pedals all look and feel admirably automotive.
The wheel is the star of the show here. The wheel itself is finished in stitched pleather with a mixture of grippy perforated texture around the contact points and a smooth finish at six and twelve o’clock, with a white centering stripe at the very top. The quality of the stitching is extremely neat and tidy with zero loose threads on my review sample, and there’s a satisfying amount of cushioning to the wheel that I appreciated when the base was giving me jolts of feedback at full force to indicate collisions.
The input layout includes 12 face buttons, 11 of which have swappable keycaps with different color options and supplied stickers, one scroll wheel, a POV hat switch, and two magnetic switches on the back. Additionally, the scroller and hat switch can be pushed in to register a separate input binding.
That’s plenty for any racing sim. Personally, the most demanding title I play in terms of inputs is Assetto Corsa Competizione, and generally, I prefer to have two on-wheel dials to adjust TC and engine maps. That’s achieved easily enough on the Revosim, though, since the hat switch also has a rotational dial input. That leaves plenty of button inputs free for lights and wiper controls, menu commands, pit controls, and a view change.
The wheel shape and size is round, with less of a flat bar bottom than Moza’s R5 or R9 wheels, but neither is it perfectly round like the Thrustmaster T598. That means it’s just about applicable for any racing discipline from open wheeler stuff to rally and drift, though being a round wheel, it’s better suited to the latter two.
Nacon doesn’t currently make any other wheels to swap in its place, so if you’re a hardcore F1 racer, you might be better served by the likes of Fanatec’s CSL F1 bundle with its smaller F1-shaped wheel, though let’s be honest – in terms of lap times, there’s going to be very little difference.
(Image credit: Future)
I love the feel of the face buttons. They feel almost like mechanical switches (they’re not), and although there’s a tiny bit of lateral play, they feel of far superior quality to the input buttons on most sub-$1,000 wheels. The fact that their faces can be swapped out in different colors and stickers can be added to them from a supplied sheet is, I’m surprised to note, quite a big deal to me. It’s intrinsically enjoyable to set the wheel up with buttons particular to a specific game. The rotary dial and hat switch are less spectacular in how they feel, but they do the job reliably.
And if you’re going to install this into a cockpit, that’s all you need to know. There’s no ‘but’. For desktop users, though, the ‘but’ is considerable. This isn’t really a desktop-use wheel.
Some might argue that it’s priced high enough that the vast majority of its end users will have race seats anyway, but the fact that it’s bundled with desk clamps and marketed as being compatible for use on a desk means I have to judge it on those terms too, and the fact is it’s very awkward to use this base when clamped to your desk. The clamps will secure it tightly enough to withstand that 9Nm of force, but the clamps’ positioning and length mean you’re very likely to bang your knees against them, or else have to sit in a strange position to avoid them.
Down at ground level, the design of the pedal modules themselves is problem-free. Nice big contact patches with your feet, a variety of elastomers for the brake pedal’s load cell, so you can adjust stiffness. But the base design is once again not really fit for use outside of a cockpit.
The grip surfaces on the base don’t grip hard enough, and there’s nowhere near enough weight at the bottom of the pedal base to prevent it from tipping when you hit the brake, even when using the weakest elastomer. When you screw this directly to a cockpit pedal mount, it’s rock-solid and feels fantastic to use… but only then.
Let’s finish with a positive, though, to underline that poor desktop use is the only negative about this bundle. The quick-release mechanism is really exemplary stuff. Fanatec owners will probably break into a sweat at the mere mention of quick releases, since the company’s move from the QR1 to QR2 standards was nothing short of a debacle due to stock issues and the consumer experience is still confusing since several different tiers of QR2 mechanism are available for purchase, separate from the wheels themselves, and both wheel-side and base-side components need to be bought. Nacon’s mechanism creates a wonderfully tight, secure feel with no rattle or play between the wheel and base, and taking the wheel on and off is a smooth operation.
(Image credit: Future)
Nacon Revosim: Performance
Smooth, powerful torque delivery
Low latency articulation in games
Not all games have default mappings yet
Yes, it feels great to drive a lap with the Revosim. But to quantify exactly how good, we need to break it down in context.
First, direct drive versus belt-driven wheels. Belt-driven was the prevalent technology during force feedback wheels’ emergence in gaming, and it can give you plenty of feeling and a meaty jolt when it needs to. But inherent to the technology is a grainy feeling when rotating the wheel, a noisy motor, and ‘cogging’ – a sensation of the wheel snapping between tons of resistance and none, because the motor can’t keep up with the information being fed into it to articulate the feedback quickly and precisely enough.
Direct drive is a pricier alternative that articulates the force feedback without any belts, gears, or pulleys, and that means it’s faster, smoother, and feels closer to the real thing. Until very recently – the last 2-3 years – it’s been a prohibitively expensive tech which only enthusiasts have invested in, but following the lockdown sim racing boom, manufacturers including Thrustmaster, Logitech G, Fanatec, and the major industry disruptor Moza have all brought affordable, sub-$1,000 direct drive wheels to market.
So, firstly, in the most fundamental terms, Nacon’s Revosim wheel feels like a big step up compared to any belt-driven wheel, like the Logitech G923, or even Thrustmaster’s T-GT II, the Rolls-Royce of conventional belt-driven models.
(Image credit: Future)
So the real question is how it compares to those other direct drive bundles in the same price bracket. Most enthusiasts who follow the market will look straight to the 9Nm of torque, since on paper it’s a big selling point.
Thrustmaster’s T598 offers just 5Nm on the spec sheet, though the wheelbase uses a new axial drive tech which seems to be able to effectively ‘overclock’ torque and generate a much more muscular sensation than the number suggests. Moza’s R9 bundle offers 9Nm but sells for around $1,000, while Fanatec’s CSL DD QR2 base will get you to 8Nm for under $400, but that’s just for the base, not a bundle with a wheel or pedals.
However, after spending many hours with both the T598 and this wheel, I’m less of a stickler for the power numbers. The Thrustmaster is capable of outputting enough resistance to make my hands feel like they’re in a Tough Mudder after five laps, and let’s not forget that turning the steering wheel of a real car is not a feat of strength, even at speed and during traction loss. Articulation is what matters, and while max torque output is a part of that equation, it’s not as simple as looking for the higher number and deciding that’s better.
