I need everyone in the movie industry to listen up and repeat the following pact: "I solemnly swear to never make a film told through the lens of social media ever again. Never will I sit my main character in front of a screen, digesting the rest of the storyline through open internet tabs, Instagram feeds and MacBook files. I will only include digital elements if it effectively serves the plot."
Agreed? Great, because Chris Pratt's new AI sci-fi thriller Mercy is the latest victim of this heinous crime. With a 101 minute runtime, Pratt spends 90 of those sitting in the same chair, wrongly accused of a murder he didn't commit. Instead of being given a defense lawyer like a normal society would, he has to face off against an AI-generated judge in a 'mercy' courtroom (who conveniently looks exactly like Rebecca Ferguson).
If he can't prove his innocence past a certain percentage, he'll be fried on the spot. Override the algorithm sufficiently, and he'll walk free. Cue an entire movie of sifting through ring cam footage, facetiming witnesses and finding crucial evidence on his daughter's private Finsta account.
After about 15 minutes of this, the gimmick wears off pretty quickly. Pratt himself is clearly loving it (possibly due to the ease of his character also being called Chris) but unsurprisingly, this doesn't translate offscreen. Mercy is mundane in its own unique way, but there are few surprises – it'll hit you over the head with its ambivalent AI messaging.
Mercy refuses to call AI a hero or a villain, and that's a missed opportunity
"Maybe humans and AI both make mistakes" is a line of dialogue in Mercy that I've only slightly paraphrased, and it sums up the movie's moral vagueness in one nifty sentence. Sure, we've just spent an hour and 40 minutes watching an AI-generated court judge nearly kill Chris over a wrongful conviction, but we all make mistakes, right?
This was Amazon MGM Studios' chance to lay down the AI line by deciding what side of the industry argument they're on. Instead, they've chosen to sit on the fence, and that transforms any vim and vigor Mercy did have into pure monotony. If we're not using storytelling to send home a powerful message, especially about something so ever-changing, then what's the point?
Of course, the point is to make a bit of money at the box office by seeming to touch on a topical subject. It's the same way that a social media influencer might look like they're supporting a social campaign, but are actually doing the surface-level bare minimum to help it. Mercy could have been an industry-changing heavyweight piece of art, but no – let's play around with some CGI graphics instead.
For a big-budget studio, these graphics feel incredibly cheap. This is where the most obvious connection to Prime Video's take on War of the Worlds, starring Ice Cube, comes into play. Both have the same function and aesthetic look – almost as if Amazon is ashamed that is uninspired slop is all it's got to offer.
Rebecca Ferguson is our AI judge. (Image credit: Amazon MGM Studios)
Almost no movie (perhaps with the exception of 2023 thriller Missing) can use tech, screens and social media as its sole method of storytelling to its advantage – the concept is as lame as lame comes. But our AI-fashioned Rebecca Ferguson is the jewel in our crown of criminal offenses.
Even as a non-human entity, Ferguson shines. She's far from a voice of reason, but seeing the cracks in her generated facade is easily the most satisfying payoff in this otherwise faltering farce. She's also the only source of continuity when Mercy decides to finally let Chris out of his chair for an unhinged 15-minute duration, abandoning all of its narrative mechanics without warning.
You get where I'm coming from here. ChatGPT could probably have written a much stronger script and overarching plot, while watching any other takes on AI or the digital world would be a more shrewd use of your time. Our best case scenario is hoping Mercy is popular enough to finance more Guardians of the Galaxy or Star-Lord content, and then never speak of it again.
Audeze is known for enthusiast-level audiophile hardware. When that tech drips down to the Maxwell gaming line, reviewer and consumer alike have an important question to ask: Can we actually hear a difference versus the competition?
The answer in this case is a resounding, 90mm driver-powered ‘yes’ in the form of the new Audeze Maxwell 2 wireless gaming headset that rattles your eardrums and stupefies you into a kind of aural nirvana. In 15 years of reviewing audio equipment from gaming to studio product categories – and do excuse me while I do a little sick in my mouth at the pompousness of this statement – I’ve rarely heard such a well-rounded and emotive frequency response.
It’s important to keep that in mind, because although there is good reason to be critical of this headset as a consumer release, it really can’t be faulted in raw audio terms. If great sound is all you care about, money no object, then you’ve already read all you needed to in this review. Go and enjoy your new headset.
But gaming headsets have become an incredibly crowded vertical, and in the race to win our attention and money, manufacturers have really spoiled us with features lately. Broadcast-quality noise-cancelling mics, simultaneous 2.4GHz wireless and Bluetooth connections, and even active noise cancellation have started to feel like table stakes in the flagship model end of the market.
That places a lot of importance on the secondary features of this follow-up to the original Audeze Maxwell. After all, it follows a prior model (the 'Gen 1', if you will) that gobbled up acclaim and awards like a ravenous James Cameron on a nineties Oscars night. The Gen 1 Maxwells are available for around $100 / £100 less than the new 'Gen 2s', and sadly, there’s no single must-have feature about the newer incarnation that justifies spending more money.
The Gen 2s do feature the company’s SLAM Acoustic Management, a marketing buzzword for ‘better audio’ more or less, along with Bluetooth connectivity, a wider headband for better weight distribution, and redesigned physical controls that do indeed feel pleasant to locate and operate. But given that the newer model is 2.4oz / 70g heavier than its predecessor, elements like the headband design upgrade feel less like a win and more like a necessity.
So here I am in the very strange position of reviewing a stellar headset that I can’t fully recommend, because so much of what makes it stellar was also true of the outgoing model.
(Image credit: Future/Phil Iwaniuk)
Audeze Maxwell 2: price & availability
List price: $349.99 / £339.99 / around AU$520 (Xbox version)
Significantly more than the SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Wireless but less than the Nova Elite
Maxwell V1 is still available and cheaper
You’d expect a premium price from an Audeze headset. The company has made its name by delivering no-compromise sound from audiophile-grade equipment, and a lot of that tech has found its way into the Maxwell gaming line. You can hear and feel the quality difference compared to the vast majority of gaming headsets immediately, even versus some of our favourite options like the Razer BlackShark V3 Pro and the SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Wireless.
There’s a slight price difference between the PS5 and Xbox versions of this headset, both of which are also compatible with PC and mobile devices via Bluetooth. The PlayStation option is slightly cheaper at $329.99 / £339, while the Xbox version has a $349.99 / £369 list price. This makes it significantly cheaper than the other recent audiophile gaming headset of the time, the SteelSeries Arctis Nova Elite, which retails for a chonky $599.99 / £599.99.
It’s not just the sound that communicates where the money’s been spent. The build quality and presentation are also wonderful, like something you’d find waiting for you on an eye-wateringly expensive first-class plane seat. The only caveat, as you’ll read numerous times throughout this review, is that the outgoing model is currently going cheaper, and it’s fundamentally just as good.
(Image credit: Future/Phil Iwaniuk)
Audeze Maxwell 2: Specs
Audeze Maxwell 2
Price
$349.99 / £339.99 / around AU$520
Weight
17.2oz / 490g
Drivers
90mm Planar Magnetic
Compatibility
PC, Xbox Series X|S, PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch|2, MacOS, iOS, Android
Connection type
Bluetooth, 2.4GHz wireless, wired 3.5mm/USB-C
Battery life
80 hours
Features
Detachable hypercardioid 16-bit/48KHz high bandwidth mic with FILTER AI noise removal, internal beamforming mics, 24-bit/96kHz high-resolution audio, patent-pending SLAM technology, Bluetooth support for Auracast, LE Audio, LDAC, and AAC
Software
Audeze App (PC and mobile)
Audeze Maxwell 2: Design & features
Chunky and imposing looks, but very heavy
Pro audio finish with impressive materials choices
Control layout takes some getting used to
One thing’s for certain: you’re extremely unlikely to misplace this headset. Weighing in at 17.2oz / 490g (Or around 16.2oz / 460g if you remove the magnetic earcup plates) and featuring deep, luxurious cushioning around formidably large cups housing 90mm drivers, this is a strikingly solid model that conveys quality and longevity as soon as you cast your eyes over it. Brushed gunmetal finish, soft memory foam cushioning, and a new inner headband suspension strap with breathable holes combine to create an aesthetic that communicates the Maxwell 2’s mission: audiophile-grade gear in the gaming market.
