Computers - Organizer

I tested the HP Pavilion 16 and it feels more premium than its price suggests – but don’t expect a powerhouse performer

5:42 pm | January 21, 2026

HP Pavilion 16: Two-minute review

The HP Pavilion 16 is aimed at those looking for a capable everyday machine for a reasonable price.

It’s clear that HP has paid attention to the aesthetics of the Pavilion 16. Not only does the Sky Blue colorway add more interest than the monochromatic tones typical of mid-range laptops, but the materials employed look premium as well.

Its elegance is further emphasized by its sheer slenderness; I don’t recall having seen a thinner 16-inch laptop, making it one of the best laptop designs around. While this aspect helps with portability, the deceptively hefty weight doesn’t.

I can’t complain about the build quality of the Pavilion 16, though. There’s little flex to any part of it, despite its aforementioned lean form, while the parts that are plastic are pleasing to the touch. This is especially true of the keys, which have a slight texture for added tactility.

There are some useful ports on the Pavilion 16, including two USB-A, two USB-C (which support both Power Delivery and DisplayPort standards), and an HDMI port. However, most are loaded on the right-hand side, and the two USB-C ports are placed closest to the user, which can be inconvenient as the power cable has to be plugged into one of them.

Three-quarter view of HP Pavilion 16 open on desk with pink wall in background — (Image credit: Future)

The Pavilion 16 handles general tasks rather well, from light productivity to 4K video streaming. However, since it lacks a dedicated GPU, graphics-heavy workloads are handled with less aplomb. Some light gaming is still possible, but you’ll have to dial back the settings and settle for unremarkable frame rates and visuals.

Fan noise is noticeable, even when the Pavilion 16 is running at a moderate intensity, but I would still describe it as being within acceptable bounds. Nearly all of the heat is confined to the very rear of the underside, which I also appreciated.

The 1200p WUGXA display is sufficient for this size of laptop, providing a clear and sharp image. Color reproduction and brightness levels are also commendable, although reflections can be a little too prominent at times.

If you’ll be doing a lot of typing, the Pavilion 16 is likely to meet your needs. The wide spacing of the keys, coupled with their deep travel and dampening, makes them satisfying to use. And if you’ll be dealing with lots of numbers in your work, you’ll be pleased with the inclusion of a numpad, too.

However, the touchpad is less impressive. It’s quite small for this size of laptop, yet at the same time manages to intrude while typing; I would often trigger cursor movement with my thumb palm. In the main, though, it’s still sufficient enough for everyday use.

An area where the Pavilion 16 excels is battery life. It lasted over 20 hours in our movie playback test, and charging times are very fast as well. On this front, it beats most of its similarly-priced rivals.

When you combine this aspect with its other plus points, the Pavilion 16 adds up to an enticing proposition, given its reasonable starting price. There are certainly other great laptops at this end of the market, some of which may have the edge in terms of performance, but the Pavilion 16 remains one to consider if you’re after a mid-range, workaday machine.

HP Pavilion 16 review: Price & Availability

Close-up of webcam on HP Pavilion 16, with pink wall in background — (Image credit: Future)

Starts from $459 / £569 (about AU$700)
Available now in various configurations
Reasonable price point

The HP Pavilion 16 starts from $459 / £569 (about AU$700) and is available now. Models with different Intel and AMD processors are available, as are models with touchscreens. RAM configurations also vary from 8GB to 16GB.

This is a reasonable price for a large laptop of this spec. For a similar price, you could also get the Acer Aspire Go 15. I was impressed with its performance when I reviewed it, which is perhaps marginally better than that of Pavilion 16. However, its display is less impressive than the Pavilion 16’s.

If you’re looking for another budget alternative, the HP OmniBook 5 14-inch (2025) could be one to look out for. It features a cutting-edge and vibrant OLED display, and impressively long battery life.

Value: 4 / 5

HP Pavilion 16 review: Specs

HP Pavilion 16 review configuration
Price	£569 (about $745 / AU$1,140)
CPU	Intel Core Ultra 5 125U (3.6GHz, 12 cores)
GPU	Intel Graphics (integrated)
RAM	16GB LPDDR5
Storage	512GB PCIe 5.0 NVMe M.2 SSD
Display	16-inch (1920 x 1200), 16:10, IPS, micro-edge, anti-glare
Ports and Connectivity	2x USB-A, 2x USB-C (Power Delivery, DisplayPort 1.4a), 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x 3.5mm combo audio; Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.3
Battery	59Wh
Dimensions	14 x 10 x 0.7in (358 x 255 x 18mm)
Weight	3.9lbs / 1.77kg

HP Pavilion 16 review: Design

Close-up of keyboard on HP Pavilion 16, on desk with pink wall in background — (Image credit: Future)

Exceptionally thin
Premium feel
Mixed connectivity options

The Pavilion 16 cuts an elegant figure, thanks to its minimalist design that’s free from fuss and unsightly bulges. The Sky Blue colorway also helps to distinguish it from many others in this sector, endowing the unit with enough interest while maintaining a professional appearance.

More impressive is just how slender the Pavilion 16 is. For a 16-inch laptop, it’s remarkably thin, which certainly helps with transportation. Its weight, on the other hand, is more of a hindrance, since it’s heavier than I expected it to be.

The plastics used in the Pavilion 16 feel premium, especially that of the keys, which are finished with a subtle texture that offers a pleasing amount of traction. They’re also secured firmly in place, without a hint of looseness.

Close-up of touchpad on HP Pavilion 16, on a desk — (Image credit: Future)

This same level of solidity applies to the overall construction of the Pavilion 16, too. There’s remarkably little flex to the chassis or the lid, despite how thin both are. What’s more, the hinge holds the display in place with impressively little wobble, no matter the angle, while being very easy to adjust at the same time.

There are two USB-A and two USB-C ports on the Pavilion 16, as well as an HDMI port – an increasingly rare sight on modern laptops. There’s no SD card reader, though, which is a small shame.

A bigger point of contention is the placement of the ports. All but two are on the right, which might prove inconvenient for some. And while I was glad to see the USB-A ports split across both sides, the two USB-C ports are both on the right.

What’s more, they’re located in front of all other ports, nearly mid-way along the chassis, which can cause issues when connecting the USB-C power adapter. Personally, I always prefer the power port to be the furthest away, in order to prevent the power cable from trailing over others or being obstructed by things you may have next to your laptop.

Design: 4.5 / 5

HP Pavilion 16 review: Performance

Close-up of left-side ports on HP Pavilion 16, on desk with pink wall in background — (Image credit: Future)

Reasonable everyday performance
Not ideal for gamers or creative pros
Tactile keyboard

HP Pavilion 16 benchmarks

Geekbench 6 (Single Core): 2,166; (Multi Core): 9,496
Cinebench R23 (Multi Core): 7,730
Cinebench R24 (Single Core): 94 (Multi Core): 411
Crossmark Overall: 1,433
3DMark Night Raid: 18,673; Fire Strike: 4,717; Steel Nomad: 352; Solar Bay: 6,519; Solar Bay Unlimited: 6,993; Solar Bay Extreme: 737; Solar Bay Extreme Unlimited: 734
BlackMagicDisk Read: 2,639MB/s; Write: 2,494MB/s
Total War: Warhammer III: Mirrors of Madness (1080p, Low): 22.7fps

The everyday performance of the Pavilion 16 is commendable. It handles light productivity, browsing, and entertainment tasks well, which is what one would expect from this grade of laptop. More impressively, it can stream ultra-HD video without issue.

Such content is enhanced by the large display, which is allowed to make full use of its space thanks to the thin bezel. There’s enough brightness and vibrancy to make the viewing experience an enjoyable one, and while reflections can reveal themselves at points, for the most part the Pavilion 16 does an admirable job of keeping them at bay.

Even when performing moderately intense workloads, the fans in the Pavilion 16 were audible. However, the noise never rose above a muted whir, so I didn’t find them disruptive. Most of the heat was confined to the rear underside, with commonly-touched surfaces remaining cool.

Since it has no dedicated GPU, the Pavilion 16 isn’t the best choice for gamers or creative types. Cyberpunk 2077 was just about playable on Medium settings, but even here I experienced some stuttering and the occasional slowdown. Naturally, it wasn’t very pleasant to look at, either. You'd be better off checking out our list of the best gaming laptops instead.

Close-up of right-side ports on HP Pavilion 16, on desk with pink wall in background — (Image credit: Future)

Thanks to the wide chassis, the keyboard fits comfortably in the Pavilion 16, even with its number pad. However, while the keys have plenty of space between them, they don’t seem as large as those on other laptops. I had to adapt my typing accordingly, but as the size difference is that great, this didn’t take long.

Better is the considerable amount of travel and dampening they have, especially by laptop standards. This makes them more tactile and engaging to use.

Despite its relatively small size, the touchpad got in the way as I typed. The palm of my right thumb frequently triggered cursor movement; thankfully, no clicks or taps registered, which would’ve been much more disruptive.

Its small size also means navigation isn’t as expansive as it could’ve been. What’s more, it lacks the smoothness of some of the best in class, and I felt a slight rattle whenever I tapped or clicked, which made such actions feel awkward. Having said all this, I’ve certainly experienced more frustrating laptop touchpads, and it’s perfectly usable in the main.

Performance: 3.5 / 5

HP Pavilion 16 review: Battery Life

Three-quarter rear view of HP Pavilion 16, open on a desk with pink wall in background — (Image credit: Future)

Lasts long
Beats many rivals
Quick to charge, too

The battery life of the Pavilion 16 is very impressive. It lasted a mighty 20 hours and 15 minutes during our movie playback test, a score that bests many of its rivals by a large margin. The Acer Aspire Go 15, for example, only managed close to 12 hours.

Equally as impressive is just how quickly the Pavilion 16 can fully recharge, taking about 90 minutes.

Battery Life: 5 / 5

Should I buy the HP Pavilion 16?

HP Pavilion 16 Scorecard
Attributes	Notes	Rating
Value	The HP Pavilion 16 offers a lot for the money, but it stands alongside some equally-capable rivals.	4 / 5
Design	The HP Pavilion 16 is remarkably thin for its size, while the looks and build quality are admirable at this price point.	4.5 / 5
Performance	For general tasking, the HP Pavilion 16 suffices. The display and keyboard are great, but gaming and creative applications suffer from the absence of dedicated graphics.	3.5 / 5
Battery Life	The HP Pavilion 16 can outlast many of its rivals by a long way, and it’s quick to recharge, too.	5 / 5
Total	The HP Pavilion 16 represents good value considering what it offers, but you’ll have to settle for poor graphical performance.	4 / 5

Buy the HP Pavilion 16 if...

You’ll be doing a lot of typing
The tactile keyboard is a cut above many others at this price point, owing to its deep travel and comfortable layout.

You want all-day battery life
Its impressive score in our battery test means the HP Pavilion 16 should last you a full day or more unplugged.

Don't buy it if...

You want to game or create
Since it doesn’t have a dedicated GPU, the Pavilion 16 can only handle very light gaming and creative tasks.

You want the best touchpad
The touchpad on the HP Pavilion 16 is quite small for a 16-inch laptop, and it’s not the smoothest operator. It can also get in the way when typing.

HP Pavilion 16 review: Also Consider

Acer Aspire Go 15
The starting price of the Acer Aspire Go 15 is much lower than that of the Pavilion 16, but you’d be wise to ignore this base model, since its spec is frankly unfit for modern use. The model that most closely matches the Pavilion 16 is also similarly priced. But while it performs well, its display is far less impressive, so I wouldn’t recommend the Aspire Go to those wanting the best visual experience.

Read our full Acer Aspire Go 15 review.

HP OmniBook 5 14-inch (2025)
Another HP laptop, the OmniBook 5 is a little more expensive than the Pavilion 16, but it features an OLED display, which impressed us with its vibrancy. Its light build and enjoyable keyboard and touchpad were further highlights. Build quality and top-tier performance are somewhat lacking, but the OmniBook 5 is a solid offering all the same.

Read our full HP OmniBook 5 14-inch (2025) review.

