Cerebras, the company behind the Wafer Scale Engine (WSE), the world’s largest single processor, shared more details about its latest WSE-2 today at the Linley Spring Processor Conference. The new WSE-2 is a 7nm update to the original Cerebras chip and is designed to tackle AI workloads with 850,000 cores at its disposal. Cerebras claims that this chip, which comes in an incredibly small 26-inch tall unit, replaces clusters of hundreds or even thousands of GPUs spread across dozens of server racks that use hundreds of kilowatts of power.
The new WSE-2 now wields 850,00 AI-optimized cores spread out over 46,225 mm2 of silicon (roughly 12×12 in.) packed with 2.6 trillion transistors. Cerebras also revealed today that the second-gen chip has 40 GB of on-chip SRAM memory, 20 petabytes of memory bandwidth, and 220 petabits of aggregate fabric bandwidth. The company also revealed that the chip consumes the same 15kW of power as its predecessor but provides twice the performance, which is the benefit of moving to the denser 7nm node from the 16nm used with the previous-gen chip.
These almost unbelievable specifications stem from the fact that the company uses an entire TSMC 7nm wafer to construct one large chip, thus sidestepping the typical reticle limitations of modern chip manufacturing to create a wafer-sized processor. The company builds in redundant cores directly into the hardware, which then leaves room for disabling defective cores, to sidestep the impact of defects during the manufacturing process.
The company accomplishes this feat by stitching together the dies on the wafer with a communication fabric, thus allowing it to work as one large cohesive unit. This fabric provides 220 Petabits/S of throughput for the WSE2, which is slightly more than twice the 100 Petabits/S of the first-gen model. The wafer also includes 40GB of on-chip memory that provides up to 20 Petabytes/S of throughput, both of which are also more than twice that of the previous-gen WSE.
Image 1 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 2 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 3 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 4 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 5 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 6 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 7 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 8 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 9 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 10 of 10
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Cerebras hasn’t specified the WSE-2’s clock speeds, but has told us in the past that the first-gen WSE doesn’t run at a very “aggressive” clock (which the company defined as a range from 2.5GHz to 3GHz). We’re now told that the WSE-2 runs at the same clock speeds as the first-gen model, but provides twice the performance within the same power envelope due to its increased system resources. We certainly don’t see those types of generational performance improvements with CPUs, GPUs, or most accelerators. Cerebras says that it has made unspecified changes to the microarchitecture to extract more performance, too.
As you can see below, cores are distributed into tiles, with each tile having its own router, SRAM memory, FMAC datapath, and tensor control. All cores are connected via a 2D mesh low-latency fabric. The company claims these optimizations result in a 2x improvement in wall clock training time with a BERT-style network training that was completed using the same code and compiler used with the first-gen wafer-scale chip.
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 2 of 4
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 3 of 4
(Image credit: Cerebras)
Image 4 of 4
(Image credit: Cerebras)
As before, the chip comes wrapped in a specialized 15U system that’s designed specifically to accommodate the unique characteristics of the wafer-scale device. We’re told that the changes to the first-gen CS-1 system, which you can read about in-depth here, are very minimal in the new CS-2 variant. Given that the most important metrics, like power consumption and the size of the WSE, have remained the same, it makes sense that most of the system is identical.
Cerebras hasn’t specified pricing, but we expect the WSE-2 unit will continue to attract attention from the military and intelligence communities for any multitude of purposes, including nuclear modeling, but Cerebras can’t divulge several of its customers (for obvious reasons). It’s safe to assume they are the types with nearly unlimited budgets, so pricing isn’t a concern. On the public-facing side, the Argonne National Laboratory is using the first systems for cancer research and basic science, like studying black holes.
Cerebras also notes that its compiler easily scaled to exploit twice the computational power, so the software ecosystem that is already in place is supported. As such, the WSE-2 unit can accept standard PyTorch and TensorFlow code that is easily modified with the company’s software tools and APIs. The company also allows customers instruction-level access to the silicon, which stands in contrast to GPU vendors.
Cerebras has working systems already in service now, and general availability of the WSE-2 is slated for the third quarter of 2021.
There’s no doubt that the Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 is a speedy memory kit. Unfortunately, the hefty price tag will probably scare off potential buyers.
It’s hard not to know Acer – it’s one of the more prominent mainstream brands in the computer industry. However, the company’s Predator sub-brand might not ring a bell for the typical computer user that’s not into gaming. Nonetheless, the Predator label is home to Acer’s premium gaming PCs, laptops, monitors, and chairs. To further expand its reach, Acer has created Predator Storage, a new family of high-performance storage and memory products that target enthusiasts and gamers alike.
Acer won’t actually manage Predator Storage, though. Following in HP’s footsteps, Acer has handed the reins over to Chinese OEM Biwin Storage to manufacture and commercialize Predator-branded memory and SSDs on its behalf in the United States and Canadian markets. Today marks Predator Storage’s first venture into the memory market. The sub-brand debuts with its Apollo RGB series of gaming memory that offers frequencies ranging from DDR4-3200 up to DDR4-5000.
Image 1 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Predator Apollo RGB memory modules sport an aluminum heat spreader for effective heat dissipation. According to the brand, the design takes after a cyberpunk theme. It features a two-tone paint job with a mixture of black and silver colors and is carved in such a way that it exposes the majority of the LED diffuser. However, one thing to consider is that the Predator Apollo RGB measures 51.4mm (2.02 inches) tall, so you’ll need to make sure you have the necessary clearance space for the memory modules, especially if you’re using a large CPU air cooler.
