The ID-Cooling SE-207-XT is a great option for builders looking for the performance of larger-air cooling on a budget. It isn’t going to perform like a $100 premium air cooler, particularly in the highest-end CPUs, but it does provide enticing performance for a lot less.
For
+ Budget pricing
+ Easy to install
+ Simple, aesthetic design
Against
– Fan noise at full speed
– Lags behind larger, premium air coolers
Features and Specifications
ID-Cooling’s SE-207-XT is a seven-heatpipe, dual-tower assault on large air cooling with a name that makes it difficult to remember–but that might all soon change. Making use of a pair of 120mm cooling fans with zero RGB capability, the SE-207-XT is menacingly matte black, making for a no-nonsense approach for system builders seeking a stealthed-out PC.
The SE-207-XT isn’t as large as some of the behemoth heatpipe coolers we’ve seen in recent years. And while it is true that it isn’t going to jump to the top of our cooling charts, it isn’t lagging that far behind the leaders, either. This makes the SE-207-XT a great mid-range, budget-priced, large air cooler for those looking for the cooling benefits of a huge CPU cooling tower, while focusing the majority of their build budget on other components.
ID-Cooling SE-207-XT Specifications
Height
6.125″ / 155.6mm
Width
4.88″ / 124mmmm
Depth
4.0″ / 101.6mm (5.63″ / 143mm w/ fans)
Base Height
1.75″ / 44.5mm
Assy. Offset
0.0 (centered), 1.0″ / 25.4mm w/ front fan)
Cooling Fans
(2) 120 x 25mm
Connectors
(2) 4-pin PWM
Weight
40.1 oz / 1138g
Intel Sockets
115x, 1200, 2011, 2066
AMD Sockets
AM4
Warranty
2 years
Web Price
$60
Features of ID-Cooling SE-207-XT
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The SE-207-XT is accompanied by a modest set of mounting hardware to accommodate most current AMD and Intel desktop CPU sockets. The Intel backplate features pre-assembled mounting posts, making it very strong and eliminating tedious assembly steps which we normally find for backplate setups. A third set of spring wire clips are provided and can be used to allow the cooler to have an additional fan for a push/pull/pull configuration, if you are so inclined. Likewise, an included 3-way PWM splitter is ready to handle the default 2-fan setup out of the box, or ythat triple fan layout.
An included syringe of ID-TG25 (ID-Cooling) thermal compound means system builders won’t be left ordering in a tube of thermal paste or making an extra trip back to your local electronics supply store.
ID-Cooling covers the SE-207-XT with a 2-year warranty.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The SE-207-XT makes use of seven copper heatpipes which snake through 44 individual stacked cooling fins on each divided tower. The heatpipes are offset for dissipation and airflow throughout each cooling tower and collect at the base within the solid cantilever mounting brace. The cooling fins on each cooling tower allow air to flow both straight through as well as out the lateral sides of the tower, rather than ducting air all the way through the cooler.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The solid base collects the seven heatpipes and encapsulates them within the cantilever mounting plate with a milled-copper base to make direct contact with the CPU IHS. The machine screws on the mounting plate are permanently affixed and align over the mounting bars, which are secured to the motherboard socket hardware mounting locations. The mounting screws help align the SE-207-XT when it comes time to tension the cooler down and finish the installation process, which we will detail shortly.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The base of the SE-207-XT is milled perfectly flat, as there is not any visible ambient light seen between a steel rule and the milled copper baseplate. Additionally, the offset of the heatpipes and the fixed tension screws can be seen a bit more clearly from this angle.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The base of the SE-207-XT makes for a consistent thermal compound spread patch during installation and seems to be a bit more ‘clingy’ to residual MX-4 compound than usual, although nothing alarming.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Cooling for the SE-207-XT comes from a pair of included 120mm ID-Cooling ID-12025M12S series, 4-pin PWM fans rated up to 1800 RPM and 76.1 CFM. These fans also feature rubber noise -educing mounting pads on each corner of both sides and utilize a hydraulic bearing.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
During installation, the mounting crossbars are affixed atop the SE-207-XT’s plastic offsets to the backplate mounting posts. And chunky, machine-cap nuts hold everything securely to the motherboard. The center of the image shows the tension screws secured to the threaded studs on the mounting cross bars, which help align the cooler directly over the CPU and simplify installation.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Once the SE-207-XT is mounted, each of the 120mm PWM fans are secured to the cooler to move airflow right to left toward the rear case fan, providing a direct channel of air through the cooling tower. While the fan positioning on the cooler via the spring clips can be adjusted to account for taller memory DIMM modules, be advised that RAM height can be an issue in some instances, where those sticks of RAM might cause interference directly beneath the cooling tower itself.
The Patriot Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20 is only worthy of consideration if you’re willing to invest your time to optimize its timings and if you can find the memory on sale with a big discount.
For
+ Runs at C16 with fine-tuning
+ Balanced design with RGB lighting
+ RGB compatibility with most motherboards
Against
– Very loose timings
– Overpriced
– Low overclocking headroom
Patriot, who isn’t a stranger to our list of Best RAM, has many interesting product lines in its broad repertoire. However, the memory specialist recently revamped one of its emblematic lineups to keep up with the current RGB trend. As the name conveys, the Viper Steel RGB series arrives with a redesigned heat spreader and RGB illumination.
The new series marks the second time that Patriot has incorporated RGB lighting onto its DDR4 offerings, with the first being the Viper RGB series that debuted as far back as 2018. While looks may be important, performance also plays a big role, and the Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 memory kit is here to show us what it is or isn’t made of.
Viper Steel RGB memory modules come with the standard black PCB with a matching matte-black heat spreader. It was nice on Patriot’s part to keep the aluminum heat spreader as clutter-free as possible. Only the golden Viper logo and the typical specification sticker is present on the heat spreader, and the latter is removable.
At 44mm (1.73 inches), the Viper Steel RGB isn’t excessively tall, so we expect it to fit under the majority of the CPU air coolers in the market. Nevertheless, we recommend you double-check that you have enough clearance space for the memory modules. The RGB light bar features five customizable lighting zones. Patriot doesn’t provide a program to control the illumination, so you’ll have to rely on your motherboard’s software. The compatibility list includes Asus Aura Sync, Gigabyte RGB Fusion, MSI Mystic Light Sync, and ASRock Polychrome Sync.
The Viper Steel RGB is a dual-channel 32GB memory kit, so you receive two 16GB memory modules with an eight-layer PCB and dual-rank design. Although Thaiphoon Burner picked up the integrated circuits (ICs) as Hynix chips, the software failed to identify the exact model. However, these should be AFR (A-die) ICs, more specifically H5AN8G8NAFR-VKC.
You’ll find the Viper Steel RGB defaulting to DDR4-2666 and 19-19-19-43 timings at stock operation. Enabling the XMP profile on the memory modules will get them to DDR4-3600 at 20-26-26-46. The DRAM voltage required for DDR4-3600 is 1.35V. For more on timings and frequency considerations, see our PC Memory 101 feature, as well as our How to Shop for RAM story.
Comparison Hardware
Memory Kit
Part Number
Capacity
Data Rate
Primary Timings
Voltage
Warranty
G.Skill Trident Z Royal
F4-4000C17D-32GTRGB
2 x 16GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
17-18-18-38 (2T)
1.40 Volts
Lifetime
Crucial Ballistix Max RGB
BLM2K16G40C18U4BL
2 x 16GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
18-19-19-39 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
G.Skill Trident Z Neo
F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
2 x 16GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
16-16-16-36 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
Klevv Bolt XR
KD4AGU880-36A180C
2 x 16GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
18-22-22-42 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
Patriot Viper Steel RGB
PVSR432G360C0K
2 x 16GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
20-26-26-46 (2T)
1.35 Volts
Lifetime
Our Intel test system consists of an Intel Core i9-10900K and Asus ROG Maximus XII Apex on the 0901 firmware. On the opposite side, the AMD testbed leverages an AMD Ryzen 5 3600 and ASRock B550 Taichi with the 1.30 firmware. The MSI GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Gaming Trio handles the graphical duties on both platforms.
Intel Performance
Image 1 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Things didn’t go well for the Viper Steel RGB on the Intel platform. The memory ranked at the bottom of our application RAM benchmarks and came in last place on the gaming tests. Our results didn’t reveal any particular workloads where the Viper Steel RGB stood out.
AMD Performance
Image 1 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 19
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The loose timings didn’t substantially hinder the Viper Steel RGB’s performance. Logically, it lagged behind its DDR4-3600 rivals that have tighter timings. The Viper Steel RGB’s data rate allowed it to run in a 1:1 ratio with our Ryzen 5 3600’s FCLK so it didn’t take any performance hits, unlike the DDR4-4000 offerings. With a capable Zen 3 processor that can operate with a 2,000 MHz FCLK, the Viper Steel RGB will probably not outperform the high-frequency kits.
Overclocking potential isn’t the Viper Steel RGB’s strongest trait. Upping the DRAM voltage from 1.35V to 1.45V only got us to DDR4-3800. Although we had to maintain the tRCD, tRP, and tRAS at their XMP values, we could drop the CAS Latency down to 17.
Lowest Stable Timings
Memory Kit
DDR4-3600 (1.45V)
DDR4-3800 (1.45V)
DDR4-4000 (1.45V)
DDR4-4133 (1.45V)
DDR4-4200 (1.45V)
G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 C16
13-14-14-35 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
19-19-19-39 (2T)
Crucial Ballistix Max RGB DDR4-4000 C18
N/A
N/A
16-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
20-20-20-40 (2T)
G.Skill Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 C17
N/A
N/A
15-16-16-36 (2T)
18-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
Klevv Bolt XR DDR4-3600 C18
16-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
N/A
18-22-22-42 (2T)
N/A
Patriot Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20
16-20-20-40 (2T)
17-26-26-46 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
As we’ve seen before, you won’t be able to run Hynix ICs at very tight timings. That’s not to say that the Viper Steel RGB doesn’t have any wiggle room though. With a 1.45V DRAM voltage, we optimized the memory to run at 16-20-20-40 as opposed to the XMP profile’s 20-26-26-46 timings.
Bottom Line
It comes as no surprise that the Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20 will not beat competing memory kits that have more optimized timings. The problem is that C20 is basically at the bottom of the barrel by DDR4-3600 standards.
The Viper Steel RGB won’t match or surpass the competition without serious manual tweaking. The memory kit’s hefty $199.99 price tag doesn’t do it any favors, either. To put it into perspective, the cheapest DDR4-3600 2x16GB memory kit on the market starts at $154.99, and it checks in with C18. Unless Patriot rethinks the pricing for the Viper Steel RGB DDR4-3600 C20, the memory kit will likely not be on anyone’s radar.
The What Hi-Fi? Virtual Show took place on Saturday 24th April, featuring interviews, expert advice and a Live Q&A session with the What Hi-Fi? team.
Thousands of you logged on to watch the videos and ask questions – and there’s still time to catch up on any videos you missed.