I love that look, personally. I’m especially impressed by little details like the pin-sharp Audeze logos on each earcup, beneath the magnetic covers. Remove the detachable mic, and this is definitely a pair of headphones you wouldn’t mind being seen in public wearing.
There’s a downside to that: it’s an especially heavy model. Weight doesn’t have a linear relationship with discomfort, of course, and manufacturers can do plenty to minimise the effect of 17.2oz / 490g sitting across your cranium. But if you are prone to discomfort when wearing bulkier cans, this particular attribute is worth keeping in mind.
Personally, I found the comfort levels high for two to three hours of use. I do feel the weight across the top of my head, and also in the increased clamping force of the earcups around my ears, but not to such a degree that I need a break. It’s January as I write this in the UK, so heat isn’t an issue, but I could imagine the pleather earcup cushions might be more of an issue in hotter climes, as with any headset that has a lot of clamping force.
Moving on to the layout of its physical controls, redesigned for this Gen 2 model, I’m impressed overall. I love to have a physical chat mix dial on the headset, and sure enough, there’s a nice notched scroller with beautiful actuation on the rear-left earcup, just below the volume scroll wheel. On the right-hand cup are the power button and mic mute toggle switch, the latter of which is recessed so much that it can be slightly fiddly to operate, but it feels like the switch itself is of a high-quality, durable standard. The only fiddly aspect of the layout is the pairing button on the front of the left earcup, the position of which takes a little while to commit to memory.
(Image credit: Future/Phil Iwaniuk)
Audeze Maxwell 2: Performance
Sound with a genuine wow factor
AI mic noise cancellation is hit or miss
App support for further tweaks
Now we’re into the section where the Maxwell 2 shines. It takes a lot of clever designers, engineers, and the right suppliers to achieve audio this good, and, particularly in the gaming vertical, most manufacturers have simply never taken the commercial risk of spending this much to reach this level of fidelity.
Audeze has the advantage of having honed its tech in the enthusiast space, giving the company a library of designs and parts to refer to when designing a gaming model. We saw the fruits of that labour in the original Maxwell, and now those same 90mm drivers with their frankly preposterous 10Hz-50KHz frequency response have been tuned further with Audeze’s SLAM technology.
The marketing materials say this technology allows for “heightened spatial immersion, precise and punchier bass response”, and I can’t argue with that. Apparently, it’s all down to the physical construction of the drivers, not a software-level boost, and that’s always firmer ground to establish audio fidelity on.
The overall fidelity standard has raised its game in gaming headsets lately, so the difference between contemporaries like the Razer BlackShark V3 Pro or SteelSeries Arctis Pro Nova Wireless and this model isn’t as night and day as might have been the case five years ago, when ‘gaming’ models were still artificially boosting their low end at the cost of clarity. Rather, it’s that every component part of the aural landscape is that bit clearer and more emotive.
(Image credit: Future/Phil Iwaniuk)
The bass response is huge, but tight. It doesn’t overwhelm the rest of the EQ spectrum, leaving room for sparkly high-end frequencies to chime. Human speech sounds true-to-life, indicating a well-tuned midrange response, while the stereo landscape feels impressively vast when you listen to the right sources. Try out some binaural recordings, and you’ll hear what I mean.
If audio reproduction is peerless – and it is – then audio output is a different story. The mic on this Gen 2 model features AI-assisted noise cancellation, and not to blame everything on Skynet’s malicious invasion of our lives, but it doesn’t work very well in my experience.
I’ve tested this headset using every connection type available, including digital and analog wired connections, but whenever I enable the AI noise cancellation, I get a muffled sound in Discord. That’s likely due to Discord and Audeze’s noise cancellation technologies working counterproductively over the top of each other, but whatever the cause, it’s a shame to have to turn off the noise cancellation.
After some tuning, the mic sounds much better. But at this price point, the expectation is for a mic with out-of-the-box quality. Similarly, there are some other chinks in the armor when you dig around in the connectivity options. Simultaneous Bluetooth connection is only possible with a digital or analog wired connection, rather than with the 2.4GHz wireless via the dongle – another feature you’d hope for at this price.
I can’t knock the 80-hour battery life, mind you. That’s an incredible figure, and charging is easy enough via a USB-C connection just below the mic.
(Image credit: Future/Phil Iwaniuk)
Should you buy the Audeze Maxwell 2?
Buy it if...
You’ll stop at nothing for incredible sound It was never in doubt – there’s no comparison to the fidelity, punchiness, and emotion generated by the 90mm drivers inside these earcups.
You’re all about that bass The bass response from these drivers is like sprinting into a brick wall - with a tailwind.
You want audiophile headset looks So long, RGB, and tribal designs. Hello to a grown-up aesthetic that you’d be happy to wear in the street.
Don't buy it if...
You can find a Gen 1 for sale instead It’s practically just as good, and it’s available for less. Sorry, Gen 2, but it just makes sense to buy the older model.
You need the utmost mic quality There are some issues with Discord’s noise cancellation and the AI-powered Audeze version.
Simultaneous Bluetooth and 2.4GHz wireless is a deal-breaker If this is a must-have for you, then you'll need to look elsewhere, though you can achieve simultaneous digital or analog wired with Bluetooth, though.
Also consider...
Does this Audeze model put you ill at ease? Consider these premium wireless alternatives.
Audeze Maxwell 2
Razer BlackShark V3 Pro
SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Wireless
Price
$349.99 / £339.99 / around AU$520
$249.99 / £249.99 / around AU$510
$349 (£329, AU$649)
Weight
17.2oz / 490g
12.9oz / 367g
11.85oz / 336g
Drivers
90mm Planar Magnetic
Razer TriForce Bio-Cellulose 50 mm Drivers Gen-2
40mm neodymium
Compatibility
PC, Xbox Series X|S, PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch|2, MacOS, iOS, Android
PC, Xbox Series X (Xbox version only), PlayStation 5 (PlayStation version only), iOS, Android
Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PS5, PS4, Nintendo Switch, PC, Mac, Mobile
Connection type
Bluetooth, 2.4GHz wireless, wired 3.5mm/USB-C
Bluetooth, 2.4GHz wireless (Hyperspeed dongle), USB wired, 2.5mm wired
Wireless (2.4Ghz via dongle), Wired (USB-C), Bluetooth 5.3
Battery life
80 hours
70 hours
Up to 60 hours (2 x fully-charged batteries), Infinite Power System
Features
Detachable hypercardioid 16-bit/48KHz high bandwidth mic with FILTER AI noise removal, internal beamforming mics, 24-bit/96kHz high-resolution audio, patent-pending SLAM technology, Bluetooth support for Auracast, LE Audio, LDAC, and AAC
40mm Neodymium, ANC, magnetic drivers, 360-degree spatial audio, retractable ClearCast 2.X mic
Software
Audeze App (PC and mobile)
Razer Audio App, Razer Synapse
SteelSeries GG/Sonar (PC)
Razer Blackshark V3 Pro Quite simply, the best all-round gaming headset on the market today. The V3 Pro version features ANC, a great mic, and a comparable 70-hour battery life, bested only in raw audio fidelity by the Audeze Maxwell 2.
Steelseries Arctis Nova Pro Wireless Featuring SteelSeries’ unique dual-battery charging solution, premium looks, plus ANC implementation, the Nova Pro Wireless is a premium headset option with few faults.
Put through its paces in gaming, movies, music and work calls
When a headset with audio fidelity chops as formidable as this arrives, there’s only one thing for it: you play lossless classical music, as loud as your ears can withstand, until entering a stupor. That’s stage one of testing this headset.
Given that there are several connection options and multi-device compatibility, I checked each option off to ensure functionality and fidelity. I also updated the firmware via the Audeze software before poking around in the app options.
Given that the higher weight looked like it might be an issue, I wore the Maxwell 2 all day during my workday for a week straight, which included using it for work calls. That also gave me a chance to take feedback on the mic quality using different chat clients, which is where I identified that the Discord issue isn’t a universal noise-cancelling problem.
Oh, and in case you’re wondering, Baby Steps sounds fantastic through these things.