How I tested the HP Pavilion 16

Tested for a few days
Used for multiple purposes and benchmarked
Experienced laptop reviewer

I tested the HP Pavilion 16 for a couple of days. I used it for a variety of tasks, from productivity and browsing to streaming video and gaming.

I also ran our series of benchmark tests, designed to comprehensively assess every aspect of a laptop's performance. This included a battery life test, where I ran a movie on a continuous loop until the HP Pavilion 16 shut down.

I am an experienced laptop reviewer, having tested a large number across a broad range of price points, form factors, and specifications.

Polar Loop: One minute review

The Polar Loop is, on the surface, what a lot of folks want. It’s a lifestyle-friendly wearable like the popular Whoop MG, but one that doesn’t come with a mandatory monthly subscription.

It’s screen-free, with a lightweight body and fabric strap for maxed-out comfort. Polar has kept the Loop simple, offering a limited set of features rather than trying to cram in lots of extras. It tracks your sleep, your steps and has a crack at recognising and logging activity sessions — runs, walks and so on. This part is patchy, but the Polar Loop was never going to be that big a hit as a one of the best fitness tracker with the hardcore exerciser crowd anyway.

The Polar Loop’s issues are largely software-based. You have to get on with the Polar app to make the Loop fun to use, and its interface and presentation of data could really do with a rethink. This is planned for the future, but for now, this isn’t quite the Whoop-killer you may be hoping for. It’s shown up on that front by the cheaper Amazfit Helio Strap.

As is, what you get is a decent screen less tracker, but one that may be better later into its lifespan – after a software update, at least.

Polar Loop: Specifications

Component	Polar Loop
Price	$199 / £149.50 / AU$299
Dimensions	42 x 27 x 9mm
Weight	29g with band
Case/bezel	Stainless steel/Plastic
Display	N/A
GPS	N/A
Battery life	Up to 8 days
Connection	Bluetooth
Water resistant	Yes, 3ATM

Polar Loop: Price and Availability

$199 in the US
£149.50 in the UK
AU$299 in Australia

The Polar Loop launched in early September 2025 as a subscription-free alternative to the Whoop band. This is a little over a year since the launch of the Polar 360, a business-oriented wellness wearable that’s ultimately pretty similar to this consumer version. It costs $199 in the US, £149.50 in the UK and AU$299 in Australia.

While there are no explicit ongoing costs, there is a totally optional subscription called Polar Fitness Program, which works out an adaptive training plan for you. This costs 9.99 Euro a month after a free trial. This is far better value than the Whoop, which doesn’t sell you the device at all – just an expensive subscription. But for a fitness tracker that doesn’t actually do a lot, it’s still quite highly-priced.

Value score: 3.5/5

Polar Loop: Design

Screenless
Steel accents
Comfortable stretchy bands

The Polar Loop is similar enough to the Whoop band that Whoop has sued Polar claiming the company nicked its design. However, what this really boils down to is a couple of conventions already seen across the screenless wearables landscape.

Polar uses a fabric strap that weaves, buckle-like, over the wearable’s main unit. It covers where the screen would be in a normal watch. The Loop uses a velcro-style fastener and is clearly designed to look like a lifestyle wearable over a hardcore fitness gadget. While much of the core brick is plastic, the top and outer parts are brushed bronze-shade steel. It’s there to provide a touch of class.

These screen-free wearables are intended to be the kind of gadget you set and forget, at least until the battery runs out. The Polar Loop weighs 29g, strap included, light enough not to pick up any real momentum as you swing your arms unlike a watch like the Apple Watch Ultra, which weighs close to 60g. But you are still gong to see those familiar skin indents when you occasionally take the watch off, pressing its contours into your wrist.

Is it comfy? Sure, these slightly stretchy fabric bands are ace for comfort. But I’ve found the Amazfit Helio Band slightly easier to forget I’m wearing, no doubt because it’s even lighter: just 20g.

The Polar Loop has no buttons and no LED status indicator. You can’t interact with it if you try. There’s not even a vibration motor: it’s about as stripped-back as Polar could make it. Water resistance is rated at WR30, which in other wearables is often seen as not enough for safe swimming, while Polar says the Loop is fine for “bathing and swimming” under the ISO22810 standard, just not diving or snorkelling.

Design score: 4/5

Polar Loop: Features

No subscription
Very little interaction
Precision Prime heart rate sensor from 2018

One of the core appeals of the Polar Loop is, of course, that there is no mandatory subscription. There is a paid part of the app, though.

It’s called Polar Fitness Program, which costs around $11 a month (9.99 Euro). This launched in April 2025, provides tailored workout plans. It would work much better when paired with Polar’s more conventional fitness watches, like the Polar Grit X2, than a Loop.

The Polar Loop’s own feature set is very stripped-back. You can’t, for example, make the watch broadcast its heart rate data to be used by another device. There’s no altimeter, so counting of steps climbed is not recorded. You cannot use the Polar Loop as an alarm as there’s no vibration motor. When the Polar Loop is running low on battery you’ll simply get an incessant reminder to charge on your phone. You know the funny bit? Polar actually released a tracker called the Loop 2 in 2015 that did have vibration, and a half-hidden screen made up of 85 LEDs.

Neither that band nor the Polar Loop records blood oxygenation data either, despite the heart rate array making use of green, red and orange LEDs. Polar calls this its Precision Prime array, and it has been around for absolutely ages. A similar design was found in 2018’s Polar Vantage V. That’s a lifetime ago in tech terms, but the basics still work well.

Features score: 2.5/5

Polar Loop: Performance

8 days of battery life
Some activity tracking errors
HR data testing similar to Garmin Elevate V5 sensor

Despite the lack of a screen, Polar says the Loop lasts eight days, which is actually a bit less than some of its watches with displays. This is basically on the money. You can expect it to last around a week. With no GPS or screen, there should be little variation in how long it lasts based on your activity level.

Like any wearable, the Polar Loop is heavily reliant on its heart rate sensor for any data beyond your steps. This wearable has a pretty good one, despite using older hardware. While this is not a replacement for a full-on runner’s watch due to its lack of GPS, its HR data during runs is pretty similar to that of a Garmin Forerunner 970 (one of the best Garmin watches) and its Elevate V5 sensor, wore concurrently during most of my testing.

The Polar Loop doesn’t tend to mess up the start of workouts, or show unexpected major HR spikes during the work day when you do little more than potter about. There was one unexpected spike during a tracked run, but in general the results are solid here.

By default, the Polar Loop will record basic stats 24/7, and then automatically log any slightly extended stretches it believes you’re exercising. Go for a 12-minute walk? You can expect to see that pop up in the Polar app. It’s not entirely flawless, though; during one run, the Loop only clocked half of the hour-and-change workout, seemingly stopping during a brief break, only to fail to register the second half. The durations of some sessions are off too, although you can always take a more active approach to tracking: in the Polar phone app, you can manually start a tracked session, select the Loop, and use it as the source for HR data.

That aside, the Polar Loop has a good stab at recording your daily steps. And it of course tracks sleep, too, estimating your time spent in the light, deep and REM sleep zones, and records interruptions. The Polar Loop is more sensitive to these than another wearable’s full-on wakeful moments detection, so you may well see your sleep records peppered with these tiny interruption blips.

The lead stats Polar wants you to focus on are sleep duration, sleep solidity and regeneration — basically how much that sleep is getting your body back where it needs to be. However, there’s also an ANS Charge (autonomous nervous system charge) section in which you can check out breathing rate and heart rate variability.

All the basic data is here, and it’s sound enough. The Polar Loop’s biggest issue is the phone app isn’t really all that enjoyable to use, may look dated to some and doesn’t really direct the user that well as to what they should focus on.

The app’s home screen is Diary, which acts like a feed of your day, showing recent auto-tracked exercises, your step count and so on, in semi-chronological order. This is not as effective as the software in Amazfit’s rival Helio Strap app, which is more intuitive and has a handy traffic light-style system to alert you to any stats that may be out of the ordinary.

Screen-free wearables are massively reliant on their apps for the overall quality of experience. And Polar’s could do with some work. It’s just not that inviting a space to hang out in. Polar does plan to fully revamp the app in future, but right now we can only work with that we have.

Performance score: 3.5/5

Polar Loop: Scorecard

Category	Comment	Score
Value	The lack of a forced subscription is good but this is not the most aggressively priced tracker around.	3.5/5
Design	It’s comfortable, it looks decent and has some higher-grade steel elements, plus you get a choice of colours.	4/5
Features	A watch like this doesn’t need scads of features, but it does miss out on a few elements that could be handy.	2.5/5
Performance	Heart rate accuracy is decent but you may not want to rely on auto exercise recognition for accurate session logging.	3/5

Polar Loop: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

You like its style

An important factor here is how the Loop doesn’t look like a fitness watch, with a two-tone fabric outer strap with steel accents.

You want a subscription-free experience

While you can pay for a training plan subscription, there’s no mandatory subscription with a Polar Loop.

You want pure passive tracking

With no screen, and even no vibrate or buttons, this is a zero-interaction wearable for those who want no wrist distractions.

Don’t buy it if…

You are expecting big health insights

At the time of review the Loop doesn’t present its data in the most cogent way, and also has fairly basic hardware.

You want better software before buying

While Polar has plans to overhaul its software and interface, we don’t know when that will happen at the time of review.

Also consider

Whoop MG

The screen-free band that made this category sing, but requires a pricey subscription.

Read our full Whoop MG review

First reviewed: December 2025

The Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade Switch 2 version is better than I expected — it isn’t flawless, but the game is still absolutely brilliant

3:20 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Consoles & PC Gadgets Gaming Nintendo | Tags: Final Fantasy, Nintendo Switch | Comments: Off

Ever since I first played it on the PS5 a few years ago, I’ve been certain Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade is a gaming masterpiece – the inarguable best way to play the role-playing game (RPG) classic that is Final Fantasy VII. But now that it’s coming to the Nintendo Switch 2, is the game still as excellent?

TL;DR, yes, but I’m left feeling like the Switch 2 edition is only the second best way to play the best way to play Final Fantasy VII.

I’m not the only person who loves Final Fantasy VII Remake. Former TechRadar Computing Hardware expert Jackie Thomas gave it five stars out of five back when it released on the PS4 almost six years ago, and the story, music, and general beauty of the game haven’t changed with this port.

But as you’d expect, going from a home console to a handheld hybrid, some technical downgrades are to be expected – with both texture quality, framerate, and fidelity dips noticeable, though playing in Docked mode does give it a noticeable visual bump.

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot of Yuffie — (Image credit: Square Enix)

That said, are you playing on the Switch 2 for graphical superiority? If you are you might want to rethink your console choice, as the true beauty of the Nintendo hybrid is its ability to game on the go, and for an tens-of-hours-long RPG – that’ll hold your attention between 30 and 90 hours based on whether you want to focus on the story, complete a few side quests along the way, or seriously devour every piece of additional content across both the main campaign and bonus Intermission downloadable content (DLC) episode – is essential for more time-strapped gamers.

Finding time to play all of that at home can be tough, especially if you share your TV. Taking Final Fantasy 7 Remake on the go as part of your morning commute, on trips if you travel regularly, or simply enjoying it in portable mode on the couch while someone else uses the main screen in your home entertainment setup makes finding the time much more manageable – meaning you can actually start enjoying the games you buy, and not just stare at them in your ever-growing digital library.

If this convenience is what you crave, you’ll love Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade on the Nintendo Switch 2. For everyone else, this game is still required reading, but you’d be better served by its PlayStation 5 edition (provided you have access to the console).

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot showing Cloud and Barrett — (Image credit: Square Enix)

Final Fantasy 7 Remake is part one of Square Enix’s recreation of the 1997 RPG, Final Fantasy 7. While it is, in some ways, simply a third of a game, the care and attention put into every inch of this title doesn’t leave you feeling shortchanged.

As I mentioned in the intro you can easily spend close to 90 hours playing Remake if you sink your teeth into every challenge the game has to offer, including finishing every side mission, earning the high score in every minigame, completing the game on Hard mode (which requires a whole replay), and besting the greatest foes in Shinra’s virtual battle zone.