You can register on the What Hi-Fi? Virtual Show website to watch any of the sessions back in full, right up until 24th May. And it’s completely free.
We talked through how we review and what makes our test rooms fit for purpose, gave tips on how to get the best from your hi-fi system and set-up your TV, while also looking back on some of the best products to have passed through our test rooms. We also took your questions on the day in our Live Q&A.
Want to know about the next big thing before anyone else? We heard from Audio-Technica, Bluesound, Cambridge Audio, Denon, Fyne Audio, KEF, Mission and MQA, including exclusive news on forthcoming products.
As well as watching back all the sessions, you can also enter our show competition for your chance to win a Bluesound Dolby Atmos soundbar.
Watch all the sessions from the What Hi-Fi? Virtual Show
The Thermaltake Toughpower GF2 ARGB 850W has good performance, but an earlier model is a little better.
For
+ Full power at 47 degrees Celsius
+ Satisfactory overall performance
+ Efficient at normal loads
+ Effective APFC converter
Long hold-up time
Low inrush current
Adequate distance between the peripheral connectors
Compatible with the alternative sleep mode
Fully modular
10-year warranty
Against
– The Toughpower GF1 ARGB 850W performs better
– Noisy at higher loads
– Low efficiency under light loads
– Poor transient response
Specifications and Part Analysis
In addition to Thermaltake’s GF1 ARGB PSU line, which Channel Well Technology made, Thermaltake also decided to include another similar line in its portfolio, the Toughpower GF2 ARGB. All GF2 units are based on a High Power platform and have similar specifications to the GF1 models, making us wonder why Thermaltake created internal competition. The only differences are the RGB side panels on the GF2 units and the PWM control of the fan since this High Power platform uses an MCU to adjust fan speed.
The 850W member of the GF2 ARGB is a little less performant than the similar-capacity GF1 ARGB model so, if they both available at the same price, the GF1 seems like the better buy. Besides the GF1 ARGB 850W, which with a little more tuning could be added in our best power supplies article, other strong opponents of the GF2 ARGB 850W are the Corsair RM850x (2021), the XPG Core Reactor 850, and the Seasonic GX-850.
The GF2 ARGB line consists of three models with capacities ranging from 650W to 850W. All units are fully modular, and their RGB lighting is compatible with the software provided for the mainboards of Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, and ASRock. Besides the 18-LED fan, the PSUs’ panels also feature RGB lighting, so you have to make sure that you will use these PSUs along with a chassis that doesn’t hide them in a separate compartment.
Image 1 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Product Photos
Image 2 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Toughpower GF2 ARGB 850W will be our test subject. This PSU is strong enough to support a potent gaming station equipped with an Nvidia RTX 3080/90 or an AMD RX 6800/6900 XT graphics card, along with a high-end CPU which will allow the GPU to deliver its full performance without any issues. It has to prove, though, that it is a better choice than the CWT-made Toughpower GF1 ARGB 850W unit since its price is at the same levels.
Image 1 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Product Photos
Image 2 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 7
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Specifications of Thermaltake Toughpower GF2 ARGB
Manufacturer (OEM)
High Power
Max. DC Output
850W
Efficiency
80 PLUS Gold, Cybenetics Platinum (89-91%)
Noise
Cybenetics Standard++ (30-35 dB[A])
Modular
✓ (fully)
Intel C6/C7 Power State Support
✓
Operating Temperature (Continuous Full Load)
0 – 40°C
Over Voltage Protection
✓
Under Voltage Protection
✓
Over Power Protection
✓
Over Current (+12V) Protection
✓
Over Temperature Protection
✓
Short Circuit Protection
✓
Surge Protection
✓
Inrush Current Protection
✓
Fan Failure Protection
✗
No Load Operation
✓
Cooling
140mm Hydraulic Bearing Fan [TT-1425 (A1425S12S-2)]
Semi-Passive Operation
✓ (selectable)
Dimensions (W x H x D)
150 x 85 x 160mm
Weight
1.64 kg (3.62 lb)
Form Factor
ATX12V v2.53, EPS 2.92
Warranty
10 Years
Power Specifications of Thermaltake Toughpower GF2 ARGB
Rail
3.3V
5V
12V
5VSB
-12V
Max. Power
Amps
22
22
70.9
3
Watts
120
850
15
3.6
Total Max. Power (W)
850
Cables & Connectors for Thermaltake Toughpower GF2 ARGB
Modular Cables
Modular Cables
Description
Cable Count
Connector Count (Total)
Gauge
In Cable Capacitors
ATX connector 20+4 pin (610mm)
1
1
18AWG
No
4+4 pin EPS12V (660mm)
1
1
16AWG
No
8 pin EPS12V (660mm)
1
1
16AWG
No
6+2 pin PCIe (500mm+160mm)
3
6
16-18AWG
No
SATA (510mm+160mm+160mm+160mm)
3
12
18AWG
No
4-pin Molex (500mm+150mm+150mm+150mm)
1
4
18AWG
No
FDD Adapter (+160mm)
1
1
22AWG
No
ARGB Sync Cable (610mm+160mm)
1
2
26AWG
No
AC Power Cord (1400mm) – C13 coupler
1
1
18AWG
–
There are plenty of cables and connectors, including two EPS, six PCIe, twelve SATA, and four 4-pin Molex connectors. On top of that, all cables are long, and the distance between the peripheral connectors is adequate.
Image 1 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Cable Photos
Image 2 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Component Analysis of Thermaltake Toughpower GF2 ARGB
We strongly encourage you to have a look at our PSUs 101 article, which provides valuable information about PSUs and their operation, allowing you to better understand the components we’re about to discuss.
General Data
–
Manufacturer (OEM)
High Power
PCB Type
Double Sided
Primary Side
–
Transient Filter
4x Y caps, 2x X caps, 2x CM chokes, 1x MOV, 1x Champion CMD02X (Discharge IC)
1x PFC P10V45SP SBR (45V, 10A), UTC 2N70L FET (700V, 2A, 6.3Ohm)
Standby PWM Controller
SI8016HSP8
-12V
–
Rectifier
1x KEC KIA7912PI (-12V, 1A)
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Overall Photos
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
This is a High Power platform, and the design looks good. The heat sinks are small, but this is an efficient PSU, so there won’t be any issues there, although larger heat sinks could allow for a more relaxed fan speed profile, hence for lower noise output.
On the primary side, we meet a half-bridge topology and an LLC resonant converter. On the secondary side, a synchronous rectification scheme is used for 12V, and a pair of DC-DC converters regulate the minor rails.
Image 1 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Transient filter
Image 2 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The transient/EMI filter has all necessary components, including a Champion CMD02X discharge IC, which provides a small efficiency boost.
We didn’t find an NTC thermistor. Nonetheless, the PSU has low inrush currents, so there is inrush current suppression through another circuit, which the APFC controller controls.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Bridge rectifiers
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The pair of bridge rectifiers is installed on a dedicated heat sink, which is pretty small. Still, these rectifiers can easily handle the PSU’s full power even with low voltage input.
Image 1 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
APFC converter
Image 2 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The APFC converter uses two Infineon FETs and a single CREE C3D08060A boost diode. The bulk caps are provided by Rubycon and have enough capacity to provide a longer than 17ms hold-up time. The APFC controller is an ICE3PCS01G IC.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Main FETs and primary transformer
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Two Infineon IPA60R180P7S installed into a half-bridge topology are the primary switching FETs. The LLC resonant controller is a Champion CM6901X IC.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
12V FETs and VRMs
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Six Infineon BSC027N04LS FETs regulate the 12V rail, while the minor rails are generated through a pair of DC-DC converters.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Filtering caps
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The electrolytic filtering caps are provided by Chemi-Con and Rubycon and are of good quality. A large number of polymer caps is also used for ripple filtering purposes.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Supervisor ICs
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The supervisor IC is a WT7527RA, and right beside it, we find an STC STC15W401AS MCU, used to control the cooling fan’s speed.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
RGB Board
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
This is the RGB controller’s board.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
5VSB circuit
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The 5VSB circuit uses a UTC 2N70L FET on its primary side and a PFC P10V45SP SBR on its secondary side.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The -12V rail is regulated through a KEC KIA7912PI regulator IC.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Modular board front
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Several polymer caps are installed on the modular board, forming a secondary ripple filtering layer.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Soldering quality
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Soldering quality is satisfactory.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Cooling fan
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The cooling fan is quite strong, and it uses a hydraulic dynamic bearing so that it will last for long.
We would like to thank be quiet! for supplying the review sample.
The be quiet! Pure Power 11 FM (Fully Modular) line lists three models of different capacities: 550 W, 650 W, and 750 W. I will take a look at the strongest member of the line to check on how it fares against the competition in the 750 W Gold category, including the new Corsair RM750x (2021) with the Magnetic Levitation fan, Cooler Master V750, MWE Gold 750, and the XPG Core Reactor 750. A strong competitor is also the Seasonic GX-750, but I don’t have 230 V data for this model.
According to be quiet!, all Pure Power 11 FM models operate quietly. Thanks to the fully modular cable, installation and cable management will be easier than with the semi-modular and non-modular Pure Power 11 models. For the new Pure Power 11 FM line, be quiet! cooperated with CWT and used a new platform. The Pure Power 11 and Pure Power 11 CM units are based on FSP platforms that are not as capable.
The 750 W fully modular Pure Power unit is fully compliant with the ATX12V v2.52 specification. Hence, it’s highly efficiency under incredibly light loads and compatible with Alternative Sleep Mode. The maximum operating temperature for continuous full-power delivery is set to 40°C, and a quality SilentWings fan measuring 120 mm across handles cooling.
Specifications
be quiet! Pure Power 11 FM 750W
Features & Specifications
Max. DC Output
750 W
PFC
Active PFC
Efficiency
80 PLUS Gold, Cybenetics Gold (89%–91%)
Noise
Cybenetics A (20–25 dB[A])
Modular
Yes (fully)
Intel C6/C7 Power State Support
Yes
Operating Temperature
0–40 °C
Protections
Over Voltage Protection Under Voltage Protection Over Power Protection Over Temperature Protection Over Current Protection Short Circuit Protection
Cooling
120mm rifle bearing fan (BQ QF2-12025-MS)
Semi-passive Operation
No
Dimensions (W x H x D)
150 x 85 x 160 mm
Weight
1.63 kg (3.59 lb)
Compliance
ATX12V v2.53, and EPS 2.92
Warranty
5 years
Price at Time of Review (excl. VAT)
No information available
be quiet! Pure Power 11 FM 750W
Power Specifications
Rail
3.3 V
5 V
12 V1
12 V2
5 VSB
-12 V
Maximum Power
20 A
20 A
36 A
32 A
3 A
0.3 A
120 W
750 W
15 W
3.6 W
Total Maximum Power
750 W
be quiet! Pure Power 11 FM 750W
Power Distribution
12V1
ATX, PCIe1, PCIe2, Peripheral
12V2
EPS, PCIe3, PCIe4
Normally, 12V2 would be stronger since it has both EPS and two PCIe connectors.
