Computing Components

Intel Arc B580 review: A spectacular success for Intel and a gateway to 1440p for gamers on a budget

5:00 pm | December 12, 2024

Intel Arc B580: Two-minute review

When I reviewed the Arc A770 and A750, I said that these Alchemist GPUs were impressive first efforts for Intel's Arc range, but not yet at the level that they needed to be to compete with the likes of Nvidia and AMD in discrete graphics.

Well, with the release of the new Intel Arc B580 (2nd-gen Battlemage), there's no doubt that Intel has produced one of the best graphics cards of this generation, and given gamers on a budget an absolute gift just in time for the holidays.

For starters, let's talk about the price of this GPU. At just $249.99 / £249.99 / AU$439, the Arc B580 undercuts both Nvidia's and AMD's budget offerings, the RTX 4060 and RX 7600, while offering substantially better performance, making its value proposition untouchable at this price range.

While I'll dig deeper into the performance in a bit, I'll cut to the chase and point out the simple fact that neither the RTX 4060 nor the RX 7600 can game at 1440p without severely compromising graphics quality. Not only can the B580 perform this feat, it does so brilliantly.

This comes down to some very straightforward spec choices that Intel made with its Battlemage debut that, especially in hindsight, make Nvidia and AMD's respective decisions even more baffling. First, with a VRAM pool of 12GB, the B580 can hold the larger texture files needed for 1440p gaming, whereas the RTX 4060 Ti cannot, due to its 8GB VRAM loadout.

Then there's the B580's wider 192-bit memory interface, compared to the RTX 4060 Ti's and RX 7600 XT's 128-bit. While this might seem like an obscure spec, it's the secret sauce for the B580. This beefier interface allows it to process those larger texture files much faster than its competitors, so this GPU can fully leverage its bigger VRAM pool in a way that Nvidia and AMD's competing cards simply can't, even with larger VRAM configurations.

Boiling all this down, you end up with a budget-class GPU that can get you fast 1440p framerates the likes of which we haven't seen since the RTX 3060 Ti.

Even more impressive, in my mind, is that I did not encounter a single game where there was some kind of quirk or hiccup caused by the driver. With the Arc Alchemist cards last year, there were issues with some games not running well because of inadequate driver support, or a game's reliance on an older version of DirectX that the Alchemist GPUs weren't optimized for. I didn't encounter any of those problems this time around. The Intel graphics team's long, hard work on getting Arc's drivers up to par has definitely paid off.

If there's a criticism I can make of this graphics card, it's that its creative performance isn't as good as Nvidia's. But given the entire creative world's reliance on Nvidia's bespoke CUDA instruction set, neither Intel nor AMD were ever really going to be able to compete here.

Fortunately, the Intel Arc B580 is a graphics card for gaming, and for any gamer looking to play at 1440p resolution on the cheap, the B580 is really the only graphics card that can do it, making it the only GPU you should be considering at this price point.

Intel Arc B580: Price & availability

An Intel Arc B580 resting upright on its retail packaging — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

The Intel Arc B580 is available in the US, UK, and Australia, and has been from December 13, 2024, starting at $249.99, £249.99, and AU$439 respectively. Third-party graphics card partners like Acer, ASRock, and others will have their own variants of the B580, and their prices may be higher, depending on the card.

The closest competition for the Arc B580 in terms of price are the Nvidia RTX 4060 and AMD RX 7600, both of which have a $20-$50 higher MSRP. And while Nvidia and AMD are preparing to roll out their next-gen graphics cards starting next month, it will still be a few months after the initial flagship launches before either company's budget offerings are announced. So, the B580 is the only current-gen GPU available for under $250 / £250 / AU$450 at the moment, and will likely remain so for many months to come.

Value: 5/5

Intel Arc B580: Specifications

The video output ports on the Intel Arc B580 — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Arc B580: Architecture & features

A masculine hand holding up the Intel Arc B580 — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

The Intel Arc B580 is the first discrete GPU from Intel based on its new Xe2 graphics architecture, codenamed Battlemage, and there are a lot of low-level changes over the previous-gen Intel Arc Alchemist. Many of these are small tweaks to the architectural design, such as the move from SIMD32 to SIMD16 instructions, but when taken together, all of these small changes add up to a major overhaul of the GPU.

That, in addition to using TSMC's 5nm process, means that even though the GPU itself has become physically smaller in just about every measure, it's much more powerful.

The B580 has a roughly 17% reduction in compute units from the Arc A580 and about 10% fewer transistors, but Intel says that its various architectural changes produce about 70% better performance per compute unit (or Xe core, as Intel calls it). I haven't tested or reviewed the Intel Arc A580, so I can't say for certain if that claim holds up, but there has definitely been a major performance gain gen-on-gen based on my experience with the higher-end Arc Alchemist cards. We also can't ignore the substantially faster boost clock of 2,850MHz, up from 1,700MHz for the A580.

Outside of the GPU architecture, there is also a smaller memory bus, with the A580's 256-bit interface dropping down to 192-bit for the B580, but the B580 features a 50% increase in its video memory pool, as well as a faster memory clock.

Specs & features: 4.5 / 5

Intel Arc B580: Design

The brand marking on the Intel Arc B580

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

The Intel Arc B580 Limited Edition reference card is what you'd call the 'base' version of this GPU, but don't call it basic.

Despite its all-black-with-white-accent-lettering appearance, this is a good-looking graphics card, much like the initial Arc Alchemist GPUs before it, thanks to its matte, textured black shroud, dual-fan cooling, and rather understated aesthetic.

In a PC component world full of ostentatious, overly aggressive and flashy designs, there is something almost respectable about a graphics card in 2024 that presents itself without gimmicks, almost daring you to underestimate its capabilities due to its lack of RGB.

That said, there is one noticeable difference with this graphics card's design: the open 'window' over the internal heatsink to help with airflow and cooling. Unfortunately, the HWInfo64 utility I use to measure temperature and power draw for the GPUs I review couldn't read the Arc B580 during testing, so I can't tell you how much of a difference this window makes compared to something like the Intel Arc A750—but it certainly won't hurt its thermals.

Beyond that, the card also sports a single 8-pin power connector, in keeping with its 190W TBP, so you can pretty much guarantee that if you already have a discrete GPU in your system, you'll have the available power cables from your PSU required to use this GPU.

It's also not a very large graphics card, though it is larger than some RTX 4060 and RX 7600 GPUs (it's about 10.7-inches / 272mm), though third-party variants might be more compact. In any case, it's a dual-slot card, so it'll fit in place as an upgrade for just about any graphics card you have in your PC currently.

Design: 4.5 / 5

Intel Arc B580: Performance

An Intel Arc B580 running on a test bench — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

OK, so now we come to why I am absolutely in love with this graphics card: performance.

Unfortunately, I don't have an Intel Arc A580 card on hand to compare this GPU to, so I can't directly measure how the B580 stacks up to its predecessor. But I can compare the B580 to its current competition, as well as the Intel Arc A750, which prior to this release was selling at, or somewhat below, the price of this graphics card, and has comparable specs.

In terms of pure synthetic performance, the Arc B580 comes in second to the Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti, performing about 10% slower overall. That said, there were some tests, like 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra, Wild Life Extreme (and Wild Life Extreme Unlimited), and Time Spy Extreme where the extra VRAM allowed the Arc B580 to pull ahead of the much more expensive Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti. The Arc B580 did manage to outperform the RTX 4060 by about 12%, however.

Creative workloads aren't the Arc B580's strongest area, with Nvidia's RTX 4060 and RTX 4060 Ti performing substantially better. This might change once PugetBench for Creators Photoshop benchmark gets updated however, as it crashed during every single test I ran, regardless of which graphics card I was using.

Notably, the Intel Arc B580 encoded 4K video to 1080p at a faster rate using Intel's H.264 codec in Handbrake 1.61 than all of the other cards tested using Nvidia or AMD's H.264 options, so this is something for game streamers to consider if they're looking for a card to process their video on the fly.

But what really matters with this GPU is gaming, and if you compare this graphics card's 1080p performance to the competition, you'll have to go with the nearly 40% more expensive Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti in order to beat it, and it's not a crushing defeat for Intel. While I found the Arc B580 is about 17% slower than the RTX 4060 Ti on average at 1080p (with no ray tracing or upscaling), it's still hitting 82 FPS on average overall and actually has a slightly higher minimum/1% FPS performance of just under 60 FPS.

The AMD RX 7600 XT, Intel Arc A750, and Nvidia RTX 4060 don't even come close to reaching these kinds of numbers, with the Arc B580 scoring a roughly 30% faster average 1080p FPS and an incredible 52% faster minimum/1% FPS advantage over the Nvidia RTX 4060, which comes in a very distant third place among the five GPUs being tested. All in all, it's an impressive performance from the Intel Battlemage graphics card.

Also worth noting is that the Intel Arc B580's ray-tracing performance is noticeably better than AMD's, and not that far behind Nvidia's, though its upscaling performance lags a bit behind AMD and Nvidia at 1080p.

Even more impressive, though, is this card's 1440p performance.

Typically, if you're going to buy any 1440p GPU, not even the best 1440p graphics card, you should expect to pay at least $400-$500 (about £320-£400 / AU$600-AU$750). And to really qualify as a 1440p GPU, you need to hit an average of 60 FPS overall, with an average FPS floor of about 40 FPS. Anything less than that, and you're going to have an uneven experience game-to-game.

In this regard, the only two graphics cards I tested that qualify are the Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti and the Intel Arc B580, and they are very close to each other in terms of 1440p performance. (I can give an honorable mention to the Nvidia RTX 4060, which almost got there, but not quite).

While Nvidia has certain built-in advantages owing to its status as the premiere GPU brand (so pretty much any game is optimized for Nvidia hardware by default), at 1440p it only barely ekes out a win over the Intel Arc B580. And that's ultimately down to its stronger native ray-tracing performance—a scenario which pretty much no one opts for. If you're going to use ray tracing, you're going to use upscaling, and in that situation, the RTX 4060 Ti and Arc B580 are effectively tied at 1440p.

And this 1440p performance in particular is why I'm so enthusiastic about this graphics card. While this is the performance section of the review, I can't help but talk about the value that this card represents for gamers—especially the growing number of 1440p-aspiring gamers out there.