I can say, as someone who has done exactly this, you won’t regret the time you spend in Midgar, but even if you simply focus on the main quest-focused story (including the Intermission story featuring Yuffie), then you’ll still be savouring Final Fantasy VII for around 30 to 40 hours.

Even if you’ve played the 1997 version, there’s plenty to enjoy here too.

The Remake expands on the story in a way that better fleshes out each character, the relationships between the key players, and (if I’m honest) makes the experience much more engaging rather than what could at times feel like a slog.

There are a few new twists and turns to discover as well, but every single one feels like a worthy addition to the mythos and the core story FFVII is telling – rather than fluff that would detract from its message.

Combat ready!

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot of Cloud, Tifa and Barrett — (Image credit: Square Enix)

The gameplay has had a tune-up, too.

I enjoy turn-based battling, but Final Fantasy VII’s approach to combat is undeniably more active and approachable to a wider audience. At the same time, I appreciate the “Classic” difficulty mode the game introduces, which helps to return some of the accessibility offered by turn-based combat if you want it.

If playing regularly, you must actively attack and block with your character to charge ATB so you can perform more powerful skills and spells. In Classic mode, the characters all fight and guard automatically, letting you simply focus on which enemy to target and when you want to use those more powerful moves.

It’s not a substitute for the slower pace of turn-based fights, but feels closer to it if you require a slightly calmer pace.

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot showing Cloud on a bike — (Image credit: Square Enix)

In any case, with this more active approach to combat comes complexity where lots can be happening at once – especially in bigger fights that have Cloud, Tifa, and Barrett slashing, punching, and firing away at a small army of Shinra guards and bots returning fire – but the Switch 2 did its best to keep things flowing smoothly.

There’s no in-system way to track framerate, but the gameplay did seem to hold steady at 30 frames per second (fps) as Square has promised. If you’re used to higher rates, you’ll notice some frameyness to the game in handheld mode, but honestly, it doesn’t detract from the experience – especially since this isn’t a game like a shooter where 60fps-afforded precision is essential.

There are also a few noticeable texture and model downgrades compared to the PlayStation version, which are even more apparent if, like me, you’re used to the PS5 rendition rather than the PS4 edition of Remake. When you dock your Switch 2, however, things do start to look a lot better, and even in handheld mode, there is an undeniable beauty to Final Fantasy VII Remake that persists even if the overall quality has taken a hit.

Again, as I mentioned in my intro, it’s also not like you’re choosing the Switch 2 for its graphical fidelity. Quality is the price we pay for handheld convenience, and I’ll hold firm to the fact that this port does look great, even if not quite as great as the PlayStation edition. It just comes down to what you value more.

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot showing Sephiroth — (Image credit: Square Enix)

The only other point I’ll make on the Switch 2 vs PlayStation comparisons is cost.

At launch, the Switch 2 Final Fantasy 7 Remake Intergrade will cost you $39.99 / £39.99 / AU$69.95. It’s a reasonable price of entry in my mind, but you should note that a twin pack of Remake and its part 2 Rebirth on PS5 will set you back $59.99 / £59.99 / AU$159.95 (it’s not such a great deal based in Australia at full-price, though I’ve seen it on sale for much less in each of these regions meaning it’s a better deal than these numbers make it look).

Two games for effectively the price of one-and-a-half (or even for the price of one if you get the twin pack with a discount) is clearly a good deal. So if you have access to both consoles, and won’t appreciate the convenience of handheld mode, or would appreciate the better value proposition, then you might want to consider your options for how to experience Final Fantasy VII.

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot showing materia — (Image credit: Square Enix)

Should you play Final Fantasy 7 Remake Intergrade on the Switch 2?

Play it if…

You want to experience one of the greatest RPGs ever made again
FFVII is beloved for a reason, and the remake is simply the best way to experience the story in 2026.

You care about portable gaming
The game runs really well on the Switch 2 in handheld mode. Sure, it isn’t graphically perfect, but that’s not what the Switch 2 is for.

You like games with lots of content
You can easily spend over 50 hours playing this title if you devote yourself to its bonus content and DLC in addition to its main story, you might even stretch to closer to 90 hours if you want to complete hard mode too. So if you like long games this is a solid pick up.

Don’t play it if…

You have a PS5
The Nintendo Switch 2 version is good, but for the most cost-effective and best quality way to experience FFVII on console, you should play the PS5 version if you can.

You want high quality and performance
This title still looks beautiful on the Switch 2, but it does look more framey and overall looks lower quality than non-handheld versions.

You want turn-based action
The appeal of classic RPGs is turn-based combat, and while this remake maintains elements of that style of gameplay it’s a very different experience.

Final Fantasy VII Remake Switch 2 screenshot showing Aerith praying — (Image credit: Square Enix)

Accessibility

Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade has several difficulty controls to help with accessibility.

There’s Classic mode if you’d prefer a simpler battle system, but also the ability to always have max HP, a full ATB gauge, and constantly deal max damage (among other effects) that can make the game more approachable.

Beyond this, there are subtitles for all cutscenes, and there isn’t a built-in colorblind mode, which can unfortunately make a couple of fights and minigames a little tougher if you are colorblind.

How I reviewed Final Fantasy VII Remake on Nintendo Switch 2

I’ve already put over 80-hours into Final Fantasy VII Remake and its DLC episode on my PS5 – as I mentioned in my review, I enjoyed it so much I went out of my way to get every trophy – so I already knew my thoughts on its mechanics and its story before booting this title up, and had a great point of reference for the Switch 2 version.

The focus of this review was to test how well the Nintendo Switch 2 can handle the game I love. To test this, I played the title over many, many hours in both docked and handheld mode, made sure to explore both the main story, side quests, and minigames, and made notes about its technical capabilities.

I reviewed this game using a standard Nintendo Switch 2 when in handheld mode, and on a Amazon Fire TV Omni QLED with a Sonos Beam (Gen 2) soundbar, and an 8BitDo Ultimate 2 controller in docked mode.

New Prime Video thriller Steal is a heart-stopping high-stakes cash heist — but stick with the sloppy middle to get a gratifying payoff

5:00 pm | January 20, 2026

Author: admin | Category: Amazon Prime Video Computers Gadgets Streaming | Comments: Off

What would you do if you worked a mundane finance job with middling pay in the city's banking district, only to find that when you arrived at the office, you were taken hostage by a terrifying team of armed strangers? Unluckily for Zara (Sophie Turner), that's exactly her Monday morning in the new Prime Video drama, Steal.

With the stakes immediately sky high, the six-part series is a far cry from other January streaming choices like Harlan Coben's Run Away and Agatha Christie's Seven Dials. It's an original story, and it certainly feels fresh to watch. We've not had a money-led TV show in quite a while (and certainly not framed through workplace monotony), and oddly, the thing we always avoid talking about is going to become the subject of watercooler gossip.

Why? Because Steal puts the pedal to the metal from the moment you press play on episode 1. The premiere episode is an incredibly strong start to a new series, with our heart in our mouths as Zara and her team are held at gunpoint while our strangers fleece the trading company out of millions of pounds, which come directly from the everyday person's pension.

It's a dramatic way to start the day, but the basics of this could genuinely happen to any of us at any given time, making our thriller binge hit a little too close to home. But when we find out that Zara is more involved than meets the eye (without spoilers), the risk-factor flatlines.

Steal starts and ends with a financial implosion, but the middle is a drab sinking fund

In an ideal world, Steal would have been four episodes rather than six. Given that miniseries tend to be capped at six episodes (especially on a global streaming service), I'm not too surprised by the show's structure, but by the time we reach the middle of the tale, we're treading water.

There's only so many times that Zara can tell others that she's in trouble before it gets old, feeling as though her strife is something we've seen a million times before. Rather than being riddled with B-plots, Steal is focused on its main storyline at all times, and that leaves little wriggle room for creative exploration.

Sure, the heist becomes a literal matter of life-or-death, but sometimes you need a palette cleanser to offset a pill that's truly tricky to swallow. Four episodes would have cut the chaff to get straight to the final climax, with little time for characters to wait around feeling sorry for themselves, even though the painful mess is all their fault.

As I've touched on, episode 1 is a lesson in how to open a show to any aspiring writer. The tension ticks along nicely, with Sophie Turner delivering arguably the best performance of her career to date – and certainly one of the most vulnerable.

Everything we learn about Zara during this build-up cannot be trusted, and that's a seductive risk for us to play with. How much can we trust her, and how much can we trust her perspective of the heist? There are certainly no clean hands here, that's for sure.

Motherland and Line of Duty fans rejoice – Anna Maxwell Martin is Steal's secret weapon

The cast of Steal hold their hands and phones in the air — She's not one of the gun-toters, don't worry. (Image credit: Prime Video)

As much as I thoroughly enjoyed Turner's performance, I wouldn't say that she's the breakout star of the show. That accolade is reserved for Anna Maxwell Martin, who has about two scenes across the entire six episodes.

She's a straight-talking MI5 enigma who meets with Zara on the sly to try and tease highly sought-after information out of her. Blunt and overtly threatening in her tone, Maxwell Martin turns in exactly how I'd imagine Julia from Motherland would be if she was a copper.

Unintentionally humorous, could potentially kill you, and more than anything, is completely over the drama that she's been sucked into.

All-in-all, it's a really solid outing from Steal. I really hope that Amazon can keep up this quality of content, even if it's messy overall – I'd much rather TV took risks like this that didn't land rather than play it one-note and totally safe.

Frankly, Steal is worth watching for its first episode alone, but the season finale isn't too far behind in terms of satisfaction levels. If you've ever wished that you chose a high-flying financial career over whatever it is you do in real-life, this will reverse that pipe dream in the blink of an eye.

Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!

And of course you can also follow TechRadar on TikTok for news, reviews, unboxings in video form, and get regular updates from us on WhatsApp too.

I tested the Nutribullet Flex portable blender: a lightweight, convenient companion for smoothies on the go

4:06 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Gadgets Home Juicers & Blenders Small Appliances | Comments: Off

Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender: one-minute review

Nutribullet has cemented itself as a trusted name in the kitchen appliance space, with its blenders and juicers among the best in the market. The Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender offers this same quality in a more lightweight package, allowing for on-the-go blending.

The Nutribullet Flex is an upgraded version of the Nutribullet Portable Blender, adding a few welcome new features, including increased capacity and clear charge indicators. As such, it comes in slightly more than its predecessor, while still being affordable at under $100.

Nutribullet Flex blender on kitchen counter — (Image credit: Future)

Considering the quality of this personal blender, it offers excellent value for money for those seeking a convenient, portable blender that produces optimal results with cold beverages and smoothies. Its lightweight design means you can easily disassemble the appliance and take it with you to work, the gym, or on vacation, while its rechargeability means you won’t be searching high and low for a plug socket.

Each of its four charges allows for approximately eight blend cycles (each lasts 30 seconds), meaning you can quickly mix your food and transport it with ease, using the convenient carry loop attached to its lid. If you’re looking for a personal blender that prioritises convenience, speed, and cold beverages, this is an excellent choice.

Nutribullet Flex blender being held with carry loop — (Image credit: Future)

However, this blender lacks versatility and can struggle with some ingredients or recipes, so you’re best to stick to cold drinks and smoothies with this one. Its portability is always negatively impacted by its volume, which could restrict where you can use it, and the lack of storage for its sharp blades.

Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender: price and availability

$69.99 / £59.99 / AU$99.95 at Nutribullet
Available at third-party retailers, such as Amazon, Decathlon, and Target

Priced at $69.99 / £59.99 / AU$99.95, the Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender offers great quality for an affordable price. And, what’s more, we regularly see discounts on this appliance at Nutribullet and third-party retailers.

While it doesn’t offer as much versatility as many of the best blenders on the market, if you’re looking for a portable blender for cold drinks and smoothies, without breaking the $100 mark, this is a great choice.