Back to the opening statement, then: it feels good to drive a lap with the Revosim because it’s capable of conveying weight transfer, traction loss, the unsettling floatiness of a car under heavy braking, and the quick spasms your wheel can make in complaint when you try to put a lot of power down in a low gear. For their part, the pedals both feel comfortable and offer the right amount of resistance, particularly so for the adjustable load cell brake pedal.
A final word should go to the inclusion of a phone mount, so that you can use a smartphone app like Simhub to turn your phone into a digital cockpit display. In real terms, this is just an extra piece of plastic in the box, but it’s a small inclusion that elevates the driving experience so much. That tells the story of the overall package: little details and additions that turn a good bundle into a great one.
(Image credit: Future)
Should I buy the Nacon Revosim?
Buy it if...
You race in a cockpit Look at other options if you race at your desktop, but if you’re mounting to a cockpit, this is as sturdy as it is comfortable.
You’re considering your first direct drive wheel What a great price this is for an entry-level DD wheel. You don’t need to make a big fiscal commitment to enjoy smoother driving.
You’re not going to upgrade piece by piece The Revosim ecosystem is small so far – in fact, it’s really just this bundle, plus a handbrake and sequential gearbox – so look elsewhere if you want a base that you’ll keep adding to.
Don't buy it if...
You’re already racing a direct drive wheel As great as this package is, you don’t need to worry that you’ve lost the competitive advantage that your Fanatec, Moza, or Thrustmaster wheel offered; now this one’s come along.
You need an F1-style wheel Despite the nice, quick-release mechanism, there aren’t currently any other first-party wheel shapes besides this round wheel.
You race on consoles The Revosim is PC only for now, so Gran Turismo 7 pros need not apply.
Nacon Revosim: also consider...
If the Nacon Revosim doesn’t turn your head, try these similarly priced rivals.
Nacon Revosim
Thrustmaster T598
Thrustmaster T-GT II
Price
$799.99 / £699.99 (around AU$1435)
$499.99 / £449.99 (around AU$899.99)
$799.99 / £699.99 (around AU$1,211.99)
Weight
52.9lbs / 24kg
14.1lbs / 6.4kg
29lbs / 13.2kg
Peak torque
9Nm
5Nm
Around 6Nm
Features
Direct drive, customizable button covers, quick release wheel, two-pedal base, phone mount attachment
Direct drive, modular pedal base, detachable rim, 100% torque overshoot
Detachable wheel, three-pedal base
Connection type
USB-A
USB-A
USB-A
Compatibility
PC
PS5, PS4, PC
PS5, PC
Thrustmaster T598 For a slightly more affordable entry point into direct drive racing, the T598 has a wonderfully smooth wheel actuation and tons more power than its Nm output suggests. Odd wheelbase shape and size, though.
Thrustmaster T-GT II Priced similarly but featuring older belt-driven tech, the T-GT II nonetheless offers a great experience for desktop users with minimal grainy sensation or cogging.
Tested in F1 24, F1 25, Rennsport, ACC, and AC Evo
Two weeks of testing in a cockpit and on a desktop
Variety of elastomers used, custom FFB profiles tested
Although it’s cheap for a direct drive wheel, this is still a big financial outlay, so the intended audience is the sim racer who goes where the serious competition lies. With that in mind, I headed to various racing sims where the hotlap leaderboards are fiercely contested and where PvP racing is (usually) conducted with a degree of sporting consideration. I also played F1 24 and F1 25.
Those titles run the gamut of supported and non-supported games, but even in the non-supported ones, I didn’t run into any major difficulties besides having to set my input binds button by button. Force feedback response was convincing and useful in every game.
I swapped out the elastomers to try a variety of braking stiffness levels, and while everyone has a preference, the important thing is that there’s sufficient variance out of the box that most racers will be able to find their preferred feel.
The same goes for force feedback strength – I tweaked a few values in all the games I played, to get a sense of where the min and max are for its feedback types, and found that both the floaty (cheaty) super-low FFB feel and the muscular, jolty response types are possible here with minimal tweaks.
Light spoilers follow for Peacemaker season 2 episodes 1 through 5. Full spoilers also follow for Peacemaker season 1 and The Suicide Squad.
It's incredibly rare to see a C-tier comic book anti-hero star in his own show. It's even less likely that such an individual, who's now arguably one of DC Comics' hottest commodities, would be positioned as the most important cog in a nascent cinematic franchise.
Few eyebrows are being raised about Peacemaker being that person, though. With season 1 of the titular character's TV series receiving critical and commercial acclaim in early 2022, it was a case of when, not if, a sophomore outing would arrive.
Over three years later, Peacemaker season 2 is not only ready to be unleashed, but also become a core component of James Gunn and Peter Safran's DC Universe (DCU). The fact that this chaotic tragicomedy's next installment is as super as its first, and sets the stage for future DCU and DCU-adjacent projects, proves they made the right decision to use it as a key building block for their burgeoning shared universe.
Hero to zero
Whether it's saving the world or being grilled by school kids, Chris Smith can't catch a break (Image credit: HBO Max)
Set a few months after Gunn's Superman movie, Peacemaker season 2 reunites us with Chris Smith (John Cena), aka the eponymous anti-hero, as he continues to struggle with reconciling his past.
Things aren't much better in the present, either. A failed job interview to join The Justice Gang, the corporately owned team of metahumans introduced in Superman, coupled with Emilia Harcourt (Jennifer Holland) continually rejecting his romantic advances, leaves Smith longing for a better life.
I really got a kick out of Cena plumbing the depths of Smith's inner turmoil
As fate would have it, such an opportunity presents itself to Smith via the secret Quantum Unfolding Chamber (QUC), an inter-dimensional location outside of normal space that exists in the home of his deceased father, Auggie Smith (Robert Patrick). Inebriated one night, Smith stumbles onto a parallel world where his dead dad and brother are alive, and the Peacemaker of this world is a celebrated hero who's in a relationship with this universe's Harcourt. Hypnotized by this idyllic reality, Smith is drawn to it time and again – but, as the saying goes, the grass isn't always greener on the other side.
If the hit HBO Max show's second season sounds like it's putting a multiversal spin on introspective movies like It's a Wonderful Life with a Sliding Doors-style narrative, that's intentional.