(Pocket-lint) – The Google Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL were announced in October 2019, succeeded by the Google Pixel 5 in September 2021. There’s also the Pixel 4a and the Pixel 4a 5G to consider. If you’re choosing between the Pixel 4 and 4 XL and you want to know which might be the right choice for you though, you’re in the right place.
This is a comparison of the Pixel 4 against the Pixel 4 XL. You can also read our Pixel 4 vs Pixel 3 feature to find out how they compare to their predecessors and our Pixel 5 vs Pixel 4 feature to see how they compare to their successors.
squirrel_widget_168586
What’s the same?
Design
Rear and front camera
Processor/RAM/Storage
Software and features
The Google Pixel 4 and 4 XL both feature the same design – aside from physical footprint – with a contrasting power button and three colour options. They both have a black frame, a glass front and rear and a rear camera system within a square housing. They also both have gesture controls and Face unlock thanks to Google’s Soli motion-sensing radar chip.
The two devices also feature a bezel at the top of their displays and they both run on Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 855 platform. Neither offers microSD support, as has been the case on all Pixel devices, and neither has a 3.5mm headphone jack.
The software experience is identical, with both launching with Android 10.
What’s different between the Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL?
Plenty transfers between little and large in the case of the Pixel 4 devices, but there are a few differences too.
Physical size
Pixel 4: 147.1 x 68.8 x 8.2mm
Pixel 4 XL: 160.4 x 75.1 x 8.2mm
Unsurprisingly, Google Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL differ in terms of physical size.
The Google Pixel 4 measures 147.1 x 68.8 x 8.2mm and weighs 162g, while the Google Pixel 4 XL measures 160.4 x 75.1 x 8.2mm and weighs 193g.
Display
Pixel 4: 5.7-inches, Full HD+, 90Hz
Pixel 4 XL: 6.3-inches, Quad HD+, 90Hz
As with the physical footprint, the display size differs between the Pixel 4 and 4 XL. The Pixel 4 has a 5.7-inch screen, while the Pixel 4 XL offers a 6.3-inch screen.
The Pixel 4 has a Full HD+ resolution, while the Pixel 4 XL has a Quad HD+ resolution, meaning the larger device offers a sharper screen. Both have a 90Hz refresh rate though, both are OLED panels and both support HDR.
Battery
Pixel 4: 2800mAh
Pixel 4 XL: 3700mAh
The Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL offer different battery capacities, like the older the Pixel 3 and 3 XL. The Pixel 4 has a 2800mAh battery, while the Pixel 4 XL has a 3700mAh battery.
squirrel_widget_168578
Conclusion
The Google Pixel 4 and 4 XL offer identical designs, hardware and software experiences, though there are differences in battery capacities, price, displays and footprint sizes.
You don’t compromise much by opting for the smaller device though, and you save a few pennies too – especially now these models have been succeeded. Some will want the higher resolution display and larger battery capacity offered by the XL model, but if you aren’t bothered by those, the Pixel 4 is a great option.
(Pocket-lint) – The Xiaomi Mi 11 range spans a significant spectrum from top-tier flagship, in the Mi 11 Ultra, to the standard Mi 11, down to the more entry level – which is where this, the Mi 11 Lite 5G, finds itself.
Despite plonking ‘Lite’ into its name, however, the Mi 11 Lite 5G really is not a low-power phone by any means. It’s just not as crazy-powerful as the upper echelons in the range. The second clue to that regard is the ‘5G’ aspect of the name – because, yes, there’s also speedy connectivity.
So if you’re not looking to spend a fortune on a phone, want 5G connectivity, and having a slimmer and easier-to-manage handset is high up your list of appeals, the Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G ticks a lot of boxes. But then so do a bunch of competitors. So can this entry-level 5Ger deliver?
Design & Display
Display: 6.55-inch AMOLED panel, 90Hz refresh, 1080 x 2400 resolution
Finish options: Truffle Black, Mint Green, Citrus Yellow
Dimensions: 160.5 x 75.7 x 6.8mm / Weight: 157g
Side-mounted fingerprint scanner
No 3.5mm jack
Upon pulling the Mi 11 Lite 5G from its box we let out a rare gasp. Because, shown here in its apparent ‘Mint Green’ finish – it looks more ‘Bubblegum’ to us, which is the name for the non-5G variant – this handset looks really fresh and standout. Very dapper indeed.
That’s partly because Xiaomi has redesigned the range, so the Mi 11 Lite looks way more evolved than the previous 10T Lite version. Look at those side-by-side and the older model looks rather dated – it’s quite a stark difference. Yet there’s mere months between them in terms of release cycle.
That said, the Mi 11 Lite 5G is only a little like other Mi 11 handsets in terms of design. The cameras are far different to the Ultra’s “megabump”, arranged in a really neat format that, although similar to the Mi 11, doesn’t protrude to the same degree from the rear.
The rear finish is good at resisting fingerprints too, which is a breath of fresh air (minty fresh, eh!), while the branding is subtle and nicely integrated.
Motorola’s new Moto G9 Plus is a stunner of a phone – find out why, right here
By Pocket-lint Promotion
·
But above all else, it’s the Mi 11 Lite 5G’s thickness that’s its biggest take-away point. By which we mean thinness: because this handset is far slimmer than, well, pretty much anything we’ve used for months and months. We can’t think of a slimmer 5G smartphone. That, for us, has bags of appeal – it’s been really refreshing not carting a brick around in the pocket for the couple of weeks we’ve been using this phone.
Such a svelte design means the 3.5mm headphone jack has been binned, though, so it’s wireless connectivity only in that regard. But we can take that – it makes the design look more enclosed and complete anyway. There’s also no under-display fingerprint scanner here, with a side-mounted one in the power button a perfectly acceptable alternative – that operates speedily and we’ve got very much used to using it.
The display, at 6.55-inches, is still large despite the phone’s overall trim frame. It’s flat, with the phone body curving gently at the edges to make it really comfortable to hold. And there’s no teardrop notch to cry about this time around either – it’s a single punch-hole one to the upper corner, which is fairly inconspicuous.
That screen, an AMOLED panel, delivers on colour, brightness and verve, while a 90Hz refresh rate can deliver a little added smoothness to proceedings. There’s not a 120Hz option here – kind-of odd, as the 10T Lite did have that – but, really, most eyes aren’t going to tell the difference. We’d take the battery life gains every time instead, thanks.
Performance & Battery
Processor: Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G, 8GB RAM
Software: MIUI 12 over Google Android 11 OS
Battery: 4250mAh, 33W fast-charging
Storage: 128GB/256GB, microSD
Speaking of battery, that’s the first thing we assumed would be poor in the Mi 11 Lite 5G – because of how slim it is. But how wrong we were. For starters the 4,250mAh capacity cell is pretty capacious – and in our hands was easily able to deliver 16 hours a day with around 25 per cent battery or more remaining.
That’s been irrelevant of what we’ve asked the phone to do in a given day. Strava tracking for an hour and an hour of gaming in the evening, in addition to hours of screen time, calls and so forth. It’s no problem for this device. Note, however, that we’ve been unable to locate a 5G signal area during testing – lockdown and all that – so whether that would adversely affect battery life is for debate. What we do see in the settings, however, is a 5G option to toggle the connectivity off when it’s not needed, to further extend battery life.
However, while battery life ticks along just fine, part of the reason is down to the rather hardcore software approach. Xiaomi’s MIUI 12 – skinned over the top of Google’s Android 11 operating system – by default has a lot of “off” switches selected. Seriously, MIUI is hell-bent on ensuring battery lasts and lasts – sometimes to the detriment of the experience and use of apps.
As such, you’ll need to investigate individual apps within the settings and permit them to self wake as and when they need, removing any automated battery restrictions from the important ones that you have and would, say, expect push notifications from. In the past we’ve had MIUI cause delays with notifications in other Xiaomi phones. In the Mi 11 Lite 5G, however, that’s been no problem whatsoever – perhaps because we’re so used to it and in setting the software in how we want to conduct our business; or, perhaps, because Xiaomi has sorted that issue out in an incremental update!
Otherwise the software is pretty robust. There are some oddities, such as an additional Xiaomi store as an addition to Google Play, but the two hardly interfere too much. And having copied over a bumper crop of apps, it’s clear to see that there are Xiaomi pre-install favourites and various not-needed staples – browsers, calendars, that kind of stuff – that just clogs up the home screen to start with, but is easily replaced with Chrome and your other favourites.
Regarding the phone’s innards, there’s a Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G platform handling proceedings, putting the Mi 11 Lite 5G one step down from the top-tier 800 series platform. Does that really matter? We’ve not found it to at all. From general user interface use, to app opening time, fluidity has been high throughout.
Besides, a 700 series chipset is more than good enough to run your more demanding favourites too. We’ve been plugging away at South Park: Phone Destroyer and PUBG: Mobile without hindrance, showing just how good the balance of power and battery life can be in devices such as this.
Wide-angle (0.5x): 8MP, f/2.2, 1.12µm, 119-degree angle of view
Macro: 5MP, f/2.4
Single front-facing punch-hole selfie camera: 20MP, f/2.2
Buy a ‘Lite’ phone and you’re never going to expect too much from the cameras, right? However, Xiaomi has done a reasonable job here of balancing things out. For starters all three lenses are actually useful – there’s not a lens here for the sake of number count, like with so much of the competition.
The main 64-megapixel sensor uses four-in-one processing to output 16-megapixel shots as standard, which hold enough colour and detail. Even in low-light conditions we’ve found the quality to hold up fairly well, too, so this sensor delivers the goods.
It’s a shame that there’s no optical stabilisation on the main lens, because holding it steady – especially when shooting Night Mode shots – is tricky and can result in a little softeness in dim conditions if you’re not careful.
Pocket-lint
: Wide-angle – full shotWide-angle – full shot
The wide-angle, however, is a weaker sensor. It’s just 8-megapixels in resolution, can’t deliver the fidelity of the main one by any means, and displays some blur to the edges. That’s pretty common for wide-angle cameras, sure, but there are better iterations around. Still, there’s practical use from a sensor such as this, so it’s a positive to have it rather than not.
Last up out of the trio is a macro sensor. Now, typically, these are throwaway afterthoughts. But, actually, the one on this Mi handset is acceptable – probably because it’s a 5-megapixel sensor, not the 2-megapixel type that too many other budget handsets opt for. That means images are of a usable scale, and you’ll get a little extra something out of super close-up shots from this sensor. We doubt you’ll use it a lot, though, as it’s hardly a practical everydayer, plus its activation is tucked away in settings – but there’s fun to be had from it nonetheless.
What we like about the Mi 11 Lite 5G’s camera setup is that it’s not trying to oversell you a bunch of pointless lenses. It doesn’t protrude five miles from the back of the phone, either, delivering a neat-looking handset that, while hardly reaching for the stars in what it can do, is perfectly capable. And, compared to the likes of the Moto G100, for example, the Xiaomi actually has the upper hand in its image quality delivery.