As with any modern-day gaming memory, the Predator Apollo RGB is equipped with RGB lighting that you can configure to your heart’s content. Software isn’t provided for such purposes, but the memory is compatible with all the major RGB ecosystems, including Asus Aura Sync, Gigabyte RGB Fusion 2.0, MSI Mystic Light Sync, and ASRock Polychrome Sync.
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Our Predator Apollo RGB memory kit checks in at an unorthodox data rate of DDR4-4500. There are so few DDR4-4500 memory kits on the market that we can count them with the fingers of one hand. As you can tell by now, the Predator Apollo RGB is a dual-channel 16GB memory kit, so it consists of two DDR4 memory modules with a density of 8GB each. The memory modules are based on a single-rank design and are manufactured with a 10-layer PCB and 15μm gold-plated contacts.
Leveraging Samsung’s K4A8G085WB-BCPB (B-die) ICs, the Predator Apollo RGB is rated for DDR4-4500 at 19-19-19-39 timings with a 1.45V DRAM voltage requirement. When the XMP 2.0 profile for the advertised speed isn’t active, the memory modules default to DDR4-2133 with automatic timings at 15-15-15-36. 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
Thermaltake ToughRAM RGB
R009D408GX2-4600C19A
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4600 (XMP)
19-26-26-45 (2T)
1.50
Lifetime
Predator Apollo RGB
BL.9BWWR.255
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4500 (XMP)
19-19-19-39 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
Patriot Viper 4 Blackout
PVB416G440C8K
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4400 (XMP)
18-26-26-46 (2T)
1.45
Lifetime
Klevv Cras XR RGB
KD48GU880-40B190Z
2 x 8GB
DDR4-4000 (XMP)
19-25-25-45 (2T)
1.40
Lifetime
TeamGroup T-Force Xtreem ARGB
TF10D416G3600HC14CDC01
2 x 8GB
DDR4-3600 (XMP)
14-15-15-35 (2T)
1.45
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 is the main graphics card in our RAM benchmarks.
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)
The Apollo RGB kit performed as expected on the Intel platform. The memory struggled against rivals with lower frequencies and optimized timings. However, it was surprising to see that the Apollo RGB even bested the T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14 kit, even if it’s only by a couple of points. The Apollo RGB ranked second place in the gaming chart.
AMD 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)
On the contrary, the Apollo RGB memory performed best on the AMD platform. The memory kit managed to defeat all the memory kits, except for the T-Force Dark Z FPS DDR4-4000 C16 memory kit. Gaming on the AMD platform also favored Predator Storage’s kit as it jumped up to the top of the gaming chart.
Overclocking and Latency Tuning
Image 1 of 3
Memory Review (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Despite leveraging Samsung B-die ICs, increasing the DRAM voltage to 1.5V didn’t get us anywhere. Bumping it to 1.55V, however, allowed us to overclock the memory to DDR4-4600. In the process, we also dropped the timings from 19-19-19-39 to 18-18-18-38.
Lowest Stable Timings
Memory Kit
DDR4-3600 (1.46V)
DDR4-4000 (1.45V)
DDR4-4200 (1.45V)
DDR4-4400 (1.45V)
DDR4-4500 (1.55V)
DDR4-4600 (1.55V)
DDR4-4666 (1.56V)
Thermaltake ToughRAM RGB DDR4-4600 C19
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
18-24-24-44 (2T)
20-26-26-45 (2T)
Predator Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
18-18-18-38 (2T)
18-18-18-38 (2T)
N/A
Patriot Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-4400 C18
N/A
N/A
N/A
17-25-25-45 (2T)
21-26-26-46 (2T)
N/A
N/A
Klev Cras XR RGB DDR4-4000 C19
N/A
18-22-22-42 (2T)
N/A
19-25-25-45 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
TeamGroup T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-3600 C14
13-14-14-35 (2T)
N/A
19-19-19-39 (2T)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
If you’re perfectly satisfied with DDR4-4500, the Apollo RGB kit is very happy with a 1.5V DRAM voltage and tight timings of 18-18-18-38. That was the lowest we could push the memory before instability kicked in.
Bottom Line
The first time is always the hardest, and despite being the company’s first foray into the memory market, Predator Storage did a good job with the Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 kit. We won’t delve into the memory’s aesthetics since it’s a subjective matter. Performance-wise, the Apollo RGB will not disappoint, but it will have a hard time contending with some DDR4-4000 and above memory kits with tight timings, more specifically on Intel platforms. In its favor, the Apollo RGB does feature high-quality Samsung B-die ICs, so overclocking and tweaking are definitely on the menu, but your mileage will vary.
The Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 kit’s price tag will be the hardest thing to swallow for most consumers. The MSRP for the memory kit is $299.99, so it’s on the more expensive end of the spectrum. It’s hard to consider the Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 at current pricing, especially when you have tough competitors, like Patriot’s Viper 4 Blackout DDR4-4400 C18 that only sets you back $134.99. However, hardware doesn’t always retail at the manufacturer’s established MSRP, especially when it comes to products like memory that tend to have volatile pricing, so it remains to be seen if the Apollo RGB DDR4-4500 C19 will maintain the $299.99 price tag when it lands at retailers this month.
Apple introduced a redesigned iMac today with a slimmer display, an Apple Silicon chip, and a case with bright, bold colors that throws back to the classic colorful all-in-one iMacs. Apple said the new iMac was designed from the ground up for the M1 chip.