Indeed, if season 1 trained its lens on Smith's superhuman alter-ego and his attempts to redeem the 'Peacemaker' name, its sequel is all about the man himself reflecting on the choices he's made and, if he had a do-over, how he'd handle things differently. I really got a kick out of Cena plumbing the depths of Smith's inner turmoil and, despite Smith's efforts to deal with them more maturely, his deeply flawed approach to handling his demons with external vices and increasingly regular trips to an alternate dimension that allow him to live a double life.
Harcourt and Smith's relationship is put through the wringer this season (Image credit: Curtis Bonds Baker/Max)
Parallels can be drawn between Smith's methodology and that of his perennial love interest, Harcourt. Harcourt's sense of self is rattled after she's fired by ARGUS and blacklisted by every US intelligence agency for apparently helping to expose former ARGUS chief Amanda Waller's role in Project Butterfly and Task Force X last season.
Two sides of the same coin, this impulsive pair uses physical pleasure and pain to numb themselves to their deep-seated trauma, and continues the show's exploration of the nature versus nurture debate in engrossing fashion through their individual arcs. Meanwhile, surprise-laden flashbacks to events that occur after 2021's The Suicide Squad, but before season 1, add a fascinating extra layer of complexity to their dynamic.
John Economos' (left) loyalties are split between his job and his friends this season (Image credit: Curtis Bonds Baker/Max)
The rest of Peacemaker's primary ensemble – who, alongside Smith and Harcourt, are collectively known as the 11th Street Kids – also face similar soul-searching experiences as part of their season 2 arcs.
Indeed, the six-month time jump between Smith chancing upon another universe and this season's main storyline is sufficient enough to show how Leota Adebayo (Danielle Brooks), John Economos (Steve Agee), and Adrian Chase/Vigilante's (Freddie Stroma) lives have changed.
The fascinating regression of some friendships... gives Peacemaker 2 a more pronounced soap opera edge than its forebear.
There's a greater emphasis on what makes each character tick and how they deal with setbacks, too, through their more substantial individual arcs this season. The pleasing progression of certain core dynamics and nascent character pairings gives rise to new kinds of awkward, albeit heart-warming, camaraderie. Equally, the fascinating regression of some friendships adds more than a pinch of melodrama, giving Peacemaker 2 a more pronounced soap opera edge than its forebear.
Admittedly, some characters get more to do than others. I was pleased to see the often underappreciated Agee shine in a much bigger role this season, and even Eagly, Smith's rambunctious White Eagle pet/sidekick, gets a funny, though quickly resolved, subplot this time around. However, I wish Stroma's scene-stealing sociopath wasn't relegated to the sidelines as much as he is. Hopefully, season 2 will rectify this glaring oversight in its final three episodes.
Careful what you wish for
Langston Fleury and Sasha Bordeaux are two of numerous new additions to Peacemaker's cast (Image credit: Curtis Bonds Baker/HBO Max)
With numerous supporting cast members killed off in season 1, there are plenty of vacancies to fill on its follow-up's roster.
So, how do they fare in the DCU Chapter One show? They're all terrific, but Tim Meadows' Langston Fleury and Michael Rooker's Red St. Wild are the pick of the bunch. The former – a greasy, smug, and misogynistic sycophant – picks up the cocksure slack that Cena's Smith discards this season, while the latter plays to Rooker's character strengths as a delightfully unhinged individual who's drafted in by ARGUS director Rick Flag Sr (Frank Grillo) and his deputy Sasha Bordeaux (Sol Rodriguez) to track down Eagly for reasons I won't spoil.
Frank Grillo returns as Rick Flag Sr after appearing in Superman and Creature Commandos season 1 (Image credit: Jessica Miglio/Max)
Like Stroma's Chase, I was initially disappointed over the use of Grillo's Flag Sr. Apart from a couple of scenes, including one of the flashbacks I mentioned earlier, Waller's recently-installed replacement – he was hired by ARGUS eight months before season 2's primary story begins – mostly takes a backseat in this season's first four episodes.
Like Stroma's Chase, I was initially disappointed over the use of Grillo's Flag Sr
Okay, Grillo's active role in proceedings is dictated by how the plot unfolds. However, considering Grillo told me that Flag Sr would be "on a mission" for justice in Peacemaker 2 – remember, the titular anti-hero killed his son in The Suicide Squad – I'd hope this storyline would've featured more heavily in earlier entries. Thankfully, once season 2 refocuses its efforts on the Flag Sr portion of the plot, the full weight and impact of Peacemaker's actions in that 2021 Gunn-directed film reverberate through episode 5 and, hopefully, in its final three chapters.
Leota Adebayo and Adrian Chase spend more time together this season compared to its predecessor (Image credit: HBO Max)
While we're on the topic of The Suicide Squad, season 2 does a mostly good job of confirming what parts of the DC Extended Universe (DCEU), i.e., Warner Bros' previous superhero-packed cinematic franchise, are officially canon in the DCU.
Ever since Gunn confirmed Peacemaker's second season would be part of his new-look shared universe, fans have wondered how it would handle this. Season 1 and The Suicide Squad were technically part of the DCEU – learn more about it via my DC movies in order guide – before Gunn and Safran's reboot. Smith's surprising but crowd-pleasing cameo in Superman, as well as Peacemaker season 2's official trailer, did little to answer fans' biggest questions. Fortunately, all is revealed through a handy 'previously on...' segment just minutes into this season's premiere. No spoilers, but I think the vast majority of fans will be pleased with the way that Gunn humorously retcons a particular scene from last season's finale – one that was the biggest canonical headache for many.
Michael Rooker's Red St. Wild is the primary antagonist of this season's Eagly-led subplot (Image credit: HBO Max)
Expected though they are, it's marvellous to see events and characters from the wider DCU play active roles in Peacemaker 2. Whether it's references to Superman's story, or episode 1's brilliantly dysfunctional interview scene involving The Justice Gang, I was heartened to see these narrative yarns spun out further and prove that, unlike Marvel's cinematic juggernaut, events on the big screen can and should be felt keenly in their small screen counterparts.
I'll admit season 2's new title sequence steadily grew on me to the point where I was actively singing along to it
And what of the most anticipated part of the show's return – i.e., this season's new title sequence. Last season's opening credits went viral in early 2022, with Gunn telling Entertainment Weekly it was watched four billion times on TikTok. No pressure, then, to make it as good, if not better.