Prior to the Intel Arc B580, gaming at 1440p—which is the PC gaming sweet spot; believe me, I've extensively tested nearly every GPU of the past four years at 1440p—was something reserved for the petit bourgeois of PC gamers. These are the folks not rich enough to really go in for the best 4K graphics cards, but they've got enough money to buy a 1440p monitor and a graphics card powerful enough to drive it.

This used to mean something approaching a grand just for these two items alone, locking a lot of gamers into incremental 1080p advances for two successive generations. No more.

Now, with an entry-level 1440p monitor coming in under $300 /£300 / AU$450, it's entirely possible to upgrade your rig for 1440p gaming for about $500 / £500 / AU$750 with this specific graphics card (and only this graphics card), which is absolutely doable for a hell of a lot of gamers out there who are still languishing at 1080p.

Ultimately, this, more than anything, raises the Intel Arc B580 into S-Tier for me, even though Nvidia's $399.99 RTX 4060 Ti GPU gets slightly better performance. The Nvidia RTX 4060 Ti just doesn't offer this kind of value for the vast majority of gamers out there, and even with its improved performance since its launch, the 4060 Ti is still very hard to recommend.

The Nvidia RTX 4060, meanwhile, can't keep up with the B580 despite being 20% more expensive. And with the AMD RX 7600 XT, laden with its $329.99 MSRP (about £250 / AU$480 RRP), falling noticeably behind the B580, the RX 7600 (which I haven't had a chance to retest yet) doesn't stand a chance (and has a slightly more expensive MSRP).

And, it has to be emphasized, I experienced none of the driver issues with the Intel Arc B580 that I did when I originally reviewed the Intel Arc A750 and Arc A770. Every game I tested ran perfectly well, even if something like Black Myth Wukong ran much better on the two Nvidia cards than it did on Intel's GPUs. Tweak some settings and you'll be good to go.

This was something that just wasn't the case with the previous-gen Arc graphics cards at launch, and it truly held Intel back at the time. In one of my Intel Arc Alchemist reviews, I compared that generation of graphics cards to fantastic journeyman efforts that were good, but maybe not ready to be put out on the show floor. No more. Intel has absolutely graduated to full GPU maker status, and has done so with a card more affordable than the cheapest graphics cards its competition has to offer.

Simply put, for a lot of cash-strapped gamers out there, the Intel Arc B580's performance at this price is nothing short of a miracle, and it makes me question how Intel of all companies was able to pull this off while AMD and Nvidia have not.

Even if you don't buy an Intel Arc B580, give Intel its due for introducing this kind of competition into the graphics card market. If Intel can keep this up for the B570, and hopefully the B770 and B750, then Nvidia and AMD will have no choice but to rein in their price inflation with the next-gen cards they plan to offer next year, making it a win-win for every gamer looking to upgrade.

Performance: 4.5 / 5

Intel Arc B580: Should you buy it?

A masculine hand holding an Intel Arc B580 — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Buy the Intel Arc B580 if...

You want an extremely affordable 1440p graphics card
A 1440p graphics card can be quite expensive, but the Intel Arc B580 is incredibly affordable.

You're looking for great gaming performance
The Intel Arc B580 delivers incredible framerates for the price.

Don't buy it if...

You're looking for a budget creative GPU
While the B580 isn't terrible, if you're looking for a GPU for creative work, there are better cards out there.

You want a cheap GPU for AI workloads
The Intel Arc B580 might have dedicated AI hardware, but it still lags behind Nvidia by a good amount.

Also consider

Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060
The Nvidia RTX 4060 is a better option for a lot of creative tasks on a budget, though its gaming performance isn't as strong despite the higher price.

Read the full Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 review

Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti
If you want a strong 1080p and 1440p gaming GPU, but also need some muscle for creative or machine learning/AI workloads, this card is what you'll want, so long as you're willing to pay the extra premium in the price.

Read the full Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 Ti review

How I tested the Intel Arc B580

The backplate of the Intel Arc B580 — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

I tested the Intel Arc B580 for about three weeks
I used my updated suite of graphics card benchmark tests
I used the Arc B580 as my primary work GPU for creative workloads like Adobe Photoshop, as well as some in-depth game testing

Test System Specs

Here are the specs on the system I used for testing:

Motherboard: ASRock Z790i Lightning WiFi
CPU: Intel Core i9-14900K
CPU Cooler: Gigabyte Auros Waterforce II 360 ICE
RAM: Corsair Dominator DDR5-6600 (2 x 16GB)
SSD: Crucial T705
PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower PF3 1050W Platinum
Case: Praxis Wetbench

Over the course of about three weeks, I used the Intel Arc B580 as my primary workstation GPU when I wasn't actively benchmarking it.

This included using the graphics card for various creative workloads like Adobe Photoshop and light video encoding work.

I also used the B580 for some in-depth game testing, including titles like Black Myth Wukong, Satisfactory, and other recently released games.

I've been doing graphics card reviews for TechRadar for more than two years now, and I've done extensive GPU testing previous to that on a personal basis as a lifelong PC gamer. In addition, my computer science coursework for my Master's degree utilized GPUs very heavily for machine learning and other computational workloads, and as a result, I know my way around every aspect of a GPU. As such, you can rest assured that my testing process is both thorough and sound.

Originally reviewed December 2024

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D review: a gaming dynamo with new, unexpected suprises

8:24 pm | November 11, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: CPU, Intel Core, Total War | Comments: Off

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Two-minute review

This generation of processors has been a mixed bag at best (and disappointing at worst), so it makes sense that Team Red would go all out to ensure the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D delivered something that exceeded expectations.

In that regard, the 9800X3D is a smashing success, delivering substantially better gaming performance than the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D that it replaces, though at a slightly higher $479 / £449.99 (about AU$700) price point. For gamers though, most will happily pay a bit more for a roughly 15% increase in gaming performance on average.

The chip isn't without faults, though. It isn't the absolute best processor for gaming in terms of framerates (that title belongs to the Intel Core i9-14900K over several games, averaged out), but where the last-gen Intel flagship simply threw raw wattage to get to the top, AMD's latest gaming processor uses substantially less power to come within 6% of the 14900K's overall gaming performance, a difference that is so close to being within the margin of variance and test setups that if I reran all my tests next week, the 9800X3D might beat it outright.

But, honestly, it doesn't need to do that. Intel's 14900K is overkill for anyone not running creative workloads like video editing, and the power cost is simply too high to justify getting an extra 6% overall gaming performance in synthetic tests. The Ryzen 9800X3D, meanwhile, will get you effectively identical actual performance and at a lower cost, both in MSRP terms, but also reduced power consumption and indirect savings like not needing to shell out for a 360mm AIO cooler to get the most out of the chip.

For that, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is indisputably the best processor for gaming you can buy right now, and it cements 3D V-Cache as the second most impressive innovation for gaming hardware after AI upscaling and it's something that Intel just doesn't have an answer for it.

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Price & availability

An AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D in its retail packaging — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

How much is it? Its MSRP is $479 / £449.99 (about AU$700)
When is it out? It went on sale November 7, 2024
Where can you get it? You can get it in the US, UK, and Australia

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is available now in the US, UK, and Australia for $479 / £449.99 / AU$799, respectively.

This is a bump up from the price of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D it replaces, which launched at $449 / £439 / AU$779. I would have loved to see the price remain the same, of course, but the last-gen chip wasn't exactly a cheap processor to begin with, and both chips are very much targeted at an enthusiast market where the price bump here isn't exactly going to be a dealbreaker—so long as the performance increase justifies the bump in price.

In terms of Intel's competing offerings right now, on the performance side, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (and Intel Core i9-14900K, for that matter) is $110 / £100 / AU$300 more expensive to get the same kind of gaming performance. As for in-class silicon, the 9800X3D is about 15-20% more expensive than the competing Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, and is roughly 33% more expensive than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X.

Essentially, the 9800X3D is a specialist chip for gamers, and while it isn't a performance slouch, at this price it's really only for PC gamers who want the best overall gaming processor and don't much care about stellar performance elsewhere. For those who need more than just a gaming chip, other options from AMD and Intel will be a better fit for the price.

Value: 3.5 / 5

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Specs

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Features & chipset

A mockup of the design of AMD's 2nd-generation 3D V-cache — (Image credit: AMD)

The fundamental specs of the 9800X3D aren't much different from the 7800X3D. They both sport the same 8-core/16-thread setup as the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X, but like the 7800X3D, the 9800X3D has an additional 64MB L3 cache while the Ryzen 7 9700X only has 32MB L3 cache.

This 3D V-Cache in the Ryzen 7 9800X3D has been redesigned from the previous two generations of AMD X3D chips. This second-generation 3D V-Cache, as AMD calls it, fundamentally changes how the 3D V-Cache die interfaces with the main processing die, which addresses some of the main complaints of the previous two generations of X3D chips.

In the first iteration of 3D V-Cache, the extra cache die was stacked on top of the main processing cores, but with 2nd-generation V-Cache, the extra cache die is underneath the main die, leaving the main processing cores free to directly interface with the CPU cooler.

This is a big deal, since the processing cores are where all the heat is being generated, so having an extra layer of silicon between it and the CPU cooler had a lot of implications for what the chip could do. Thermals had to be carefully managed, so clock speeds had to be kept in check and there was no ability to overclock the chip.

By moving the 3D V-Cache die underneath the main processor core complex, the thermal restraints around clock speeds and voltage no longer apply, so the 9800X3D is the first 3D V-cache chip to feature full overclocking support, allowing precise voltage controls at the same voltage limits as the rest of the Ryzen 9000-series lineup.

Compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, then, the 9800X3D benefits from noticeably faster base clock and boost clock speeds out of the box, and overclockers can now tinker with their CPUs without too much concern that they'll brick the chip (though with overclocking, that is always possible and can void your warranty, so use caution).

Beyond that, the only major change from the previous generation is faster DDR5 memory support, from 5200MHz with the 7800X3D to 5600MHz with the 9800X3D, though both chips support AMD EXPO memory overclocking for even faster memory speeds.