The new iMac has a 24-inch, 4.5K display with narrower borders around the top and sides. It still has a large chin on the bottom, but the rear of the display is now flat instead of curved — Apple says the volume has been reduced by over 50 percent. The screen also has Apple’s True Tone tech for automatically adjusting the color temperature.
Apple is also promising a much-needed update to the iMac’s camera and mics so that you’ll look better on video calls. It now has a 1080p resolution and a larger sensor.
The new iMac is 11.5mm thin, but Apple says it should stay quieter and cooler than the previous model thanks to the M1 chip. The new model has “two small fans” replacing the “bulky thermal system” of the previous-generation iMac, the company says.
There’s also a new magnetic power cable — it sounds a lot like the old MagSafe cable — that attaches to the back. Ethernet can be connected to the power brick and delivered through the same cable. The entry-level model will come with two USB-C / Thunderbolt ports on the back, and a higher-end model will add an additional two USB-C ports (without Thunderbolt support). Incredibly, there is still a headphone jack.
Alongside the new iMac, Apple is also introducing a keyboard, mouse, and trackpad in colors to match. The keyboard has a Touch ID button for logging in.
The new iMac starts at $1,299, though some of the colors are reserved for the higher-end $1,499 model. It’ll be available in the second half of May, with orders starting April 30th. There are seven color options total. The base model comes with 8GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD; it can be upgraded to include up to 16GB of RAM and 2TB of storage.
This is the first iMac to switch to Apple Silicon, the chips that Apple has been designing in-house. The company first added an Apple Silicon chip to the MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Mini in November. Apple plans to eventually roll out these Arm-based chips to its entire Mac line. While the transition means that macOS software needs to be updated to support the new chips, so far the trade-offs have been worth it. The first generation of M1 Macs have been extremely well received, with the new chips offering improved power and battery life.
Finding software via the Microsoft Store app for Windows 10 might be less painful soon. Windows Central today reported that Microsoft is redesigning the app to offer a better experience for developers and consumers alike with a variety of changes.
Microsoft started distributing software via the Windows Store for Windows 10 in 2015. Then in 2017, it rebranded the platform to the Microsoft Store, and that version of the storefront hasn’t changed much in the four years since its introduction.
But that could be about to change. Windows Central said that Microsoft plans to change the Microsoft Store’s user interface to better appeal to Windows 10 users while simultaneously introducing new policies to be more developer-friendly.
Both aspects of that redesign will prove vital. Windows 10 users have little incentive to find apps on the Microsoft Store because it isn’t comprehensive and, in many cases, it isn’t much more convenient than simply downloading an “.exe” directly.
This contributes to a vicious cycle where consumers aren’t driven to the Microsoft Store because it doesn’t have all the apps they want, and as long as they’re willing to find programs elsewhere, developers aren’t going to flock to the storefront.
Windows Central reported that Microsoft plans to incentivize software distribution via the Microsoft Store with three policy changes that would:
Allow developers to submit unpackaged Win32 apps to the Store
Allow developers to host apps and updates on their own content delivery network (CDN)
Alllow developers to use third-party commerce platforms in apps
The storefront is also expected to be “reinvigorated with new layouts, WinUI designs, iconography, and fluid animations” as part of the Sun Valley update to Windows 10 that’s expected to make sweeping changes to the operating system later this year.
Microsoft will always struggle to make the Microsoft Store as popular on Windows 10 as, say, the App Store is on iOS by the platform’s very nature. It’s easy to make a distribution channel popular when it’s literally the only way to install apps on a platform; it’s much harder to do the same for an optional distribution channel.
At least there’s hope for people who don’t want to go search the web every time they want to install a particular app. Being an optional part of the Windows 10 experience doesn’t make the Microsoft Store’s ease of use or developer policies less important.
AMD is releasing Adrenalin driver 21.4.1 today with several improvements for some of the best graphics cards, as well as a host of new updates to AMD Link and Radeon Software. These include features such as CPU monitoring in the Radeon Software, a new GPU stress-testing utility, and a Windows 10 app for AMD Link.
AMD Link — AMD’s remote desktop program — has been updated to version 4.0, and includes an all-new Windows 10 app for use on any Windows 10 device. No longer are you constrained to using AMD Link on a smart TV or Arm-based smartphone/tablet. AMD also added a few extra features including 144 fps streaming support, trackpad sensitivity support, and 5.1 surround sound support.
For Radeon Software, AMD added several additional features that should make the app easier to use and more useful. In the streaming department, AMD has added a new automatic quality function that allows Radeon Software to dynamically adjust your stream quality (if you’re streaming from Radeon Software), to ensure a stable and good quality stream. Plus, you can now choose which monitor you want your video to stream from if you have multiple monitors.
Probably the most exciting feature for enthusiasts is the addition of CPU monitoring inside Radeon Software specifically for Ryzen CPUs. In the past, Radeon Software’s performance metric utility was limited to monitoring the GPU. Now it has been upgraded to measure Ryzen CPUs as well.
For users who are color blind, AMD has added a new collard deficiency correction tool that allows users to adjust his or her monitor to the three major color blindness types.
A few other noteworthy additions are an updated bug reporting tool from AMD that will automatically pop up when an error occurs on your system to help AMD find and kill more bugs. Another one is AMD crash defender, which is quite interesting in that it will stop a predicted crash or BSOD from occurring on your system. If this system really works, it should be a really handy feature to have.