Initially, I wasn't a fan of season 2's glam-rock-inspired dance number. With each episode that passed, though, I'll admit it steadily grew on me to the point where I was actively singing along to 'Oh Lord' by Foxy Shazam, aka the licensed song this season's ambitious choreographed sequence is set to. Don't be surprised if you feel the same way after re-watching it multiple times.
My verdict
Peacemaker season 2 is an impressive, entertaining, and startlingly thought-provoking continuation of its predecessor. A series packed with the usual trappings of a James Gunn project – dark and awkward humor, heart-wrenching moments, action-heavy sequences, a banging soundtrack, reams of melodrama, and broken characters you can't help but adore – it's must-see TV for DC comic book devotees, nascent DCU fans, and casual observers alike.
There are blemishes, some of which I've outlined above and others, like the occasionally jarring tonal shift, ruin its chances of earning a better rating. However, those flaws are comparatively minor in the grand scheme of things.
As I mentioned up top, not many DC Comics characters could carry their own series and be an integral part of the DCU storytelling machine. And yet, Peacemaker proves that, with the right cast and crew, and a creator who understands the material, anything is possible. If Chris Smith existed in the real world, I'm convinced the high regard he's held in by viewers would finally help him to *ahem* make peace with his past.
Peacemaker's second season launches with a two-episode premiere on August 21 (North and South America) and August 22 (everywhere else). Read my dedicated guide for Peacemaker season 2 before it arrives.
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X isn’t just a “cut-down” version of the flagship AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X—it’s a deliberately tuned, high-clocked, 32-core workstation CPU that hits a sweet spot for many professionals.
By halving the core count from 64 to 32 while boosting base frequency to 4.0 GHz (and up to 5.4 GHz on single-core boost), AMD has created a chip that is easier to cool, faster in certain lightly threaded scenarios, and considerably more affordable.
When I first unboxed it, the 9970X didn’t feel like all that different proposition from the 9980X. The packaging, socket installation, and TRX50 platform requirements are the same, but it’s only after I spent two weeks extensively testing both HEDT chips that the performance story for the 9970X revealed itself.
(Image credit: AMD)
In heavily threaded workloads like Blender Cycles and Cinebench multi-core, it delivers S-tier throughput in absolute terms—my Cinebench R23 multi-core score averaged 76,136, which is closer to the 9980X’s 115,098 than it is to the third-best result from my test group, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D with an average score of 42,100. That’s because the higher sustained clocks and reduced cross-die latency help the 9970X punch above its core count.
Where the difference becomes even more apparent is in day-to-day interactivity. Complex CAD assemblies, large Photoshop and Premiere projects, Unreal Engine scene editing, and other workloads with bursts of single-threaded or lightly threaded activity feel snappier than on the 9980X, a chip that feels purpose-built to maximize multi-core performance above any other consideration. That’s because the 9970X’s smaller core count means fewer CCDs to coordinate and a higher per-core thermal limit, allowing for faster frequency off the line. This will also pay dividends in applications that can sometimes scale unevenly across cores, such as large database server operations or multiple multi-threaded tasks running concurrently.
The 9970X’s power and thermals also proved more manageable in my testing. Under sustained all-core load, the chip’s maximum power draw hovered around 300W, but this was managed easily enough by the 360mm AIO cooler on the test bench. This kept the chip’s maximum tdie temperature at a balmy 74℃. For those who want to keep chip cooling simple in the form of a high-end AIO, this could make a tangible difference.
(Image credit: AMD)
Platform benefits are unchanged from the rest of the Threadripper 7000 Pro lineup: you still get quad-channel DDR5-6400 ECC memory support, up to 80 PCIe 5.0 lanes, and motherboard designs built for multiple GPUs, high-bandwidth storage, and add-in accelerators. That means it can serve as the central brain for a machine-learning workstation, a film-editing suite with multiple GPU accelerators, or a high-end simulation box without compromise.
Like earlier Threadrippers before it, the 9970X’s gaming performance is at best a distant secondary consideration—and like the 9980X, the 9970X won’t match the best processors on the consumer market, like the Core i9-14900K or Ryzen 9 9950X3D, in pure gaming FPS.
(Image credit: AMD)
However, with an average of over 240 FPS at 1080p in my tests, it’s more than capable of handling games competently between work sessions, especially when paired with one of the best graphics cards like the Nvidia RTX 5090.
The real magic of the 9970X, though, is how it blends workstation-class parallel compute with desktop-class responsiveness. For many pros, this chip will actually feel faster than the 9980X in mixed workloads, all while costing $2,499.99 / £2,299.99 / AU$4,199.
This is literally half the cost of AMD’s “best” HEDT processor. It’s still a major investment, but in the right pipeline, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X delivers a better return on both performance per dollar and performance per watt than its bigger sibling, making it the best AMD processor for just about every workstation PC that can run it.
How much does it cost? $2,499.99 / £2,299.99 / AU$4,199
When is it available? It is available now
Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X is available now for $2,499.99 / £2,299.99 / AU$4,199 in the US, UK, and Australia, respectively.
From a prosumer, enthusiast, and industry perspective, though, the price of the 9970X is going to be much cheaper than the 9980X, not to mention the Threadripper Pro 9000-series chips. So while its hard to call something costing more than a couple grand "cheap", for this class of product, this isn't that bad, especially considering that there's no increase in price from the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X.
Meanwhile, for many professionals, the 50% difference in price between the 9970X and 9980X—for what can often feels like 75–99% of the real-world performance of the 9980X—has to weigh heavily in its favor.
It’s important to note that Threadripper chips aren’t typically sold through mainstream retailers, so availability will be more limited than with high-end consumer CPUs. You’ll need to check with specialty component retailers, workstation-oriented e-tailers, and system integrators building high-end rigs for creative, engineering, or research applications in your region if you’re looking to upgrade to the 9970X.
It’s also worth noting that a total platform investment might be necessary as well. A TRX50 motherboard, high-bandwidth DDR5 ECC memory kit, and capable cooling are all required for the 9970X, and these can easily add a couple of grand to a build. That said, for buyers who rely on multi-core compute and high I/O throughput to make a living, the 9970X offers excellent return on investment.