For those who want to keep under the $50 mark, however, the Nutribullet Magic Bullet Portable Blender ($39.99 / £39.99 / A$79.95) offers a solid alternative. If you don’t mind splashing out a bit more for a more powerful, convenient on-the-go blender, we highly recommend the Nutribullet Flip ($99.99, roughly £80 / AU$150), especially if you intend to make a lot of frozen or icy beverages.

Value score: 4.5/5

Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender: specifications

Review model	NBPB09220_250721
Accessories	USB-C charging cable (500mm / 19.7in)
Smart control	No
Rated power	100W
Capacity	590ml cup (400ml max)
Time range	Each blending cycle lasts 30 seconds
Dimensions	3.3in (D) x 11.4in (H) x 3.3in (W) / 83mm (D) x 290mm (H) x 83mm (W)
Weight	Approx. 1.9lbs / 850g
Dishwasher safe	Yes, top rack

Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender: design

Rechargeable, with plug-in option
Tight seals prevent leaks
Carry loop on sip lid for on-the-go drinks
No storage for blade block

Out of the box, the Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender comes with a motor base, a 590ml cup, a sip lid featuring a carry loop for on-the-go use, and a blade block. While our model came in black, Nutribullet offers several colour options, including green and grey.

The blender is straightforward to assemble and takes up minimal space, making it ideal for smaller kitchens or communal work/living spaces. Disassembling the appliance also requires minimal effort; its parts are fairly compact, so they easily fit into an average-sized backpack or gym bag. Our only concern is a lack of storage for the blade block, which is sharp. Including a small hub for this could make the appliance safer to transport.

Image 1 of 2

Nutribullet Flex blender sip lid — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Nutribullet Flex blender control button — (Image credit: Future)

This portable blender’s 590ml cup offers enough space to make a single smoothie or drink for one, though it's worth noting that the 'max' line on ours was at 400ml, meaning, in reality, that’s the capacity you have to work with. The accompanying sip lid screws snuggly onto the cup, preventing any leakages, while its secure carry loop allows you to carry your finished drink in hand as soon as your blending is complete.

The blade block fits tightly onto the bottom of the cup and is locked into the motor base with a satisfying click. Again, we had no issues with leakages throughout our testing. The motor base has a minimalistic LED display, featuring a large power button. This simply requires one press to turn on. When turned on, a clockwise light ring appears around the button, confirming it's ready to be operated. Below this button are four LED lights, indicating the amount of charge the blender currently has.

Image 1 of 2

Nutribullet Flex blender motor base — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Nutribullet Flex blender USB charging port — (Image credit: Future)

The Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender is rechargeable, meaning it largely works wirelessly. A USB-C cable for charging is included, which plugs into a discrete port at the back of the motor base. However, no adapter is included. While you can use the appliance plugged in, it must have at least one charge (one white light) for this to work, and operating the blender plugged in pauses charging during the blend cycle. In addition, the provided cable is only 50cm long, restricting where you can place the appliance.

We found it took approximately 50 minutes for one light (charge) to appear, and the blender offered approximately eight 30-second blending cycles per charge. This does, however, seem to be variable and can depend on what you’re blending and if you’re overheating the appliance.

This blender’s lightweight design makes it fairly easy to transport, but you may want to consider where you use it. Nutribullet products are typically quite loud, and while the Flex Portable Blender is a bit quieter (depending on its use), we found it averaged a decibel reading of 82, roughly equivalent to the volume of traffic. So, while you can take it to work or the gym, your colleagues and peers may not appreciate it.

Design score: 4.5/5

Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender: performance

Best suited to beverages
Blends smoothies consistently well
Struggles with certain solid ingredients
30-second blend cycle may not be enough

We began our testing of the Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender with Nutribullet’s own Banana Kale smoothie recipe. Due to the size of the appliance, we had to half the recipe to ensure it fit the cup. This blender comes with a small leaflet instructing you on how to build a smoothie optimally, in other words, the order to add the ingredients. It’s a lifesaver for those new to smoothie making, and blenders, too, for that matter.

After adding the ingredients and securing the cup, we pressed the power button, which triggered a 30-second blend cycle – which you can stop at any time by pressing the button again. The results were impressive: the consistency was thick and creamy, but smooth. There were no lumps of unblended fruit or veg in the cup or under the blades.

Image 1 of 4

Nutribullet Flex blender containing banana kale smoothie ingredients — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 4

Nutribullet Flex blender with banana kale smoothie — (Image credit: Future)

Image 3 of 4

Nutribullet Flex blender containing banana kale smoothie — (Image credit: Future)

Image 4 of 4

Nutribullet Flex blender containing remnants of banana kale smoothie — (Image credit: Future)

Next, we used one of the recipes Nutribullet recommends for this appliance. Following the included QR code takes you to the Nutribullet app, which allows you to input your appliance type and dietary requirements and suggests recipes based on your needs. The app itself is a bit of a pain; it signed us out every time we closed it, and wouldn’t let us sign in again without creating a new account. The recipes, too, were limited to fewer than 10, primarily smoothies and lattes.

We tried the Strawberry Banana Smoothie, composed of almond milk, ice, chia seeds, half a banana, strawberries, and vanilla extract. We again built the smoothie as suggested, but found that – despite being recommended for the Portable Blender – the ingredients exceeded the max line. This is potentially because they’re for the non-Flex version of this device, but this isn’t specified in the app (nor is Flex specifically a choice when choosing your device). As a result, we had to remove a large amount of ice for the blender to function safely.

Image 1 of 4

Nutribullet Flex blender containing strawberry banana smoothie ingredients — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 4

Nutribullet Flex blender with finished strawberry banana smoothie — (Image credit: Future)

Image 3 of 4

Chia seeds stuck in Nutribullet Flex blender — (Image credit: Future)

Image 4 of 4

Remnants of strawberry banana smoothie in Nutribullet Flex blender — (Image credit: Future)

The results, again, were excellent. However, we did find a small lump of unblended banana in the final product, and some of our chia seeds had stuck to the side of the cup in a clump. Overall, this didn’t affect the final product and, again, there was no unblended residue stuck under the blades.

As part of our standard control testing for blenders, we don’t simply test smoothies, however. Nutribullet describes the Flex Portable as being for “on-the-go lifestyles,” and while that suggests it's primarily for beverages, it doesn’t specify it’s only for smoothies and cold drinks.

Image 1 of 3

Nutribullet Flex blender containing ingredients for hummus — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 3

Nutribullet Flex blender containing blended hummus — (Image credit: Future)

Image 3 of 3

We tested Nutribullet’s hummus recipe, again halving the ingredients. While the bottom portion of the ingredients blended fairly well after one cycle, the top remained untouched. The blender struggled considerably with the thickness of the hummus, slowing it to a standstill at one point, despite our attempts to loosen the mixture. Similarly, the appliance struggled with ice.

We wanted to use our ice control tests to check the chopping abilities of the blade. Again, the bottom portion was chopped, but the top remained untouched.

Nutribullet Flex blender containing ice — (Image credit: Future)

Surprisingly, what did work well was mayonnaise, another of our controls. This recipe applies more to a standard blender, as it requires adding oil while the device is on. We, instead, stopped the blender short of its cycle to add more before blending further each time. The result was actually nice, well-blended mayonnaise.

While the Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender is capable of mixing some non-beverage recipes, it’s not recommended. This isn’t necessarily a big drawback for this product, which is likely aimed at those making beverages on-the-go rather than quick mayo for your lunchtime sandwich.

Image 1 of 2

Nutribullet Flex blender containing blended mayonnaise — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Mayonnaise remnants in Nutribullet Flex blender — (Image credit: Future)

What is worth noting is its struggle with more solid, thicker ingredients and its lack of versatility. If you are in the market for a portable blender that focuses on making cold drinks and does that well, but doesn’t offer the capabilities of competitor products, this is an excellent choice.

Performance score: 4.5/5

Should you buy the Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender?

Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender score card
Attribute	Notes	Score
Value	This blender offers great value for an affordable price, even if it doesn't offer a lot of versatility.	4.5/5
Design	This appliance's lightweight design and carry loop make it easy to take your drinks on the go, but we wish there was a storage hub for its blade and it wasn't as loud.	4.5/5
Performance	This blender excels when making smoothies and cold drinks, but isn't necessarily suited to other recipes.	4.5/5

Buy it if

You want to make cold beverages on the go

The Nutribullet Flex Portable Blender is lightweight and has fairly compact parts, so it should easily fit in your work or gym bag, making it convenient to transport day-to-day. What’s more, thanks to the carry loop on its sip lid, you can make your drink, detach the cup from the base, and immediately take it to-go.

You want a high quality, affordable blender

Nutribullet is a top-of-the-range brand, and this blender offers the quality you would expect – without an eye-watering price tag. If you want a quality portable blender for under $100, this is a great choice.

It's for personal use

This appliance has enough capacity for one drink or smoothie at a time. So, it’s an ideal size for those looking for a portable blender for solo use.

Don't buy it if

You want versatility

As we’ve said above, this blender is great at making cold beverages, but lacks versatility when it comes to other recipes. If you want a blender with more options, it’s worth considering an alternative.

You want to use it in quieter environments

At an average of 82 decibels, this portable blender is quieter than some Nutribullet products we’ve tested, but still pretty loud. As such, it may not be as suited to quieter environments, like the workplace.

I tested Blink’s new Mini 2K+ camera, and was stunned by its high-resolution picture quality and ultra-compact design

2:50 pm |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Gadgets Home Home Security Smart Home | Tags: Amazon Echo, QR | Comments: Off

Blink Mini 2K+: two-minute review

First launched in 2020, it’s fair to say that the Blink Mini has seen a fair few improvements over the last five years. Initially just a compact, bog-standard 1080p security camera, it was upgraded in 2024 with colour night vision and outdoor functionality as the Blink Mini 2 before receiving its current make-over as a 2K camera (2,560 x 1,440 pixels) in September 2025.

Available in black or white, it can be bought either individually or as a two-pack. We tested the two-pack version in white which currently retails on Amazon for the very reasonable price of £69.99 (about $100 / AU$140). Alternatively, you can buy it as a single unit in both colours for £39.99 (about $50 / AU$80). Whereas many of Blink’s products are battery-operated, making them particularly flexible for installation, the Blink Mini must be plugged into the mains.

However, because it doesn’t require a battery it does mean the camera is exceptionally small, around 2 x 2 inches / 5 x 5cm for the camera itself and standing around 3 inches / 8cm tall including the base. It’s also very lightweight so it’s easy to move from one part of the house to another if, say, you want to monitor a particular area of your property while you’re away on holiday.

As with most security cameras these days, installation requires downloading the camera’s app onto your smartphone and adding the device using the QR code on the back of the product. Alternatively, you can type in the serial code into your phone instead. Unlike more advanced models, the Blink Mini only works on the 2.4GHz Wi-Fi network (it's not compatible with the 5GHz frequency). However, this wasn’t a major issue.

Two Blink Mini 2 security cameras in box — (Image credit: Future)

You can use the Blink Mini 2K+ camera on its own via the app, or as part of a much larger network with other Blink devices, including video doorbells and indoor/outdoor security cameras. Not only does the Blink Mini 2K+ come with its own built-in siren, it can also be used as an indoor chime for the Blink video doorbell which, somewhat annoyingly, doesn’t have its own plug-in chime accessory.

In addition, the device automatically connects to Amazon Alexa so you can view footage via the Alexa app/TVs equipped with Fire TV or get notifications sent to Alexa-compatible devices, such as Amazon Echo smart speakers.

As with many home security devices, full functionality, such as the ability to filter motion alerts by person or vehicle (known as Blink Smart Detection) does require a subscription. However, the good news is that Blink’s subscriptions are half the price of Ring’s subscription costs, starting at £2.50 per month (compared to £4.99 per month for Ring).

Blink Mini 2K+: subscription options

Blink Basic Plan. Cost: £2.50 (about $3.50 / AU$5) per month or £24.99 (about $35 / AU$50) year. Covers: one camera. Features: cloud storage (30 days), person/vehicle detection (Blink Smart Detection), and video editing between devices (Blink Moments).

Blink Plus Plan. Cost: £8 (about $10 / AU$16) per month or £80 (about $100 / AU$160) year. Covers: Unlimited cameras at one location. Features: All Basic features plus 10% off Blink devices and extended warranty.