Finally, AMD has added DX12 support to Radeon Anti-Lag, full support for AV1 decode and DRM-protected content, and new custom install options that allow you to choose how much AMD’s software gets installed (if at all) with the Radeon drivers.
Apple is officially launching a Tile-like item tracker that will work with the company’s software and services. Dubbed AirTag, the small circular tag will allow you to track items within Apple’s “Find My” app on iOS. Much like Tile, Apple’s AirTags will be useful for tracking items like keys or wallets, and you’ll be provided with notifications when you’re separated from your item.
Details about AirTags first appeared in copies of the iOS 13 beta nearly two years ago, and the AirTags name was also spotted in iOS 13.2. Apple accidentally confirmed the AirTags name in a deleted support video last year, too. Following the rumors, it has taken Apple a considerable amount of time to make AirTags a reality.
Apple will clearly be competing with Tile with its AirTags, but the location-tracking company has been attempting to embed its technology directly into Bluetooth chips in recent years. Tile has previously teamed up with Qualcomm, Dialog Semiconductor, Silicon Labs, and Toshiba to include Tile compatibility as an option on devices. Tile has also embedded its location-tracking network into gadgets from Boosted and Bose, and is prepping its own AirTags competitor that could let you find lost items through walls.
Apple will certainly face some competition from Tile’s broader reach here, but the deeper integration with iOS and iPhones will be a significant challenge for Tile and other competitors like Samsung’s $29.99 Galaxy SmartTags. Apple’s launch of AirTags comes nearly a year after Tile filed a complaint with the European Commission, accusing Apple of anti-competitive behavior. Tile argues that Apple’s iOS 13.5 update to Bluetooth settings has disadvantaged third-party tracking products in favor of Apple’s own Find My app that doesn’t include the same restrictions by default.
Apple has strenuously denied the allegations, and the company has even opened up its Find My app to third-party products recently. Devices will need to play by Apple’s Made for iPhone (MFi) accessory rules, so companies will need to apply to get certified and have their products tracked in the Find My app. Apple is also offering a chipset specification for third-parties to integrate with the Ultra-Wideband found in Apple’s latest iPhones.
Developing… we’re adding more to this post, but you can follow along with our Apple “Spring Loaded” live blog to get the news even faster.
Microsoft is updating Outlook to give companies the option to automatically start or end all meetings early to ensure employees have a break between back-to-backs. New settings in Outlook are rolling out to help reduce the digital overload of working remotely.
Companies can set their own scheduling defaults, and they’re fully customizable. That means you could have five minutes blocked off before or after a 30-minute meeting, or 10-15 minutes after hourlong meetings. Individuals can also set their own scheduling defaults, but the company-wide option is the significant change here.
Calendar software like Outlook has defaulted to on-the-hour meetings for decades, often inadvertently promoting the idea of back-to-back meetings with default settings that don’t consider the need for a break in between. If you create a new meeting in Outlook today it will default to on the hour and a 30-minute length. Even the drop-down menu doesn’t make it easy to select a custom time without manually entering it.
Companies can set new defaults for meetings in Outlook.Image: Microsoft
Microsoft is making these changes after carrying out its own research on digital overload, in response to the millions of people working from home during the pandemic. Video meetings have become a popular way for workers to communicate, but this change to the way we work has its drawbacks. “More remote work is challenging our wellbeing,” says Jared Spataro, corporate vice president of Microsoft 365. “Digital overload is real, and something has to change.”
Microsoft thinks this small change to Outlook could be a new way to think about meetings for many and promote wellbeing. Whether corporations enable this widely or if it even has an impact is another matter. Meetings often start late or run over because people are busy unmuting themselves or joining late because another meeting ran over its scheduled time slot. New Outlook settings won’t immediately improve that aspect of meetings, but it could plant a seed of change to help employers and employees think a little more about the impact of meetings and the need to give everyone’s brain a much-needed rest.
Microsoft is reportedly working on a big overhaul to its app store for Windows. Windows Central reports that the software maker plans to release an updated store later this year that will be far more open to all types of apps and games. This could pave the way for developers to be able to submit any Windows application to the store, including browsers like Chrome or Firefox, and even allow third-party commerce platforms in apps.
That’s a big shift for the app store on Windows if Microsoft delivers this rumored overhaul later this year. Currently, the Windows store (or Microsoft Store as Microsoft calls it) requires developers to package their win32 apps as an MSIX and use Microsoft’s own update mechanisms and commerce platforms. Microsoft will reportedly allow developers to submit standard EXE or MSI packages to the store, and updates can be managed through a developer’s own content delivery network (CDN).
Such a change would open the Windows store to many more apps, including popular ones like Adobe’s Creative Cloud suite of productivity apps, and even rival browsers like Chrome and Firefox. Microsoft launched its own Windows Package Manager last year, and it quickly became a great option for the hundreds of apps that are missing from the store right now. Apps like Steam, WinRAR, and Zoom don’t exist on the Windows store right now, but they’re available through the Windows Package Manager.
The current Windows store lacks many popular apps.
It sounds like whatever overhaul Microsoft is working on here will likely incorporate the company’s work with the Windows Package Manager to verify apps and list them in the store. Microsoft currently uses a number of methods to validate app packages for its Windows Package Manager, including scanning with its SmartScreen technology, static analysis, and SHA256 hash validation.
Microsoft’s rumored consideration of allowing third-party commerce platforms would also mean the company wouldn’t take a cut from developers who use their own in-app purchase systems. That’s another big change that would be both a surprising and open change to current app stores.