Value: 4 / 5
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X: Specs & Features
(Image credit: AMD)
AMD Zen 5 architecture
Higher base clock than 9980X
32-cores/64-threads for excellent multi-core throughput
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X specs
Socket
sTR5 (TRX50)
Architecture
AMD Zen 5
Cores
32
Threads
64
Base Clock
4.0 GHz
Boost Clock
5.4 GHz
L3 Cache
128MB
PCIe Lanes
Up to 80 PCIe 5.0
Memory Support
Up to 1TB Quad-channel DDR5‑6400 ECC
TDP
350W
Tjmax
95℃
The Ryzen Threadripper 9970X is built on AMD’s Zen 5 architecture, manufactured using a MCM design with the TSMC’s advanced N4P process for the main compute die and TSMC’s N6 proccess for chip I/O.
It combines 32 high-performance cores for 64 total threads, offering strong parallel compute capabilities while maintaining high per-core speeds that benefit lightly threaded workloads.
With a 4.0 GHz base and up to 5.4 GHz boost, it delivers both sustained throughput and the snappy responsiveness that closely parallels mainstream consumer CPUs.
A major strength of the Threadripper 9000-series is its quad-channel DDR5 memory controller, supporting ECC DDR5-6400, up from ECC DDR5-5200 from the Threadripper 7000-series, for higher data bandwidth and integrity, which are key for high-resolution video editing, scientific computation, and large-scale 3D rendering.
(Image credit: AMD)
PCIe connectivity is equally formidable, with up to 80 lanes of PCIe 5.0 for GPUs and NVMe drives (up from 48 with the 7000-series), plus an additional 8 PCIe 4.0 lanes for legacy devices. This level of I/O capacity is ideal for multi-GPU render farms, expansive storage arrays, or specialized accelerator cards.
Its 350W TDP highlights the need for serious cooling (I would not recommend anything less than a 360mm AIO cooler), but it also enables sustained all-core performance without throttling when thermals are under control. The chip is fully unlocked as well, allowing fine-grained tuning for workloads that benefit from higher clocks.
Combined with the TRX50 platform’s durability and expandability, the 9970X’s specs make it a workstation CPU that can anchor a system for years of demanding use.
Specs & features: 5 / 5
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X: Installation & test setup
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Installing the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X is more involved than seating a standard desktop CPU. It uses AMD’s sTR5 socket, which is physically massive and requires a specific installation process.
AMD includes a torque-limiting wrench with the processor to ensure even pressure across the integrated heat spreader, an important step for both thermal performance and long-term reliability. Skipping proper installation can lead to uneven contact or even bent pins on the TRX50 motherboard, so definitely watch some installation videos on YouTube and read the instructions carefully before touching anything.
For testing, I used an ASUS Pro WS TRX50-SAGE board, paired with an Nvidia RTX 5090, G.Skill 128GB DDR5-6400 ECC memory (4x32GB), and a Crucial T705 PCIe 5.0 SSD as the primary system drive running a fresh copy of Windows 11. Cooling was handled by a Silverstone XE360-TR5 AIO cooler, and power was supplied by a Thermaltake Toughpower PF3 1050W Platinum PSU.
This configuration is more or less what a professional workstation or enthusiast HEDT rig might look like, and definitely exceeds what you might find in a typical gaming PC (this will be important in a bit). Every component—from the motherboard’s VRM design to the memory configuration—was selected to match the demands of a CPU built for long, heavy, and complex computing tasks.
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X: Performance
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Phenomenal multi-core performance
Very responsive
Gaming performance is unimpressive
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X’s performance reflects its 32-core, 64-thread design and high clock speeds, as demonstrated by my various benchmark data.
Everything from Geekbench 6.4 and Cinebench R23 to V-Ray, Blender Benchmark, and HandBrake 1.9 shows that it delivers exceptional throughput across professional workloads while maintaining strong single-core responsiveness.
In Geekbench 6.4, the 9970X scored a 3,010 in single-core and a 27,567 in multi-core performance, for example. This puts its single-core performance in the neighborhood of mainstream desktop CPUs like the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, though it’s about 10% slower than the fastest processor I tested, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, in Geekbench’s benchmark. Notably, the 9970X is about 1% faster in this test, on average, than the Threadripper 9980X.
For multi-core performance, however, the only real competition for the 9970X is the 9980X. In Geekbench 6.4, the 9970X is about 31% faster than the Core Ultra 9 285K, the third-fastest chip on this benchmark in my test group.
Meanwhile, the 9970X comes in about 4% slower than the 9980X in this test. Before you go thinking the 9970X can hang with the 9980X in overall multi-core performance, though, in Cinebench R23, the 9970X scored an astounding 76,136 points in multi-core performance, which is about 81% faster than the next chip on the podium, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, score of 42,098 (followed very closely by the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with 41,281).
The 9980X, meanwhile, clocked in 115,098 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which puts the 9970X about 34% slower than the 9980X. The story is essentially the same in Cinebench R24, with some tightening in the 3DMark CPU Profile (Max Thread) and PassMark CPU tests. Overall, the 9970X is the second-best multi-core performer, coming in about 54% faster than the third-place Core Ultra 9 285K, and about 25% slower than the multi-core champ 9980X.
The faster clock speeds in the 9970X give it a responsiveness edge over the slower 9980X, which you can see play out in system benchmarks like CrossMark. Here, the 9970X beat or roughly matched the productivity performance and responsiveness of the 9980X, Core Ultra 9 285K, and Ryzen 9 9950X. It’s only real competition here is the Intel Core i9-14900K, which has a noticeably higher boost frequency for its performance cores, which is vital to app performance and responsiveness.
In creative workloads, the 9970X outperformed nearly all of the chips in my testing, save for the 9980X, though there are some notable quirks in the results that might point to poor optimization for certain tests, like PugetBench for Creators.
Here both Threadripper chips fell way behind their client-grade competition in Adobe Photoshop, or essentially tying with them in PugetBench’s Premiere test—as the 9970X did—or only slightly beating the competition—hats off to the 9980X for the win there.
Other workloads, however, show that the 9970X is substantially better suited for these workflows than consumer-class chips. The 9970X takes the top spot in the CrossMark Creativity and Handbrake encoding tests overall, and loses only to the 9980X in Blender Benchmark 4.3 and V-Ray 6’s CPU test while nearly lapping its next closest rival on the consumer side on all four benchmarks.
Since the 9970X is classified as an HEDT chip rather than a full-on industrial workstation CPU, there are a lot of non-pro enthusiasts out there who like Threadrippers for the elite performance on offer, but I’ll warn you now that gaming is not where this chip is going to excel.