Features: 4 / 5

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D: Performance

At the end of the day though, all that fancy new tech wouldn't amount to much if the chip's performance didn't deliver, and thankfully, it does - though not universally.

In the synthetic benchmarks, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D showed very strong single-core performance on par with the rest of the Ryzen 9000-series lineup. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D, meanwhile, lags behind its Ryzen 7000 siblings noticeably, owing to the need to control thermals by limiting clock speeds. The Ryzen 9800X3D does not have this problem. Likewise, its multi-core performance is also unconstrained, running ahead of the Ryzen 7 9700X across the board.

On the creative front, this is generally not going to be a chip for creatives to concern themselves with - though there is one exception. If you're a photographer or graphic designer who does a lot of work in Adobe Photoshop or its alternatives, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's extra cache is going to be a serious benefit for your workflows, beating out even the Intel Core i9-14900K in PugetBench for Adobe Photoshop be a few hundred points.

Everyone else though, this chip is not going to do much for you.

On the gaming side, this is where the 9800X3D really shows off, though there's a bit of a caveat to that. In games where the main CPU bottleneck is game logic, such as Total War: Warhammer III or Civilization VI, the extra 3D V-Cache isn't necessarily going to help your game performance. In that instance, you're going to want something with the fastest clocks possible to plow through all those AI decision trees or physics calculations before a game frame is even drawn.

As such, Intel's last-gen (and even current-gen) chips have an advantage in some games like Returnal (where complex bullet and geometry physics are the main CPU workload) or Total War: Warhammer III (where a lot of individual actors need to have their logic calculated quickly) because these gaming workloads benefit from faster clock speeds.

Where 3D V-Cache really benefits gaming is when there's data being communicated from the CPU to the GPU, like texture files or model geometry, and that additional cache memory can retain these smaller-but-not-tiny files in the fastest possible memory that can hold it. This mitigates the latency introduced when drawing a new game frame when the CPU has to go back to RAM to fetch a file because it didn't already have it in its much closer cache memory.

Games like F1 2023 and Tiny Tina's Wonderland benefited mightily from the extra available cache. In the case of the former, the Ryzen 9800X3D just wallops the Intel Core i9-14900K, and in the case of the latter, runs a very close second to it.

Taken all together, the Intel Core has a slight advantage just given the mix of games I used to test these chips, but for most gamers, the odds are good that the thing you're going to be looking for is a processor that works with your graphics card the best most of the time, and in this case, that'll be the Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

Overall, then, with performance that comes in neck-and-neck with the best Intel processors in gaming workloads on average, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D would already be an incredible chip.

But I simply can't get over the fact that the 9800X3D can do this with just 53% of the power of the Core i9-14900K. Add to that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's impressive single- and multi-core performance, surprisingly great Photoshop performance, and gen-on-gen performance gains at very little power or monetary cost, and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is easily one of the best AMD processors ever made.

Performance: 5 / 5

Should you buy the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D?

An AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D in a masculine hand — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Buy the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D if...

On balance, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is as good a gaming processor as you'll ever need.

Unlike its predecessor, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D can keep up with its peer class in general performance as well, not just gaming.

Don't buy it if...

If you're looking for more of a general-purpose processor, this chip isn't really for you.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D isn't cheap, and for those on a budget, there are good processors out there that will get the job done.View Deal

Also consider

The Intel Core i7-14700K is still my favorite processor for its incredible performance at an accessible price.

Read the full Intel Core i7-14700K reviewView Deal

Originally reviewed November 2024

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review

6:00 pm | October 24, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: CPU, Intel Core, Total War | Comments: Off

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: One-minute review

An Intel Core Ultra 9 processor in its retail packaging — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

I've had a couple of pre-briefings with Intel over the past couple of months about Intel Arrow Lake, so I can't say I'm surprised by the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, but it doesn't mean enthusiasts are going to be any less disappointed with what we got in the end.

Both Core Ultra chips effectively match the performance of the chips they are replacing, and while I've been saying for a while now that we have to stop looking at performance as the only metric that matters, the efficiency gains offered by these chips are not substantial enough to really merit the investment if you're rocking a 13th-gen Intel chip or better.

The new chips do come with some architecture changes worthy of note, though, and they aren’t all useless for consumers. For starters, the chips come equipped with an NPU, the first Intel desktops to do so, and the new Intel Arc integrated GPU offers some improved graphics capabilities that will make a real difference for some AIO (all-in-one) PCs.

However, these are largely going to be unnecessary for just about any gamer or content creator out there since most desktops are going to have a discrete graphics card that will run AI circles around the NPU in these chips, and make the Intel Arc iGPU pretty much a non-factor in anything other than the most budget gaming PC from a couple of years ago.

For some folks, unfortunately, Intel Arrow Lake misses the target they wanted it to hit, and with strong competition from AMD’s Ryzen 9000-series, these aren't the best processors for gaming or content creation. But, Intel has to start somewhere as it shifts to a new platform, and it managed to produce a very different kind of chip over its predecessors without giving up too much on the performance front, which is no easy feat.

Ultimately, they're perfectly fine chips if you're buying them in a prebuilt PC or if you're coming in from 11th-gen Intel or older (or making the move from AMD), since you'll have to buy all-new kit anyway, so you might as well set yourself up for Nova Lake next year. But anyone with a Raptor Lake chip isn't going to see any real benefit from these, so they're better off waiting for Nova Lake in 2025 to make the jump.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Price & availability

An Intel Core Ultra 5 processor in its retail packaging — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K are available now in the US, UK, and Australia, priced at $589 / £548.99 / AU$1,099 and $309 / £289.99 / AU$589, respectively.

While the prices for these two chips stay the same or come in slightly lower than their predecessors, which is good, there are a bunch of added costs to upgrade to these chips... which is bad. First, they require an LGA 1851 chipset, so you’re going to have to buy a new motherboard in order to use them. They also don’t support DDR4 RAM, so you’re likely going to have to buy new DDR5 RAM as well.

The LGA 1851 socket does take the same CPU coolers as an LGA 1700 socket, though, so if you have a 12th-gen or better processor, at least your cooler will fit.

Against AMD’s latest, the Core Ultra 9 285K is better priced than AMD’s flagship Ryzen 9 9950X, but more expensive than the Ryzen 9 9900X. The Core Ultra 5 245K is slightly more expensive than AMD’s competing Ryzen 5 9600X.

Value: 3 / 5

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Specs

An Intel Core Ultra 5 processor slotted into a motherboard — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Chipset & features

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K are newly architected desktop processors, powered by the same Lion Cove P-cores and Skymont E-cores found in the Intel Meteor Lake chips released late last year for laptops.

Intel Arrow Lake is essentially Intel Meteor Lake for desktops, and so it also features the same Intel NPU 3 13 TOPS neural processor as Meteor Lake, and the same Intel Arc Alchemist integrated GPU with four Xe cores (including four ray tracing cores) as its laptop cousin.

The max clock speeds of the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K are slightly lower on performance cores (though with a higher base frequency) and higher across the board on the efficiency cores over the Core i9-14900K and Core i5-14600K, respectively.

The maximum amount of RAM is unchanged at 192GB, though the Core Ultra chips do not support DDR4 RAM, but they can support faster DDR5 memory up to 6,400MT/s.

Other than that, the TDP of the two Core Ultra chips is essentially unchanged from the 14th-gen chips they’re replacing, but they do have a 5°C higher TjMax (Tjunction max, which is the maximum thermal junction temperature that a processor can hit before it lowers performance to prevent overheating), so the chips won’t start to throttle until they hit 105°C.

Features: 3.5 / 5

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Performance

Intel Core Ultra 5 processor in a motherboard — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Well, we’ve finally come to the performance segment of the review, and I wish I had better news for you, but most of you will be disappointed.

Starting with synthetic performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K is a very mixed bag vis-a-vis the Core i9-14900K and AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and Ryzen 9 9900X.

In some tests like Geekbench 6.2, the Core Ultra 9 outperforms the 14900K in single-core performance by about 8%, only to lose out by about the same in Cinebench R23’s single-core benchmark. Meanwhile, in Cinebench R23’s multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K comes in about 12% faster than the 14900K and is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X.

The Core Ultra 5 245K, meanwhile, is effectively even with the Core i5-14600K, but fares much better in PCMark 10’s Home CPU benchmark, showing a roughly 14.5% performance boost over the 14600K and a 5.6% better showing than the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X.

In terms of average creative performance, the Core Ultra 9 285K does slightly better than the 14900K but slightly worse than the Ryzen 9 9950X — it’s substantially better than the Ryzen 9 9900X, on average, however.

The Core Ultra 5 245K, meanwhile does slightly worse, on average, than the Core i5-14600K, but comes out nearly 23% better on average than the Ryzen 5 9600X.

The gaming performance of the Core Ultra chips was easily the biggest disappointment, however, and is where these two chips really falter against Raptor Lake Refresh.

The Core Ultra 9 285K came in about 14% slower in gaming performance than the Core i9-14900K (though about 7-8% better than the Ryzen 9 9950X and Ryzen 9 9900X).

The Core Ultra 5 245K, meanwhile, came in about 9% slower than the i5-14600K, and only about 4% faster than the Ryzen 5 9600X.

Needless to say, if you’re looking for the best processor for gaming, you’ll want to look at the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D or wait to see what the upcoming AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D does later this year.

When all the scores are tabulated and the final averages calculated, the Core Ultra 9 285K shows slightly better multi-core performance, slightly lower single-core performance, slightly better creative performance, and much worse gaming performance against its predecessor.

The Core Ultra 5 245K is generally slower for just about everything compared to the Core i5-14600K, though it does have much better productivity performance, so this will make a great chip for affordable AIO PCs without discrete graphics.

The real disappointment with Arrow Lake, though, lies with its energy efficiency... or lack thereof. Most people don’t even need the performance of the Intel Core i9-14900K or even the Intel Core i5-14600K, so I’d be fine with lower performance if it meant that there was much less power draw, but the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K max out at 90.5% and 93.3% of the power of their predecessors, respectively.

That’s still much too high, and at that point, you might as well just stick with Raptor Lake Refresh and undervolt the CPU.

Ultimately, given the significantly higher cost of making the switch to these processors from the LGA 1700 chips, the performance and efficiency just don’t make these compelling purchases on their own.