The Windows store originally appeared in Windows 8 as part of Microsoft’s big push to get developers to create universal Windows apps that would span across phones, tablets, PCs, and even Xbox consoles. This fell apart with the end of Windows Phone, and Microsoft eventually allowed developers to bring full native Win32 games to the Microsoft Store nearly two years ago. Developers have been asking for these rumored Windows store changes for years to make it far easier to get apps into the store and maintain and update them.
Microsoft is said to be planning to bring many of its own apps to this new Windows app store, including Teams, Office, Edge, and Visual Studio. The new store is rumored to be part of Microsoft’s big “Sun Valley” overhaul to Windows later this year. Microsoft has previously described this as a “sweeping visual rejuvenation of Windows,” which should see an overhaul for the Start menu, File Explorer, built-in apps, and much more.
Images of an upcoming fitness-focused virtual reality headset from HTC, dubbed the Vive Air, have leaked online. Details about the product were published by the World Design Guide(which we spotted via Engadget) as part of its annual awards. It seems likely the product will be unveiled officially at HTC’s upcoming ViveCon 2021 on May 11th and 12th.
The Vive Air is “specially designed for virtual fitness” and “optimized for high intensity with long use,” says the copy on the World Design Guide’s website. The headset is built from fast-drying knitted fabrics inspired by sports shoes, which are supposed to be lightweight and breathable. A quick-release design allows these “ergonomic soft components” to be removed for washing. The site says the Vive Air will launch sometime in 2021.
It certainly seems like a well-positioned product as VR is becoming increasingly popular for fitness activities during global lockdown. Just this month, The Verge interviewed the creator of popular VR workout app Supernatural who claimed that “fitness is the killer use case for VR” and that workout software “will be the first driving force of mass adoption [of virtual reality] through a normal consumer audience.” Creating a comfortable, lightweight headset that doesn’t stink of sweat after a week or two seems like a no-brainer.
Can a sports-focused VR headset prove a hit for HTC, though? The company’s original Vive headset helped create the most recent iteration of the VR market when it launched in 2016, but the firm’s hardware has since been overtaken by competitors like Oculus. Narrowing down on a specific (and growing) use case could be a smart way forward for the company.
If you buy something from a Verge link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.
On paper, the Surface Laptop 4 is a Surface Laptop 3 with better chips.
In look and feel, very little has changed from the last generation. Sure, there are differences here and there: the Laptop 4 is ever-so-slightly thinner, and there’s a new “Ice Blue” color option. But you get the same 3:2 touchscreen, the same port selection, and the same design.
The big changes are on the inside. You can configure both the 13.5-inch and 15-inch Surface Laptop models with either Intel’s 11th-Gen processors or AMD’s Ryzen 4000 processors. Microsoft promised that these improvements would deliver significantly better performance and battery life than the previous Surface generation.
So this review will largely focus on the new system’s performance. But my priority wasn’t to compare the 15-inch Surface Laptop 4 that we received to its predecessor. For one, the Laptop 3 set a low performance bar — it had mediocre battery life, and couldn’t even play a 4K 60FPS video without stuttering, so even a competent budget laptop would blow that out of the water. But more importantly, there’s another company out there that recently made a huge chip upgrade to its flagship models, which has left most other 2020 chip upgrades in the dust: Apple, with its Arm-based M1. So my big question when looking at AMD’s new Ryzen 7 Surface Edition (also known as the AMD Ryzen 7 4980U Microsoft Surface Edition because of course it is) is: Does it beat Apple’s M1?
The answer is no. For the most part, it’s still not quite as good. But that may not matter to Surface Laptop 4 buyers — at least, not yet.
First, a quick tour of the Ryzen 7 Surface Edition. This chip isn’t AMD’s top gun; it’s part of the Ryzen 4000 generation, and the Ryzen 5000 mobile series has been out for a few months now. It’s a bit disappointing to see that the Surface is still using the older Ryzen chips, since much of the new generation is based on a new architecture (Zen 3, to the 4000 series’s Zen 2) that has delivered performance gains.
Of course, that doesn’t make the Ryzen 7 4980U a bad chip. Ryzen 4000 chips outperform Intel’s 10th Gen Comet Lake processors across the board. The 4980U in particular has eight cores, and AMD’s excellent Radeon integrated graphics. Note that the M1 also has eight cores, but those cores aren’t created equal. An easy way to think of it is that AMD’s chip has eight all-around-pretty-good cores, while Apple’s chip has four high-performance cores and four weaker cores. You’ll see that difference reflected in our benchmark results later on.
In addition to that processor, the 15-inch Surface Laptop 4 I reviewed comes with 16GB of RAM and 512GB of storage. It costs $1,699. The most comparable M1 MacBook Pro is also $1,699. If you’re not looking to spend that much, you can get the 15-inch Laptop 4 for as low as $1,299 for 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage, which puts it neck-in-neck with the entry-level MacBook Pro, but with a bigger screen. The 13.5-inch Laptop 4 is priced more closely to the fanless MacBook Air, starting at $999 for a Ryzen 5 4680U, 8GB of RAM, and 256GB of storage. Then, there are the Intel models. You can get a 13.5-inch system with a Core i5 starting at $1,299 (also with 8GB of RAM and 512GB of storage), and a 15-inch system with a Core i7 starting at $1,799 (16GB of RAM, 512GB of storage). It’s all quite confusing, so I recommend visiting Microsoft’s site for yourself to mix and match.
The 13.5-inch model comes in Platinum, Ice Blue Alcantara, Matte Black, and Sandstone. The 15-incher comes in Platinum and Matte Black.