In my gaming benchmarks, the 9970X consistently came in at the bottom of the rankings, averaging about 241 FPS at 1080p on low settings (with a 1% FPS average of about 169). Every other chip besides the 9980X cleared 340 FPS on average, with 1% FPS averaging at least 40 FPS better. On the bright side, the 9970X did manage to beat out the 9980X, which came in dead last on every game I tested it with.
In terms of game AI performance, its also a bit of a mixed bag, with the 9970X doing very well in Civilization VII’s AI benchmark, but coming in a good deal behind in the mainstream consumer chips in the group in the Stellaris 1-year, 42 empire autoplay duration tests.
Of course, that’s not all there is to be said about gaming, since few with this kind of chip will be playing at 1080p with the lowest graphics settings on a cheap graphics card. If you’ve got the money for a Threadripper 9970X, you’re likely going to be able to swing a 4K graphics card like the Nvidia RTX 5080 or better; and gaming at higher resolutions shifts the FPS bottleneck from the CPU to the GPU, so the difference in actual framerates while playing might not be nearly so dramatic.
Thermals and power consumption were in line with what I was expecting from a 350W TDP chip. I recorded power draw ranging from 6.77W while idle to 300.6W peak, with temperatures between 37°C when idle and 74°C under sustained load using a 360mm AIO— an excellent result given the chip’s capabilities.
Overall, then, the 9970X really strikes a phenomenal balance between the responsiveness and everyday capability of the best consumer-market CPUs and the high-end performance required from a workstation-level processor.
Of course, given its price, I cannot imagine anyone who isn’t doing serious, heavy-duty 3D design, video production, or scientific simulation work needing a chip like this. If you’ve somehow stumbled into this review wondering if you should go through the ridiculous amount of expense to upgrade from a Core i9, Core Ultra 9, or Ryzen 9 system that you mostly use for gaming and prosumer-level content creation, don’t do it.
The payoff just isn’t worth the expense for anyone other than creative, AI, or scientific professionals. If you’re in a field that demands this kind of multi-core performance for your day-to-day work, however, the 9970X delivers close to flagship throughput with better responsiveness, making it one of the most balanced HEDT CPUs you’re going to find anywhere.
Should you buy the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X?
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X Scorecard
Value
For a chip this expensive, 'value' is definitely a relative term here. But for a workstation chip, this is a great value.
4 / 5
Specs & features
With high clock speeds, lots of CPU cores, and support for up to 1TB ECC DDR5 and 80 PCIe 5.0 lanes, this chips brings the latest and greatest to the table.
5 / 5
Performance
While this isn't the most powerful chip for every use case, for professional workloads, the performance on offer is incredible.
5 / 5
Final Score
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X offers a perfect balance of performance, responsiveness, and price that is impossible to beat.
4.67 / 5
Buy the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X if...
You need strong multi-core performance Of the non-Threadripper Pro 9000-chips, the 9970X outperforms everything on the market other than the 9980X, but it isn't that far behind.
You want excellent responsiveness and single-core performance While the multi-core performance is the big selling point of this chip, it offers comparable system responsiveness and single-core performance as many of the best consumer-class processors.
You want workstation performance on a 'budget' No one is calling this processor cheap, but compared to other workstation-class processors, the 9970X isn't terrible on price.
Don't buy it if...
You aren't running professional creative, academic, or enterprise workloads This chip brings fantastic performance for key professional workloads, but it's general computing and gaming performance isn't as good as substantially cheaper consumer processors.
You're on an actual budget The Threadripper 9970X, and the platform required to run it, will run you several grand at least. Many of the best consumer PCs for professional workloads are almost certainly a better value.
You are looking for a true, industrial-class workstation chip While the Threadripper 9970X is a powerful processor, for serious industrial-grade workloads (such as rendering the Gargantua approach sequence at the end of Interstellar, let's say), you should only consider this chip if you've purchased all of the available stock of the Threadripper Pro 9000-series and 9980X and still need more compute.
Also consider
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X You get twice the cores for extreme parallel workloads, but at nearly twice the cost and with much lower sustained clock speeds for less responsive single-core or lightly-threaded tasks. But if you really need that heavy, all-cores-on-deck performance for your work, only the Threadripper Pro chips will give you better results.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K OK, seriously, hear me out. If you're looking for a responsive prosumer-grade chip with excellent multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K is as good as you'll find in a consumer system, even if it falls well short of where the 9970X lands. It's also substantially cheaper.
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D If you're an enthusiast who is looking for the best processor for gaming, prosumer-level content creation, and excellent all-around performance, this is the chip you actually need, not the 9970X.
I spent about two weeks testing the Threadripper 9970X
I put the chip through my standard suite of CPU benchmarks, with special attention on professional workloads and multi-core performance
I used it for content creation, gaming, and day-to-day work
I used the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X in my day-to-day work PC, using it for general productivity, content creation for work, and a healthy dose of CPU experimentation. I also used it for gaming while running benchmarks on other systems, but that was not my primary focus.
While there are a lot of specialized workloads that this CPU will be running, most of those workflows or applications don't have readily accessible benchmarks, so I used my standard CPU testing suite to inform the potential performance for those I could not benchmark directly, and put special emphasis and attention on those benchmarks, like V-Ray 6 and Handbrake 1.9 Encoding, that directly relate to the intended market for this chip.
I've reviewed dozens of processors over my time at TechRadar, and have spent hundreds of hours of testing processors for features, special projects, and general maintenance of my benchmark score database, so I know how to push a processor to its limits and assess its quality and value, an expertise I bring to all of my reviews to ensure that you find the right chip for your needs and budget.
If you’re searching for a network monitoring platform that can handle hybrid, cloud, and on-premises IT environments without breaking a sweat, LogicMonitor deserves some serious consideration. We’ve spent weeks comparing the best network monitoring tools of 2025 and LogicMonitor consistently leads the pack for the enterprise crowd.
At TechRadar Pro, our reviewers dive deep into every major IT platform, evaluating features, integrations, and real-world usability. We look for the things that IT teams actually need, beyond the elevator pitch and the blown-up promises.
For 2025, LogicMonitor is our pick among network monitoring tools. Its AI-powered suite can automate many day-to-day IT workflows, reducing manual effort and helping teams focus on what matters. If your organization values proactive issue detection, automated insights, and seamless scalability, LogicMonitor is well worth a closer look.