The Microsoft-owned Clipchamp is distinct from most video editors, since the main draw here is that you can edit videos in your browser (provided that browser is either Chrome or Edge).
There’s an obvious advantage to that - as long as you’re logged in to your account, you can work from any computer. There's no need to check you have top-end computer specs and you don’t need to install any additional software.
Now, this isn't going to compete with Premiere Pro, Final Cut, or any of the other best video editing software I've used. As the name suggests, it's a lot more basic than those apps, and a lot of its use depends on adding content to pre-built templates.
I took a look at how easy it is to use the tool, and whether Clipchamp has a place in the creative workflow.
Being able to edit online is one thing, being restricted to only a couple of browsers is another. I’m not a fan of being forced to work with a specific browser. Personally, I like Firefox and Safari, but Clipchamp is only compatible with Microsoft Edge and Google Chrome. If you already use these browsers, great, but if you don’t, you’ll have to decide from the outset if that restriction will put you off using this video editor.
As for the price, Clipchamp comes in two flavours: ‘Free’ and ‘Premium'.
‘Free’ is surprisingly generous, letting you work on projects up to 1080p, have access to what they call ‘AI editing tools’ for audio and video, grant you the ability to record your computer’s screen, webcam, and audio, and all without any watermark anywhere, which is pretty cool.
As for ‘Premium’, its projects can be up to 4K, and you gain access to premium stock assets, filters and effects (‘Free’ only has a basic assortment of those).
Unfortunately, though, you can't get a Premium subscription as a standalone. Instead, Clipchamp is bundled with Microsoft Office 365, so if you’re not one for subscribing to business software, you’ll have to decide if Clipchamp Premium is worth getting for between $100 and $130 a year - which is quite hefty for an online video editor - or whether a tool like Canva Video might be the better pick. On the bright side, if you already subscribe to Office, then you can have fun with Premium right now.
Clipchamp: Getting started
(Image credit: Microsoft // Future)
You absolutely need a Microsoft login for personal accounts
You can choose to use your email address, or log in through your Google or Microsoft account… except if you choose to work on personal projects, Clipchamp will then inform you only Microsoft accounts are able to do that.
And that’s after giving your email address, created a password, and clicked on many, many emails and buttons,
Making it clear what the state of play is from the get-go would’ve saved me a lot of time. It doesn’t really endear you to the service you’re about to explore.
However, I decided to put that little hiccup - something that could easily be fixed with a few lines of text at the login page - to the side, and set off exploring the online service.
Clipchamp: Interface & experience
(Image credit: Microsoft // Future)
Impressive considering it's browser-based
Good interface with easy to use tools
Experience marred by tiny preview section and lots of buffering
The home page looks fine. You’ve got a sidebar on the left to gain access to your settings and ready-made templates, among others, while the bulk of the page is devoted to tips and tricks to encourage you to try new features (I was offered recording from a webcam, and using digital voices to turn your text into speech). You’ll also see a few featured templates, a button to edit by yourself, and another with the help of AI, and at the bottom, all your previous projects.
Nothing new here really in terms of design and layout, but it’s simple and clear, which helps you get to where you wish to go.
I thought I’d try out the manual editing first, as that’s my usual bread and butter… And I must say, it works really well. To the left is a sidebar containing all available tools. From there, you have access to any media you uploaded to the service, a library of stock assets, text tools and transitions, templates (again), and a section dedicated to recording media. This includes webcam, a connected camera, your desktop, or a microphone (all of which worked really well). This is also another place where the ‘text to speech’ option can be accessed.
All well and good.
When it comes to editing, it’s all about dragging. Drag a clip from your library to the timeline to add it to your project. Repeat the process, to build up your edit. Drag a clip’s edges to resize it, drag an entire clip to move it around; select an item in the timeline for its changeable parameters to appear in a sidebar to the right. It’s all pretty intuitive and standard fare.
The one thing that annoyed me is how small the preview section is. This is generally the part of the interface that needs to be as big as possible, so you can see what you’re working on. Here, it’s tiny.
Worse still, dragging the playhead along the timeline doesn’t update what you see in that preview section, so you can’t quickly scroll to another part of your edit and carry on working: you have to wait for the buffering to end.
That’s an obvious downside to working online, but it’s also a frustrating one if you’re used to working fast. If you’re a casual editor, you might be fine with that though.
Clipchamp: Recording
(Image credit: Microsoft)
All options work well
Choose your text-to-speech narrator wisely
You get four recording options in Clipchamp: Camera, Screen, Camera & Screen, and text-to-speech. These work exactly as you’d expect - grant the app access to your mic and webcam, select which window, tab, or desktop to record, hit Share.
It’s not a bad shout if you need a no-fuss one of the best free screen recorders for no-fuss, no-hassle set-up and use. It's also useful for recording piece-to-camera videos and webinars.
The built-in text-to-speech software is slightly different. It’s like a robot narrator. Input content into the text field, choose a language and voice that fits your video, then tinker with the pitch and speed to create something that passes for human speech.
The variety across the board here is excellent. However, some voices were much more natural than others, closer to ‘realistic’ smart speaker voices than the usual stilted robots found in Microsoft apps. Save the sound clip and you can drag it onto your timeline like any other media.
Clipchamp: AI editing
(Image credit: Microsoft // Future)
Not truly AI
Automatic algorithms, and not very clever ones at that
Now, might AI overcome some of the buffering I experienced? After all, if the algorithms do the work for you, it should be a much easier affair.
To be honest, this was one of the most disappointing aspects of Clipchamp. I can live with a bit of buffering. But the claims of AI editing are laughable.
First things first, I uploaded some footage - and that process is absolutely fine. Then I had to like or dislike a bunch of themes, or select the option ‘choose for me’.
When it comes to orientation, it’s either landscape or portrait (the more numerous options I found when editing manually weren't present this time round). There is an option to choose from a handful of songs and fonts, or just accept the default selection that’s been presented, and then export.
As the algorithm does its thing, I was offered various ways to save the project: save to the desktop, upload it to an online storage service such as OneDrive, Google Drive or Dropbox, or to social media sites such as YouTube, TikTok or LinkedIn.
Then came the big reveal.
I have to say, I wasn’t impressed with the output. Sure everything was edited for me, but the choices were anaemic.
I uploaded widescreen shots and requested a vertical video suitable for social media. The algorithm didn’t crop my footage. It just presented it with massive black bars top and bottom. This was not what I was expecting.
The editing was also unimpressive. Oh and the preview section during export could also be bigger (what is it with Clipchamp and tiny preview sections?)
I tried multiple times, and noticed the edit seems to follow the order the clips were in, and it didn’t even edit to the beat of its chosen song. I mean, really, that should be a basic feature for an AI tool.
If, like me, you’re not happy with the results, you can always ‘Keep Editing’, i.e., take the work already done by the machine, and refine it to your liking in the manual editing section. That could definitely save some time. Frankly, I’d bin the whole thing and start properly from scratch. But maybe that’s just me.
Should I buy Clipchamp?
(Image credit: Microsoft // Future)
Buy it if…
You’re looking for an way to edit online, with some simple tools that are well implemented, and best of all, the free tier doesn’t watermark your output!
Don’t buy it if…
You’re not a fan of having to wait for the interface to catch up with you, you’d appreciate a bigger preview section, and are far from impressed by the lamentable AI feature.
When you think of the best video editing software, you more often think of the big players like Adobe Premiere Pro, Apple Final Cut Pro, and even DaVinci Resolve. The problem is, these professional-grade tools can feel intimidating.
And that's where CyberLink PowerDirector 365 comes in. It offers high-end tools and editing workflow, wrapped up in an easy-to-understand interface that's suitable for beginners.
So, we look a look at the latest version (v24) to see how PowerDirector stacks up.
CyberLink PowerDirector 365: Price & availability
Competitively priced subscription
Often discounted
Like so many software packages these days, PowerDirector is only available on a subscription. You do have a couple of options though: pay $80 for the year for it alone, or combine it with PhotoDirector for $145 annually.
That’s the basic price, but you’ll find CyberLink often offers steep discounts for its software. For instance, as of this writing, you can get these for $60 or $93 respectively.
It’s definitely much cheaper than Adobe Premiere Pro, and it would take 4 years of you paying for PowerDirector at full price to exceed the cost of Apple’s Final Cut Pro. So price-wise, it’s pretty good.