Verdict
Although the Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite 5G looks and feels different to the rest of the Mi 11 family, there’s something refreshing about its design. It’s really slim, light, and that colour finish looks super. We can’t think of a slimmer, tidier-looking 5G handset – which makes this something of a unique proposition.
Despite being called a ‘Lite’ phone, it shouldn’t be seen entirely in that regard either. With the Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G handling everything, there’s ample power to keep that 90Hz AMOLED screen ticking along, for battery life to last surprisingly long – we didn’t expect it, given the trim design – and software that, if you tend to it with a bit of pruning from the off, has been more robust here than many other Xiaomi handsets we’ve seen in the recent past.
However, forego the 5G need, and there are lots of cheaper competitors that might also appeal, such as the Redmi Note 10 Pro. Similar grade handsets, such as the Moto G100, may also appeal – but, as far as we understand it, the Xiaomi undercuts that device’s price point, asserting its position as one of the top dogs in the affordable 5G market.
Also consider
Moto G100
A near-ish comparison in that there’s 5G and gaming-capable power for less than a flagship price. We prefer the Moto’s software, but the Xiaomi’s design has the upper hand in our view.
High performance memory kits have evolved over the last few years, both in styling and technology. Styling has shifted to heavier heat sinks, LED light bars, and fancy RGB control software. The technology has done what it inevitably will by producing greater speeds and densities at generally lower cost as DDR4 has matured. The latest processors and graphics cards have been almost impossible to get over the last six months, but memory pricing and availability has remained steady, which makes now the perfect time for Acer to launch a brand-new line of DDR4 memory under their Predator brand. You may recognize the Predator brand from their highly successful gaming monitors or range of gaming laptops and desktops. You may even know the brand because of the Thanos All-In-One gaming chair.
Acer has branched out into a wide variety of gaming products and peripherals. Now, Acer is taking the plunge into core hardware with the aid of business partner BIWIN Storage, a large Chinese OEM with 25 years of experience in the storage and microelectronics business. Acer has granted them permission to produce memory kits under the Predator brand.
The Predator Apollo RGB kit I have for testing today is one of their top-spec kits: 16 GB (2x 8 GB) at 3600 MHz, 14-15-15-35 timings, and 1.45 V. 3600 MHz has become the new gold standard for Ryzen builds, driving new focus into memory kits targeting a previously obscure specification. Let’s see how the Predator Apollo RGB holds up in this ultra-competitive segment!
I have covered a significant amount of 60% form factor keyboards recently, including the Kinesis Gaming TKO, CORSAIR K65 RGB MINI, and Ajazz K620T 2.0, with a few more still on the way. It does seem like the entire world is gung-ho on the 60% keyboard craze off late, so I sought to provide some context for these newer keyboards by covering one of the originals. Sadly, my time with the Anne Pro was limited to a few hours from a loaner courtesy a friend a few years ago, and between this and the Vortex Poker, I had learned to appreciate smaller form factor keyboards for their increased ergonomics and the potential to be used as dedicated game pads. Well, the Anne Pro may have come and gone, but we have the Anne Pro 2 now, and here we are taking a look at it!
The original Anne Pro and the newer Anne Pro 2 are the brainchildren of a group of engineers in the keyboard industry who wanted a minimalist keyboard for typing with layered functionality for reduced finger travel. The Anne Pro 2 is by itself not a new product either, having been released over two years ago, but one that is not the easiest to obtain for the sake of reviews unless you buy it yourself. So when Banggood, a B2C entity that provides access to Chinese goods globally, contacted us about doing reviews of keyboards they sell around the world, the Anne Pro 2 was the first that came to my mind. Thanks again to the retailer for sending a review sample to TechPowerUp!
Specifications
Anne Pro 2 Keyboard
Layout:
61-key, 60% form factor in a US ANSI layout
Material:
ABS plastic case, PBT plastic keycaps, and steel plate
Macro Support:
Yes
Weight:
0.64 kg / 1.4 lbs.
Wrist Rest:
No
Anti-ghosting:
Full N-Key rollover USB, 6KRO in Bluetooth mode
Media Keys:
Available via layers
Dimensions:
97 (L) x 284 (W) x 40 (H) mm
Cable Length:
6 ft / 1.8 m
Software:
Yes
Switch Type:
Choice of various Cherry, Kailh, or Gateron RGB mechanical switches
(Pocket-lint) – Flick your eyes over the Skoda Enyaq fast enough and, shocker, you might kind-of mistake it for a Tesla Model X from certain angles. No, there’s no crazy gullwing doors here. No, there’s not quite as much real-world range either (it’s not far off, on paper, at least). But, heck, the Skoda doesn’t half offer a whole lot for a lot less cash.
That’s where the Enyaq is going to really appeal. On top of that, despite being built upon the same platform as the Volkswagen ID.4 – VW Group owns Skoda, so that’s a given – the Skoda brings a little extra room for a little less money. It flips Audi Q5 grade costs on its head.
Even so, the Enyaq doesn’t really scrimp on its feature set, with a large infotainment screen included as standard, decent real-world range, and enough of the current must-have high-ride SUV appeal to be seen as a sensible option to a wide audience.
In many respects this could be the most sensible electric car option. But is being too sensible simply off-putting, or does Skoda have the appeal balanced just right?
Design & Interior
Trim levels (80 model): Loft, Lodge, Lounge, Suite, Ecosuite, Sportline
It’s all angles and elevated lines with the Enyaq – not quite to Tesla Cybertruck levels, mind – giving a distinctive look that’s still identifiably Skoda, as the various badges attached to the car will assert.
Pocket-lint
If you’re looking for an EV with decent real-world range, though, its comparable competition – such as the Kia e-Niro – go with overall gentler stylings. By comparison the Enyaq doesn’t blend into the background, while not being so obscure that it’s a head-turner for the wrong reasons – well, unless you add the optional light-up LED grille, perhaps, which’ll probably make it look like a birthday cake on wheels.
In many respects we prefer the Enyaq’s exterior aesthetic to the Volkswagen ID.4, as the Skoda just has more poise and less warbly roundedness about it. There are LED lights as standard, further adding to the visual prowess, while 19-inch alloys as the entry level (20- and 21-inch upgrades are available) add to the overall package.
Inside, it’s generally a treat too. There’s plenty of space, both front and back, with the driver and front passenger in particular getting access to most of the goodies. The seats are comfortable, the materials and plastics soft to the touch, and there’s ample space to store your various kit – from cubby holes to centre bins and cup-holders.
In terms of space the 585 litre boot is large, especially for an electric vehicle where batteries have to be hidden away (in the floor on this platform). Not that you get secondary space in the front under the bonnet – you might expect it, given the lack of an engine – but there’s still a good amount of family room in here. Enough even for a dog crate in the back, should you have a canine companion to cart around.
Comfort acquired, it’s less the sensation of the seats that’ll catch your eye, though, and more the 13-inch touch display that sits proudly off the centre of the dash. That’s a big screen to get as standard (there’s no larger option, not that one’s needed), which is great for seeing navigation and infotainment – whether you’re running with what Skoda offers or linking up Android Auto or Apple CarPlay to take care of things (side note: our Android phone took multiple attempts to function via MirrorLink, so it seems a tad glitchy right now).
Pocket-lint
TECH IN ABUNDANCE
Good as the large screen is, it’s positioned a bit of a reach away – especially for a high-riding SUV seating position such as this. And you’ll need to reach numerous times because Skoda, just like VW, is super-keen on touchscreen controls. We had issues with that in the VW ID.3, and while the Enyaq has some remnants of that experience it’s otherwise a bit more polished and has some more sensible physical shortcut keys on the dash and rotational shortcut dials on the steering wheel – which is all for the better.
Realistically, we suspect it’s more a case of getting used to the fact that volume is controlled by a slider mechanism to the bottom of the screen, or that climate control – which can be quick-selected by a physical button – will require a quick tap of your desired mode, or an up/down adjustment of the always-on-display temperature. It’s not totally taxing, but still a whisker off the mark as to where this system could get to.
Pocket-lint
The second notable screen is the driver’s Virtual Cockpit. This is far smaller scale, but therefore not distracting, and displays all the relevant at-a-glance information that you’ll want to see. Far more distracting, however, is the HUD (head-up display) with its optional augmented reality navigation system – which throws directional curves and arrows onto the panel to try and tell you where you’re turning. It’s a bit too videogame-overlay-like and we can’t really see why it’s useful – it’s more just distracting (just like it is in the original Mercedes implementation).
Additional safety and convenience features can be built into the Enyaq, too, with lane-keep, adaptive cruise control, blind spot detection, and rear parking sensors all available – you’ll just have to pay extra for these add-on features. The more you opt for, the more complete the experience, which can be rather helpful for cruise driving over those longer motorway distances.
Pocket-lint
So the interior is comfortable, packed with screens and useful information that you’ll learn to live with in little time. All we’d like is better integration with touchscreen options and a more driver-oriented screen to cut back on the arm-extended reach a little. Otherwise, as standard interiors go, this one is accomplished and kitted out.
Drive & Range
60 model: 58kWh battery, 256 mile range quoted
80 model: 77kWh battery, 333 mile range quoted
Regenerative braking paddle adjustment
Selectable drive modes
Rear-wheel drive only
So onto the big one: electric range, recharging and, well, battery anxiety. It’s all too common – especially given the UK’s lack of not only well-maintained, but fast-charging infrastructure – that the prospect of buying an EV can cause a bit of a lump in the throat. “Will it get me there and back no troubles?”
Pocket-lint
Fortunately, the Skoda Enyaq is well equipped with potential range and the way in which that translates to real-world driving. We drove the ’80’ model, which has a 77kWh battery capacity; there’s also the ’60’ model, which is more affordable and has a smaller 58kWh battery capacity.
We can’t speak of the 60, having not driven it, but the 80 is claimed to deliver up to 333 miles (that’s 535km) according to WLTP standards. As ever, those figures are a bit of a reach – upon getting into our fully-charged Enyaq it told us 210 miles were at our disposal (admittedly in 10C temperatures, which always affects these things). That’s quite the discrepancy though.
Really, we think, WLTP standards should be changed to better reflect real-world conditions. Because, actually, we’ve been impressed by the Enyaq’s range – and, in particular, consistency in delivering feedback on that available range.
Pocket-lint
Having driven away with 210 miles ‘on the clock’, some 16 miles in and the car was telling us we had 206 miles remaining, its regenerative braking clearly being top-drawer at clawing back the miles. Those figures continued to fluctuate a little – but, at the end of our three hours of driving, the distance travelled reflected the change in available range very accurately.
All in all, the car was telling us we’d get about 3.4 miles per kW, so a 250 mile range (420km) is genuinely achievable by our assessment – across all kinds of driving styles and speeds.