To see how our test system stacks up, I ran various synthetic benchmarks as well as a 5-minute, 33-second 4K video export in Premiere Pro. See the results below:
Surface Laptop 4 15-inch benchmarks
Benchmark
Score
Benchmark
Score
Cinebench R23 Multi
8144
Cinebench R23 Single
1242
Cinebench R23 Multi looped for 30 minutes
8077
Geekbench 5 CPU Multi
7028
Geekbench 5 CPU Single
1163
Geekbench 5 OpenCL / Compute
14393
PugetBench for Premiere Pro
176
Right off the bat, this system is a huge improvement over the Surface Laptop 3. It took 16 minutes and 33 seconds on the video export, where its predecessor took over three hours. (16:33 is a slower time than we’ve seen from many Intel models, but that’s expected since AMD chips don’t support Intel’s Quick Sync.) The Laptop 4 also beats multi-core synthetic results we’ve seen from Intel’s top Tiger Lake chips in the MSI Prestige 14 Evo and the Vaio Z, as well as the 16-inch Intel-based MacBook Pro,
Intel models max out at a quad-core Core i7-1185G7.
But the more interesting comparison is to the M1 machines. The Surface Laptop 4 solidly beats both the MacBook Pro and the MacBook Air on Cinebench R23 Multi, and that task alone — it lost to both machines on every other test we ran, including all three Geekbench tests, the Puget for Premiere Pro benchmark, and the Premiere Pro export. That may seem confusing but (again) it makes sense when you think about the architecture of both chips — the Ryzen chip does better on the task where it can show off all eight of its powerful cores. That indicates that you’ll do well with the Surface Book if you’re running heavy multicore workloads, where you’re more suited to the M1 if you’re primarily doing pretty much anything else.
Of course, that’s far from the whole story. The reality is that most people who want a 15-inch screen probably don’t care if there’s a better-performing 13-inch machine floating around. And the MacBook that’s comparable in size — the MacBook Pro 16 — is significantly more expensive than the Surface Laptop 4, and comes with older Intel chips. So why am I comparing this device to M1 systems, you may ask? Really, I’m benching this laptop against an imaginary 16-inch M1 MacBook Pro, which (rumor has it) will launch sometime in the third quarter of this year. Given the results I’m seeing here, the release of a machine like that would make the Surface Laptop 4 a tougher purchase to justify.
That said, there are two big advantages the Ryzen-powered Surface Laptop 4 could very well have over a 16-inch M1 MacBook. The first is battery life. I got an average of 10 hours and 52 minutes using this device as my primary driver, which is some of the best battery life I’ve ever seen from a 15-inch laptop, and one of the best results I’ve seen from a laptop this year. That beats both of the M1 MacBooks, and destroys the 16-inch Intel MacBook as well. If there’s an area where Microsoft really makes its case, it’s here.
The Laptop 4 also knocks cooling out of the park. The Laptop 4’s fans did a really excellent job cooling the system. Throughout my fairly standard load of office multitasking (including around a dozen Chrome tabs, Spotify streaming, and the like), the chassis remained downright cold. During the more intense tests I ran, the CPU remained steadily in the mid-70s (Celsius) with occasional spikes up to the mid-80s — jumps up to 90 were rare. I was able to run our 4K video export several times in a row without any negative impact on results, and I didn’t see a huge dip in Cinebench results over a 30-minute loop either.
The screen maxed out at 370 nits — a bit dim for outdoor use, as you can see here.
If you’re a fan of the 15-inch Surface Laptop’s design, you’ll be happy to know it hasn’t changed much. One of the big advantages of this device is how thin and light it is, at just 0.58 inches thick and 3.4 pounds. For context, it’s almost a pound lighter than the 16-inch MacBook Pro, and over half a pound lighter than the lightest Dell XPS 15. It’s actually only a bit heavier than the 13-inch MacBook Pro.
With that said, those who aren’t diehard Surface fans may find the Laptop 4’s design a tad dated. In particular, the bezels around the 3:2 screen are quite chunky. That makes sense on a convertible device like the Surface Book 3 or the Surface Pro 7, which you need to be able to hold as a tablet, but doesn’t fit as well on a clamshell. If you put the Laptop 4 next to any member of the XPS line, you’ll see how much sleeker and more modern the latter looks. That doesn’t mean the Laptop 4 is ugly; it’s just falling further behind other Windows laptops each year.
The port selection is also the same, which is good news and bad news. The Laptop 4 retains a USB-A port, which I stubbornly believe is still a necessity for modern laptops (looking at you, Apple and Dell). But there is just one, and neither the Intel or AMD model supports Thunderbolt on their lone USB-C ports, which is disappointing on a laptop at this price. The Surface Laptop could certainly do with more port options, even if it’s competitive with what Apple and Dell are offering in terms of numbers. (In addition to the USB-A and USB-C, you get a headphone jack and Microsoft’s proprietary charging port.)
The Windows Hello webcam is fine, delivering a serviceable picture, and the dual far-field microphones had no trouble picking up my voice. The speakers, which now support Dolby Atmos 9, sound quite clear, with good volume and bass and percussion that are audible (though not booming). Despite having Atmos speakers, our Laptop 4 unit didn’t come preloaded with Dolby Atmos software or anything similar to tune the audio.
All 15-inch models have an aluminum body.
My least favorite part of this laptop is the keyboard. It’s just a bit flat and mushy for my taste. I respect that some people prefer wider, flatter keycaps, of course. But I would take an XPS 15, MacBook, or Surface Book keyboard over this one — it’s just not quite as snappy or satisfying.