Local storage (no subscription). Cost: free. Requires: Sync Module 2 (£34.99 - about $50 / AU$70) and a USB flash drive. Features: saves clips locally. Note: Blink Smart Detection/Blink Moments is not available with this option.

Blink Mini 2K+: price and availability

How much does it cost? $49 / £39.99 / AU$89 each (£70 for two), $US49 ($89 for two), AU$69 ($130 for two)
When is it available? Available since September 2025
Where is it available? UK / US / Australia

US company Blink has earned a reputation for its reasonably priced home security devices, and the Mini 2K+ is certainly no exception. Whereas most cameras will set you back around $130 / £100 / $200 each, you can actually buy a two pack of Blink Mini 2K+ cameras for less than that price.

It’s certainly a pretty good deal, but as ever with consumer electronics these days, nothing is ever that simple. Sure, if you just want the basic features, such as motion alerts and two-way audio communication, then that is all you have to pay. But if you want the full functionality that the camera offers, including Blink Smart Detection and 30 days of recordings stored in the cloud, you will have to commit to a monthly subscription plan.

Alternatively, if you only need the subscription to store video clips, then you can always invest in the Blink Sync Module 2, which allows you to record and store up to 256GB of video clips on a connected USB flash drive. However, this will cost another £39.99 (about $50 / AU$80), plus the cost of the USB flash drive.

Finally, with an IP65 water resistance rating, the Blink Mini2K+ can be used outdoors, but only if you buy the 4m Blink Weather Resistant Power Adaptor, costing another £9 (about $12 / AU$20). Like the cameras, this is available in either white or black.

Value score: 4.5/5

Blink Mini 2K+: design

Extremely compact design
Built-in spotlight
Mains-powered only

The first thing you notice about the Blink Mini 2K+ is just how small it really is. Standing just an inch tall on a stand that can be positioned to virtually any angle, it certainly lives up to its 'mini' moniker.

Back of Blink Mini 2 camera with charging cable — (Image credit: Future)

Two colours are available – white or black (we tested the white) – and despite its bargain-basement price tag the Mini 2K+ feels like a classy, well-built security device. At the rear is a USB-C socket while provided with the camera is a 6.5ft / 2m USB-A to USB-C lead and a plug. Alternatively, it’s possible to buy a 13ft / 4m length of weather-resistant cable with power adaptor for outdoor use.

Once the Blink app is downloaded you can simply add the camera to your set up using the QR code on the back of the device where you’ll also find the speaker. This provides voice instructions during set up and can also be used as a chime for any connected Blink video doorbells.

Blink Mini 2 camera on table — (Image credit: Future)

Turn the camera around and in the centre there’s the 2K lens (2,560 x 1,440 pixels) while underneath is the built-in microphone. Also on board is a blue light that comes on during recording and at the top of the camera you’ll find the built-in spotlight for providing coloured images at night. Like the blue recording light, this can be switched on and off via the app, or set to come on automatically when the camera senses motion.

Blink Mini 2K+: performance

2K resolution
Clear two-way audio
Decent color night vision

When it comes to performance, the Blink Mini 2K+ certainly offers a big improvement over its 1080p predecessor (at the time of writing this original model is available on Amazon so cheaply) Where you really notice the difference is when using the 4x digital pinch-to-zoom feature on your smartphone. With the 1080p camera, images soon become pixilated as you zoom in. However, with this latest 2K model you can home right in and see the detail in, say, a face or an item of clothing.

Image 1 of 2

Setting up Blink Mini 2 camera using mobile app — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Footage captured by Blink Mini 2 security camera — (Image credit: Future)

Another massive improvement is in night vision. Whereas the previous model only offered traditional IR (infrared) recording in black and white, this model boasts a surprisingly powerful built-in spotlight for color recording. During my tests, the spotlight illuminated the hallway when coming home on during the evening, producing vivid colored images on recorded footage. Audio, too, has been improved with two-way talk now filtering out background noise, such as traffic, so you can hear voices more clearly.

Users with a Blink video doorbell can set multiple Blink Mini 2K+ cameras as a chime so if someone presses the doorbell you can hear it in several rooms if you so choose. That’s particularly handy as Blink’s video doorbell doesn’t come with its own plug-in door chime, unlike models from other companies such as Ring.

Image 1 of 2

Subjection detection on Blink Mini 2 security camera, shown in app — (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Video list from Blink Mini 2 camera, in mobile app — (Image credit: Future)

Finally, you can also link the Blink Mini 2K+ to Amazon Alexa to receive announcements such as ‘Motion detected at the office’ via your Echo speakers or display the video feed on your Echo Show. However, as Blink is now owned by Amazon, the device doesn’t work with rival platforms such as Google Home or Apple Home.

Performance score: 4.5/5

Should you buy the Blink Mini 2K+?

Blink Mini 2K+ score card
Attribute	Notes	Score
Value	Offering excellent value for money, you can buy two of these mini security cameras for the price of one from another brand such as fellow Amazon stablemate, Ring.	4.5/5
Design	Despite being very small, standing just a few centimetres tall, the Blink Mini 2K+ feels well-built and can be mounted just about anywhere indoors (even outdoors with a weather-resistant power adaptor).	4.5/5
Performance	Boasting 2K video resolution, the Blink Mini 2K+ also offers improved night vision over its predecessor thanks to the inclusion of a strong spotlight.	4.5/5
Average rating	The Blink Mini 2K+ is a great choice if you’re looking for a small and flexible security camera but don’t have much of a budget. The only slight fly in the ointment is you have to pay a small monthly subscription for full functionality.	4.5/5

Blink Mini 2K+: also consider

	Blink Mini 2K+	Ring Outdoor Cam Pro	Eufy 4K S330 Security Camera
Subscription price	From £2.50 a month	From £4.99 a month	None
Resolution	2K (2,560 x 1,440 pixels)	4K (3,840 x 2,160 pixels)	4K (3,840 x 2,160 pixels)
Field of view	138 degrees diagonal	140 degrees horizontal	360-degree view (pan and tilt)
Network connection	Wi-Fi (2.4GHz)	Wi-Fi (2.4GHz/5GHz)	Wi-Fi/4G
Audio	Two-way audio	Two-way audio	Two-way audio
Power	Mains (USB-C)	Mains	Battery
Hardware price	£39	£179	£189 (with solar panel)

If you're not quite sure whether the Blink Mini 2K+ is the best home security camera for you, here are two other options to consider:

Ring Outdoor Cam Pro

The Outdoor Cam Pro represents a leap into high-resolution surveillance for Ring. However, the high levels of performance come at a fairly hefty price, especially when you factor in the subscription plan.

Read our full Ring Outdoor Cam Pro reviewView Deal

Eufy 4K S330 Security Camera

An extremely innovative battery and solar-powered camera, the Eufy can be used with the supplied 4G SIM card to capture recordings, making it ideal for those who live in areas with poor Wi-Fi / broadband.

Read our full Eufy 4K S330 Security Camera reviewView Deal

Should you buy the Blink Mini 2K+?

Buy it if

You're on a budget

At £39.99 (or £70 for two), this is the most affordable way to get high-quality 2K surveillance.

You want a flexible solution

The compact design and pivot stand mean you can easily move it from room to room.

You own a Blink video doorbell

The Blink Mini 2K+ can serve as an indoor chime for the Blink video doorbell.

Don't buy it if

You want a wire-free home

The Blink Mini 2K+ needs to be connected to the mains at all times via the USB-C to USB-A cable provided.

You want advanced features for free

Unfortunately, you will have to pay a monthly fee if you want Blink Smart Detection (which distinguishes between vehicles and people) and Blink Moments (which edits footage together from multiple Blink cameras shot at the same time).

How I tested the Blink Mini 2K+ security camera

I used a pair of cameras in several rooms of the house for three weeks
I set them up myself using the QR code provided on the back of each model
I linked them to other devices including a Blink video doorbell and several Amazon Echo smart speakers

Testing the two cameras over the Christmas/New Year period gave me the ideal opportunity to see how they responded to visitors coming to the house. Throughout this time one of the cameras was focused on my hallway facing the front door with the spotlight set to come on whenever motion was detected. It also served as a chime for my Blink video doorbell, which I could hear throughout the house.

he other camera was moved between several rooms, including the kitchen and downstairs as well as upstairs rooms we use as offices. However, the cameras weren’t used outside as the units provided didn’t come with the necessary waterproof power adaptor.

The Seagate FireCuda 530R is an okay PS5 SSD, but it’s another victim of the ongoing RAM shortage

2:30 am |

Author: admin | Category: Computers Consoles & PC Gadgets Gaming Gaming Accessories Playstation | Tags: RAM, UK, US | Comments: Off

Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink: One-minute review

The Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink could be one of the best SSDs for PS5 but, at least for the moment, the pricing is out of control. The 1TB model is difficult to find, while the 2TB and 4TB variants come in at an eye-watering $365 / £220 and $599 / £539.99 respectively at third party sellers on sites like Amazon and Newegg.

This makes it almost impossible to recommend at these prices, especially when alternatives like the WD Black SN850P and Lexar NM790 with Heatsink are in stock cheaper. Of course, this is entirely being driven by the ongoing RAM shortage (which also affects SSDs with DRAM chips), so I will look to update this review if and when they come down to more reasonable rates.

Pricing aside, the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink is a solid, if somewhat unremarkable, PS5 SSD. With quoted read speeds of up to 7,400 MB/s read and 7,000 MB/s write (for the 1TB model) it’s one of the fastest models on the market on paper - though I found its performance to be less impressive in the real world than these figures would suggest.

The Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink on a colorful fabric desk mat. — (Image credit: Future)

The 2TB model that I tested scored an underwhelming 6,030MB/s speed on the internal PS5 storage benchmark putting it behind both the WD Black SN850P and Lexar NM790 with Heatsink, not to mention the company’s own officially licensed Seagate Game Drive M.2 SSD for PS5. Still, it’s comfortably above the 5,500 MB/s speed recommended by Sony and doesn’t increase loading times in any noticeable way.

As you would expect for a model marketed towards PS5 owners, the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink comes with a chunky heatsink fitted out of the box. It’s very similar to the one found on the Seagate Game Drive M.2 SSD - albeit with a colorful orange line graphic rather than a blue one. As is the case with that drive, I found it to be perfectly effective.

As a result, the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink could be a great pick for the right price. At the moment, I wouldn’t rush to add it to your basket though given the inflated rates.

Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink: Price and availability

1TB is $130 / £145 / around AU$290, 2TB is $365 / £220 / around AU$440, 4TB is $599 / £539.99 / around AU$1080
Prices vary and are hard to pin down
Stock is hard to find in the US and UK

In the US the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink costs around $130 for the 1TB model - though I wasn’t able to find any retailers carrying stock of that variant at the time of writing. 2TB and 4TB models are easier to find though with stock available at Newegg. There, 2TB goes for $365, while 4TB is $599. Both of these prices come from a third-party seller and are disproportionately high, so I would avoid buying them for now.

In the UK it’s even harder to find, as it’s currently out of stock at Amazon. Historical price data shows that the 1TB model cost around £145, while the 2TB was £220 when both were in stock. The 4TB model is currently available at Overclockers UK, where it costs £539.99.

Seagate told me that a 1TB model of the drive is currently meant to cost $114.99 / £158.99, while 2TB and 4TB are supposed to be $194.99 / £271.99 and $394.99 / £516.99 respectively - though the representative was careful to clarify that “SSD prices are currently very volatile” and “can change daily” (that latter part was even in bold for emphasis).

Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink: Specs

Price	$130 / £145 / around AU$290 (1TB) / $365 / £220 / around AU$440 (2TB) / $599 / £539.99 / around AU$1080 (4TB)
Capacity	1TB / 2TB / 4TB
Quoted read speed	7,400 MB/s
Quoted write speed	7,000 MB/s
Durability	5,050 TBW
Warranty	5-year

Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink: Design and features

Chunky heatsink fitted out the box
Readily PS5 compatible
Good warranty coverage

The Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink looks remarkably similar to the Seagate Game Drive M.2 SSD for PS5, though with some small aesthetic differences. For starters, the chunky heatsink of the FireCuda bears a little ‘FireCuda’ logo print and a subtle orange decal. Despite the size of the heatsink, this model easily fits into the PS5’s storage bay.