You’re not going to buy an Enyaq for thrills and spills, as that’s not the point of such a car, but with instant torque from that rear-wheel drive electric motor there’s immediacy to pulling away, while overtakes won’t be a problem with 0-60mph speeds of around 8 seconds. Given this car is over 2.3 tonnes, that’s not bad going for a mid-size SUV.
Future electric cars: Upcoming battery-powered cars that will be on the roads within the next 5 years
By Chris Hall
·
Pocket-lint
Behind the wheel, irrelevant of drive mode selected (there’s marginal differences between whether you’re in eco or sport), everything feels rather serene and quiet. The Enyaq presses on, not quite as spritely as some EVs we’ve driven, but in a refined manner. It’s a real smooth operator in all kinds of driving conditions.
So not only is the real-world range admirable, the interior comfortable, the standard tech kit commendable, but this EV is a total breeze to drive too. It hits a whole lot of sweetspots, that’s for sure.
Verdict
That’s the sum of it: the Skoda Enyaq, as the marque’s first dedicated all-electric vehicle, is a sound and sensible investment. It undercuts the VW ID.4 in most regards, without really compromising on what you get. It’s got the Tesla Model X appeal – but for those who could never afford such a car.
Sure, there’s some foibles – the infotainment screen has its VW-owed irks, a lot is excessively touch-based, and it’s a bit of a reach to get to physically – but for a spacious, comfortable, decent real-world ranged EV, the Enyaq hits a lot of those (not virtual) buttons.
It’s a breeze to drive, is sensible without erring towards being too boring and, crucially, its asking price is enough to make you ponder the near competition. As mid-size electric SUVs go, the Skoda Enyaq is one smooth operator.
A small-format resin 3D printer with a bargain-basement price, the Longer Orange 10’s weak output and wobbly build quality make it a poor bargain.
For
+ Inexpensive price
+ Small footprint
Against
– Laser-cut UV lid feels wobbly
– Low XY resolution
– Small build volume
The Longer Orange 10 is the entry-level 3D printer in the Orange lineup and sits below the Orange 30 and Orange 4K in both price and features. It’s available from the Longer site for $139, a surprisingly-low price that is around the cheapest I’ve seen a 3D printer of any kind for sale.
After testing the Orange 10, I’m left with more questions than answers as to who this printer is marketed towards. It uses an RGB masking LCD that defaults to a slow per-layer cure time as well as a small build volume. Importantly, it also has a pixel resolution that is over 50% larger than the Creality LD-002R, a comparable printer in price and size, resulting in lower resolution prints and pronounced stepping on shallow curves.
Longer Orange 10 Specifications
Machine Footprint
6.7″ x 6.7″ x 14.2″ (17.0cm x 17.0cm x 36.0cm)
Build Volume
3.86″ x 2.17″ x 5.5″ (98mm x 55mm x 140mm)
Resin
DLP Photopolymer Resin
UV Light
UV Matrix 405nm UV LED
Masking LCD Resolution
854 x 480
Masking LCD Size
4.5″
Interface
2.8″ LCD Touchscreen
XY Axis Resolution
.115mm
Included in the Box of Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Longer Orange 10 ships with all of the consumables you need to get up and printing including the power supply, a metal scraper for removing parts, gloves, a clean-up rag, a microSD card, a USB microSD card reader, and some resin filters for reusing resin. The UV-resistant lid ships disassembled (more on that later), and all the pieces required to assemble it are included in the box. The Orange 10 also includes a printed manual that covers all of the steps involved with getting the printer up and running.
Assembly of Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Longer Orange 10 includes a UV-resistant lid that requires assembly before it can be mounted onto the printer. This is a little unusual; most MSLA resin printers like the Anycubic Photon Mono, Creality LD-002R, and the Elegoo Mars Pro use a single-piece acrylic lid that ships mounted to the printer. The lid for the Longer Orange 10 ships in five pieces that all have a protective film applied to both sides. This film tends to tear and delaminate when peeled and was very time-consuming to remove; it took me almost fifteen minutes to remove it fully.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Once the protective film has been removed, the lid can be assembled. The jigsaw pattern on the sides of the panels allows them to snap into place, and the included black brackets hold the side panels together before the top panel is added. Assembling the lid felt a bit like a juggling act; the brackets and top hold the sides together, but the sides can’t be assembled without the top to hold them in place. It took a few tries to get it right but the lid eventually snapped together.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The lid is held together with a pair of rubber bands; one at the top and one at the bottom. While this solution is relatively inexpensive and allows the printer to ship in a slightly smaller box, the general shakiness and lack of a sturdy lid did not inspire much confidence in me after it was put together. The rubber bands pulled tight around the acrylic corners, and I’m concerned that picking up the lid will cause the rubber band to tear over time from rubbing against the sharp corners of the acrylic panels.
Design of Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The user interface of the Longer Orange 10 is a 2.8-inch color touchscreen LCD that offers basic functionality controls as well as real-time information during printing. The LCD is bright and responsive, but the overall UI is a little bare and the controls used to calibrate the build platform aren’t labeled intuitively.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Orange 10 uses a custom controller board with an STM32F103 microcontroller and an A4988 stepper driver. The controller board cooling fan is the loudest component on the printer, and it operates at a very reasonable volume during printing. The case of the Orange 10 is made from bent sheet metal, and I liked the solid and stable feel that it provided.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The masking LCD on the Longer Orange 10 is a 4.5-inch screen with a resolution of 854 x 480. This combination results in a relatively low .115mm XY resolution, a much coarser resolution than the .035mm achieved by the 4K resolution masking LCDs like the one on the Phrozen Sonic Mini 4K. Even non-4K masking LCD screens like the one on the Creality LD-002R are capable of sub-.1mm resolution (the LD-002R is .075mm), so this slightly-thick XY resolution can result in parts with visible stepping on shallow curves.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The build platform has a rear-facing slant, which allows resin to drip back into the vat during printing. The gantry to which it attaches is made from a bent piece of metal and the Z threaded rod has an anti-backlash nut installed to prevent banding during rapid movements. The motion components on the machine generally feel solid, and the gantry doesn’t seem to have any play during printing.
Leveling the Build Platform on Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The build platform on the Longer Orange 10 is secured to the gantry with four bolts that are also used for leveling. After loosening the bolts on the gantry and placing a piece of paper over the masking LCD screen, I dropped the build platform to the home position and tightened the bolts on the gantry.
The bolts have split ring lock washers as opposed to regular washers, which make leveling the bed a tedious and difficult task. As I tightened the bolts, the split ring washer moved just slightly and caused the build platform to raise or lower. Leveling this printer was a challenge that required me to work very slowly to make sure the build platform didn’t shift while tightening.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
After I leveled the build platform, I installed the resin vat in the printer and secured it with the two attached thumbscrews. The vat has a polymer frame with fill indicators graduated to the max fill line of 200ml embossed on the side. The FEP film at the bottom of the vat has been installed, pretensioned and is ready to use right out of the box.
Printing Safety with Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Longer Orange 10 uses 405nm UV resin, a material that you need to handle safely when in an uncured state to avoid injury. The resin can be harmful when making contact with skin, so make sure to wear gloves when pouring, cleaning up, or handling uncured resin. I also make sure I’m wearing gloves when removing the build platform after a print, as the resin tends to pool on top of the platform and can drip off while the platform is being removed.
Make sure you use the Orange 10 in a well-ventilated room to minimize the danger from inhaling fumes. Any spills or uncured resin stuck to a surface should be cleaned using 99% Isopropyl Alcohol and the container for the resin should be kept closed and secured when not actively pouring material.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The build platform on the Orange 10 has four upward-facing bolts that are used to secure it to the bracket. This is a poor design element, as the location of the bolts means it is very difficult to clean uncured resin off inside the bolt caps or clean the space between the bolt heads and the bracket. While the slanted build platform does allow the majority of the resin to slide back into the vat, it still pools around where the bracket meets the build platform and it can be difficult to clean completely. While this isn’t a problem unique to the Longer Orange 10, it is certainly something I find to be unnecessarily time-consuming and could be easily solved with a one-piece build platform.
Printing the Included Test Prints on the Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Longer Orange 10 includes four pre-sliced models that are ready for printing, as well as the .STL files used to make them. The first one I tested was VampireLordBust.lgs, a 75.26mm model that prints in five hours and nine minutes. The model (which I found uploaded on MyMiniFactory by searching for the file name) has supports designed into the model as opposed to being generated by the slicer software.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
I try to avoid models with supports designed into them, as every printer will handle them differently and the slicer software is usually better at generating them. This is more of a problem with MSLA resin printers, as larger supports need to be broken off which can shatter or crack the brittle cured resin.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The part printed without any issues and, as expected, removing the support material left some defects. The two large bars underneath the arms were difficult to remove fully, and the thin beams under the chin left material behind after they were cracked off. The overall level of detail on the model was muted, and the resolution didn’t look as sharp as I would have expected from an MSLA resin printer. The teeth on this vampire bust have been individually modeled, but I noticed that they were difficult to differentiate on the printed model.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The built-in model The_Three_Wise_Skulls_20mb.lgs is a taller print (107.25mm) that let me get a better feel for the level of detail the Orange 10 was capable of. This sliced model was interesting for two reasons; it prints out completely support-free, and it also prints completely solid. This means that it uses more resin in the printing process and has a heavier, denser feel than the Vampire Lord bust (78 grams as opposed to 27).
I was a little more impressed with the detail shown on this model, and the nine hour and 17 minute print time was a pleasant surprise considering the height of the model. The low XY resolution (.115mm) leads to visible stepping on the shallow curves of the model, most notably the back and sides of the skulls.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Preparing Files for Printing with LongerWare
(Image credit: Longer)
Longer includes two apps with the Orange 10; LongerWare and Chitubox. LongerWare is an app that is designed for the Orange 10, Orange 30, and Orange 120 MSLA resin 3D printers. LongerWare includes profiles for the various resin types including water-washable, standard, and castable at multiple resolutions. LongerWare offers the functionality you would expect from a slicing software, such as the ability to scale, rotate, and move models before preparing them for printing.
(Image credit: Longer)
I was disappointed in the overall experience while using LongerWare, though, as
thesoftware feels a little unfinished. There’s no ability to preview print times or material usage in the software, and once exported as an .lgs file for the Orange 10, the object can’t be opened to examine the settings. This feels like a major oversight, and it made planning my print schedule a little difficult. The only way to see the estimated print time is to save a project as a .lgs file, export it to the microSD card, insert the card into the printer, click print, and then see the time on the printer touchscreen interface.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
To test out LongerWare, I printed out a 32mm mini from Loot Studios sliced using the .05mm Water Washable resin profile. The mini (32mm_Georgios_HelmetVersion) printed in just over four hours, and it wasn’t until the mini was above the vat of resin that I noticed the supports had not attached to the model at various points. After removing the model and cleaning it, I saw that the shield was missing a large section. The supports for the shield printed all the way up to the contact point then stopped abruptly, leaving me to believe that the connection between model and support wasn’t strong enough to hold the model in place.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Despite the lack of support material on the shield, the spear printed without issue and successfully completed. The quality of the support material on the spear is hit or miss, with some of the individual structures fused with those adjacent to them.The various defects in this model are frustrating, but the bigger takeaway for me was the difficulty in using the LongerWare software. When compared with the alternative offered by Longer (Chitubox), it’s hard to imagine a situation where it would be advantageous to use LongerWare.