Even better, you can download the software and start using it for free to make sure it works as you intend it to. You’ll encounter limitations, such as a watermark output, and a host of advanced tools and effects which are off limits to you, but the essential ones aren’t.
CyberLink PowerDirector 365: Interface
(Image credit: CyberLink // Future)
Well-organized interface
Clear navigation
Launch PowerDirector and you’ll be graced with its welcome screen. From there, you can of course click on ‘New Project’ and get into the editing side of things (more on that in a minute), but that’s not all that window has to offer. You’ll find a handful of large icons, most of which offer quick drag-and-drop effects.
They’re there if you’ve already got a video clip or exported project which you wish to alter with one specific effect throughout. Click on one of those icons, a pop up window appears, drop a clip onto it, and the software will get working. Convenient, yes, but editing this isn’t. So let’s check out the editing side of things.
We’ve reached the stage now in terms of interface development, that if you’ve seen one video editor, you’ve pretty much seen them all. I don’t view that as a bad thing: it makes it easy to switch between them; aside from having a sidebar on the right instead of on the left, or similar, it should take you seconds to find your way around PowerDirector’s interface.
You’ll find a list of icons, top left, which control the top third of the interface. These allow you to switch between your clips, and specific functions, such as titles, transitions, effects, and so on. Top right is the preview section; it’s linked either to your timeline (which takes up the bottom half of the interface) or any selected clip in your media section.
Unlike Premiere Pro, the interface isn’t customisable. You work with what you get. It’s even more inflexible than Final Cut Pro - and I thought FCP was strict! - but at the end of the day, that’s not entirely a bad thing: it means you can sit in front of any computer with PowerDirector installed and know where everything is. That’s a big plus in my book. But the price for that familiarity is a rigid interface. A price worth paying? That would depend on your preference and workflow.
CyberLink PowerDirector 365: Tools
(Image credit: CyberLink // Future)
Everything you need to edit a video
Free to add effects, transitions, and titles
No keyboard controls
Everything you need to edit a video project is there for you to use. The timeline has multiple layers, so you can end up making a relatively complex movie. You’ll find various animated titles, Transitions, Effects, Particles, Stickers, and more, all ready to spruce up your edit. They are all excellent and well crafted.
If you’re on a subscription, it’s all available to you, but if you’re working with the free version, you’ll encounter some serious limitations: most of these tools are ‘premium’ ones; you can recognise them thanks to a small black crown inside a yellow circle, top left of a tool’s icon. Despite that, you’ll still be able to insert them into your project, but when it comes to exporting it, you’ll be offered the option of forking out some of your money to be able to use them, or having them automatically removed prior to rendering.
Some tools can’t be accessed unless you log in to your CyberLink account (which is free to setup). That’s because they’re AI-based and require credits to function. You do get 100 credits per month with a subscription, and any additional credit packs are reduced by 50% as long as you keep paying, but you can also get these packs at full price while using the free version. They start at 100, and go up to 2,000, and obviously the more you buy, the cheaper each individual credit gets.
Editing is simple, but it could be easier, mind you. Maybe it’s because I’m used to more professional editors: I use the keyboard a lot when editing, and other programs allow me to use the JKL keys to playback in reverse, stop and go forward respectively; using the left and right arrow keys moves me back or forward one frame, and the up and down arrow keys jump me to the next or previous edit point…
And there are so many others. These greatly speed up my work. Unfortunately, PowerDirector doesn’t have any of those, which forces users to rely more on the mouse or trackpad. It’s not necessarily a bad thing, especially if you’re not used to such shortcuts, but the lack of options certainly is.
CyberLink PowerDirector 365: Latest updates
(Image credit: CyberLink // Future)
Strong push for AI-based tools,
AI credits required, but not consumer-friendly implementation
Devs regularly adding new features
One of the great things about PowerDirector, is that new features are regularly released - whether they’re new effects to celebrate a forthcoming festive season, or new tools. At the time of review (January 2026), CyberLink is making an increasing push for AI-based tools which are, as you’d expect, powered by separately purchased credits.
One of the newest additions is ‘Video Generator’. The way it works is, you choose a style from a list of thumbnails, add your own photo, and PowerDirector will transform it to match that style and animate it as well for 5 or 10 seconds, for good measure.
The one that appealed to me the most was the ‘AI Anime Video Effect’, as it transforms your clip into animation. You have 17 styles to choose from, and the process is designed to turn 10, 20 or 30 seconds of video into your preferred style.
The only problem I can see with such features, is you have to pay before you see the results. You do get a tiny preview of the effect based on some placeholder image by mousing over the thumbnail, but truth be told, that’s really not enough.
What if ‘Vivid’ didn’t work as an anime style for your project, but ‘Classic’ would’ve been better? Well, you’ll have to pay again. The idea and concepts are good, but the implementation doesn’t feel consumer-friendly to me.
It's packed with all the tools most general users will need for content creation - and at a fraction of the price of higher-end and premium software. Especially if you manage to grab a discounted subscription. Bonus points for offering a free, if limited, option.
I like the overall workflow and the number of features that keep coming to PowerDirector. I even enjoyed using the AI tools here. But the fact that you need to keep buying credits without the ability to simply preview the AI generation means it loses a star in my review. For me, that doesn't feel fair to users.
Beyond that, though, there's not much I don't like about PowerDirector 365, especially for those who want to create professional-looking videos without the steep learning curve I often see in other video editors.
Should I buy CyberLink PowerDirector 365?
(Image credit: CyberLink // Future)
Buy it if... You want a video editor that is simple to use, is affordable (or even free), and gets regularly updated with new tools and fun effects, transitions, and animated texts.
Don't buy it if... You feel you need a video editor that’s more fluid, and you’re not a fan of the ‘pay before you see’ model that’s used for the AI tools.
When the AI revolution began, many were expecting Samsung to upgrade its assistant Bixby with an AI brain, but that didn't come with the last couple of One UI upgrades. Now, a Reddit user shared some screenshots from their rooted device, running One UI 8.5 and showing off a brand new, smarter Bixby.
Bixby with AI
The screenshots show that Bixby leverages Perplexity AI for most of its tasks, suggesting the earlier rumors about Samsung partnering with Perplexity were accurate. But Bixby integration doesn't stop there. It will also work with The Weather Channel, HERE Maps,...
Google has made some of its Gemini 3-based AI tools free in Gmail. AI Overviews and tools like Smart Replies and Help Me Write were only available for users with an AI subscription (Google AI Plus or Ultra), but no longer.
AI Inbox filters out the clutter in your inbox and gives you a briefing with quick highlights. It also sums up those long Reply to All emails, which is very handy.
Help Me Write is just what it sounds like - you can give Gemini a prompt of what you want to write, and it will do the rest. You can also refine specific parts of the generated messages. Suggested...
Dreame Technology, the China-based smart home appliance brand, has entered the wearables market with the introduction of its first AI-powered smart and health rings.
The company showcased the new lineup at CES 2026, unveiling three models. The lineup consists of the AI Smart Ring, an AI Health Ring with ECG, and the AI Health Ring with NFC. Dreame promises each of those will offer about a week of battery life.
Dreame AI Health Ring with NFC and AI Smart Ring.
The AI Smart Ring features comprehensive health tracking, including heart rate, SpO2, skin temperature, HRV insights, sleep...
As CES 2026 kicks off, right out of the gate, we have one of the biggest surprises of the show as far as laptops go, and that is the return of the Dell XPS 14 and XPS 16.
Last year, Dell underwent a major overhaul of its laptop lines, consolidating them under a kind of grid scheme of Dell, Dell Pro, and Dell Pro Max laptops, each with a base model, a Plus model, and a Premium version for different sizes.
It was controversial, for sure, and whether that controversy prompted Dell to change course or there was something in the sales performance of the rebranded laptops that gave Dell pause, whatever it was has given us back the iconic Dell XPS laptops, and it’s more than just a return to the old name.
The new Dell XPS lineup has had a solid redesign that at first sight goes a long way towards fixing the complaints I had with the last few generations of XPS laptops. It’s also powered by the new Intel Core Ultra 300 series processors, and by powered by Intel, I mean entirely.