If you’re shopping for the best prebuilt gaming PC though, though, I won’t be too worried about picking between one with a 14th-gen chip or these new Core Ultras. You’re not going to notice the difference.

Performance: 3.5 / 5

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Should you buy it?

Buy the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K or Intel Core Ultra 5 245K if...

If you haven't made the leap to the latest Intel processors, you're going to have to buy all new stuff anyway, so you might as well go for these chips and future-proof your PC for Nova Lake next year.

While the efficiency gains on these two chips aren't huge, they are more efficient, which is definitely a good thing.View Deal

Don't buy them if...

Running these chips is going to require a new motherboard at least, and likely will require you to buy new RAM as well, making these chips a substantial investment.

While the performance of these chips is great in absolute terms, they aren't any better than their predecessors, though substantially worse for gaming.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K & Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Also Consider

The Intel Core i7-14700K is still my pick for the best processor for most people thanks to its strong performance and accessible pricing.

Read the full Intel Core i7-14700K review

If you're looking for the best processor for gaming, then this is the processor you need to buy, at least until its successor come out.

Read the full AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D review

How I tested the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K

When I test processors, I put them through a rigorous process that takes into account synthetic benchmarks, creative workloads, gaming performance, and more to arrive at my scores.

I use industry standard tools like Geekbench, Cinebench, and PCMark, as well as creative apps like Adobe Photoshop, Blender, and Handbrake.

For gaming, I use built-in benchmarks for CPU-intensive games like Total War: Warhammer III on low graphics settings at 1080p to better isolate a CPU's impact on the game's framerates.

Finally, I make sure to use the same system for common-socket processors, the fastest RAM and SSD, and the most powerful GPU and motherboards available to maintain consistency wherever possible to ensure that CPU scores are comparable.

With each new processor I review, I retest previous processors I've reviewed in order to get updated scores for each, after installing the latest system and BIOS updates.

I've tested and retested two generations of processors more times than I can count over the last couple of years, so I am intimately familiar with how these chips perform, and my deep computer science and journalism background allows me to put all of this testing data into its proper context for consumers so they can make the right choice when shopping for a new processor.

Originally reviewed October 2024

Netgear Nighthawk RS300 review: high-speed Wi-Fi 7 at a competitive price

8:30 pm | September 17, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets Servers & Network Devices | Tags: PC | Comments: Off

Netgear Nighthawk RS300: One-minute review

Netgear’s range of Wi-Fi routers and mesh systems are always well-designed and offer high-end performance for business and home users who need a fast, reliable Wi-Fi connection.

They do tend to be pretty expensive, though, as we saw with the recently launched Nighthawk RS700, which weighed in at a hefty £800/$700/AU$1499. That’s a lot of money for a single, standalone router – especially for home users who probably don’t need the blazing 19Gbps Wi-Fi speed offered by the RS700.

The new Nighthawk RS300 is therefore designed to provide a high-speed Wi-Fi 7 upgrade with a more affordable price tag. As you might expect, the RS300 is slower, offering a top-speed of 9.3Gbps, but that’s still more than fast enough to handle gaming, streaming 4K video, and other demanding online tasks, and it costs just under half the price of the RS700.

Netgear Nighthawk RS300: Price and availability

Netgear Nighthawk RS300 router sitting on a table — (Image credit: Future)

How much does it cost? $329.99/£299.99/AU$1497
When is it available? Now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia

Routers and mesh systems that support Wi-Fi 7 are still quite expensive, and Netgear in particular rarely troubles itself with the more affordable end of the market. That’s why we were pleased to see that the Nighthawk RS300 costs a relatively modest $330 in the US, £300 in the UK, and AU$1497 in Australia, which actually makes it the most affordable Wi-Fi 7 router that we’ve seen so far.

There are, of course, faster Wi-Fi 7 routers, such as Netgear’s own RS700 or the gaming-oriented Rapture GT-BE98 from Asus, but the 9.3Gbps performance of the RS300 is still far faster than most home broadband services. In the US, Netgear states that the RS300 can connect to 100 devices simultaneously, and cover an area of up to 2,500 sq.ft. However, differences in national regulations mean that this area is quoted as 2,000 sq. ft in the UK and some other regions.

The sting in the tail, as always with Netgear, is its persistent attempts to sell additional subscriptions, such as its Armor security services and Smart Parental Controls - especially when there are rival routers that provide solid parental controls at no extra cost.

Value: 4 / 5

Netgear Nighthawk RS300: Specs

Netgear Nighthawk RS300: Design

Tower design provides 360-degree Wi-Fi
4x Ethernet ports for wired connections
USB for network storage

Unsurprisingly, the design of the RS300 is similar to that of the high-end RS700, with both models adopting a tall, obelisk shape and finished in matte-black. This is in contrast to the more low-profile, winged ‘shuttle-craft’ design that Netgear used for several years on earlier Nighthawk models. Netgear states that this taller design helps the router’s four internal antennae broadcast an “omni-directional” Wi-Fi signal that broadcasts through a full 360-degrees, and reaches right across your home or office.

However, the lower price of the RS300 means that its plastic casing doesn’t feel quite as sturdy as its high-end counterpart, and I’d probably opt to keep it on a lower shelf or on a table where it’s not likely to get knocked over.

Netgear Nighthawk RS300 backside ports — (Image credit: Future)

But, despite the lower price, the RS300 still provides a 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet port that can handle high-speed fibre Internet connections (WAN). There are two more 2.5 Gigabit ports to provide high-speed wired (LAN) connections for devices, such as a laptop or games console, that need the best performance for gaming or streaming 4K video.

For more routine tasks, such as web browsing and email, the router also provides two conventional Gigabit Ethernet ports as well. And, unlike some less expensive routers, the RS300 also includes a USB port that will allow you to connect a USB storage device and share files with other people on your network. I also like the LED status lights on the front panel for all of these ports. These let you see that everything is working properly at a glance without having to check the Netgear app.

Design: 4 / 5

Netgear Nighthawk RS300: Features

App is easy to use
Simple network set-up
Limited parental controls

The RS300 supports tri-band Wi-Fi 7 with a top speed of 9.3Gbps. That’s actually a pretty modest speed for Wi-Fi 7, but it should be more than adequate for most home users and even quite a few small businesses too.

It doesn’t take long to get up and running; the Nighthawk app allows you to simply scan a QR code to connect to the RS300. You do need to create a name and password in order to use the app itself, but you can then accept the default settings for the new network and connect straight away, or change those settings for extra security. That keeps things simple for home users who may not have much experience with networking and routers, but the Nighthawk app isn’t exactly overflowing with additional features.

Image 1 of 2

Netgear app homepage — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Netgear app subscription page — (Image credit: Future)

It creates a single network that merges the three frequency bands – 2.4GHz, 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz – and automatically connects your devices to the fastest band that is available in that particular room or location. Some advanced users might prefer more detailed controls within the app, such as the ability to create separate networks using each frequency band (which is available with the high-end RS700).

There are also very few parental controls included in the app. You do have the ability to create profiles for your children, and use these to pause Internet access at bed-time or dinner-time. However, additional features, such as content filters that can block unsuitable websites and online content, require a subscription to Netgear’s Smart Parental Controls service.

The Nighthawk app does offer a 30-day free trial for this service, and also for Netgear’s Armory security service, but you then have to pay $7.99/month or $69.99/year for the Smart Parental Controls, and $99.99/year for Armor. There are routers from other manufacturers that provide better parental controls free of charge, so that’s an important factor for parents of young children to bear in mind.

Features: 3.5 / 5

Netgear Nighthawk RS300: Performance

Tri-band Wi-Fi 7
2.5Gb Ethernet for broadband connection (WAN)
2.5Gb Ethernet for wired connections (LAN)

Netgear Nighthawk RS300 Benchmarks:

Ookla Speed Test – Single merged network (download/upload)

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps/150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps/150Mbps

20GB Steam Download - Single merged network

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps

Netgear’s attempts to “upsell” you with its subscription services are always irksome, but we can’t fault the performance of the RS300. Our office internet connection provides a top speed of 150Mbps, but our aging office router can only manage around 120Mbps for the Ookla Speedtest when connecting to devices that are close by in the same room, while game downloads from Steam struggle along at around 100Mbps. We also have an office at the back of our building where the Wi-Fi signal from our normal router can barely reach, forcing us to rely on a set of wired Powerline adaptors to provide a decent Internet connection.

The RS300 solved all our Wi-Fi problems straight away, immediately hitting 150Mbps for devices in the same room for both Steam downloads and the Ookla Speedtest. It had no trouble zapping its Wi-Fi signal along our L-shaped corridor to reach that back office, either. And, as I walked along the corridor with my laptop, I was pleased to find that the RS300 maintained that 150Mbps speed every step of the way for both Ookla and Steam.

Larger homes or offices that cover 4,000 sq.ft or more might need one of the best mesh wi-fi systems to reach properly, but most home users and small businesses will find that the Nighthawk RS300 provides a high-speed Wi-Fi 7 upgrade with one of the most competitive prices we’ve seen so far.

Performance: 4 / 5

Should you buy the Netgear Nighthawk RS300?

Buy it if...

You want a high-speed Wi-Fi 7 upgrade

It’s taken a while, but Wi-Fi 7 routers are finally starting to become more affordable, and the RS300 can handle most domestic broadband services without ever working up a sweat.

You just bought a new laptop or PC

Wi-Fi 7 is backwards-compatible with older computers, consoles, and mobile devices that only have Wi-Fi 5, 6, or 6E, but it will work best with the latest computers that now have Wi-Fi 7 as well.

Don't buy it if...

You’re on a budget

Most domestic broadband services run at well under 1Gb/s, so few of us really need Wi-Fi 7 right now. Plenty of the best Wi-Fi routers, many of which are more affordable, feature Wi-Fi 6 and 6E and will be just fine for the next couple of years.

You have lots of bedrooms

The RS300 has relatively modest range, so some larger homes and offices may need a mesh Wi-Fi system that uses two or more routers to create a mesh network with a greater range and net of coverage.