Overall, it’s tough to identify a true competitor to the 15-inch Surface Laptop 4. Put it next to a Windows workstation like the $1,200 entry-level Dell XPS 15 and the Surface wins on power, battery life, and weight. It’s a good purchase for someone who wants an excellent combination of efficiency and multicore performance in a 15-inch chassis, but doesn’t need the grunt of a discrete GPU.
The keyboard is backlit and has 1.3 mm of travel.
But that window of opportunity may be closing, because there’s very likely a larger M1 MacBook Pro on the way. I think there’s a good argument that people in the group described above (who don’t need a device right this second) should sit back and wait to see what Apple does in the next few months before committing to Microsoft’s machine, provided they don’t have a hard preference for operating systems.
On the other hand, even if the larger MacBook Pro is spectacular, there are some advantages the Laptop 4 will certainly retain (it runs Windows, and it’s built like a Surface Laptop) and some it will probably retain (it’ll likely be lighter than the MacBook Pro 16). And, of course, plenty of people need a laptop right now. In today’s market, among today’s 15-inch laptops, the Surface Laptop 4 is a pretty damn good buy. Microsoft didn’t change much about the outside — but on the inside, it really pulled through.
VanMoof S3 with PowerBank arriving at Castricum aan Zee from Amsterdam.Photo by Thomas Ricker / The Verge
We put a new 2021 S3 model to the test on a three-hour ride
VanMoof, maker of some of our favorite electric bikes, just announced the PowerBank, a range extender that also charges the internal battery of the company’s S3 and X3 models. Not only does the emotional-support battery promise to ease range anxiety by extending VanMoof e-bike commutes by a claimed 45 to 100 km (28 to 62 miles), it also addresses VanMoof’s biggest limitation: non-removable batteries that enable a sleek look, but could necessitate hauling the 19-kg (42-pound) bikes indoors to be charged.
I’ve had a new VanMoof S3, improved for 2021 (more on that later), with the PowerBank since Friday. After 3 hours in the saddle on two 90-minute rides, I can attest to the extended range and more convenient charging. It’s not cheap and it’s not perfect and I didn’t go quite as far as VanMoof claims, but the PowerBank makes a compelling case for purchase.
The 378Wh capacity PowerBank attaches in seconds (about 20 of them). It has an on / off button so you can choose when it charges the larger 504Wh battery found inside both the full-sized S3 and smaller X3 e-bikes. It charges from a standstill or while riding, and adds an extra 2.8 kg (6.2 pounds) to the total weight of the bike. That’s a reasonable (and unnoticeable) tradeoff if it means never having to carry the bike up the stairs to your apartment again. It also adds $348 / €348 / £315 to the cost of a bike that already starts at $1,998 / €1,998 / £1,798.
The PowerBank sits in a permanent mount you must first attach to the S3 or X3 e-bikes. The PowerBank battery then wedges into the frame and locks in place with a supplied key, and is further secured with two velcro straps. A third velcro strap is used to keep the charging cable from flopping around as it snakes up to the underside of the top tube and into the bike’s charging port. I rode on some rather bumpy brick roads and didn’t hear a single rattle from the assembly.
The thick velcro straps, while being inelegant, blend nicely into the dark black S3 model. But the straps and bulky battery are visually jarring on the smaller, light blue X3 e-bike.
Light blue VanMoof X3 fitted with a PowerBank. Eww.Image: VanMoof
While a first for VanMoof, range extenders are not uncommon amongst e-bike makers, especially for electric mountain bikes. Last month Specialized announced the Como SL commuter e-bike with an optional $449.99 range extender that it says adds about 31 miles (55 km) of range.
Over the weekend I tested a PowerBank fitted to a brand new VanMoof S3 on a 76.7 km (47.7 miles) round trip from Amsterdam to the coastal hamlet of Castricum aan Zee, and back. That’s beyond the 60 km stated range of a VanMoof ridden at max power, and far beyond the 47 km I managed during my S3 range test in April of 2020. VanMoof claims that a fully charged S3 battery coupled to a PowerBank has a range of between 105-250 km (65-155 miles), depending upon the level of powered assist you’re using. I wasn’t anywhere close to that.
I rode at full power (level 4) on exceedingly flat Dutch terrain making liberal use of the Turbo Boost button. A bit more than half of my testing was directly into a fairly strong 14-knot headwind, the rest benefited from a 6-knot tailwind. In total, I’d estimate that I could have ridden about 80 km (50 miles) before both the S3 and PowerBank batteries were empty. In other words, the VanMoof PowerBank coupled to the new S3 extended my range by about 70 percent compared to 47 km (29.2 miles) I managed last year.
In my testing, I noticed that the S3 battery emptied faster than the PowerBank could recharge it while riding at max power with lots of Turbo Boost button presses. (VanMoof confirmed this behavior after my testing was complete.) So rather than risk having to stop and recharge on the way home (or ride in a less fun economy mode), I took advantage of a 20-minute ferry wait to top off the S3 battery when it was showing just 15 percent remaining. I likely would have made it the final 7.9 km home even without the top-up, but the whole point of having a PowerBank is to avoid range anxiety and I was in a hurry to get back.
As to my buttocks, well, I should give the VanMoof’s custom saddle honorable mention. It’s surprisingly comfortable, and the first time I’ve ridden it — my S3 review bike was fitted with a different saddle last year. While I did notice a bit of discomfort down there when climbing onto the bike for my return journey, it was far less than expected.