With the new redesign, the XPS laptop is losing a discrete graphics option for the foreseeable future, which is putting a lot of trust in Intel’s new chips to deliver the mix of creative and productivity performance users expect from the XPS brand.
Whether the new Dell XPS 14 and Dell XPS 16 achieve that balance remains to be seen, but for right now, these two laptops are a fantastic return for the beloved laptop line.
Dell XPS 14 & Dell XPS 16: Price & availability
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
When is it out? The XPS 14 and XPS 16 go on sale January 6, 2026
How much is it? Starting at $2,049.99 for the XPS 14 and $2,199.99 for the XPS 16
Where can you get it? Only available in the US at launch, with global availability to follow
The Dell XPS 14 and Dell XPS 16 will go on sale in the US on January 6, 2026, with a limited number of configurations, starting at $2,049.99 for the XPS 14 and $2,199.99 for the XPS 16. Lower-priced configurations will be launching soon, as will wider availability in the UK and Australia, though no dates or pricing for those regions have been given yet.
Without knowing what the specific specs of the initial configurations are, it’s hard to tell how much the price of the new XPS laptops will vary from earlier models. With RAM prices being what they are, I would not be surprised if they come in somewhat higher, but Dell is also better able to absorb those price hikes or negotiate volume pricing down, thanks to its size, so we’ll just have to keep an eye on it over the next few weeks and months before I can give it a proper value assessment.
Dell XPS 14 & Dell XPS 16: Specs
Powered by Intel Core Ultra 300 series
No discrete graphics option
Dell XPS 14 2026 & Dell XPS 16 2026 specs
Dell XPS 14
Dell XPS 16
Processor
Up to Intel Core Ultra X9 388H
Up to Intel Core Ultra X9 388H
Graphics
Intel Arc Graphics, Intel Graphics
Intel Arc Graphics, Intel Graphics
NPU
Up to 50 TOPS
Up to 50 TOPS
Memory
Up to 64GB LPDDR5x-9600
Up to 64GB LPDDR5x-9600
Storage
Up to 4TB PCIe 5.0
Up to 4TB PCIe 5.0
Display
Up to 14-inch 2.8K (2880 x 1800) OLED InfinityEdge touch display, 400-nits typical, 500-nits peak brightness, 100% DCI-P3 color gamut, VESA DisplayHDR True Black 500
Up to 16-inch 3.2K (3200 x 2000) OLED InfinityEdge touch, 400-nits typical, 500-nits peak brightness, 100% DCI-P3 color gamut, VESA DisplayHDR True Black 500
Wireless
Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 6.0
Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 6.0
Ports
3x Thunderbolt 4, 1x 3.5mm Universal Audio jack
3x Thunderbolt 4, 1x 3.5mm Universal Audio jack
Battery
70WHr
70WHr
Webcam
8MP / 4K HDR w/ Windows Hello
8MP / 4K HDR w/ Windows Hello
Dimensions (W x D x H)
12.19 x 8.26 x 0.58 ins | 309.5 x 209.7 x 14.6mm
13.88 x 9.35 x 0.58 ins | 352.6 x 237.47 x 14.6mm
Weight
3.0 lbs | 1.36kg
3.65 lbs | 1.65kg
Dell XPS 14 & Dell XPS 16: Design
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
New, thinner, and more modern design
Fixes most of the accessibility issues with previous gen XPS models
The biggest change here for the Dell XPS 14and XPS 16 is the design of the two laptops, which significantly improves things over earlier generations.
First, the laptop feels lighter and sturdier than its predecessors, and it definitely looks more modern. The move from the Dell logo to the XPS logo on the lid also makes the laptop feel less like an office product and more like a proper ultrabook.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
From my limited time with the two laptops, the keys had good travel and felt comfortable enough in my testing, but having not typed on them extensively, I can’t say how they’ll feel after a few hours of work.
The three Thunderbolt ports along the sides and the headphone/mic jack are sufficient for most people, and while the lack of USB-A ports might annoy some, at this point, I can’t fault Dell for sticking with the faster, more intuitive USB-C interface.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The webcam is an 8MP 4K HDR webcam, which is what I would expect for a laptop in this class, and the 10W audio is spread out between a number of hidden speakers along both sides of the laptop. Given the noise in the testing area, the audio was audible, but it was also really loud. I’ll reserve judgment on that until I can do more extensive testing with it.
The OLED displays looked great on the two laptops, with the XPS 16-inch feeling much more roomy as you’d expect, but the 14-inch display is also more than enough for most. The lighting in the testing space wasn’t the greatest, so I wouldn’t trust my eyes to judge the color accuracy without a longer look in better conditions, but I honestly can’t think of anything I’d fault them for.
The biggest changes, for me at least, are the return of physical Function keys and a more visible border for the trackpads. The old virtual Function key bar along the previous gen devices and the complete lack of a visibly defined trackpad on a smooth, glassy surface were accessibility headaches that simply weren’t necessary. The trackpad could be better defined, I’ll say, but I’m just happy that you can at least see it more clearly.
Dell XPS 14 & Dell XPS 16: Performance
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
I didn’t have a chance to benchmark either the XPS 14 or XPS 16, so I can’t tell you how either will perform versus their predecessors. I will say that the lack of discrete graphics will not work in the new XPS models' favor if you are comparing them to a Dell Premium with an Nvidia RTX 4050, like the Dell 14 Premium I tested last year.
That said, I haven’t fully tested the new Intel Panther Lake chips yet, so the new XPS’s performance might end up surprising me. We’ll know soon enough.
Dell XPS 14 & Dell XPS 16: Final thoughts
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
I personally didn’t lose much sleep over the XPS rebranding last year, the way many of my colleagues did, but I’m sure the XPS’s triumphant return from exile will make plenty of people happy.
What I care far more about, though, is the redesign of these two laptops, particularly the Function keys and the trackpad. Those fixes alone make this the one laptop I’m most excited to test out in the next few weeks, and if Intel Panther Lake can live up to its hype, these two models just might be the laptops to buy in 2026.
TechRadar will be extensively covering this year's CES, and will bring you all of the big announcements as they happen. Head over to our CES 2026 news page for the latest stories and our hands-on verdicts on everything from wireless TVs and foldable displays to new phones, laptops, smart home gadgets, and the latest in AI.
In a world of smart glasses that can listen and speak to you, show you new worlds, and provide information on top of your world, Xreal's brand of display glasses is almost quaint. They're not smart. There's no effort to bring in information from the outside world or redefine how you see the real world. Put simply, this is a virtual 200-inch screen in your backpack, bag, or pocket that you can put on at any moment to enjoy a movie, gaming, or even a much larger laptop work screen.
Xreal, in fact, delivers this niche capability better than most and, with the new Xreal 1S, offers greater clarity, a wider view, and a better price than ever before.
From a practical perspective, Xreal 1S is a wearable display that uses impressive passthrough technology to take the display feed from almost any display-laden device that offers USB-C output and project it in front of your eyes on a pair of prisms backed by high-resolution Sony Micro-OLED displays.
There's no power source; inside the lightweight frames are powered by the connected device. There is virtually no setup beyond donning the frames and connecting your device.
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Instead of fancy gesture and gaze control, you still control your external device as you would without the Xreal 1S. You use the touchscreen on your phone, the keyboard and mouse on your laptop, and joysticks on your gaming devices.
The Xreal 1S brings a handful of important upgrades, including brighter screens (now 700 nits, up from 600 nits on the Xreal One), higher resolution (was 1080, now 1200), and a slightly wider field of view (was 50-degree, now 52-degree FoV).
Nestled under some settings in the new eyewear is a new Real 3D capability that can turn virtually everything on-screen, including 2D photos and videos, even an interface, into a 3D landscape. It's a work in progress that, as of this writing, provides decidedly mixed results (I suspect slipstream software updates will improve it over time).
As for how the eyewear works, the Xreal 1S headset is an excellent companion at home, work, or on the road (think a long flight or commute). It's quite easy to lose yourself in the immersive screen, and now, with a somewhat cheaper device, this might be the antidote to all those more expensive, immersive, and intelligent wearables. It qualifies as one of the best AR glasses I've used to date.