Also consider

Netgear Nighthawk RS700S

The elder sibling of the RS300 is twice as expensive, but it provides Wi-Fi 7 with a mind-boggling speed of 19Gbps, and even 10Gb Ethernet for high-speed broadband connections.

Read our full Nighthawk RS700S review here.

TP-Link Deco BE63

Larger homes and offices may need greater range rather than raw speed, so a mesh system such as the Deco BE63 can provide Wi-Fi 7 coverage that reaches into every nook and cranny.

Read our full TP-Link Deco BE63 review here.

First reviewed in August 2024

ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE review: the best midrange GPU but better

2:00 pm | July 15, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: AI, GPU | Comments: Off

ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE: Three-minute review

Earlier this year, the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (Golden Rabbit Edition), initially exclusive to China, emerged as a formidable mid-range GPU contender upon its global release. It not only competes directly with the Nvidia RTX 4070 in terms of price but also rivals the performance of the 4070 Super.

ASRock Steel Legend's version of the RX 7900 GRE retains all the features we appreciated and found lacking in the GPU. This includes 16GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit memory bus, 80 AMD RDNA 3 compute units with RT and AI accelerators, 64MB of AMD Infinity Cache technology, and support for Microsoft DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Priced at $549 (£568.44/AU$1,025), the ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE stands out as one of the best versions of AMD's mid-range GPU.

As with many GPUs from the Taipei, Taiwan-based manufacturer, it includes several appealing extras. Customizable RGB lighting is available through ASRock’s Polychrome RGB Sync app.

The metal backplate not only enhances durability but also adds a sleek look to custom desktop setups. For cooling, it features a triple-striped axial fan with 0dB silent cooling and an Ultra-fit heat pipe for efficient heat dissipation.

An ASRock Steel Series Radeon RX 7900 GRE on a desk — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

The ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE boasts higher core (1972MHz) and boost (2,333MHz) clock speeds compared to the version we reviewed last February. While this might yield a slight performance boost, the primary benefit lies in enhanced GPU durability. Buyers can enjoy added visual flair with customizable RGB lighting and an improved cooling solution, all without the concern of accelerated wear on their GPU.

Installation is straightforward, featuring PCI Express 4.0 support and requiring two 8-pin power connectors for its 260W power demand. The card includes three DisplayPort 2.1 ports and one HDMI 2.1 port.

Users will need to download the AMD Software Adrenalin Edition driver for optimal performance. Additionally, ASRock provides the ASRock Tweak 2.0 software for performance tuning and fan control adjustments.

This version of the RX 7900 GRE delivers nearly identical performance, making it ideal for 1440p native resolutions and entry-level 4K gaming, depending on the game. Gamers who also use their desktops for content creation can seamlessly edit high-resolution photos in Photoshop and videos in Premiere Pro without any issues.

Starting with Hellblade 2: Senua’s Saga, considered a high visual benchmark in gaming, we tested at 1440p native resolution with max settings and ray tracing, achieving frame rates between 30-45 fps. Enabling AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) at a balanced setting boosted frame rates to 60 fps and above.

While FSR isn't as refined as Nvidia’s DLSS, with some noticeable ghosting issues, the RX 7900 GRE’s larger VRAM can provide better performance for GPU-intensive games.

Games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Forza Motorsport (2023) also saw respectable frame rates at max settings. Aspiring competitive gamers will definitely be able to get higher 100+ frame rates on games like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III, Counter Strike 2 and Fortnite too.

The ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE is an enhanced version of an already impressive mid-range GPU. It features customizable RGB lighting, a robust metal backplate, and an efficient cooling system with 0dB silent cooling. This makes it an ideal choice for budget-conscious gamers looking for outstanding 1440p performance.

ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE: PRICE & AVAILABILITY

The ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE is now available in the U.S., UK, and Australia for $549 (£568.44, AU$1,025). It can be purchased from online retailers like Amazon and Newegg.

Priced $50 lower than the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super, the RX 7900 GRE offers 16GB VRAM compared to the 4070 Super’s 12GB, providing a slight advantage for 1440p gaming at native resolution.

However, the 4070 Super excels in Ray Tracing and AI upscaling, enhancing games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Alan Wake II.

ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE: Specs

Should I Buy ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE?

Buy the ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE if…

You require fantastic 1440p performance
The ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE is a 1440p beast with the ability to get some good performance out of 4K as well.

You need a GPU to make your desktop’s fly
The GPU looks great including the metal back panel and customizable RGB lighting.

You want good cooling components and quiet fans
Alongside the triple fan design that’s pretty quiet even when under stress, the ultra-fit heat pipe really goes a long way of keeping components cool.

Don’t buy if…

You need the best ray tracing and AI upscaling
Compared to NVIDIA’s 4070 Super, the RX 7900 GRE can’t keep up with ray tracing performance and AI resolution upscaling through DLSS.

ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE: ALSO CONSIDER

Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super
Not only can it handle 1440p resolution just as well as the RX 7900 but excels at ray tracing and AI upscaling.

Read the full Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 Super review

HOW I TESTED ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE

I used the ASRock Steel Legend RX 7900 GRE on my main computer for two weeks, playing games like Hellblade 2: Senua's Saga, Armored Core VI: Fires of Rubicon, and Forza Motorsport (2023). I also created video and photo content with Photoshop and Premiere Pro. With specs similar to the RX 7900 GRE we reviewed earlier this year, except for the additional 212Hz boost clock, the benchmarks were almost the same.

I’ve spent the past several years covering laptops and PCs, monitors, and other PC components for Techradar. Outside of gaming, I’ve been proficient in Adobe Suite for over a decade as well.

We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained - regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it's on our radar.

First reviewed July 2024

Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5 review: fantastic performance for the (current) price

2:45 am | July 13, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Tags: RGB | Comments: Off

Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5: Two-minute review

The Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5 RAM kit is now going to be my default RAM kit on the test bench, it's really that good.

It's not so much about the style, which is in itself pretty fantastic with its oragami-inspired design and attractive white heatspreader.

It's also not really about the price, especially since the current retail price for a 32GB (2x16GB) of $104.99 in the US (about £90/AU$150) is technically a discount from its list price of $164.99 (about £135/AU$240), which would make this kit a lot less appealing when compared to something like the TeamGroup T-Force Delta RGB DDR5 I reviewed in March if the Crucial Pro Overclocking ever went back up to its MSRP.

While those factors—design and price—are definitely relevant, it wouldn't mean anything if its performance wasn't up to par with the competition, and fortunately, the Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5 can more than hold its own against its rivals.

As you can see above, there are areas where the Crucial Pro OC kit doesn't quite get to the levels of some other competing DDR5 kits like the TeamGroup T-Force Delta RGB or PNY XLR8 Gaming Mako, both of which also clock in at 6,000MT/s when running in overclocking mode, but unlike those kits, the Crucial Pro can do both XMP and EXPO, so its compatibility is fantastic.

This is especially true if you work on a lot of different systems and sometimes find yourself toggling between AMD and Intel frequently enough that you have a hard time keeping track of which RAM you're using (though that might just be a me-problem).

A Crucial Pro Overclocking RAM kit — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

Currently, you can only get the Crucial Pro Overclocking in a 32GB kit (16GBx2) at 6,000MT/s, but honestly, you really don't need much more than that. Besides, the stock 5,600MT/s that you get out of the package is better than most competing kits, so if you want better stability you have the option of just plugging your RAM in and turning on your PC for great performance.

There are things that some might be missing, like the RGB aesthetic or even more control over overclocking voltages and speeds than the presets you get with the Crucial Pro Overclocking kit, but for the amount of money you're paying for what you're getting, this is currently the RAM kit to beat in this range.

Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5: Price & availability

How much does it cost? $104.99 (about £90 / AU$150)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, and Australia

You can get the 32GB (16GBx2) Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5 kit for $104.99 (about £90 / AU$150), though its does show a list price of $164.99 on Crucial's storefront where it has marked the price on this kit down considerably.

As it stands, this RAM kit is very competitive price-wise. If that ever changes, however, that will be a much bigger issue, as its performance to price ratio at its list price is genuinely terrible. You shouldn't spend more than $110/£90/AU$155 on this kit, as you can get a much better value elsewhere once you're in the $150/£120/AU$210 range.

Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5: Specs

Should you buy the Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5?

Buy the Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5 kit if...

You want easy DDR5 overclocking
The best part about the Crucial Pro Overclocking DDR5 is that you plug it in and it just works.

You want great-looking RAM for your build
Between the stylish silhouette, this is some great-looking RAM.

Don't buy it if...

You want some RGB
This is strictly non-RGB, so if you want that sort of thing, there are other options out there.

It's priced above $110/£90/AU$155
This RAM has been selling for much less than its list price, but if that ever changes, there are likely to be better options out there.

TP-Link Deco BE63: One-Minute Review

The Deco range of mesh Wi-Fi systems from TP-Link is a popular option for many people who want good Wi-Fi performance at a competitive price, and the company recently introduced a new version of the Deco with support for the latest Wi-Fi 7 standard.

Somewhat oddly, there are some differences between the Deco models that are on sale in different countries, as in the US TP-Link has named this product the Deco BE63, while in other regions it’s the BE65 instead.

There are a few other differences as well, but all models share the same basic design and features, and the three-router system that we’ve reviewed here is about the same price as some of the two-router systems we’ve seen recently – so the Deco is certainly good value for money for anyone looking for a high-performance Wi-Fi upgrade.

TP-Link Deco BE63: Price And Availability

How much does it cost? $799.99 / £699.99 / AU$1,185
When is it available? It's out now
Where can you get it? US and UK (Australia coming soon)

Customers in the US have the best range of options, as they can buy a single Deco BE63 unit that will be suitable for smaller homes for $299.99. There’s also a two-pack available for homes with around four bedrooms, costing $549.99, while larger homes can opt for the three-pack that we’ve reviewed here, priced at $799.99.

In the UK, the model number is changed to Deco BE65, and the system is currently only available as a three-pack priced at £699.99. It isn’t yet on sale in Australia at the time of writing, but the price for the Deco BE65 should be approximately AU$1,185.

Wi-Fi 7 routers and mesh systems are still quite expensive as the technology is so new, but that three-pack option is actually quite competitive. We’ve seen Wi-Fi 7 products from rival manufacturers such as Netgear and Linksys that charge similar prices – or higher – for mesh systems that only have two routers, so TP-Link is certainly providing good value for money in relative terms.