LogicMonitor: Features
LogicMonitor is loaded with features for modern IT teams managing complex hybrid environments. It’s best suited for medium-to-large organizations that need precise visibility, automation, and scalability. Execution is generally excellent, with AI-driven insights and 3000+ integrations being a major upside.
But we’d still like to see more intuitive onboarding for new users and some advanced analytics that competitors like Datadog already offer. Given its features, the price feels justified, but only if you plan to use all the features.
Infrastructure monitoring
LogicMonitor tracks the health and performance of all your devices, like servers, storage, VMs, and more, across both on-premise and cloud environments. It automatically discovers devices and provides detailed metrics for each one.
Network monitoring
Their platform continuously monitors network traffic, device status, and bandwidth usage. It auto-discovers devices, maps network topology, and uses intelligent alerting to notify you of anomalies in real time.
Log analysis
LogicMonitor centralizes log data from across your infrastructure, correlating it with metrics to give you context for troubleshooting. Flexible retention options let you choose how long to keep your data.
Synthetic monitoring
You can simulate user interactions and monitor website uptime and performance, helping ensure a smooth end-user experience.
AI and automation
LogicMonitor’s AI features automate anomaly detection, event correlation, and alert prioritization. This reduces alert fatigue and helps teams focus on what matters most.
Dashboards and reporting
Customizable dashboards and automated reports make it easy to visualize trends, share insights, and keep stakeholders informed.
Integrations
With over 3,000 integrations as of right now, LogicMonitor works with nearly every major device and cloud service, so you can monitor your entire stack from one place.
(Image credit: LogicMonitor)
LogicMonitor: Ease of use
LogicMonitor’s interface is modern and intuitive, especially after its recent UI overhaul. The new design focuses on usability, with resource-level dashboards, streamlined navigation, and a consistent look across the platform. The resource explorer and enhanced topology mapping make it easier to manage complex environments and troubleshoot issues quickly.
However, there’s still a learning curve, especially for users new to network monitoring. Some advanced features and customizations require time to master, and a few UI elements can feel clunky or buried under menus. While onboarding guidance has improved, junior engineers may still need extra training to get comfortable. On the plus side, LogicMonitor offers live training webinars and plenty of documentation to help teams ramp up faster.
LogicMonitor: Pricing
Plan
Starting price (paid annually)
What’s included
Infrastructure Monitoring
$22/resource/month
Standard events and metrics, 900+ integrations, servers, VMs, SD-WAN, storage, network devices, cloud
Cloud IaaS Monitoring
$22/resource/month
AWS EC2, Azure VM, cloud infrastructure, standard integrations
*All prices USD/month, billed annually. “Per resource” means each monitored device or instance.
LogicMonitor’s pricing is resource-based, which can add up quickly for large environments. The entry-level plans cover most standard monitoring needs, but advanced features (like AI automation or extended log retention) may require add-ons or higher-tier plans.
Compared to competitors, LogicMonitor is on the expensive side, but the depth and breadth of features help justify the investment for organizations that need them.
LogicMonitor: Customer support
LogicMonitor is known for responsive, knowledgeable customer support. Most users consistently praise the team for proactive communication, regular check-ins, and genuine advice. Support is available via live chat, email, and phone, and there are live training webinars every other week for ongoing education.
Support packages come in tiers: Standard support is included for all customers, while Premier and FedRAMP plans add proactive monitoring, health checks, and remediation assistance. Premier customers get regular account reviews and early alerts about potential issues, plus priority access to senior engineers. The main caveat is that some advanced support features are only available at higher tiers, so small teams may not get the same level of hands-on help.
LogicMonitor: The competition
LogicMonitor sits at the high end of the network monitoring market, best suited for organizations that need deep, automated insights across hybrid and cloud environments. It’s a top pick for enterprises, managed service providers, and fast-growing IT teams who want to future-proof their monitoring stack.
Main competitors include Datadog, Dynatrace, and New Relic. Datadog offers similar AI-powered monitoring and a broader analytics suite, but at a comparable or higher price. Dynatrace is praised for ease of use and tight cloud integrations, making it a good fit for teams focused on cloud-native infrastructure. New Relic stands out for its flexible pricing and developer-friendly tools, but may lack some of LogicMonitor’s enterprise features. For smaller organizations or those with simpler needs, these alternatives might offer a better balance of features and cost.
LogicMonitor: Final verdict
LogicMonitor is a powerhouse for network monitoring, offering unrivaled visibility, automation, and AI-driven insights. Its real-time alerting, deep integrations, and automated topology mapping make it an invaluable tool for IT teams managing complex environments. While the learning curve and premium pricing may give some pause, the overall value is hard to beat if you need best-in-class monitoring.
For 2025, LogicMonitor is our pick for the best network monitoring tool, especially for organizations ready to invest more for reliability and consistency. If you want to automate IT workflows with full transparency, LogicMonitor is well worth the investment.
FAQs
Is LogicMonitor suitable for small businesses?
LogicMonitor is designed for mid-sized to large organizations. Its pricing and feature set may be overkill for small businesses, but it can be scaled down if you only need to monitor a handful of resources.
What kinds of devices can LogicMonitor monitor?
LogicMonitor supports a wide range of devices, including routers, switches, firewalls, servers, wireless access points, storage systems, and cloud resources. It integrates with over 3,000 vendors and protocols.
Does LogicMonitor offer a free trial?
Yes, LogicMonitor offers a free trial so you can test the platform before committing. This lets you explore features and see how it fits your environment.
How does LogicMonitor’s AI help IT teams?
LogicMonitor’s AI automates anomaly detection, alert prioritization, and event correlation. This reduces manual effort, cuts down on alert noise, and helps teams focus on critical issues.
What support options are available?
Standard support is included, with live chat, email, and webinars. Premier and FedRAMP customers get proactive monitoring, health checks, and priority access to senior engineers.
How does one elevate something already flawless? Razer has answered that question through the latest iteration of their flagship wireless mouse, the Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro.
We loved the previous iteration for the otherworldly balance of ergonomics, performance and long lasting battery life, which is why we named it the best mouse for first-person shooters in our best gaming mouse round-up. For the DeathAdder V4 Pro, Razer takes things even further, adding more features that feel like a generational leap.