It comes well-packaged in a plastic tray with a little foam insert to keep the pins safe and a little pack of documentation. In there you’ll find an advert for Seagate’s Rescue data recovery service, a basic manual with some general advice on fitting the SSD, and information about the drive’s warranty.

In applicable regions you get five years of limited warranty coverage here, which should be enough to see you through the rest of the PS5’s lifespan and is on par with what’s offered by the competition. The drive’s quoted 5,050 TBW durability is also excellent.

Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink: Performance

Underwhelming benchmark score
Decent real-world performance
Heatsink seems effective

Despite the lofty quoted speeds, the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink achieved quite an underwhelming result in the PS5’s internal storage benchmark coming to just 6,030MB/s which is on the lower end of the results for SSDs that I’ve tested. Still, this is more than fast enough for the PS5 and in my testing didn’t impact playing in any noticeable way.

While the substantially cheaper Lexar NM790 with Heatsink caused occasional stutters in demanding games like Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 and Assassin’s Creed Valhalla, the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink was silky smooth in every title that I tested.

Its performance in my usual real-world file transfer tests was also decent. Copy to the SSD from the PS5’s internal storage, 68.75GB of Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 took just 44 seconds to transfer. The drive performs very well with even larger file sizes too, with the 86.33GB Ghost of Yotei copied in just 45 seconds. A combination of both games totaling 154.7GB only took 1 minute and 24 seconds.

Smaller titles were a little bit slower, with the 16.85GB Wuchang: Fallen Feathers taking eight seconds and the tiny 1.2GB C Smash VRS taking just two.

Copying from the SSD back to the console, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 and Ghost of Yotei were ready in 4 minutes and 41 seconds and 6 minutes and 5 seconds respectively, while both at once took 10 minutes and 17 seconds. Finally, Wuchang: Fallen Feathers was ready to launch after 1 minute and 13 seconds while C Smash VRS took 13 seconds. These figures are all perfectly adequate, though realistically more dependent on the PS5’s internal write speed than anything else.

There was no noticeable slowdown throughout my testing, which would indicate that the chunky heatsink does its job well and curbs thermal throttling.

Should I buy the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink?

Buy it if...

You find it for the right price
The Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink is far too expensive for what it is at the moment. Stock is also hard to find and I’m hopeful that prices will become more reasonable when supply is a bit more plentiful.

You’re after a 4TB model
Unlike the company’s officially licensed Seagate Game Drive M.2 SSD for PS5, the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink is available in a 4TB model. This gives you a compelling reason to choose it, despite the lack of PlayStation branding, if you feel you need a hefty amount of storage space.

Don't buy it if...

You want the fastest performance for your money
Drives like the Samsung 990 Pro with heatsink proved faster than the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink in my testing - so I’d recommend them instead if you’re after the very top performance.

Also consider...

After some alternatives to the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink? Here are two to consider.

	Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink	Lexar NM790 with Heatsink	WD Black SN850P
Price	$130 / £145 / around AU$290 (1TB) / $365 / £220 / around AU$440 (2TB) / $599 / £539.99 / around AU$1080 (4TB)	$94.99 / £74.99 (1TB) / $159.99 / £129.99 (2TB) / $269.99 / £233 (4TB)	$119.99 / £107.99 / AU$199 (1TB), $189.99 / £184.99 / AU$339 (2TB), $319.99 / £329.99 / AU$699 (4TB), $749.99 / £705.99 / around AU$1,170 (8TB)
Capacity	1TB / 2TB / 4TB	1TB / 2TB / 4TB	1TB / 2TB / 4TB / 8TB
Quoted read speed	7,400 MB/s	7,400 MB/s	7,300 MB/s (8TB: 7,200 MB/s)
Quoted write speed	7,000 MB/s	6,500 MB/s	6,600 MB/s
Durability	5,050 TBW	1000TBW (1TB) / 1500TBW (2TB) / 3000TBW (4TB)	600TBW (1TB)
Warranty	5-year	5-year	5-year

Lexar NM790 with Heatsink
Our current go-to budget pick is this drive from Lexar. Performance is less consistent than the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink, but prices are substantially lower across the board - especially if you’re shopping for a 4TB model.

For more information, check out our full Lexar NM790 with Heatsink review

WD Black SN850P
The WD Black SN850P is the way to go if you’re after a super high capacity 8TB drive as one of the few models on the market of that size. It’s perfectly speedy, though still quite expensive for what you get.

For more information, check out our full WD Black SN850P review

How I tested the Seagate FireCuda 530R with heatsink

Tested for a week
Tried with multiple games
Compared to other PS5 SSDs

I tested the Seagate FireCuda 530 with heatsink for a week, fitting it to my personal PS5 console. During that time I evaluated its performance with a range of copy tests, in addition to recording the console’s internal benchmark score and trying it with a range of installed games to determine whether the SSD would cause any impact on smoothness.

Throughout my time with the SSD I compared the experience to my hands-on testing of other models including the Samsung 990 Pro with Heatsink, WD Black SN850P, Lexar NM790 with Heatsink, Seagate Game Drive M.2 SSD for PS5, Lexar Play 2280 and more.

Polar Grit X2: One minute review

It's fair to say Polar’s smartwatch line up has become a little confusing over the last few years, with “Pro” and “Titan” versions floating around at premium prices alongside the Grit, Vantage M and Ignite series – it's not exactly easy for buyers to decipher which model is the best for them.

The arrival of the Polar Grit X2 doesn't exactly help things. But it does point to the brand at least trying to make its outdoor models simple again – not by reinventing the wheel, but by taking the best bits of the Grit X2 Pro and repackaging them into something that feels more wearable, less intimidating and – crucially – much cheaper.

That’s the core appeal here. The Grit X2 uses the same underlying hardware and software as the Pro model, including Polar’s Elixir biosensing platform (that tracks heart rate, ECG, SpO2 and skin temperature), dual-frequency GPS for better outdoor accuracy, and a bright AMOLED display that finally makes mapping feel like a proper “modern” feature rather than a gimmick. It also keeps full offline maps capability and a generous 32GB of storage for them, which is still something many outdoor watches either charge extra for or half-deliver.

Where it differs is mostly in the build. The case is smaller and lighter, the materials aren’t as premium as the Pro, and water resistance drops from 100m to 50m. That might sound like a downgrade on paper, but in reality, the Grit X2 is simply more practical for most wrists and most lives, especially if you’re wearing it 24/7 for sleep tracking and recovery insights.

It’s not perfect, though. Polar’s smartwatch features remain fairly basic – notifications, music controls, a few widgets and that’s your lot, as usual with Polar – and Polar Flow is still one of the least intuitive companion apps in the game. The watch interface also looks a bit old-school next to Garmin’s slicker menus and Apple’s “everything is an app” approach.

Still, if what you want is a capable, no-nonsense outdoor watch that leans heavily into training, recovery and mapping, the Grit X2 is arguably Polar’s best value rugged wearable yet.

Polar Grit X2: Price and availability

Polar Grit X2 smartwatch review — (Image credit: Polar)

Price: £399 / $799 / AU$799
Release date: June 2025
Colors: Night Black and Brown Copper

The Polar Grit X2 launched in June 2025 and lands in a noticeably more approachable price bracket than the Grit X2 Pro, which is exactly the point.

In the UK, the watch has a £399 RRP but if you shop around you're likely to find it for less. At the time of writing, it's on sale for £331.17 on Polar's official online store. In the US, the watch is listed for a pretty unproportionate $799, probably due to import reasons from Polar's native EU, and in Australia it’ll cost you AU$799.

That pricing puts it in an interesting middle ground. It’s clearly more “serious” than basic outdoor-ish watches, but it’s also not trying to compete directly with the ultra-premium crowd like the Garmin Fenix 8 or Apple Watch Ultra range on price. Instead, it’s more of a smart alternative if you want flagship-grade tracking and mapping without paying flagship money.

Value score: 4 / 5

Polar Grit X2: Design

Slimmer, lighter and easier to live with than the Pro
AMOLED display looks fantastic and is protected by sapphire glass
Strap is comfortable but oddly stiff

The Grit X2 feels like Polar’s attempt at a rugged watch that doesn’t look like a dinner plate strapped to your arm. It sports a 44.7mm case (around 45mm in real-world terms) with a fairly slim 12.5mm thickness, which is a genuinely wearable size for an outdoor watch and a noticeable shift from the bulkier Pro model.

Despite being the “cheaper” version, it still keeps a stainless steel bezel and sapphire glass over the display, which is exactly what you want on something that’s likely to scrape against rocks or whatever else life throws at it. The main cost-saving is in the case itself, which is reinforced polymer instead of a more premium metal build. It doesn’t feel cheap, but it does feel less luxurious than the Pro if you’re the kind of person who cares about that.

The watch is also MIL-STD-810H certified, meaning it’s been tested against shock, temperature and humidity extremes. In other words, it’s meant to handle the outdoors properly, not just look like it can.

The display is a 1.28-inch AMOLED panel with a 416 x 416 resolution, and it’s one of the main reasons this watch feels like a modern upgrade over older Grit models. It’s sharp, colourful, and makes maps far more usable than the old MIP screens do. You can set it to always-on too, which looks great, but obviously hits battery life considerably.

Around the bezel you get Polar’s familiar five-button layout, and they’re textured and easy to press even when your hands are cold or sweaty. That matters more than you’d think, especially when you’re mid-run and don’t want to be poking at a touchscreen in the rain.

My only real gripe here is the strap. It’s flexible enough, but it has a slightly stiff feel that makes you very aware of it during workouts. The good news is it uses a simple sliding pin mechanism, so swapping it out is easy if you’d rather stick a softer strap on there.

Design score: 4 / 5

Polar Grit X2: Features

Loads of outdoor and training features lifted from the Pro model
Offline maps are excellent – route guidance is less seamless
Smartwatch features still feel basic

The Grit X2 is essentially running the same feature set as the Grit X2 Pro, which is a big deal when you consider how much cheaper it is (£399 vs £649 RRP, although obviously US costs are much higher).

Polar’s Elixir biosensing platform is the main draw here, boasting 4th-gen optical heart rate tracking, wrist-based ECG, blood oxygen-sensing (SpO2) and skin temperature tracking. In real life, that translates to a watch that feels properly serious about health data, rather than just ticking the usual smartwatch boxes.

Polar’s recovery tools are still some of its strongest features. You get Nightly Recharge, which breaks down how well your body recovered overnight, and more sleep insights than most people will ever need. There’s also Training Load Pro and Cardio Load, which help you understand how hard you’re pushing across sessions, plus performance tests like leg recovery and walking tests.

It’s a very “Polar” approach, which is to say it’s geared toward people who actually care about training patterns and recovery trends rather than just collecting colourful rings.

The outdoor side is equally strong. You get full offline maps, 32GB of storage for them, and navigation features that finally put Polar in a more competitive place with the likes of industry big guns Garmin and Suunto. The maps themselves look great on the AMOLED display, and moving around them feels responsive rather than laggy. You can switch orientation, view points of interest and pan around without it feeling like you’re fighting the watch.

The less slick part is how you actually get routes and turn-by-turn navigation. You can upload GPX files, or sync routes from services like Komoot and Strava, but those options often require paid subscriptions – and the whole process still feels more fiddly than it should. You can absolutely use the maps without turn-by-turn guidance, but if you want a seamless experience planning a route on the fly, for instance, Polar still isn’t there yet.

As for smartwatch features, it’s the usual Polar story. You get phone notifications (but can’t act on them), weather widgets, and music controls. That’s basically it. There's no app store, nor is there a proper ecosystem. Nothing that feels meaningfully new compared to previous Polar watches. If you want your watch to replace your phone for anything beyond workouts, this isn’t the one.