Value: 5 / 5

TP-Link Deco BE63: Design

TP-Link Deco BE63 close up — (Image credit: Future)

Smart and compact cylindrical design
4x Ethernet ports (2.5Gbps)
1x USB 3.0 port

This new version of the Deco sticks with the familiar white, cylindrical design that TP-Link has used in recent years. Each router stands 176mm high and 107.5mm in diameter, so they don’t take up too much space when you’re setting them up. They’re sturdily built too, and TP-Link adds a little flourish with what initially looks like a simple brush-stroke pattern, but actually becomes recognizable as a large ‘7’ as you move further away.

There are four 2.5Gbps Ethernet ports on the back of each router, and each port can be used to connect to the internet (WAN), or to provide a wired connection (LAN) for devices such as a laptop or games console. And, unlike some of its rivals, the Deco also includes a USB 3.0 port that allows you to connect a hard drive or other storage device to your home or office network.

TP-Link Deco BE63/BE65: Specifications

Wi-Fi: Tri-band Wi-Fi 7 (2.4GHz/5.0GHz/6.0GHz)
Wi-Fi Speed: 10Gbps (US) ; 9.2Gbps (UK)
Ports (per router): 4 x 2.5Gb Ethernet (WAN/LAN), 1x USB-A (3.0)
Processor: Unspecified
Memory: Unspecified
Storage: Unspecified
Dimensions: 176 x 107.5 × 107.5mm, 1.1kg

But, as we’ve mentioned, there are some differences beneath the surface of the Deco, depending on which region you live in. The model sold in the US is called the Deco BE63, and provides tri-band Wi-Fi 7 using the 2.4GHz, 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz frequency bands, with a top speed of 10Gbps. However, customers in other regions are offered the Deco BE65, which has a slightly lower top speed of 9.2Gbps.

We were told by TP-Link that these differences are due to varying national regulations in each region, which affect the top speed that can be used on each frequency band (although this isn’t something we’ve encountered with other mesh systems that we’ve reviewed in the past).

The Deco hasn’t yet gone on sale in Australia, but TP-Link is actually planning to release three separate models in that region, with the standard Deco BE65 being joined by the BE65-5G with support for 5G mobile broadband, and the BE65 Pro, which will provide faster 5Gbps Ethernet ports for wired connections.

Design: 5 / 5

TP-Link Deco BE63: Features

TP-Link Deco BE63 ports — (Image credit: Future)

Free parental controls
MLO network
Quick setup, well-designed app

Getting started was straightforward enough, as the Deco app prompted us to connect one of the Deco routers to our existing broadband router, and was then able to automatically connect to the new Deco mesh network. We were then prompted to create a new name and password for the Deco network, and the three Deco routers automatically connected to each other. So, all that really needs to be done is to simply plug them in.

On the downside on the ease-of-use front, the app does throw some jargon at you, asking you to select settings such as ‘VLAN’ and ‘Dynamic IP.’ Most people will be able to ignore these and just accept the default settings shown in the app, but TP-Link could explain these settings more clearly for newbie users who aren’t Wi-Fi wizards.

The Deco app is well-designed overall, though, and its main screen quickly shows you all the key information about your network. There’s a network map that displays the status of the three routers and all the devices connected to each router. It also shows the current download and upload speeds, and has a built-in speed test to check your broadband connection (using the same Ookla Speedtest that we use for our performance testing).

TP-Link Deco BE63 app — (Image credit: TP-Link)

Some mesh systems simply merge all three frequency bands – 2.4GHz, 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz – into a single network, while others create a separate network for each. The Deco sits somewhere in-between, as it creates one network that combines the 2.4GHz and 5.0GHz bands, but splits off the 6.0Hz band to create a separate high-speed network for newer computers and mobile devices that have Wi-Fi 7 or Wi-Fi 6E (which both support 6.0GHz).

We were also interested to learn that – unlike most of its Wi-Fi 7 rivals – the Deco also provides an option to activate or deactivate ‘multi-link operation’ (MLO) and create a separate MLO network as well. This is a key feature of Wi-Fi 7 that allows devices to use the 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz bands at the same time in order to improve Wi-Fi performance.

However, MLO only works with computers and mobile devices that also support Wi-Fi 7, so having the ability to create a separate MLO network allows you to prioritize performance for newer devices that cater for Wi-Fi 7. Alternatively, for older PCs, laptops and mobile devices, the Deco app also provides a QoS option (Quality of Service) that allows you to give priority to specific devices, such as a console or gaming PC, so that they get the best performance.

TP-Link Deco BE63 - 3 devices showing ports — (Image credit: Future)

We were also pleased to find that the Deco app includes some useful parental controls free of charge. You can create profiles for each child in your family, specifying their name and age, and any particular devices that they may use. The app allows you to specify a ‘bedtime’ schedule that blocks internet access for your children at night-time, and also provides content filters that can block adult content and other types of unsuitable material.

There are additional subscription services available, including an Advanced Parental Controls service, which includes extra features such as the ability to block age-restricted videos on YouTube. This costs £17.99 / $17.99 / AU$29.99 per year or £2.99 / $2.99 / AU$4.99 per month, but the basic parental controls provided for free are still better than those offered by some of TP-Link’s rivals, so parents are getting good value for money here.

Features: 4 / 5

TP-Link Deco BE63: Performance

TP-Link Deco BE63 Lifestyle 2 — (Image credit: TP-Link)

Tri-band Wi-Fi 7
Separate 6.0GHz network
2.5Gbps for wired connections

Whatever region you live in, the Deco BE63/BE65 provides impressive Wi-Fi 7 performance. Our aging office router can deliver fairly good performance levels for computers and mobile devices that are nearby, but its Wi-Fi signal struggles to reach a room located at the back of the building, where we have to use a set of Powerline adapters to provide a more reliable wired connection.

TP-Link Deco BE63 benchmarks

Ookla Speed Test – 2.4GHz/5.0GHz merged network (download/upload)

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps / 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps / 150Mbps

20GB Steam Download - 2.4GHz/5.0GHz merged network (download)

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps

Ookla Speed Test – 6.0GHz (download/upload)

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps / 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps / 150Mbps

20GB Steam Download - 6.0GHz (download)

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps

We therefore connected the first Deco router to our existing office router, with another Deco unit in the back office, and the last one in a hallway that was roughly halfway between the other two.

When running the Ookla Speedtest, devices in the same room as our old office router generally get a Wi-Fi speed of 120Mbps, which is fine for most uses but still less than the full 150Mbps provided by our office broadband service. Downloads from the Steam games store tend to struggle a bit more in that room too, rarely getting above 100Mbps.

However, the Deco immediately put that to rights, stepping up to 150Mbps on both the 6.0GHz band and the combined 2.4/5.0GHz band, and it was also able to maintain those consistent download speeds for both Ookla and Steam.

Furthermore, the Deco mesh system didn’t bat an eyelid as we walked with our laptop down the hall to that back office, effortlessly maintaining that 150Mbps download speed for Ookla and Steam on all frequency bands.

Performance: 4 / 5

Should You Buy The TP-Link Deco BE63?

TP-Link Deco BE63 Lifestyle 1 — (Image credit: TP-Link)

Buy the TP-Link Deco if...

You have lots of bedrooms
In most regions outside the US, the Deco BE65 is currently only available as a three-pack mesh system, which will be suitable for larger homes with more than half a dozen bedrooms. That may change in the future, though, with any luck.

You have a laptop or PC with Wi-Fi 7
Although Wi-Fi 7 is backwards-compatible with older Wi-Fi standards, it does include some important new features, such as MLO – multi-link operation – that can only be used if your computers or mobile devices also support Wi-Fi 7.

Don’t buy it if...

You’re on a budget
Prices for routers and mesh systems that support Wi-Fi 7 are coming down at last, but this is still very much state-of-the-art Wi-Fi technology. Most home users, and most smaller businesses, can still get by with less expensive Wi-Fi 6 or 6E.

You just want to watch Netflix
Wi-Fi 7 provides blazing fast wireless performance, with the new Deco models hitting 9-10Gbps. However, most domestic broadband services are still lagging behind with average speeds of around 100-200Mbps, so few of us really need Wi-Fi 7 right now – and you won’t need these speeds for basic streaming duties, either.

TP-Link Deco BE63: Scorecard

TP-Link Deco BE63: Also Consider

First reviewed: July 2024

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: lightning-fast Wi-Fi 7 router with impressive features for hardcore gamers

9:29 pm | June 11, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets Servers & Network Devices | Comments: Off

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: One-minute review

Most of the Wi-Fi 7 routers that we’ve seen in recent months are general-purpose models, designed for home and office use. However, the new ROG Rapture GT-BE98 from Asus is very much a specialist router aimed at hardcore gamers who want the very best performance for their online action.

Asus has pretty much thrown in the kitchen sink with the GT-BE98 – and then given the sink a bit of a polish and some go-faster stripes to ensure that every aspect of its performance is fine-tuned to perfection.

With quad-band Wi-Fi 7 and a top speed of 24.4Gbps – which Asus slightly exaggerates by rounding it up to 25Gbps on its web site – the GT-BE98 is one of the fastest Wi-Fi 7 routers we’ve seen so far.

It also boasts top-of-the-range wired connectivity, along with a high-performance quad-core processor, and no less than eight chunky antennae that are designed to push the Wi-Fi signal into every corner of your home. Needless to say, it’s serious overkill for most of us – and, in fact, there can’t be many non-professional gamers who have access to the sort of high-speed broadband that could really do justice to a router like the GT-BE98.

However, it’s a great demonstration of the kind of performance provided by Wi-Fi 7, and how promising more affordable Wi-Fi 7 kit should be when it arrives for the rest of us. And, of course, Wi-Fi 7 is still backwards-compatible with older PCs and devices as well.