Xreal 1S: Price and availability
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
The Xreal 1S was unveiled on January 4, 2025, and is now available to order in the US and UK from Xreal.com for $449 / £399.
This is notably a $50 price reduction from the Xreal One, while enhancing several features. The Xreal 1S frames are still more expensive than the Meta AI-sporting Ray-Ban Meta Wayfarer Gen 2 ($329), but, despite their intelligence, the Meta frames do not include a pair of displays (See the Meta Ray-Ban Display for that).
Throughout this review, I also test-drove a couple of optional accessories, including the $99 Xreal Eye, a 12MP modular camera, and the Xreal Neo ($99), a battery pack and video passthrough device necessary for using the Xreal with your Nintendo Switch. While the camera is a nice-to-have and nudges the Xreal 1S toward Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses territory (it takes passable photos and fun POV videos), the Neo is a must-have if you want the Nintendo Switch virtual big-screen experience.
Value: 4/5
Xreal 1S: Design
Wired USB-C connection
Lightweight – just 84 grams
Auto-dimming shades
The benefit of the Xreal 1S not being stuffed with technology and battery power is immediately obvious. It's a light, almost stylish piece of eyewear that doesn't weigh heavily on the face.
At a glance, it might be easy to mistake them for a large-ish pair of sunglasses. The flexible stem does get a bit bigger than your standard ones to house microphones, Bose speakers, and, on one side, control and volume buttons.
The frames rest comfortably on your nose with a sort of floating bridge. Xreal provides three sizes of nose pads. I was able to stick with the mid-sized.
Behind the dimmable lenses are a pair of thick prisms that aim the Sony Micro OLED displays, which sit horizontally at the top of each lens, at each eye.
I wear glasses, and since I can't put contacts in my eyes, I needed the optional $99 prescription insert from Honsvr. It's pretty easy to attach the prescription lens's lightweight frame to the main Xreal 1S housing: you just have to pop out a pair of tiny rubber stoppers (I used a SIM car remover) and then stick the tiny matching stems into the newly exposed holes. Once my prescription was firmly in there, it never shifted or fell out.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
The good news is that the inserts do not push the frames any further from your face (they're already further away than your standard eyewear). If there's one downside to my inserts, it's that the Xreal 1S already looks a little odd when viewed from the side. Now I have another set of lenses in front of my eyes.
Without a companion system, the Xreal 1S is just an inert pair of awkward-looking glasses.
On the back end of one stem is a USB-C port that accepts one side of the roughly, included 4 ft woven cable (the Xreal 1S also ships with a case and cloth for cleaning). The other end plugs into your device of choice. As I mentioned earlier, there's no external battery. Plugging the Xreal 1S into, say, your laptop automatically powers up the glasses.
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
I also added the optional Xreal Eye modular 12MP camera. Like the subscription lenses, I had to remove a rubber plug before inserting the camera at the peak of the bridge. The camera is useful for capturing decent photos and videos (stored locally, you offload them by plugging the frames into a device and switching to transfer mode). The placement of the camera dead-center on the frames may make them less than welcome in some social situations.
Overall, these are relatively low-key digital frames that won't draw much attention at the office, on a plane, in a train, or at home. They are not for deep immersion of walking about and will draw the occasional stare, but are otherwise well-built for their purpose, and even with a cable running out of the back of one stem, they never feel heavy or uncomfortable to wear.
Design score: 4/5
Xreal 1S: Performance
1200p, 120Hz image at 700-nit brightness
Works with almost any USB-C device with a screen
Good Bose audio
As I mentioned, there's minimal setup to use these display glasses. All you need is a device with a screen and a USB-C port that supports video output.
Inside the Xreal 1S is the X1 chip that handles its video processing duties as well as spatial awareness that allows me to either fix the virtual screen in place or let it follow my gaze.
As soon as I plugged into the frames, they powered up (yes, they draw power from the host system), and within seconds, I saw an extended screen; the system does not instantly present you with the Mac's main desktop. Instead, my MacBook Pro saw the Xreal 1S as another display. I was then able to use the Mac to arrange my displays so that the Xreal 1S virtual display was stacked above my laptop display.
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
After that, I could use the mouse to move windows onto that screen. Because the Honsver prescription inserts only had my near-vision prescription and not the far-vision one to match my progressive eyeglasses, I could not effectively see and use the laptop keyboard while wearing the Xreal 1S.
That's okay, though, it's with entertainment and social content where the Xreal 1S's virtual display really shines.
I started my entertainment journey by plugging the lenses into the new Lenovo Legion Go S, where I played Spider-Man Remastered.
As I held the portable game platform in my hand and used the Legion's joysticks to play, I marveled at the large, clear, and colorful virtual display. Not only is the 1200p screen sharp, but the motion is perfectly smooth thanks, in part, to the 120Hz refresh rate, and there is effectively zero lag time (it's been measured at 3ms latency). Even in bright spaces, the now 700nit displays held fast, looking just as bright and solid, almost as if I were in a darkened theater. The Bose speakers delivered clear, crisp, and relatively loud sound to my ears, and I quickly lost myself in the gameplay. If you plan on wearing these while, say, on a flight, I would suggest you use earbuds (they'll still pull audio from the host system) so you don't disturb your seatmates.
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
The Xreal 1S offers two view styles: one fixes the big, virtual screen in place, and if you look away, the display remains anchored in space (this is the extent of the system's spatial capabilities). The other option is to let the screen follow you. Xreal smartly made sure that the screen follows with a smooth lag so that you never feel even a hint of motion sickness.
Switching between these screen modes is easy. You just single-press the control button to anchor the screen or let it move with your gaze. I generally found that I like fixing the screen in place. If you choose the anchored view and you can't see all of the screen, you can long-press the button to realign the view.
There's also the ability to move the screen further away or closer to you, or enlarge os shrink the virtual screen by inch increments. Doing so, though, means accessing the Xreal 1S's slightly confusing menu system. To access the menu, you double-press the control button under the left-hand stem and then press one side of the volume, which also doubles as menu navigation. You can choose to make the screen quite large, but then you're looking all around the 52-degree FoV to see everything. I'd suggest always keeping the four screen corners in full view.
It's through the volume button that you access the lens darkness control. I made it full darkness for a more immersive feel, which is especially useful when watching video.
I next connected the Xreal to my iPhone. As soon as I unlocked the iPhone 17 Pro Max, my virtual screen appeared. I opened social media, including Instagram Reels and TikTok, and had a ball leaning back and flicking through posts on my phone, as the big screen floated in front of my eyes. It's worth noting here that the video feed from the phone to the Xreal 1S does not turn off your iPhone screen. So, yes, someone next to you could still see what you're viewing. You might want to lower the brightness on your iPhone screen for some degree of privacy.
I particularly enjoyed watching Netflix videos in full-screen mode and can honestly imagine myself enjoying a full, big-screen movie on my next cross-country flight.
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Xreal's new Real 3D mode was in beta when I tested the glasses. It can convert any image or video (even interfaces) into 3D. Some of it looks good, but most of my early experiences with it on the iPhone 17 Pro Max were not great. Some images developed duplicate images behind them (there was me and an outline of me behind me), and others looked jagged. I'll withhold judgment on this feature until I get the final version.
Xreal 1S also works with the Nintendo Switch and Switch 2, but not without a special $99 adapter, the Neo. Nintendo has blocked some third-party video adapters, but Xreal quickly updated the Neo to get around the latest block.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
Neo is not just an adapter. It's also a 10,000mAh battery backup and can power the Nintendo Switch or any other device you plug into it. It even has an integrated MagSafe-style magnet if you want to attach it to the back of your iPhone.
It took me a minute to realize I needed to remove the Joy-Cons from the console to make this work. (Image credit: Lance Ulanoff / Future)
To use the Neo, you connect it to the Nintendo Switch or Switch 2 and then plug the Xreal 1S into the Neo. The Nintendo Switch only works with the adapter in docked mode, which means you need to remove the Joy-Cons. After that, it's another great experience. I played Super Mario Kart on both the Nintendo Switch and Switch 2. It was easy to get lost in the big-screen gameplay, and, in a way, not having to hold the entire Nintendo Switch was a side benefit. To play, I just gripped the two Joy-Cons.