Preparing Files for Printing with Chitubox
(Image credit: Chitubox)
Chitubox includes the Orange Longer 10 on its list of supported printers, but you’ll need to import a plugin to export the .lgs extension used by the printer. Longer includes both the Chitubox app as well as the required plugin on the microSD card included with the machine. Chitubox offers all of the functionality of LongerWare as well as additional features such as print time estimates, material usage estimates, and the ability to fix any potential issues with a sliced file by deleting islands (individual pixels that are not connected to the main body and can float around in the vat or stick to the FEP film).
(Image credit: Chitubox)
I used the same profile on Chitubox that I used on LongerWare (Water Washable for 0.05mm), but I noticed that the exposure time was set to six seconds as opposed to eight. This is a minor difference, but it did make me wonder about what other changes may exist in the various profiles between the slicers. The Z speeds all seemed to be the same, and the bottom layers had the same exposure and height settings as well.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Sliced in Chitubox, the 32mm miniature Minotaur model by Loot Studios printed out in 3 hours and 2 minutes and didn’t seem to have the support delamination issue that the model sliced in LongerWare had. The detail was similar to the other models printed, although some of the smaller features looked a little soft. The support material was attached to the model throughout, and the removal was quick and easy.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Print Size Comparison of the Longer Orange 10 vs. Creality LD-002R
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Longer Orange 10 is a compact 3D printer with a noticeably smaller footprint than other MSLA resin 3D printers. The $199 Creality LD-002R MSLA resin 3D printer offers similar specifications at a slightly-higher price point, so it makes sense to compare the overall build volume and printer volume to get a feel for how much smaller the Longer Orange 10 really is.
Longer Orange 10
Creality LD-002R
Masking LCD Resolution
854 x 480
2560 x 1140
XY Resolution
.115mm
.075mm
Build Dimensions
3.86 x 2.17 x 5.5 inches
4.69 x 2.56 x 6.3 inches
Build Volume
46.07 cubic inches
75.64 cubic inches
Printer Dimensions
6.7 x 6.7 x 14.2 inches
8.7 x 8.7 x 15.9 inches
Printer Volume
637.44 cubic inches
1203.471 cubic inches
Build / Footprint Ratio (higher is better)
7.20%
6.20%
The significantly reduced length in the X and Z axes on the Orange 10 directly translates to a significantly impacted build volume when compared with the LD-002R. The lower resolution masking LCD on the Orange 10 means that the XY resolution is also lower than the LD-002R. However, the compact form factor of the Orange 10 gives it a slight advantage when comparing the overall build volume to footprint ratio.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Printing the Included Bracket Print on the Longer Orange 10
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
After printing a few miniatures, I wanted to see how the Longer Orange 10 performed when making parts that were intended for real-life use. The Orange 10 includes a file on the microSD called ‘BRACKET.lgs’ which prints out in a speedy hour and a half. The bracket has been filled with hexagonal lightweighting holes that perforate the model vertically and circular lightweighting holes that run through horizontally.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The printed bracket felt stiff and lightweight, and the inclusion of this model gave me something to think about while it was curing. While the overall resolution of the Orange 10 doesn’t seem up to the task of printing highly-detailed miniatures, larger or blockier models that don’t require sharp detail may be a good fit for this printer.
The bracket had a minor amount of stepping in the XY plane, but that’s less of a consideration when printing functional parts like this. Seeing this model made me think that this printer may have a home with any user who is looking to print functional parts where accuracy is less of a concern.
Bottom Line
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Longer Orange 10 is currently available directly from Longer for $139. In addition, the Orange 10 is $179.99 on Amazon, and Amazon Prime members can currently pick it up for a very reasonable $143.99 with free shipping. At that price, it can certainly appear that the Orange 10 is a good value for someone interested in getting involved with 3D printing.
Unfortunately, I have a hard time finding a compelling reason to go with the Longer Orange 10 when other budget MSLA resin 3D printers like the Creality LD-002R exist in the same price range. The relatively low resolution on the XY plane and non-Mono LCD means that the Orange 10 will take longer to print lower resolution parts than other budget MSLA resin machines. The Orange 10 strikes me as an application-specific machine, but you will need to have that application ready and in mind before purchasing this printer.
Generally speaking, a lot of the appeal of the Orange 10 will likely come from the rock-bottom pricing of the machine. For users unconcerned with speed or accuracy who want a hands-on assembly like they would get from the Creality Ender 3 Pro FDM 3D printer, the Orange 10 offers a complete MSLA resin 3D printing experience for less money than a date night for two.
The Mavix M5 looks and feels premium, backed by its tough mesh upholstery and pleasant faux leather accents. However, a backrest that forces you to recline and low lumbar support area leaves too much of your back, shoulders and neck unsupported when sitting up straight. It may be better for console or living room gaming than playing at a desk.
For
+ Quality build
+ Wide, supportive seat
+ Versatile, subdued look
+ Smooth-rolling wheels
Against
– Not enough support when sitting up straight
– Lumbar support too low
– Expensive
The Mavix M5 doesn’t look like your average gaming chair. With its black mesh build and faux leather accents, it’s nearly all business. But this chair is still ready to rock with its reliable recline, adjustable armrests and solid seat. The quality of its build is where its $555.55 price starts to make sense, and a warranty that covers some parts for up to 12 years makes for a less risky buy.
But gamers who are a bit on edge while gaming or look to sit up perfectly straight when working, the M5 isn’t a good fit. With the backrest connecting to the seat at a 105-degree angle at minimum, there’s no support for the shoulders and a lot of the back when sitting at a 90-degree angle. You might want to be “Straight Up” like Paula Abdul, but instead the M5 will leave you feeling like Fat Joe in a perpetual state of “Lean Back.”
Mavix M5 Specs
Upholstery
Mesh and PU faux leather
Total Height (with base)
45-54 inches
Seat Height
18.5-23 inches
Backrest Width (Shoulder Level)
20.5 inches
Seating Area Width (Total)
20.5 inches
Seating Area Width (Point of Contact)
20.5 inches
Seating Area Depth
19-21 inches
Armrest Width
4 inches
Armrest Height
23.5-27 inches
Recommended Maximum Weight
300 pounds
Warranty
Non-moving metal parts: 12 years
Moving parts: 5 years
Design
You wouldn’t guess that Mavix calls the M5 a gaming chair by its looks. If you plan on using it in an office setting or even in the living room, which isn’t that far-fetched giving its laidback disposition, it’ll create less of a scene than the bold designs of most gaming chairs. It’s black-on-black mesh pattern and faux leather details look like something you’ve seen cloned by the dozen in office conference rooms. It’s not a flashy chair and will put gamers used to bold colors and references to their favorite characters to sleep. But if I had to pick between the look of the Mavix M5 or the outrageously purple Cooler Master Caliber R2, I’d go for the toned down, versatile look of the M5. That said, any gaming chair I have is destined to do double duty as an office chair. More carefree gamers may feel different about the M5’s looks.
But don’t think this is just a standard mesh chair with no interesting characteristics. For one, the contrast of the faux leather lumbar support area with the headrest and armrests bring some premium finesse. And the white Mavix stitching on the headrest and along the chair’s spine also stand out, even if Mavix isn’t a massive name among gamers yet. Which brings me to the Mavix logo seemingly spray painted on the plastic spine of the chair. This effect is less well-done than the stitching, and, in my unit, showed notable spotting and inconsistency. I can see it fading over the years, and do you know what looks worse than the odd word “Mavix” written on your chair? “Mavix” with parts of the letters missing written on your chair.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The M5 looks most intriguing from the side. With its unique shape and build, the chair’s profile sports an almost futuristic look. Deep curves and bold gaps plus mesh upholstery make it feel less bulky too. However, cleaning is a little tougher than just wiping a faux leather surface with a damp cloth, since gunk can get caught between the mesh holes.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
In a rarer move, you Mavix actually gives you a choice in whether or not you use the headrest. It even includes a covering for the where you’d screw in the headrest so it doesn’t look like something’s missing.
I prefer as much support as possible and cringe at the idea of wasting a whole headrest, so I used it for my testing. It uses a surprisingly thin piece of leather and I do wonder about boring a hole in it after very many years. But overall, the PU leather is finely detailed, from its stitching and texture to its reliable adjustments.
Mavix told me that the M5 is fit for gamers up to 6’4” and 300 pounds.
Comfort and Adjustments
Colorful gaming chairs can become the focal point of a room, but black goes with everything, so I was eager to roll the M5 into my home office and let other peripherals and decor command my setup. But although the M5 looked appropriate in an office setting, it didn’t feel suitablebecause it doesn’t want me to sit up perfectly straight. In fact, the backrest is set at a 105-degree recline at default. You have to recline at least a little bit.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
An extra low lumbar support area touched the back of my hips when sitting up straight, and that’s about the only contact my body made with the chair when sitting upright in a 90-degree angle, which is how I strive to sit when working. Someone a few inches taller and wider than me had the same experience. The M5 didn’t support their shoulders and most of their back at its lowest recline setting. Shoulder support is one of the top reasons I recommend gaming chairs over any ol’ chair, so it’s super disappointing to lack it here. You can raise the lumbar support area (5 settings total), but even at its highest setting, it was still only making contact with my glutes.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
You raise the lumbar support by lifting the bottom of the backrest with both hands, and each time you do, you hear a very loud, metallic clicking noise. Be careful not to make too many adjustments while streaming. I always left mine in the highest position, so after I settled on that, the offputting noise was avoidable.
When sitting up straight, I was able to get the headset to provide some neck support, but it never felt natural. At best my neck was resting on the harder ledge of the headrest, rather than the intended, curved region. There isn’t really any give it to it, so any hairstyles that put your hair behind your head, like a ponytail, make it more uncomfortable. Many gaming chairs I’ve tested are lacking in the neck support area though. Even the luxurious and moveable neck pillow in the Secretlab Omega Titan faltered.
Instead of sitting up straight or encouraging perfect posture, the M5 is a more laid-back chair. It feels more lounge-like and will be more fitting for gamers who look as relaxed when they game as I look stressed and focused. It can also be a good fit for the living room, where I’m more likely to game with a console controller and lean back. But when I’m gaming at a desk with a keyboard and desk, I prefer to sit straight or even forward. The M5 isn’t good for that.
Still, this is a surprisingly firm chair with a lot of support in the seat, which might’ve surprised me if I didn’t feel how heavy the seat is. Mesh means you won’t find yourself inadvertently stuck to it on a warmer day, and it feels rough when rubbing on your skin. The seat also didn’t sink in or cause any aching when I sat on it for hours. But because of the unfortunate backrest positioning, I’m usually sitting all the way at the back of the seat, where it starts sloping downwards. And although this is a porous chair, its mesh feels strong and built to hold you for a long time.