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: Price & Availability

An Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98 on a table — (Image credit: Future / Cliff Joseph)

How much does it cost? $749.99 / £699.99 / AU$1,499
When is it available? It's on sale now
Where can you get it? Available in the US, UK, Australia

Pricing for the GT-BE98 is a little erratic, depending on the region where you live. You can’t currently buy the GT-BE98 directly from Asus in the US or Australia at the moment, so you’ll need to shop around online, with prices in the region of $749.99 or AU$1,499 (and Asus’ US website doesn’t even bother to point you in the direction of any retailers, which isn’t very helpful).

Customers in the UK can buy direct from Asus, with both Asus and Amazon listing the router at £699.99. And, believe it or not, that’s not a bad price for a state-of-the-art Wi-Fi 7 router such as this, since rivals such as Netgear’s Nighthawk RS700S are just as expensive – around $699.99 / £799.99 / AU$1,499 at the moment – while only providing tri-band support and a top speed of 19Gbps.

Value: 4 / 5

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: Specs

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: Design

Weighs a hefty 2kg
10Gb Ethernet WAN/LAN port
4x 2.5Gb Ethernet LAN ports

Even by the standards of most gaming routers, the GT-BE98 is a seriously over-the-top piece of kit.

It’s built like a tank and, at 2kg, weighs more than many laptops. Even its array of eight external antennae seems unusually threatening, with a chunky ‘dual-feed’ design that helps to isolate the transmission and reception circuitry for optimum performance.

The router is powered by a quad-core processor running at 2.6GHz, and there are separate amplifiers for each of the four frequency bands. That sort of power requires good cooling and ventilation, so there’s a large heating vent on the top of the router, while the top panel consists of an aluminum heat plate coated with a nano-carbon layer to help dissipate the heat.

And, of course, like any good gaming router, the GT-BE98 has a glowing logo on top, with completely gratuitous RGB lighting effects that can be controlled via the Asus app.

Design: 5 / 5

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: Features

Free parental controls
Option to prioritize gaming performance
Supports additional ‘virtual’ networks

Most Wi-Fi 6E and Wi-Fi 7 routers support tri-band Wi-Fi, using the 2.4GHz, 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz frequency bands, but the GT-BE98 adds a second 5.0GHz band to provide quad-band Wi-Fi 7 with a top speed of 24.4Gbps.

That’s backed up by state-of-the-art wired connectivity as well, with the GT-BE98 boasting 10Gb and 2.5Gb Ethernet ports that can be used for either high-speed broadband connections (WAN) or wired connections to a laptop or other devices (LAN).

There’s a second 10Gb LAN port as well, which is set as a dedicated ‘gaming port’ that takes priority over all the other ports to ensure that your gaming rig gets the best possible performance. There are three additional 2.5Gb ports for LAN connections, and a single Gigabit Ethernet LAN port that dawdles along behind for doing boring stuff like email and work. You even get two USB-A ports for connecting a hard drive or other storage device to your network.

The Asus app could use a little fine-tuning, though. The app didn’t seem to recognize the GT-BE98 even when my laptop was already connected to it and was happily streaming the BBC News channel while I worked.

Image 1 of 3

A screenshot of the Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98's mobile app interface — (Image credit: Future / Cliff Joseph)

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

Eventually I had to do things the old-fashioned way, using an Ethernet cable to connect the laptop to the router, and then configuring the router via its web browser interface.

Once that was done the Asus app was then able to connect to the GT-BE98 and worked without any further problems. However, Asus still needs to update the app so that less experienced users can get started without having to muck around with Ethernet cables and the not-very-friendly browser interface.

The app does provide some useful features, though – most notably free parental controls that include scheduling features and content filters to block various categories of unsuitable material.

And, unlike some of its rivals, Asus doesn’t charge an extra subscription for these features (Netgear, we’re looking at you). Gamers have the option to prioritize gaming to provide maximum performance, or other tasks such as video streaming or file transfers.

You can also use Asus AiMesh technology to run the GT-BE98 as part of a mesh Wi-Fi system. And, unusually, the Asus app lets you set aside some bandwidth to create ‘virtual’ networks for specific uses, such as having a kids’ network, or an IoT network (Internet of Things) for smart devices such as lights that you may have in your home.

Once again, though, the app feels a little cumbersome here, and assumes a fair amount of technical knowledge from the user, so ease of use remains an area that needs improvement.

Features: 5 / 5

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: Performance

Quad-band Wi-Fi 7
24.4Gbps speed
High-speed wired connections

Benchmarks

Here is how the Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98 performed in our benchmark tests:

Ookla Speed Test - 2.4GHz (download/upload)
Within 5ft, no obstructions: 145Mbps / 20Mbps
Within 30ft, three partition walls: 80Mbps / 20Mbps
Ookla Speed Test - 5.0GHz (download/upload)
Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps / 20Mbps
Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps / 20Mbps
Ookla Speed Test - 6.0GHz (download/upload)
Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps / 20Mbps
Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps / 20Mbps
20GB Steam Download - 2.4GHz
Within 5ft, no obstructions: 75Mbps
Within 30ft, three partition walls: 75Mbps
20GB Steam Download - 5.0GHz
Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps
Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps
20GB Steam Download - 6.0GHz
Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps
Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps

The initial setup process could be a little smoother, but we certainly don’t have any complaints about the performance of the GT-BE98. Our ageing office router only transmits on the 2.4GHz and 5.0GHz bands, and even then it struggles with our office broadband connection, which runs at 150Mbps.

Even at close range, when transmitting to devices in the same room, our office router can only manage 80Mbps for the Ookla Speed Test on the 2.4GHz band, and 120Mbps on the 5.0GHz band. Steam downloads tell a similar story, at just 40Mbps for 2.4GHz and 100Mbps for 5.0GHz.

However, we also have an office located at the back of the building that the Wi-Fi signal from our old router can barely reach, forcing us to rely on Powerline connectors to provide a more reliable wired connection.

Unsurprisingly, the GT-BE98 coped with both office locations easily. Even on the slowest 2.4GHz band, it boosted the Ookla test to 145Mbps for devices in the same room, and even managed to provide a steady 80Mbps in the back office that normally can’t get Wi-Fi at all.

Steam downloads on 2.4GHz almost doubled to 75Mbps for devices in the same room, and the GT-BE98 maintained that speed even in our back office as well. There are many smart devices, such as lights and security cameras, that still rely on the 2.4GHz band, so it’s worth having that speed improvement on 2.4GHz if you want the option of creating an IoT network using the Asus app.

But, of course, the 2.4GHz band is the slowest of the four frequency bands supported by the GT-BE98, and we weren’t at all surprised to find that the GT-BE98 effortlessly hit our maximum 150Mbps in both of our test locations when using its additional 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz bands.

Like most Wi-Fi 7 routers, the GT-BE98 is overkill for most home users, but it’s competitively priced when compared to rival models, and will be a great option for gamers who need every advantage when they’re fighting it out online.

Performance: 5 / 5

Should you buy the Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98?

Buy the Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98 if...

You’re a gaming guru
Very much aimed at hardcore gamers, the GT-BE98 provides state-of-the-art performance and features for serious gaming and online matches.

You have a tricked-out gaming rig
Gaming PCs with Wi-Fi 7 are now starting to appear, so the GT-BE98 will be the perfect Wi-Fi upgrade for the well-heeled gamer.

Don't buy it if...

You don’t have Wi-Fi 7
Wi-Fi 7 is backwards-compatible with older versions of Wi-Fi, but there are some advanced features that won’t be available with older PCs and gaming consoles.

You’re on a budget
Needless to say, the GT-BE98 is seriously expensive. There are more affordable routers with Wi-Fi 6 or 6E that can still provide good gaming performance.

Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98: Also consider

If my Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98 review has you looking for other options, here are two more routers to consider...

How I tested the Asus ROG Rapture GT-BE98

Linksys Velop Pro 7: One-Minute Review

Linksys originally announced the new Wi-Fi 7 version of its Velop Pro mesh system back in October 2023, but the final technical details of the Wi-Fi 7 standard weren’t actually ironed out until the official announcement at CES earlier this year.

So, like several other Wi-Fi 7 products, it’s taken a little while for the Velop Pro 7 router to actually go on sale. It’s a welcome arrival, though, as while the Velop Pro 7 isn’t exactly cheap, it’s considerably less expensive than some of the other Wi-Fi 7 mesh systems and routers that we’ve seen so far - ushering in some hope that Wi-Fi 7 is starting to become a little more affordable for ordinary home users.

It’s not a top-of-the-range Wi-Fi 7 system, mind, offering tri-band Wi-Fi with a top speed of just over 10Gbps. That’s actually fairly mid-range for the blazing fast Wi-Fi 7 standard, but it’s still more than fast enough to cope with most domestic broadband services and tasks such as online gaming or streaming 4K video.

Wi-Fi 7 is also backward-compatible with older PCs and mobile devices that use Wi-Fi 5 or 6, so you don’t have to worry about compatibility problems if you decide to upgrade with a Wi-Fi 7 system such as the Velop Pro 7. And, as we’ve seen with previous Velop systems, you can buy either one, two or three Velop mesh routers to suit the size of your home.

Linksys Velop Pro 7: Price And Availability

How much does it cost? $699.99 / £749.99 (around AU$1,060)
When is it available? Now
Where can you get it? Available in the US and UK

Each Velop router unit can cover an area of around 3,000 square feet, so people in smaller homes will probably find that a single router meets their needs perfectly well for a price of £399.99 / $349.99 (around AU$530).

However, the two-piece system that we tested costs £749.99 / $699.99 (around AU$1060), and there’s a three-device option also available for £999.99 / $899.9 (around AU$1,365). The Velop Pro 7 is currently available in the US and UK, although – as we’ve seen with other Wi-Fi 7 products – poor old Australia seems to be a bit of a Wi-Fi deadspot, having only recently caught up with last-gen Wi-Fi 6E.

That’s still fairly expensive, of course, but the Velop Pro 7 is only around half the price of rival Wi-Fi 7 mesh systems such as Netgear’s extravagantly expensive Orbi 970, which costs a hefty £1,499.99 / $1,699.99 (around AU$2,600) for a similar two-piece system - and a whopping £2,199.99 / $2,299.99 (around AU$3,475) for a three-piece system.