The Neo will work with almost any device, delivering power while also passing the video signal through. You can even plug an external power source into it, which will then let you keep using your third-party device even if it's run out of power (and the Neo is tapped, too). Just remember, the Neo will run you another $99.
Performance score: 4.5/5
Should you buy the Xreal 1S glasses?
Xreal One Scorecard
Attribute
Comment
Score
Value
The Xreal 1S are more affordable than the last model but with even better visual clarity and a larger viewport. Does that make then fully-worth nearly $500. That deopends on how much you value a lean-back big, virtual screen experience.
4/5
Design
Sticking to one core feature makes these frames lither and more comfortable than most AR glasses. They still have some awkwardness, but are generally attractive and rugged enough to wear whenever yo want a big virtual screen experience.
4/5
Performance
This is an excellent virtual screen experience that enhances social media, gaming and video watching. I do wish the menu system was easier to navigate.
4.5/5
Buy it if…
You want a big screen wherever you go The Xreal 1S is a no-fuss virtual big screen for all your devices.
You want a lean-back experience Stop leaning over your phone. The Xreal 1S's virtual screen lets you lean back and enjoy.
You don’t need AI and connectivity on your face Xreal 1S do one thing and do it well: deliver a big-screen experience in a wearable, but don't weigh it down with extra AI and notifications.
Don’t buy it if…
You were expecting augmented reality Xreal 1S puts a floating screen in front of you but that image does not interact with the real world in any meaningful way.
You don’t want to spend more than $250 The Xreal 1S are excellent but they do cost almost $450, If you have a Nintendo Switch, you'll be shellign otu another $99 for the Neo.
You want full immersion These glasses can dim to cut out some of the outside world, but the sound is open-eared, and the glasses do not wrap around your face to form a light seal.
Also consider
Xreal Air 2 If you want to stick with Xreal, the Xreal Air 2 or its electrochromic dimming-enhanced Xreal Air 2 Pro are both solid options that cost a little less – though expect a slightly less good image and noticeable inferior audio. Read our Xreal Air 2 reviewView Deal
Meta Quest 3 While not a direct competitor to Xreal’s glasses, the Quest 3 is an XR product that you should consider if you want to experience what VR and MR have to offer – it’s simply superb. Read our Meta Quest 3 reviewView Deal
How I tested the Xreal 1S glasses
I spent a couple of weeks with the Xreal 1S using them to play games. view movies, and pursue social media. I tried them with the Neo adapter on a Nintendo Switch (1 and 2) and also connected that accessory to my iPhone.
The Noise Luna Ring 2 is the second generation of the Luna Ring. I reviewed the original in early 2025 and liked that it felt comfortable, offered solid insights, and was impressively accurate for sleep tracking from a first-gen product.
On paper, the Luna Ring 2 doesn’t sound like a huge leap forward and, visually, you’d be forgiven for not immediately spotting what’s changed. The design tweaks are subtle, and if you already own the first Luna Ring I don’t think this is a must-have upgrade.
But taken on its own, this is a good smart ring. A few pain points have been ironed out. The ring is around 10% slimmer, there’s a new charging case which looks great and stores multiple top-ups, battery performance has improved slightly and the app feels quicker to update. I also felt like sleep tracking was more precise this time round, which is probably due to the improved sensor accuracy.
The main advantage here remains the same as last time round, there’s no subscription here. That immediately makes it more appealing than the Oura Ring 4 (the most popular smart ring) if you’re not keen on adding another subscription to your life, especially if you consider that the Oura Ring 4 is more expensive to begin with.
Personally, the best new feature here is Luna’s circadian alignment tools, presenting guidance about when to get sunlight, drink coffee and exercise throughout the day. It includes a “caffeine window” that tries to stop you sabotaging your sleep with badly timed coffee. These are genuinely useful, presented nicely and feel actionable and meaningful than an arbitrary score.
There are still some things I didn’t like here. The app is pretty information dense and yet again the typography choices feel too small and fussy, which makes daily use less enjoyable than rivals. There’s an AI coach here, but it delivers generic chatbot advice rather than anything helpful. And while battery life here is good, it doesn’t quite make it as long as some rivals.
But the biggest issue here is the market. When I first reviewed the Luna Ring Gen 1, I said one of the main problems wasn’t the ring itself but the competition. That’s even more true now. The Oura Ring 4 still offers the most refined overall experience, the Samsung Galaxy Ring is great as long as you’re not on iOS and the Ultrahuman Ring Air and RingConn 2 Air are strong subscription-free alternatives to both. More and more cheaper alternatives are now entering the market too, like the Amazfit Helio Ring, which isn’t as good but is cheaper.
If you want a capable, subscription-free smart ring with strong sleep tracking and don’t mind that it doesn’t look quite as premium as the big names, the Luna Ring 2 is a good choice. It’s just not the obvious pick and even though I like it I’m not sure there’s anything standout here to recommend it over the competition.
Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2) review: Price and availability
(Image credit: Future)
Price is around $329/£299/AU$510
No subscription fee
Several color options at the same price
The Luna Ring 2 is available for around $329/£299/AU$510. I say around as pricing seems to vary across regions and I’m writing this during sale season when prices are fluctuating.
It comes in a range of finishes, including Sunlit Gold, Stardust Silver, Rose Gold, Midnight Black and Lunar Black – that last one is a matte shade. All of these finishes are the same price, which is good as some rivals charge more for specific colors or materials. Then again, that could explain why the Luna Ring 2 has a less premium look and feel than rivals, but I’ll get to that later.
That puts it below the Oura Ring 4, which typically retails for $349/£349 at full price, though more premium materials and colors can push that up to $499/£499. What’s more, you’ll need an ongoing membership to unlock full insights, which is a further $5.99/£5.99. The Samsung Galaxy Ring was also more expensive at launch at $399/£399/around AU$750, though it’s hard to compare given it’s not for iOS users.
Meanwhile, subscription-free rivals include the Ultrahuman Ring Air at £329 (it isn’t available in the US at the time of writing) and RingConn Gen 2 Air at $299/£280/AU$570 (approx). You can also find the Amazfit Helio Ring for £119.90 as a budget option.
All of this means the Luna Ring 2 is more affordable than the Oura Ring 4 but not a budget pick. The lack of subscription does help it seem better value, but it’s not so cheap that it’s a no-brainer over the rest.
Value score: 3.5 / 5
Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2) review: Specifications
Colors
Silver, Black, Matte Black, Rose Gold, Gold
Weight
3-5g (depending on size)
Material
Titanium
Battery life
Up to 7 days
Connectivity
Bluetooth
Waterproofing
Up to 50m/164 ft
(Image credit: Future)
Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2) review: Design
Light and comfortable
Slightly slimmer than first Luna Ring
Can look cheaper than rivals, especially in gold
The Luna Ring (Gen 2) is a light and compact ring, weighing between 3g and 5g depending on the size you need. On paper, that’s a small shift from the Gen 1 ring, and Luna says its Gen 2 ring is 10% slimmer and lighter overall. In reality, the difference is subtle. But the Gen 2 is genuinely very comfortable to wear 24/7.
Sizing runs from 6 to 14 and you get a sizing kit in advance, which works the same way as most smart ring brands. It’s based on standard ring sizes, but I still find that different brands fit slightly differently, so the kit is worth using.
The ring itself is made from titanium with a PVD coating and there’s a non-allergenic and seamless inner surface that sits against your skin. It’s rated 5ATM, which means you don’t need to take it off for showers, swimming or getting caught in the rain. Ideal if you’re trying to build a habit of wearing it constantly.
(Image credit: Future)
As for colors, there’s a nice choice here. Stardust Silver, Rose Gold, Sunlit Gold, Midnight Black and Lunar Black, a matte shade. The marketing images make most of them look shiny, and in real life the Sunlit Gold I tested is particularly shiny. Other brands have glossy finishes too, but here it tips over into looking a bit more like a plastic gold ring rather than blending in to look like jewellery, at least to my eye.
The real star of the design in this newer version isn’t the ring itself, but the new charging case that comes with it. Instead of the little charging plinth that came with the Gen 1 version, you now get a compact case that looks more like the cases you get with earbuds, or the Samsung Galaxy Ring. Not only does it pack in lots of extra charges, it’s one of the nicest smart ring charging solutions I’ve used so far.