Starting with the design that feels even more refined in its sleekness and pure functionality. Not only is the gaming mouse lighter than ever but more comfortable for palm and thumb placement as well.
That’s not even counting the redesigned wireless dongle, which now features a sleek dome-shaped design accented by three customizable LED lights that display key info like battery life and polling rate.
Beyond just looking great on any desk, it’s a major upgrade from the previous add-on dongle used with the last DeathAdder Pro. This new version isn’t just more stylish—it delivers a true 8000 Hz polling rate with 37% lower latency, making it significantly more efficient.
(Image credit: Future / Ural Garrett)
Whether you’re browsing the web or diving into Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, cursor movement feels noticeably smoother thanks to the upgraded optical sensor, now capable of up to 45,000 DPI, 900 IPS, and 85G acceleration.
It also offers precise, customizable control through the Razer Synapse app, giving users pitch-perfect personalization for any task or playstyle.
Beyond movement smoothness, the smaller yet much improved mouse clicks not only feel even more responsive and crisp but lighter and more durable with a click lifecycle of over 100 million clicks.
(Image credit: Future / Ural Garrett)
The scroll wheel even sees the most interesting improvement thanks to using an optical sensor instead of a traditional mechanical rotary encoder.
This makes scrolling down webpages and weapons while playing shooters feel better than ever. When it comes to competitive gaming at an optimal level, the DeathAdder V4 Pro manages to do the most.
Adding to all of that greatness is a 150-hour battery life, which means players will go a long time between charges.
Though this device excels its job, some potential buyers may have a few problems. For the colorful gamers who like RGB on everything, the DeathAdder V4 Pro continues the line’s black and green colorway without any customizable lighting options.
Meanwhile, the retail price of $169.99 / £169.99 / AU$299.95 makes this slightly more expensive than the previous V3 Pro, though the v3 Pro required a special dongle attachment, which was sold seperately, to reach an 8K Polling rate.
(Image credit: Future / Ural Garrett)
Eventually, Razer would sell a $159 edition V3 Pro that featured both. However, the DeathAdder V4 Pro costing $10 bucks more could rub folks the wrong way.
From my perspective, the price is more than worth it as the added features on the DeathAdder V4 Pro offer a fantastic nice bang for the buck.
That said, it's not the cheapest mouse on the market, so buyers on a budget might want to look elsewhere (like our best cheap mouse guide) as this is a premium product with premium price.
The Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro builds on an already exceptional foundation, delivering meaningful upgrades in precision, comfort and performance that make it a true standout for serious gamers. While its premium price and lack of RGB may give some pause, those seeking top-tier functionality will find this mouse more than earns its place at the top.
Razer DeathAdder v4 Pro: Price & availability
(Image credit: Future / Ural Garrett)
How much does it cost? $169.99 / £169.99 / AU$299.95
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia from Razer’s online store and other retailers
The Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro is available now in the US, UK, and Australia for $169.99 / £169.99 / AU$299.95.
Outside of Razer’s online store, it’ll also be available at major retailers including Best Buy, Amazon and the like. While the price may feel a bit extreme, there is value in paying for the best wireless gaming mouse for esports that money can buy.
Most importantly, the mouse and wireless dongle come packed in together, which means that buyers won’t have to pay extra. For anyone who just wants to compete at a high level, the price won’t matter much.
Casual or even aspiring competitive gamers with a limited budget still have options for quality wireless gaming mice. This includes at the lowest, the Cooler Master MM311, which has a 1,000Hz max polling rate and can reach as high as 10,000 DPI.
Those who treat the price point as a drop in the bucket but can’t get past the lack of customizable lighting on the DeathAdder V4 Pro may appreciate the Razer Basilisk V3 Pro 35K. Though it lacks the lightweightness of the DeathAdder, its performance and battery life is admirable when it comes to high-level competitive play.
Should you buy the Razer DeathAdder v4 Pro?
Razer DeathAdder v4 Pro Scorecard
Value
The $169 price point is worth every penny; even if it's slightly more expensive than the previous generation.
5 / 5
Design
Razer’s classic black and green colorway looks better than ever with a lighter chassis and smaller improvements like separated side buttons.
5 / 5
Performance
Everything about the performance of the DeathAdder V4 Pro improves on the previous generation in terms of connection speed, polling rate, DPI, and battery life. That doesn’t even count additions like the optical scroll wheel.
5 / 5
Final score
Some say that it’s hard to improve upon perfection but Razer surely figured it out with the DeathAdder V4 Pro.
5 / 5
Buy the Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro if...
You want the best esports-level mouse money can buy If you have the $169 to spend, the Razer DeathAdder V4 improves on ergonomics, performance and battery life while also making significant additions like the optical scroll wheel.
You require a blend of standard-setting ergonomics and performance More comfortable than ever, the gaming mouse is also lighter at 56g and features better-placed side buttons. Meanwhile, wireless performance sees enhancements with a reduction in latency, improved optical sensor allowing 45,000 DPI.
You need a long battery life This high-level performance gaming mouse manages to have excellent battery life that can go up to 150 hours between charges.
Don't buy it if...
You want a little RGB flair Though the Razer DeathAdder V4 has the look and feel of a performance-oriented gaming mouse, more colorful gamers who need RGB lighting are going to be disappointed.
You're on a tight budget The price might be a bit much for the casual gamer looking for a quality gaming mouse.
Also consider
The Razer Basilisk V3 Pro 35K If you want to tone down the high-end esports-level performance a bit for some RGB lighting options, then Razer’s Basilisk V3 Pro may be a fine option.
Corsair M75 Wireless Mouse The Corsair M75 Wireless Mouse is an excellent performer, plus it’s lightweight, and, most importantly for lefties, has an ambidextrous design with buttons on both sides.
I used it to play games like Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, FBC: Firebreak, Splitgate 2, and Marvel Rivals
Given that the previous generation of the Razer DeathAdder Pro earned our top pick for best FPS mouse in our gaming mouse roundup, I put its successor through the wringer with a heavy dose of first-person shooters.
My test lineup included Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, FBC: Firebreak, Splitgate 2, and Marvel Rivals, offering a solid understanding of speed, precision, and reaction-based capabilities.
Beyond the battlefield, I also assessed how the mouse handled everyday tasks—browsing the web, managing playlists on music streaming platforms, and navigating between applications—to get a full picture of its performance in both gaming and daily use.