Value: 4 / 5

Linksys Velop Pro 7: Design

Slim, compact design
Lots of Ethernet ports
Available with one, two or three routers

The design of the Velop Pro 7 will be familiar from previous Velop models, with each router consisting of a slim white tower, topped off with the Velop’s trademark tapered ‘teardrop’ shape on the top panel.

The router devices are slim and light enough to fit easily onto a shelf or table – although the height of each unit, at 221mm, means they’ll need a bit of headroom if you want to place them on a bookshelf or something similar.

Linksys Velop Pro 7: Specifications

Wi-Fi: Tri-band Wi-Fi 7 (2.4GHz/5.0GHz/6.0GHz)
Wi-Fi Speed: 10.7Gbps
Ports (per router): 1 x 2.5Gb Ethernet (WAN), 4 x Gigabit Ethernet (LAN)
Processor: Qualcomm 1.5GHz, quad-core
Memory: 1GB SDRAM
Storage: Unspecified
Dimensions: 221 x 95 x 95mm, 0.95kg / 2lbs

The Velop routers are identical, so you can connect one of them to your existing router to use your broadband connection, and then place the other router(s) further away to extend the mesh network right across your home or office.

But while the Velop Pro 7 routers look very similar to previous models there are some significant differences. The Velop Pro 6E that we reviewed recently only included two Gigabit Ethernet ports on each router, with one required for the connection to your existing router and only the second port available to provide a wired connection.

In contrast, the Velop Pro 7 routers all have five Ethernet ports – a 2.5G port for a high-speed Internet connection (WAN) and four Gigabit Ethernet ports to provide wired connections for devices such as a games console or laptop.

There are no USB ports, though, which would allow you to connect a hard drive or other storage device to your network, but that’s not likely to be a deal-breaker for most users.

It’s a little odd, though, that Linksys avoids any mention of the Velop’s speed on its website, preferring to simply state that Wi-Fi 7 is a lot faster than Wi-Fi 6 (gosh, really?). After a little digging, we found a reference to a speed of ‘over 10Gbps’ before eventually locating a datasheet that specified a speed of 10,680Mbps (or 10.68Gbps).

Design: 4 / 5

Linksys Velop Pro 7: Features

Ports of the Velop Pro 7 — (Image credit: Future)

Tri-band Wi-Fi 7
App feels a little unfinished
Parental controls are still in beta

As mentioned, the Velop Pro 7 provides tri-band Wi-Fi 7, using the 2.4GHz, 5.0GHz and 6.0GHz frequency bands, which will be more than fast enough to cope with most home and office broadband connections.

Getting started is fairly straightforward, although the process is a little cumbersome at times. There’s a QR code printed on the base of each router, but this didn’t allow us to automatically connect to the Velop network, as is the case with many rival mesh systems.

Instead, we had to write down the network name and password that were printed on the base of the router and enter these by hand, before subsequently changing the network details and creating a new name and password of our choosing.

You also have to start the setup process with the two Velop routers placed close to each other while you create your new network, and then move the second router – referred to as a ‘node’ - to another location once that’s done. And, oddly, the app told us several times that we had no internet connection - even though we were already streaming the BBC News channel on an iPad using the Velop network.

The app continues to be something of a mixed bag later on, as well. It creates a single network that combines the three frequency bands, which does keep things simple for new users - but more advanced users might prefer to have greater control over the network settings.

The app does include features such as a guest network, and the option to create a schedule to control your children’s internet access. However, the parental controls are a work in progress, with the app’s ‘Safe Browsing’ mode still being labeled as ‘beta’. This provides content filters that can block unsuitable material, although this feature isn’t clearly explained in the app. Furthermore, at present it seems to block content for all devices on your network, rather than allowing you to create different profiles and settings for children of different ages.

Features: 3.5 / 5

Linksys Velop Pro 7: Performance

Image 1 of 3

Performance in action — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 3

Velop Pro 7 performance — (Image credit: Future)

Image 3 of 3

Linksys Velop Pro 7 — (Image credit: Future)

Top speed of 10.68Gbps
Good performance and range
Zaps through walls and other barriers

The Linksys app may be a little rough around the edges, but we didn’t have any complaints about the performance of the Velop Pro 7.

Our aging office router can’t even handle the full 150Mbps provided by our broadband connection, and even devices that are in the same room rarely get more than 100Mbps for either Steam downloads or the Ookla speed test. We also have a room at the back of the building that our office router can barely reach at all, forcing us to rely on Powerline adaptors to provide a wired connection for our office computers in that room.

Therefore, we set up the Velop Pro 7 with the first Velop unit connected to our normal office router, and the second Velop ‘node’ placed in a hallway just adjacent to that tricky Wi-Fi deadspot in the back office.

Linksys Velop Pro 7 benchmarks

Ookla Speed Test - Single merged network (download/upload)

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps / 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps / 150Mbps

20GB Steam Download - Single merged network

Within 5ft, no obstructions: 150Mbps

Within 30ft, three partition walls: 150Mbps

Unsurprisingly, the Velop easily hit 150Mbps for both Steam downloads and the Ookla speed test when connecting to devices in the same room. And, more importantly, the Velop’s far-reaching network didn’t bat an eyelid as we picked up our laptop and wandered along the corridor to that back office, continuing to maintain a speed of 150Mbps the whole time.

Performance: 5 / 5

Should You Buy The Velop Pro 7?

Linksys Velop Pro 7 lifestyle — (Image credit: Linksys)

Buy the Linksys Velop Pro 7 if...

You’re An Early Adopter
It’s still early days for this new technology, but PCs, laptops and mobile devices that support Wi-Fi 7 are already starting to appear, so upgrading to a Wi-Fi 7 router or mesh system is a good way of future-proofing your home or office network.

You Have A Large Home
You can buy a single Velop Pro 7 router on its own, but it’s really intended as a mesh system that uses two or more routers to cover a wider area, up to 6,000 square feet or more.

Don’t buy it if...

You’re On A Budget
The Velop Pro 7 is one of the most affordable Wi-Fi 7 systems we’ve seen, but it’s still pretty expensive. Most domestic broadband services just don’t need the sheer speed of Wi-Fi 7, so most of us can stick with more affordable routers that use Wi-Fi 6 or 6E.

You Only Have A Couple Of Bedrooms
Mesh systems like this are very much designed for larger homes and offices. If you only have a small family home, or share an apartment with friends, then a single, conventional router will be all you really need.

Velop Pro 7: Scorecard

Velop Pro 7: Also Consider

First reviewed: May 2024

FlumeIO 5901 U.2 SSD review: as good a PCIe 5.0 enterprise drive as you’re going to find

3:30 am | April 29, 2024

Author: admin | Category: Computers Computing Computing Components Gadgets | Comments: Off

FlumeIO 5901 U.2 SSD: Two-minute review

Mainstream customers looking for fast storage have had a pick of dozens of M.2 PCIe 5.0 SSDs on the market over the last year and a half, but enterprise customers, creative industry professionals, or those who have been looking to upgrade their cloud server storage from older SATA or racks of PCIe 3.0 U.2 drives haven't been as lucky.

With U.2 PCIe 5.0 drives only now just starting to make it to market, storage newcomer FlumeIO just might be a godsend with its FlumeIO 5900-series U.2 NVMe PCIe 5.0 SSDs, offering a massive speed upgrade for I/O-heavy devices like network servers at a surprisingly affordable price for an enterprise-grade SSD with this level of performance.

With budgetary pricing starting at $643 for 4TB, and scaling up to $2,059 for 16TB, the FlumeIO 5900-series (comprised of the FlumeIO 5900 and FlumeIO 5901 models, the latter of which I tested for this review), is often cheaper than slower, last-gen drives like the Samsung PM9A3, a Gen 4.0 drive with substantially lower read/write speeds, fewer IOPS, and higher latency.

A FlumeIO 5900-series SSD in a masculine hand — (Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)

It goes without saying that this affordability is relative, as customers in enterprise channels are used to paying many thousands of dollars for new drives on a rolling basis as their existing SSD drives near the end of their drive-write lifespan.

But while this drive is almost exclusively for data centers or similar high-throughput, high-volume network devices and systems, there are many creative or engineering and research workstations out there with U.2 compatible motherboards, and this drive might be especially interesting for those in these industries who need both massive storage capacity as well as speed.

Fortunately, the FlumeIO 5900-series promises a lot and effectively delivers on those promises, at least as far as my testing is concerned. After an extensive couple of weeks putting this drive through its paces, it was ultimately with a heavy heart that I had to send it back to FlumeIO, as it's the kind of SSD I'd have loved to have incorporated into my test bench in the NYC TechRadar office.

Starting with a simple, single direct I/O operation with 4KB read/write blocks and a 4GB file size, the FlumeIO 5901 scored lower than the promised IOPS and sequential read speeds, but that's to be expected when using a single process and blocks so small, but it is instructive as to the performance of a single process on this drive. Multiple processes in a production environment will be able to push these numbers much higher, as we see when increasing the block size, process pool, and I/O queue depth.

Moving things into a more "production" like environment starts to push up against the promised 14GB/s sequential read and 10GB/s sequential write performance, while its random read IOPS likewise increases considerably, while its random write IOPS decreases a bit, given the increased block size.

Increasing the block size to 128KB slows things down a bit, especially with random I/O IOPS, but increase the number of processes to a true production environment of 128 processes or higher and these numbers too will likewise increase considerably.

For content creators or researchers with workstation-class hardware capable of mounting a U.2 drive and who might be considering this drive over an M.2 PCIe 5.0 SSD like the Crucial T705 or similar, this drive has a lot to offer you as well, including substantially faster random read and write speeds, while still maintaining top-tier sequential read and write performance that you'd expect from a PCIe 5.0 drive.

Even better, rather than having to configure several M.2 SSDs into a RAID configuration to get a solid storage device for very large files, this drive can give you a one-and-done solution thanks to its significantly larger capacities.

In the end, then, whatever your needs might be, this is one of the best U.2 SSD options on the market, and if you're looking for a PCIe 5.0 SSD, there aren't really many to choose from, making it relatively lower price point all the more impressive.

FlumeIO 5901 U.2 SSD: Price & availability

The FlumeIO 5900 series SSDs will be available in Q2 2024 with budgetary pricing kicking off at $643 for 4TB, and topping out at $2,059 for 16TB.