Design score: 4 / 5
Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2) review: Features
(Image credit: Future)
Strong core health and sleep data
Circadian alignment tools genuinely helpful
AI integration feels gimmicky
The Luna Ring (Gen 2) follows the familiar smart ring formula, lots of sensors in a tiny band. You get green and red LEDs for heart rate, blood oxygen and skin temperature tracking, photodiodes and a 3-axis accelerometer for movement.
From those, Luna tracks your sleep time, sleep stages and sleep score, resting heart rate and heart rate variability (HRV), respiratory rate and SpO2, temperature fluctuations, stress, activity and menstrual and ovulation tracking, based on temperature and HRV.
There’s automatic detection for walking and running, plus basic workout logging for other exercises. Though, as with most smart rings right now, this isn’t designed to replace a full-on running or fitness watch, but it works well for general movement.
It’s worth noting there’s no VO2 max estimate here, which you’ll find on some rival rings and many of the best smartwatches. If you like that training metric, you might miss it here.
The more interesting additions on the software side are Luna’s “Life OS” platform, which has been updated in this version. It brings new tools like the aforementioned circadian alignment guide and a “caffeine window”. These suggest the best times to get sunlight, eat, exercise and drink coffee based on your patterns, with the aim of nudging you into a more consistent rhythm and protecting sleep.
I found those features genuinely useful and really nicely presented. Even if they don’t transform your sleep overnight, they did gently encourage me to think about my day in a way that’s more aligned with my sleep and rhythms.
There’s also an AI coach here, but I found it quite gimmicky (like most AI integrations these days). It’s essentially a chatbot bolted onto your health data. Now, some people might enjoy asking it questions, but in my testing the nutrition and lifestyle advice felt generic. Responses could be slow and if you already know the basics of health and fitness you might find it a little condescending.
On the integration front, the Luna Ring currently works with Apple Health and Google Fit, which at least lets you pull workouts from other platforms. But there are no deeper third-party integrations yet, so you can’t plug it directly into more specialized training apps or health dashboards, for example.
Features score: 3.5 / 5
Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2) review: Performance
(Image credit: Future)
Sleep tracking feels upgraded
Battery life is good, not class-leading
Good app but a bit cramped
Let’s start with the battery, as that’s been updated over the previous version. Noise says you’ll get between 4 to 7 days, which is quite a broad amount of time. During my testing I consistently got just under 6 days out of it, which I think is good. It’s an improvement over the first ring, which only ever reached 4 days.
The charging case can store around 30 days of power before you need to plug it in, which was really handy. Especially considering the charging case is light, small and looks nice.
For content, the Oura Ring 4 and Ultrahuman Ring Air can deliver six to eight days, while the RingConn Gen 2 Air can stretch to 10 to 12 days. So Luna sits in the good but not outstanding bracket where battery is concerned. Good thing it’s got the charging case this time around, which helps – did I mention I love the charging case?
The Luna Ring (Gen 2) will automatically detect walking and running and in my experience it did this reliably. You’re prompted to confirm detected sessions, which is handy.
For other exercise types, you’ll need to log activities manually and there are lots to choose from, including yoga, treadmill, cycling, bouldering, pilates, even surfing. As with most smart rings, it’s not a hardcore training tool, there’s no GPS or dedicated workout models. Think of it more as an everyday health tracker that handles simple workouts reasonably well rather than something you’d use for serious training.
I have mixed feelings about the Luna app. On the plus side, it’s packed with information and you can dig deeper into information about sleep, readiness, activity, temperature and more. In some places, scores are accompanied by short explanations, which I always appreciate more than a bare number.
(Image credit: Future)
However, the presentation of the data still doesn’t quite land for me. Fonts are tiny and a lot of elements are tightly packed together. It’s a subjective complaint, sure, but one that does impact on my day to day enjoyment of using it.
Some of the language and flagging around health data also feels more alarming than it needs to be. For example, waking up to a red exclamation mark on my SpO2 with a blunt “Pay Attention” message isn’t in line with how I think wearables should be talking to us about health. The same goes for some of the coaching prompts, they’re technically accurate, but not particularly warm or human.
Sleep tracking is where the Gen 2 shines, it does a great job at picking up on sleep and wake times, even on nights when my sleep was broken. I often wake up around 3am, read for a few hours, then go back to sleep. The Luna Ring 2 picked up this pattern consistently, where in the past other wearables have not detected the break or not detected me falling back to sleep again. It also detected short naps accurately.
You get a full breakdown of your sleep stages, a nightly sleep score and insights into what’s pushing that score up or down. Over time, trends are handy to see.
(Image credit: Future)
As for whether those circadian tools I mentioned earlier improve my sleep, that’s hard to say definitively, but having prompts about when to get outside, drink coffee or exercise did make me more intentional about my routine.
Finally, there’s the AI coach. I know other reviewers enjoy this kind of feature, but here it still feels like a very basic chatbot sat on top of your data rather than anything geared to personalized guidance. Generic nutrition tips, slow responses and a lack of nuance mean it’s not something I enjoyed using.
Though I will say one of the suggested prompts was “Which health metric needs my attention today?” which does highlight anything noticeable without digging around. Without that I’d say it was a bit useless.
Performance: 4 / 5
(Image credit: Future)
Scorecard
Attributes
Notes
Rating
Design
Light, comfortable and slightly slimmer than Gen 1. The gold color looks less premium than rivals. But the charging case is excellent.
4 / 5
Features
Strong core health and sleep tracking with useful circadian alignment feature. The AI coach and lack of VO2 max are my only bugbears.
3.5 / 5
Performance
Accurate sleep tracking, decent activity detection and good but not class-leading battery. App is overall great but needs a design refresh in my opinion.
4 / 5
Value
Cheaper than some rivals and subscription-free but not cheap enough or polished enough to be a really obvious choice over rivals.
3.5 / 5
Should I buy the Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2)?
Buy it if…
You want a smart ring without an added subscription Oura is still the most popular choice, but its monthly membership and initial price make it an expensive choice. The Luna Ring 2 is one of several capable subscription-free alternatives.
You want accurate tracking and plenty of data I’ve focused a lot on rivals in this review, but taken by itself this is a good device with accurate sleep and recovery tracking, and a generous amount of data and trends to explore.
You want strong sleep tracking without bulk If you mainly care about sleep and general recovery, smart rings are hugely appealing because you can ditch the bulk of a smartwatch at night.
Don’t buy it if…
You want the absolute best tracking and polish I was impressed by the Luna Ring 2 overall but the Oura Ring 4 will still deliver the most polished experience in terms of design, app refinement and depth of insights.
You care a lot about premium materials and finishes If you want your smart ring to double as jewellery, Oura’s rings do look and feel more high-end.
You already own the first Luna Ring This is a nice step up with a better charging experience and extra features. But if you’re happy with the Gen 1 and not itching for a new ring, there isn’t a killer upgrade here.
Noise Luna Ring (Gen 1): Also consider
Oura Ring 4 Still the best all-rounder for design, app experience and depth of data across iOS and Android. More expensive than the Luna Ring 2 and does require a subscription to unlock its full potential. But for some the extra polish and insights will be worth it. Read our full Oura Ring 4 review
Ultrahuman Ring Air A strong subscription-free alternative. With a slick design, polished app and good sleep and recovery tracking. It’s widely considered the second best option after Oura. Ultrahuman Ring Air review
How I tested the Noise Luna Ring (Gen 2)
(Image credit: Future)
Paired with an iPhone 16 Pro
Wore the ring 24/7
I’ve been testing wearables for 12+ years
I tested the Noise Luna Ring 2 for several weeks, paired with an iPhone 16 Pro. I wore it all day and night, including running outdoors, to gym sessions, during long workdays in coffee shops, evenings at home and, of course, while sleeping. I only took it off to charge it or when showering – yes, it’s waterproof but I never like to risk soap or shampoo messing it up.
Over the past 12 years I’ve reviewed dozens of wearables, including smart watches, fitness trackers and smart rings from Oura, Ultrahuman, RingConn, Motiv, and more. Having got hands-on with so many, I’ve got a strong sense now of what makes a smart ring comfortable, truly useful – from design and comfort to performance, app quality, and long-term wearability – and standout in a busy and competitive space.