The seat’s depth is adjustable, but this didn’t fix any of my complaints. It is a rarer adjustment to find on a gaming chair and ensures you have enough room between the seat’s lip and the back of your knees. We have seen this on other chairs, though, including the far more expensive Herman Miller X Logitech G Embody.
Speaking of having enough room, the M5’s seat is a roomy 20.5 inches wide. For comparison, the Secret Lab Omega’s sittable area is 14 inches wide. That extra seat is great for wider frames and even the occasional crossed-legged sit; although the chair’s harder sides and rougher texture make this more taxing. You can add an extra inch to the seat’s width if you pay Mavix an extra $44.44 (anyone else noticing an odd pricing pattern?).
Keeping up with its more loungy feel, the M5 can recline from its 105-degree default position back to 150 degrees. Some gaming chairs go all the way back to 180 degrees, but I’m not one to catch a nap in my gaming chair, so 150 degrees is ample. I felt relatively sturdy in this position, but there is some give, allowing the chair to push back about another inch if you apply pressure and then gently shift forward back into place.
There’s a knob that controls how difficult it is to recline, but I found it hard to reach, hard to twist and ultimately ineffective.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The M5’s 5 wheels can lock in place or roll around smoothly. Unlike cheaper chairs, the M5 moves smoothly and easily without making an alarming metallic or clunking noise that makes you wonder if you should be moving the thing around at all.
Another more premium touch that makes the $555.55 price more sensible is the adjustability of the armrests. These foam rests are covered in faux leather and just the right amount of squish and depth at about 0.6-inch thick. They move up and down 3.5 inches and can click inward for 3 settings total per armrest. There’s a little wobble to the armrests if you force it but this was hardly noticeable unless I was purposely rattling them.
Assembly
The M5 was one of the easiest gaming chairs I’ve built. I was able to complete it within 40 minutes by myself. Typically, I need help holding the back in place while I screw it into the seat, but I was able to attach the heavy seat to the base all on my own this time.
Overall, the chair required 4 bolts and washers for the armrests, 3 bolts and washers for attaching the backrest to the seat and 2 screws for attaching the optional headrest. Mavix is kind enough to give you an hex and allen wrench for the job, as well as two spare pairs of bolts and washers, just in case.
What you don’t get are print-out instructions. Instead, you’ll have to rely on Mavix’s video, which can be annoying, but you can get the information you need without turning audio on.
Warranty
A gaming chair is the type of thing you’d hope to be able to hang onto for years, especially when it’s over $500. Mavix offers one of the better warranties we’ve seen for a gaming chair — or, parts of a gaming chair, I should say.
The M5’s non-moving and metal parts, which a Mavix spokesperson told me encompasses the “backrest support system, mechanism casing and chair base” and “armrest under seat brackets” are guaranteed for 12 years. Unfortunately, the hole-filled mesh, armrests and faux leather pieces aren’t included here. The chair’s “moving parts and materials” are under warranty for 5 years, with 2 years of those including coverage of shipping costs for new parts. For comparison, the Secretlab Omega has a 3-year warranty that goes up to 5 years if you share a picture of your chair on social media. The $300 AndaSeat Jungle’s warranty, meanwhile, is 2 years.
You can see the full details of Mavix’s warranty here.
Bottom Line
The Mavix M5 is a well-made gaming chair that seems built to last and lounge. Its mesh design is more buttoned up than other gaming chairs we’ve seen with bright colors or familiar characters, but not everyone needs their gaming chair to scream of League of Legends. Finding a home that the M5 doesn’t clash with will be easy.
For something with a more uptight look, this is a laid-back chair. With 105-degrees being the most acute recline the backrest supports, sitting perfectly straight becomes painful, due to a lack of support in everything from the upper-lower back upward. This is a shame for those who aim for perfect posture or like to lean a little forward to really get into the action.
For the more loungy gamer though, this won’t be a problem. If you like to lay back while playing (you are relaxing, after all), the M5 will feel strong, and its mesh fabric makes for a tough throne that’ll keep you supported (where your body makes contact), even when laying back 150 degrees. Console and living room gamers, especially, may appreciate the M5’s more relaxed positioning.
With it’s sturdy, quality build and supportive seat and armrests, the M5 is the latest thing to make leaning back cool, although probably not as much as Fat Joe did.
Twitter has removed more than 50 tweets critical of the Indian government’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, and did so at the request of the Indian government. First reported by Indian news site MediaNama, the Indian government sent Twitter an emergency order on Friday to censor 52 tweets, according to a disclosure notice on the Lumen database. The censored accounts include a sitting member of India’s Parliament, two filmmakers, an actor, and a West Bengal state minister.
A Twitter spokesperson said in an email to The Verge that the company may make certain tweets unable to be viewed by people within India if the tweets violate local law. Twitter says it notified account holders before it withheld content to make them aware that the action was taken in response to a legal request from the government of India.
“When we receive a valid legal request, we review it under both the Twitter Rules and local law. If the content violates Twitter’s Rules, the content will be removed from the service,” according to the Twitter spokesperson. “If it is determined to be illegal in a particular jurisdiction, but not in violation of the Twitter Rules, we may withhold access to the content in India only. In all cases, we notify the account holder directly so they’re aware that we’ve received a legal order pertaining to the account.”
It isn’t the first time that Twitter has bowed to pressure from the Indian government. During protests by farmers in February, the company permanently blocked more than 500 accounts and removed others from being visible within India. The Indian government issued a notice of noncompliance to the company, the New York Times reported at the time, which could have meant jail time for Twitter’s employees in India if the company had refused. Among the accounts suspended in February was Indian news magazine The Caravan (which was later reinstated):
Indian law restricts the publication of material that the government considers defamatory, or which could incite violence. According to the Lumen notice, one of the tweets that was censored in India (but which is still visible outside the country) was this one from West Bengal state minister Moloy Ghatak, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi of downplaying the seriousness of the coronavirus pandemic.
“India will never forgive PM @narendramodi for underplaying the corona situation in the country and letting so many people die due to mismanagement. At a time when India is going through a health crisis, PM chose to export millions of vaccine to other nations,” the tweet reads.
India is in the midst of a second wave of COVID-19 cases, which has made ventilators, medicine, and oxygen scarce. According to the Johns Hopkins coronavirus resource center, India reported 346,786 new cases of the coronavirus on Friday, a new record high, and 2,624 deaths, also a new record. Less than 1.5 percent of the country’s population has been fully vaccinated.
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
If a $100 budget phone is the fast-food dollar menu and a $1,000 flagship is a steakhouse dinner, then the Samsung Galaxy A52 5G sits comfortably halfway between the two: the laid-back all-day cafe with surprisingly tasty food.
It’s good. More importantly, it’s good where it matters. Sure, you have to order your food at the counter and get your own water refills, but it’s worth it because brunch is fantastic and the prices are reasonable.
The A52 5G is the highest-specced of the budget A-series Galaxy phones we’ll see in the US this year, offering all of the basics for its $499 price tag along with a few good extras. Its 6.5-inch screen comes with a fast 120Hz refresh rate that’s scarce at this price point. Its main camera includes optical image stabilization, something I missed when I used the more expensive OnePlus 9. The A52 5G is rated IP67 waterproof for some extra peace of mind. And hey, there’s still a headphone jack! In this economy!
Still, this isn’t a flagship, and costs had to be cut somewhere. The device’s frame and back panel are plastic, and while I like the matte finish on the back, there’s a certain hollowness when you tap on it that’s not very reassuring. There’s also no telephoto to complement the wide and ultrawide cameras, just digital zoom plus a depth sensor and macro camera of dubious usefulness.
The important stuff is here, though. Samsung has the A52 5G on its list for monthly OS updates currently, and it says it will offer three years of major Android OS updates and at least some security support for four years. That will go a long way toward making the most out of your investment in this phone, and it will help you take advantage of its headline feature: 5G — Sub-6GHz, specifically, with hardware-level support for the C-band frequencies carriers will start using in 2022.
It’s getting more common to see 5G offered in midrange and budget phones, but in this country, it’ll be a couple more years before our 5G networks are truly good. Healthy device support for the next few years makes it more likely that the A52 5G will actually last long enough to make it to that 5G promised land.
The A52 5G offers solid everyday performance with a Snapdragon 750G chipset and 6GB of RAM.
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G performance and screen
The A52 5G uses a Snapdragon 750G processor with 6GB of RAM, and the combination feels like a good fit here. You can certainly push it out of its comfort zone with heavier tasks like webpages with JavaScript, and I noticed it hesitating a moment too long when opening the camera app from the lock screen. But for day-to-day tasks and social media scrolling, it keeps up well.
As in last year’s model, the screen is where the A52 5G (and Samsung generally) really stand out. This is a 6.5-inch 1080p OLED panel that’s rich, bright, and generally lovely to look at. Plus, it offers all of the velvety smoothness that comes with its 120Hz refresh rate. Swiping between home screens, opening apps, scrolling through Twitter — it all just feels nicer with a fast refresh rate.
Even considering the additional power needed for the 120Hz screen, the A52 5G’s 4,500mAh battery consistently lasted well into the next day in my use. I managed to get two full days out of it when I forgot to charge it overnight and decided to embrace chaos and just plow through on the remaining charge. This was with light to moderate use, and I was down to low double-digit battery percentage by the end of day two, but my gamble paid off.
One feature I continue to fight a losing battle with on the A52 5G is the in-display optical fingerprint sensor. I’ve been chastised by the phone many times for not leaving my finger on the sensor long enough, and I almost always need at least two tries to get it to register. That hit rate goes down significantly outside in bright light.
These problems aren’t unique to this device, and you can just opt to use (less secure) facial recognition or a plain old PIN to lock and unlock the phone. But there are nicer in-display fingerprint readers in pricier phones like the OnePlus 9 and Samsung’s own S21, so it’s a trade-off to be aware of.
The Galaxy A52 5G ships with Android 11, which is great. The less good news is, as we saw in the S21 devices earlier this year, Samsung’s latest take on the OS stuffs a lot of unwanted apps, ads, and general clutter into the UI. I see enough ads throughout my day as it is, and I do not appreciate seeing one more when I check the weather on my phone’s own weather app.
If there’s a positive way to look at this situation, it’s that it feels more forgivable on a budget phone than on a $1,000-plus flagship. But I’d rather not have the ads at all. If you buy the similarly priced Pixel 4A 5G, you give up a lot of other features from the A52 5G, but you get an ad-free experience.
Housed in the rear camera bump are a standard wide, ultrawide, macro, and depth sensor.
Samsung Galaxy A52 5G camera
The A52 5G includes three rear cameras, plus a 5-megapixel depth sensor. You get a 64-megapixel standard wide with OIS, 12-megapixel ultrawide, and the seemingly obligatory 5-megapixel macro camera. There’s also a front-facing 32-megapixel selfie camera.