Features score: 3 / 5

Polar Grit X2: Performance

Dual-frequency GPS is accurate and reliable for most outdoor training
Heart rate tracking is solid, but can drift high in hard efforts
Sleep and recovery insights are strong

In day-to-day use, the Grit X2 performs like you’d expect from a watch using Polar’s latest hardware.

Dual-frequency GPS is now becoming standard across sports watches, allowing for more accurate positioning in challenging environments. However, that doesn’t automatically mean every watch that features it is perfect. In the Grit X2’s case, though, it’s a strong performer. Compared against watches like the Garmin's latest Forerunner 970, it generally held up well in terms of accuracy and didn’t do anything weird with routes.

Heart rate tracking is also solid, especially in steady-state workouts where optical sensors tend to behave best. When intensity ramps up, it still has that familiar wrist-sensor problem where readings can spike a bit higher than expected, especially during sudden pace changes. It’s not the end of the world, but if you're obsessed with accuracy, you'll be way better off with a chest strap, or perhaps using the Polar H10 alongside this watch.

I also used the Grit X2 for indoor sessions and general gym workouts, and it handled those well enough, with the usual caveat that wrist HR is never going to be flawless when you’re gripping bars or constantly flexing your wrists.

Sleep tracking is one of Polar’s longstanding strengths, and it shows here. The Grit X2 does a decent job of capturing the broad trend, like when you fell asleep, how long you slept, and whether your night was restful or messy, etc. Sleep stages (REM, deep, etc.) are still something I take with a pinch of salt on a wrist-mounted wearable, but the overall sleep score and recovery insights are useful. If you want a watch that encourages you to take recovery seriously, Polar remains one of the best at it.

The area where Polar lets you down in the Grit X2 isn't the tracking, it's the presentation. The Polar Flow app might be packed with data, but it's just so poorly put together. Some of the terminology is also a bit cryptic, which makes quick glances harder than they should be.

When it comes to battery life, the Grit X2 uses a 310mAh battery, which is smaller than the Pro model’s chunkier cell. Polar says you’ll get up to a week in smartwatch mode (assuming you don’t use the always-on display), and in my experience that’s realistic. Turn on always-on, however, and that’ll obviously be cut down.

For GPS tracking, you’re looking at about 30 hours in the best accuracy mode, which is decent for most runners, hikers and cyclists.

One genuinely neat addition is that you can charge the watch while still tracking an activity. That’s not something you’ll do while running, but if you’re hiking with a power bank in your pack, it’s a smart way to avoid ending an activity early just because battery anxiety kicks in.

The most interesting battery detail, though, is that it’s replaceable. That’s rare on rugged sports watches, and it’s a big deal for longevity. Polar says you can’t do this yourself and will cost €39.90 ( around £35 / $45), plus service and shipping fees to send the watch to a Polar Service Center. If you’re someone who keeps watches for years, that’s a pretty good perk.

Performance score: 4 / 5

Polar Grit X2: Scorecard

Category	Comment	Score
Value	Good feature set for the money	4/5
Design	Lightweight and comfortable.	4/5
Features	Fine, but more comprehensive options available.	3/5
Performance	Excels as a training tool, limited as a watch.	4/5

Polar Grit X2: Should I buy?

Buy it if...

You want Pro-level outdoor features for less

It’s basically the Grit X2 Pro experience in a cheaper, lighter package.View Deal

You care about maps and navigation

Full offline maps plus 32GB storage makes it a proper adventure companion.View Deal

You like deep recovery insights

Polar’s sleep and training load tools are still among the best.View Deal

Don't buy it if...

You need robust smartwatch features

There’s no app store, voice assistant or payment support, for example.View Deal

You hate fiddly apps

Polar Flow is simply not the most intuitive app experience.View Deal

You need huge battery life

It’s good, but some rivals will outlast it on multi-day GPS-heavy trips.View Deal

Also consider

Garmin Fenix 8

If you want the most complete rugged “do everything” ecosystem, Garmin still leads. Better smartwatch support, deeper customisation, and often stronger battery - but you’ll pay significantly more.

Check out our full Garmin Fenix 8 review View Deal

COROS Vertix 2S

If battery life is your top priority and you want a performance-first adventure watch for ultra-distance days, Coros is hard to ignore. Less smartwatch fluff, huge endurance focus.

Check out our full COROS Vertix 2S review View Deal

Suunto Race

A great pick for outdoor navigation fans who want a cleaner, simpler interface and strong mapping tools, with certain models also offering solar charging for longer trips off-grid.

Check out our full Suunto Race View Deal

How I tested

I wore the Polar Grit X2 daily for around two weeks, testing its features during various activities, including running, cycling and yoga. I used its dual-band GPS for outdoor workouts and tracked recovery metrics with Polar’s app tools.

I also evaluated its smartwatch functionality by syncing it to a smartphone, using it for notifications and assessing app integration. To test durability, I wore it during both high-intensity workouts and casual everyday use, paying attention to comfort and battery performance.

First reviewed: January 2026

MIO: Memories in Orbit is a pleasant stroll after the brutal ultramarathon of Hollow Knight: Silksong — and I’m here for it

7:16 pm | January 19, 2026

Author: admin | Category: Computers Gadgets Gaming | Comments: Off

When I booted up last year’s tough-as-nails and long-awaited Hollow Knight: Silksong, I knew I had to focus up and lock in – this is a Metroidvania that doesn’t go easy on you. I loved it. At the same time, you don’t always want to settle down for an evening of gaming, knowing you’re going to be turned into a fine paste for hours on end. After the path of pain I willingly trudged through in Silksong, I’m thankful for a brilliant little gem called MIO: Memories in Orbit.

It’s a Metroidvania that certainly offers up its own level of challenge, but this is a simpler, friendlier, and more pensive affair, one that I’m sure anyone with a love of the genre will find charming, intriguing, and entertaining.

Review info

Platform reviewed: PS5
Available on: PS5, Nintendo Switch 2, Nintendo Switch, Xbox Series X, Xbox Series S, PC
Release date: January 20, 2026

Developer Douze Dixièmes is clearly a team that knows its chosen genre well, ticking all the boxes you’d expect across an adventure that lasts a dozen hours or so at a minimum. However, much more awaits beyond the game’s first ending, and I was driven to uncover more of the story, face the game’s hardest bosses and conquer the most demanding platforming sections.

This is the way the world ends

A screenshot from Mio: Memories in Orbit — (Image credit: Focus Home Interactive)

You play as Mio, a nimble and fleet-footed robot, who must explore The Vessel and prevent this dilapidated AI-controlled spaceship that serves as home to a community of charming robots from a complete shutdown. To do so, you have to partake in that most classic of video game quests: collect the five MacGuffins that are scattered in the far corners of the facility and bring them together to breathe life back into the system.

Best bit

Up until you enter the Vaults in the bowels of The Vessel, MIO: Memories in Orbit has been a fairly tame and breezy Metroidvania. It's here, though, where the game ramps up the challenge and asks you to make use of all the traversal abilities you've acquired so far. Plus, for the lore enjoyers, elements of the story start to become clearer, and enlightening secrets are revealed.

As you explore, the familiar language of the Metroidvania is all around you, showing you how Mio’s skills and abilities will grow and improve. These are the grappling points you’ll be able to latch onto later. Here are the doors that only open with a certain attack. There’s the chasm that can only be crossed once you can glide. Anyone with a good amount of experience with the genre will find Mio comfortable and understandable at a glance.

At first, I found this made the game a bit too relaxed for my liking, and I feel that other fellow veterans of the genre may also react this way to the game’s opening hours. Sure, I was still enjoying my time winding my way through the corridors of The Vessel, bashing corrupted robots into pieces, and breezing my way past the obstacles in my way, but I was hoping things would escalate.

What helped put off some of those initial worries was the fact that The Vessel is such a fun and fascinating place to explore. From the grandiose Metropolis with its gold-plated buildings and imposing architecture, to the overgrown gardens rife with threatening foliage that reaches out to grab you with its red tendrils, there’s an impressive variety to this constructed and isolated world floating through space.

And it looks gorgeous too: the vibrant colors and graphic novel-esque hand-drawn design make the game pop. Mio herself is a funky-looking character, too, with a swish cape and flowing strands leaking out the back of her head like hair. I especially like the general robots that inhabit The Vessel with their big blocky heads, stuck-on goggle-eyes, and expressive waves to Mio as she passes.

Special shoutout should go to the music as well, which does an incredible job of setting the tone and creating an atmosphere in each biome of The Vessel. Understated and ethereal choral singing mixes with funky electronic bops and pulse-racing boss music to create a diverse soundtrack full of originality and wonder. One particular section genuinely made me just stop and enjoy the music for a moment because it was so perfectly suited to the environment.

Flow state

Eventually, you reach the mechanical bowels of The Vessel in its vaults, one of the most engaging areas to explore, where some of the toughest platforming challenges are found as you avoid lasers, spiked rollers, and fiery pits. And here’s where MIO started to come into its own and remind me of another genre great: Ori and the Blind Forest.

Here, you can combine the various moves you’ve unlocked to string together double jumps, wall climbs, glides, and other traversal abilities to explore new locations, zip through tight sections of platforming, and survive testing combat challenges. From here on, I had countless joyous moments of entering that wonderful flow state and emerging on the other side with immense satisfaction or in awe at a new location I’d discovered (or ingeniously implemented shortcut I’d unlocked).

Yet, while exploration and platforming are where the game excels, combat is where it slumps a little. It’s never bad, but it is missing a spark or idea to elevate it. I think it’s because you simply mash a combo string of three attacks and, well, that’s about it. Yes, there’s a dodge, and yes, you can use the Hairpin power to grapple towards enemies and keep combos going in midair, but it’s all just to continue that one-two-three punch again and again.

Modifiers you buy using the ‘Nacre’ currency dropped by defeating enemies give you a chance to optimise your build and personalise your setup to suit your preferred play style, but there are limits to how many you can equip. The majority only offer light tinkering at most, too, rather than anything that meaningfully expands your offensive options.

For example, you can mark enemies to receive more damage after a successful dodge, or add a heavy attack after a grapple. It helps a little. And I did find a few fights where it excels. Combat, though, is ultimately competent and serviceable, if repetitive.

It doesn’t diminish everything else I like about MIO: Memories in Orbit, though. It doesn’t always turn out this way, but developers with a reverence for the Metroidvania genre have gone out and made an excellent Metroidvania of their own – one that I encourage fans of the genre (or just great games in general) put at the top of their must-play list.

Should you play MIO: Memories in Orbit?

Play it if…

You’re looking for your next great Metroidvania
Fans of the genre – with the likes of Ori and the Blind Forest, Nine Sols and Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown on their completed list – should move this to the top of their pile

Atmosphere, story, and exploration are a priority
MIO: Memories in Orbit offers a unique, pretty, and enigmatic world to explore, with fun and stimulating exploration mechanics that reward curiosity, and a story with multiple layers to uncover.

Don’t play it if…

You want a challenge on the level of Silksong
There are spikes of higher difficulty and challenge, but for the most part, MIO is an accessible and manageable Metroidvania. So, if you’re here for a brutal challenge, you may come away slightly disappointed.

You prefer a more directed experience
MIO is clear about your overall objective and does nudge you in the right direction often, but like most Metroidvania games, it’s fairly hands-off when it comes to giving you a specific objective marker or direction to aim.

Accessibility

MIO: Memories in Orbit has a few but limited accessibility options that are mostly focused on the game's difficulty. These come in the form of three assists. One makes bosses easier over time by reducing their health every time you die, a pacifist option stops all enemies (except bosses) from attacking you, and the final one gives you more health after you stand on the ground for a brief period of time.

Outside of that, controls can be fully remapped, which I would encourage to more easily reach various abilities during challenging boss fights and platforming sections. Also, subtitles can be toggled on or off.

How I reviewed MIO: Memories in Orbit

I played MIO: Memories in Orbit for around 17 hours on a PlayStation 5 Pro on a Samsung S90C OLED TV using a DualSense Wireless Controller. A handful of hours of my playtime were also spent using the PlayStation Portal, which worked very well for this style of game.