Taken with 2x digital zoom
Taken with ultrawide
Taken with ultrawide
The 64-megapixel main camera produces 16-megapixel images in its standard photo mode that are bright with the very saturated colors you’d expect from a Samsung phone. Sometimes the look is pleasant, but more often than not, it’s a little much for my taste. The good news is that this sensor is capable of capturing lots of fine detail in good lighting, and it even does well in dim to very low-light conditions.
I put its night mode up against the Google Pixel 4A, which is still the low-light champ in the midrange class. There’s more noise visible in the A52 5G’s night mode shot, and details have a watercolory look, but while the 4A hangs on to its title, the A52 5G is quite close behind.
Left: Galaxy A52 night mode. Right: Pixel 4A night mode.“,”image_left”:{“ratio”:”*”,”original_url”:”https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22465175/samsung_night_crop.jpg”,”network”:”verge”,”bgcolor”:”white”,”pinterest_enabled”:false,”caption”:null,”credit”:null,”focal_area”:{“top_left_x”:0,”top_left_y”:0,”bottom_right_x”:2040,”bottom_right_y”:1580},”bounds”:[0,0,2040,1580],”uploaded_size”:{“width”:2040,”height”:1580},”focal_point”:null,”asset_id”:22465175,”asset_credit”:null,”alt_text”:””},”image_right”:{“ratio”:”*”,”original_url”:”https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22465178/pixel_night_crop.jpg”,”network”:”verge”,”bgcolor”:”white”,”pinterest_enabled”:false,”caption”:null,”credit”:null,”focal_area”:{“top_left_x”:0,”top_left_y”:0,”bottom_right_x”:2040,”bottom_right_y”:1580},”bounds”:[0,0,2040,1580],”uploaded_size”:{“width”:2040,”height”:1580},”focal_point”:null,”asset_id”:22465178,”asset_credit”:null,”alt_text”:””},”credit”:null}” data-cid=”apps/imageslider-1619271003_9454_116978″>
Left: Galaxy A52 night mode. Right: Pixel 4A night mode.
The Pixel 4A is still the better camera in good lighting, too, but the differences are more subjective here. The 4A goes for more subdued color rendering, and the A52 5G’s images lack a little contrast in comparison.
So the A52 5G can’t beat the generation-old imaging tech in the 4A, but that might say more about the Pixel than anything else. Aside from that, the A52 5G turns in good all-around camera performance. Images from the ultrawide sometimes have a little cooler color cast but are generally good. The selfie camera offers two zoom settings: a slightly cropped-in standard wide view and an ever-so-slightly wider angle. The “focal length” difference between the two is almost laughably small.
At its default settings, the selfie camera does a fair amount of face smoothing and brightening. I don’t think it quite crosses the line into hamcam territory, but it certainly has that telltale “maybe it’s AI, maybe it’s Maybelline” smoothed look to it.
If you want to go full hamcam, there’s a new mode just labeled “fun” in the camera app with AR face filters brought to you by Snapchat. There’s a different selection of them every day, and you don’t need a Snapchat account to use or share them.
I’m tempted to dismiss them as “for the youths,” but maybe this is really for the olds like me who would rather not join another social platform if I can possibly avoid it, thank you very much. At last, I can transform my face into a piece of broccoli and share it with the world without logging in to Snapchat — three years after the kids have all moved on to something else. Anyway, it’s there, it works, and you can indeed turn your face into broccoli.
Good hardware and healthy software support make the A52 5G worth spending a little more on.
There’s a lot that the Galaxy A52 5G gets right. Maybe the most important feature is one that sounds much less exciting than cool headline specs: security updates for at least the next few years. At $500, this is the higher end of the budget market, but a few extra hundred dollars is likely easier to swallow if you know you’ll get a couple more years out of your investment.
Samsung has invested in hardware in all the right places: the 120Hz screen makes for an elevated user experience, battery life is good, camera performance is strong, and a healthy processor / chipset combination handles daily tasks well.
What I didn’t love — the cluttered software, fussy fingerprint sensor, a tendency toward oversaturated color in photos — feels more forgivable when the phone gets the nonnegotiable stuff right. The Pixel 4A 5G is probably this device’s closest competition, and it beats the A52 5G on camera quality and a cleaner UI, but it’s a smaller device without a fancy fast refresh rate screen. Depending on how you feel about either of those things, the 4A 5G might be the better pick for you.
In any case, the A52 5G is a good midrange phone today. But just as importantly, it will be a good phone a few years from now. With solid hardware and a software support system to back it up, this is a pricier budget phone that’s worth budgeting a little extra for.
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
Lenovo’s Ideapad Flex 3 Chromebook is one of the tiniest Chromebooks I’ve ever used. It’s also one of the cheapest, retailing for just $349.99.
Any laptop that costs that little is going to have some serious drawbacks — and the Flex 3 certainly does. On the other hand, if you’re the sort of shopper who’s willing to set those aside, this little IdeaPad also has a number of pleasant surprises up its sleeve. There are even a few areas (in particular, the battery life) where it gives significantly more expensive devices a run for their money.
I’ll start with the pleasant surprises. The Flex 3 offers a more modern port selection than I’d expect at its price point — there are two USB 3.1 Type-C Gen 1 ports and two USB 3.1 Type-A Gen 1 ports (one on each side, which is really handy for charging and connecting accessories), as well as a microSD reader, an audio combo jack, and a lock slot. There’s a 720p webcam that works decently well if you’re not in low light. And the touchpad is surprisingly sturdy — I often find that touchpads in this price range feel plasticky. The Flex even comes with a Google Security H1 chip, which encrypts sensitive on-device data.
There’s a power button on the side, as well as a volume rocker.
There are two features that really impressed me (in addition to the battery life, which I’ll discuss later on). First, I can’t stop talking about the keyboard. It’s great, with tons of travel and a satisfying click. The keys have a slightly rough texture that really grew on me. I got one of the highest scores I’ve ever gotten on my usual typing test, with almost no errors. The only note is that it lacks backlighting, a feature you’ll find on more expensive devices like Acer’s Chromebook Spin 713 (our current top Chromebook pick) and Lenovo’s Flex 5 Chromebook.
God, I love a good keyboard.
Second, audio. The balance and volume that these 2W stereo speakers deliver are on par with those of any number of more expensive Chromebooks. They easily beat the Spin 713, which sounds tinny and thin. There are caveats, of course: There’s very little bass, percussion is weak, I heard a bit of distortion at max volume, and you’ll want an external speaker for any crowded setting. But the Flex is great for video conferences and regular music-listening, and certainly beats what I’ve heard from all kinds of Windows laptops that are over $1,000.
Now, for the major drawbacks. First, this thing is a clunker. It’s not too heavy, at 2.65 pounds, but it’s 0.7 inches thick, and it’s not too far from the size of many modern 13-inch laptops despite having just an 11-inch screen. My main turnoff, though, is the bezels. Good lord, the bezels are enormous. When I’m using the Flex 3, I feel like I’m looking at a small window of screen floating in an abyss of black. It looks like a device you’d have bought in 2014.
I wish Lenovo had sprung for a better screen.
I do like some things about the chassis, though. It doesn’t feel at all flimsy, with an aluminum cover and a non-plasticky finish. The display and keyboard are free of flex (despite the laptop’s name). And the 360 hinge is sturdy, with very little wobble.
Speaking of the display, though: That’s the second major drawback here. It’s cramped — I often use two windows side-by-side and I’ve been squinting at tiny text in order to make that work on the Flex 3. Moreover, it’s dim (maxing out at 250 nits), kicks back a ton of glare even indoors, and is quite low-resolution (1366 x 768). I’m gonna be real: It’s pixel-y to look at. I’ve been using the Flex 3 as my primary driver for a week, and while I will miss the keyboard and audio when I send it back, I can’t wait never to have to look at this terrible screen again.
That’s the lowdown on the chassis — let’s look inside. This Ideapad Flex 3 Chromebook configuration is powered by Intel’s dual-core Celeron N4020. That’s the bottom of the barrel as Intel processors go, and it comes with just 4GB of memory (LPDDR4-2400, soldered) and 64GB of eMMC 5.1 storage.
On a Windows machine, these specs would be a hard pass. But Chrome OS is a lighter load, and I can vouch that the Flex 3’s screen is a bigger limit on multitasking than its horsepower is. I was able to use the laptop for a substantial workload, jumping between dozens of Chrome tabs and some apps, but the experience was cramped enough that I wouldn’t recommend it.
The color is called “almond”.
Scrolling got a bit sluggish when I tried to work on top of a Spotify or YouTube stream, and the transitions between laptop and tablet mode were a bit slower than I would’ve liked. The only task where I ran into real trouble, though, was sorting through a batch of shots in Google Photos (with a couple other apps running on the side). The Flex 3 did get the job done, but it was quite slow. The one Zoom meeting I tried (on top of some other tabs I needed) was also a bad experience — audio randomly cut out a couple times, and video was stuttery throughout.
Overall, this device is best if you’re looking to do basic office or school tasks, and don’t think you’ll need to have more than a few things open at a time. (And in case this doesn’t go without saying, you’ll want to stay far away from this thing if you plan on doing anything fancy with Linux.)
The flipside of the weak processor is that the Flex 3 has excellent battery life. I averaged eight hours and 45 minutes to a charge with brightness at 50 percent — and I was pushing the thing harder than most people probably will be, as noted above. You can expect that this thing will last all day, and certainly longer than many more powerful Chromebooks. The 45W charger is acceptably quick, juicing the device up to 60 percent in 52 minutes.
Six rows of keys.
The Flex 3 runs Chrome OS, which means it can run Android apps natively. Some of these have improved since the last time I used this operating system — Messenger is now functional and no longer a complete disaster that bricks the machine, for example. But most of the services I use daily (Slack, Twitter, Gmail, Reddit, etc.) are just better experiences in a browser, so I didn’t use the dedicated app functionality all that often. There’s also still a double-notification problem — every time I got a Slack message, I got a notification both from the Slack Android app and my browser.
The Flex 3 also supports Chrome OS’s tablet mode, which has gotten quite good. It supports Android-esque gesture controls, which should help flatten the learning curve for new Chromebook users (though they were a bit sluggish on this device).
Deciding whether to buy a $350 Chromebook comes down to understanding what the big drawbacks are. In this case, there are two: The screen is cramped, and the processor is weak. So the question to ask is: Given those caveats, can you get your stuff done?
If you’re just using this device to pay bills, email people, and run some YouTube videos, I would say you can. It’ll be a little cramped, but you can. And if you can stomach that, the Flex 3 does deliver some great benefits in other areas, from the great keyboard and convenient ports to the outstanding battery life and respectable audio. In these categories, it rivals or surpasses our top Chromebook pick (the Spin 713). If you’re okay with its flaws, you’ll find that the Flex 3 offers quite a bit for its budget price.
Photography by Monica Chin / The Verge
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