Audio was played through a Samsung HW-Q930C soundbar, and I’d suggest a good-quality soundbar or a pair of headphones to fully appreciate the game’s excellent audio.

Although I reached an ending to the game in about 14 hours, there are additional areas to explore, bosses to fight, and secrets to uncover should you wish to go for 100% completion, which the developers say can take anywhere between 25 and 40 hours.

First reviewed January 2026

Lavazza’s A Modo Mio Deséa makes delicious espresso and a decent cappuccino – if you use the right milk

5:00 pm | January 18, 2026

Author: admin | Category: Coffee Machines Computers Gadgets Home Small Appliances | Tags: Australia, Europe, US | Comments: Off

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa: one-minute review

The Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa is a compact capsule coffee maker with optional milk-frothing for cappuccinos and macchiatos, plus hot and cold milk foam. It's excellent at the fundamentals, and Lavazza's A Modo Mio pods are superb – affordably priced and packed with great quality coffee, with no flavored or sweetened options.

The Deséa is simple to use, as you'd expect from a capsule coffee maker, and is exceptionally quiet. During the testing period, it reached a maximum of only 50dB during brewing, making it the quietest machine I've tested to date.

It uses the same milk-frothing system as the Lavazza Assoluta (an automatic coffee maker that adapts its own settings to suit your chosen beans). This comprises a large glass cup with a lid containing a rotating electric whisk and a steam pipe. It works reasonably well with full-fat dairy milk, but in tests it produced very little foam when used with oat milk. This was very different to my experience with the Assoluta, so I suspect the much smaller Deséa may not be able to generate the same level of steam pressure.

Overall, it's a likeable little espresso machine that would be a good option for small kitchens, particularly if you're the lone coffee-drinker. The price of its capsules won't make you sweat, even if you enjoy several cups a day.

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa: specifications

Name	Lavazza A Modo Mio Smeg
Type	Capsule coffee maker
Dimensions (H x W x D)	11 x 5.7 x 15 inches / 280 x 145 x 380mm
Weight	9.9lbs / 4.5kg
Water tank capacity	37oz / 1.1 liters

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa: price and availability

Similar price to other capsule coffee makers with milk foaming
Available in Europe and Australia, but not currently sold in the US
A Modo Mio coffee pods are much cheaper than alternatives

The Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa has a list price of £249 / AU$349 (about $330), but is often available at a discount. For example, at the time of writing, it could be found on sale for £199 in the UK in Lavazza’s online store, and $261.75 in Australia. Currently, this model isn't available in the US.

That price is about standard for a capsule coffee maker with a built-in milk frother. For comparison, the De'Longhi Lattissima One is currently priced at $429.99 / £259.99 / AU$519.

What sets the Deséa apart from the competition is the price of its capsules. A pack of 16 Lavazza A Modo Mio capsules retails for £6.45 / AU$15 (about $9), and the cost per drink drops significantly if you buy a bundle instead. That makes the A Modo Mio capsules some of the cheapest around, and much less expensive than Nespresso Vertuo or Tassimo alternatives.

A Modo Mio pods offer up lots of choice when it comes to coffee blends, roasts and terroir, but you won’t find any hot chocolate or coffee with added flavors. Your options are espresso, espresso, and more espresso. During testing, I found the freshly ground and vacuum-sealed beans excellent – but note that if your drink of choice is pumpkin spice, you won’t find it here.

Value score: 4.5/5

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa: design

Compact and smart-looking
Includes milk-frothing system
Milk frother only works with supplied mug
Dishwasher-safe components

The Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa is available in black, white, cream and a deep burgundy (different retailers keep different colors in stock). It has a robust-feeling, glossy case with the company logo embossed on the side, and although it isn't quite as sleek as the Lavazza A Modo Mio Smeg, it certainly isn't a slouch in the looks department. Gloss finishes can sometimes be a magnet for fingerprints, but I was pleased to find that this wasn’t an issue with the cream-colored model I tested.

Image 1 of 2

Person adjusting height of drip tray on Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker — You can adjust the height of the drip tray to suit different cups (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Coffee capsule slot on top of Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker — The Deséa takes Lavazza A Modo Mio capsules, which can be composted industrially (Image credit: Future)

The Deséa is particularly compact, even for a capsule coffee maker. At just 11 x 5.7 x 15 inches / 280 x 145 x 380mm (H x W x D), it will easily tuck away into the smallest of kitchens – and can be stashed in a cupboard when not in use (provided it’s properly cleaned and dried beforehand). Despite this, it has a larger water tank than most pod coffee machines, holding 37oz / 1.1 liters. That’s because this isn’t just an espresso machine; it can also foam milk for lattes and cappuccinos using high-pressure steam.

The Deséa has an unusual milk-frothing system that uses a special glass mug with a lid containing a steam tube and a whisk. It's the same system used by the Lavazza Assoluta I tested a couple of months ago, and although it isn't as effective as a proper steam wand, it works reasonably well – provided you use the right type of milk.

However, bear in mind that you can only make milk-based drinks in the glass mug; the special lid doesn't fit onto other cups. Unless you buy a second (they are $22.70 / £15 each), you and your partner won't be able to enjoy lattes as the same time.

Image 1 of 2

Milk frothing cup for Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker — The milk system uses a glass mug with a lid containing a steam pipe and a rotating whisk (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Water tank detached from Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker — The water tank holds almost a liter and has a sturdy lid and handle to prevent spills (Image credit: Future)

Most removable components (including the cup, drip tray and used pod container) can be safely cleaned in the top rack of your dishwasher, although they take only a moment to wash by hand, too.

The drip tray can be detached and positioned higher up to avoid splashes if you’re using an espresso cup, which is a welcome touch. Used pods drop into a bin that can be accessed by removing the tray and pulling out a drawer on the front of the machine.

Design score: 4/5

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa: performance

Produces excellent espresso
Extensive drinks menu
Milk system doesn't work as well as a steam wand
Performs better with dairy than plant-based milk

The Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa has a cleverly designed control panel that displays the different menu options depending on the cup you’re using. Place an ordinary cup of any size under the dispenser and you’ll see options for brewing an espresso, long espresso (lungo), and long coffee. Push the milk-foaming cup into place and the options for milk-based drinks will light up. The full menu includes:

Espresso
Long espresso (lungo)
Long coffee (Americano)
Cappuccino (regular or large)
Latte macchiato
Hot milk foam
Cold milk foam

You can adjust the volume of your coffee pour, which is a nice feature that you won’t find on many capsule coffee machines. All the drink size options are customizable; just hold the appropriate button on the control panel for three seconds to begin dispensing, then press it again once you have the desired volume. When you hear two beeps, you know the new setting has been saved successfully, ready to use next time.

Like the Lavazza A Modo Mio Smeg coffee maker I tested recently, the Deséa brews excellent, well-rounded espresso in just a few seconds, and does so extremely quietly. Using a decibel meter, I measured an average volume of 50dB when extracting coffee, which is about the same as the murmur of a quiet office (although Lavazza claims the volume doesn't exceed 43dB).

After your coffee has brewed and the lights on the front panel have re-illuminated, lift the lid and after a second or two you’ll hear the used pod drop into the collection bin.

Image 1 of 2

Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker dispensing espresso — Espresso is consistently delicious, and the machine's pump is exceptionally quiet (Image credit: Future)

Image 2 of 2

Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker waste bin with used coffee pods — Used pods drop into a bin, ready to be collected for commercial composting (Image credit: Future)

The milk system is a little louder when injecting steam, reaching a maximum of 70dB for a couple of seconds as it incorporates air, but it's quieter than the squeal and rip of a manual steam wand, and the whisk is whisper-quiet.

When you want to use the milk system, take a good look at the fill lines on the side of the glass cup that indicate how much milk to add for different drink sizes. Add too much milk and it risks splashing; too little and it won’t foam properly.

During tests, the Deséa didn’t fare very well when texturizing oat milk, which was very different from my experience with the Lavazza Assoluta. Despite the two machines using the same cup-and-lid system, the Assoluta produced inches of creamy oat foam, whereas the Deséa heated the milk (a little too much – it reached 70ºC, whereas the optimum for coffee is about 60-65ºC), but didn’t actually create any froth, even with the "extra foam" option selected.

Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker dispensing espresso into milk to make cappuccino — The milk system works much better with dairy than plant-based milk (Image credit: Future)

The Deséa’s milk system worked much better with full-fat dairy milk, although I found that it still didn’t produce quite as much foam as the Assoluta. This might be because the smaller Deséa can’t generate as much pressure and inject as much steam into the liquid.

The Deséa can also prepare cold milk foam. To do this, add your cup of milk, drop in a coffee pod if required, hold the temperature +/- button on the front of the machine until the foam and latte lights turn blue, then press the one you want. Again, during my tests this worked better with dairy milk. It’s a nice feature, but bear in mind that the Deséa can only brew hot coffee, so if you want to make a cold latte then you’ll need to add a shot of hot espresso when the milk is ready, which will raise the temperature. You might like to add a few ice cubes to the drink once it’s made (but not before, as they could damage the whisk).

Cappuccino prepared using Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa coffee maker — The whisk produces large bubbles rather than fine microfoam, so the froth tends to break down relatively quickly (Image credit: Future)

Finally, a word on waste. Lavazza’s A Modo Mio capsules are compostable, but you can’t simply toss them into your household waste or add them to a compost pile. They have to be processed in an industrial facility; currently Terracycle is the only service that offers this in the UK. There’sno home collection or postage system as there is with plastic and foil coffee pods, so you’ll need to gather your used capsules and take them to a drop-off point. If there isn’t one near you, you can apply to create one.

Performance score: 3.5/5

Should you buy the Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa?

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa score card
Attribute	Notes	Score
Value	Similar price to other capsule coffee makers with milk frother, but the pods are much cheaper.	4.5/5
Design	Compact and smart-looking, though milk system only works with supplied mug.	4/5
Performance	Doesn't foam milk as well as a steam wand, but espresso is consistently excellent and the whole machine is very quiet in use.	3.5/5

Buy it if

You have a compact kitchen

There aren't many coffee machines this small with a milk-frothing system, and the Deséa is light enough to easily move around your home and tuck into a cupboard when it isn't in use.

You're a frequent coffee-drinker

Other capsule coffee makers may be cheaper to buy, but the pods can be very expensive, particularly if you drink several cups a day. Lavazza's A Modo Mio pods are super affordable, and packed with great-quality coffee.

Don't buy it if

You prefer plant-based milk

The Deséa's milk system works best with full-fat dairy, which is true of many automatic coffee makers. If you want to stick with oat or soya, you might be better choosing the Lavazza A Modo Mio Jolie, which arrives with a standalone milk frother.

You want to make a round of coffees

The milk system only works with Lavazza's own mug; you can't fit the lid onto your own favorite cup. Again, a more basic Lavazza A Modo Mio machine and a separate milk frother would be a great alternative.

Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa: also consider

If you're not sure whether the Lavazza A Modo Mio Deséa is the best coffee maker for you, here are two other options for your shortlist:

De'Longhi Lattissima One

This smart coffee maker uses Nespresso Original pods (the ones shaped like top hats) and has a milk system that produces foam more like a conventional steam wand. You can use any cup and the froth is thick; but the capsules cost more than A Modo Mio ones.

Read our full De'Longhi Lattissima One review

De'Longhi Dedica Duo

Want to move on from capsules? This little manual espresso machine costs about the same as the Deséa and is a great introduction to fresh speciality coffee. It has an excellent steam wand as well.

Read our full De'Longhi Dedica Duo reviewView Deal

How I tested the Lavazza A Mio Modo Deséa

I used the Lavazza A Mio Deséa for two weeks, making at least two drinks per day and using all of the available drink options (including hot and cold milk foam). I used it with dairy and oat milk, both of which were freshly purchased and chilled. I used two different types of Lavazza A Modo Mio coffee capsules, with different intensities.

I measured the temperature of the prepared milk with a food thermometer, and used a decibel meter app to measure the machine's volume.

For more details, see how we test, rate, and review at TechRadar.

« Previous Page — Next Page »