Despite my test coming in below the lowest range estimate for the PowerBank, VanMoof still stands by its numbers. “It should give most riders an additional 45-100km range depending on conditions and an individual’s use-level,” said the company in an email response to my findings. Apparently, my aggressive riding style, weight (190 pounds / 86 kg), height (6 feet / 183 cm), and ambient conditions at testing make me an outlier.
Some other observations…
VanMoof e-bikes don’t provide a USB charging port for phones mounted on the handlebar and the arrival of the PowerBank doesn’t change that. That’s an oversight in my opinion. A range extender enables riders to travel longer distances, which often requires GPS navigation on a phone operating at peak brightness and paired with Bluetooth headphones for turn-by-turn directions and maybe some music playing over your 4G / 5G connection. My three-year old iPhone wasn’t up to the task, which meant tethering it to yet another battery I had to carry in my jacket. I forgot about the cable when I stopped off at a ferry crossing, nearly causing me to topple over.
VanMoof says a USB port was considered but was ultimately left off for “waterproofing reasons.” Shame.
I should also note that the S3 I tested was one of the models that recently added support for Apple’s Find My tracking network. While that was the headline item, VanMoof’s X3 and S3 e-bikes were also upgraded with improved on-bike displays that are more visible in direct sunlight, and electronic shifters that are more accurate. I complained about the display readability in my review last year and it is slightly improved. More importantly, the e-shifter seems much improved over the S3 variation that I reviewed at launch in April of 2020. At the time I said it glitched on 2 out of 100 shifts, but the automatic four-speed on my new S3 glitched about 1 out of 100+ shifts over my three hours of riding. I characterize a glitch as an unexpected mechanical “clink” sound, a surprise free-wheel of the pedals when you expect to feel resistance, or an obvious feeling of being in the wrong gear.
VanMoof, unlike many e-bike makers, is able to constantly improve the hardware and software of its e-bikes because it has a dedicated factory and relatively tight control over a supply chain of custom VanMoof parts. That means it doesn’t have to compete for Shimano shifters or Bosch motors, for example, which left many bike manufactures without parts for months after the recent surge in e-bike demand. Good thing, too. The first shipments of S3 and X3 models were plagued by issue rates as high as 10 percent, the company co-founders told me last year.
VanMoof says it also improved the internal wiring of its bikes for better resistance to weather, added new pedals for better grip, and new fender flaps to reduce excess splash on wet roads. It also made the shipping boxes more environmentally friendly — important when you consider that VanMoof ships around 12,000 of those giant boxes a month, as of September 2020.
All this is to say that the 2021 S3 and X3 models, the ones with the “Locate with Apple Find My” label printed under the top tube, are the best VanMoof e-bikes yet, which really is saying something. The new PowerBank option is just icing on the cake.
All photos by Thomas Ricker / The Verge unless otherwise stated
There’s new video of the Ingenuity helicopter on Mars, captured by the Perseverance rover’s cameras and posted to Twitter by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The copter had its first flight earlier today, lifting 10 feet off the Martian surface for 39 seconds and marking the first flight of a powered craft on another planet. The video shows the tissue box-sized craft zipping up and hovering in place before gracefully landing back on the surface.
The video was shot at a 34mm focal length at 6.7 frames per second and is a sequence of about 1,400 frames, according to Perseverance imaging scientist Justin Maki. A “full-zoom version” at 110mm is coming in the next few days, along with photos from Ingenuity’s 13-megapixel horizon-facing camera. A black-and-white photo of its shadow, taken with its 1.5-megapixel navigation camera during the flight, has already been sent back.
Ingenuity’s flight was delayed multiple times because of an issue that required reinstalling its flight control software. NASA engineers are delighted at the success of the first flight test. Unlike Perseverance, Ingenuity won’t be involved in carrying out any specific experiments or explorations on Mars, but there are more flight tests planned for it in the coming weeks.
(Pocket-lint) – Fitbit announced the fashion-focused Luxe activity and wellness tracker in April 2021, joining the Charge 4 and Inspire 2 in the company’s extensive portfolio.
How do the three devices compare though? You can read how all of Fitbit’s devices stack up against each other in our separate feature, but here we are looking at how the Fitbit Luxe compares to the Charge 4 and the Inspire 2.
Price
squirrel_widget_145405
The Fitbit Luxe starts at £129.99 in the UK and $149.95 in the US, with the Special Edition model costing £179.99 in the UK and $199.95 in the US. There are a range of accessories available, including a Gorjana bracelet.
The Fitbit Charge 4 starts at £129.99 in the UK and $149.95 in the US, with the Special Edition models costing £149.99 in the UK and $159.95 in the US.
The Fitbit Inspire 2 is priced slightly lower than the Charge 4 and the Luxe, costing £89.99 in the UK and $99.95 in the US.
The Fitbit Luxe is the most premium of the three Fitbit devices being compared here, offering a stainless steel body, coloured touchscreen display, a buttonless design, rounded edges and a focus towards fashion and style, with a range of accessories available.
The Fitbit Charge 4 has an aluminium body, and it too offers a premium design like the Luxe, but it has squarer edges and a more sporty look, along with a monochrome touchscreen display and inductive button on the side. Different accessories are available, but they are more standard compared to the bracelets and stylish straps available for the Luxe.
The Inspire 2 has a plastic body so it’s a little cheaper in its appearance compared to the Luxe and Charge 4. It also has a smaller touchscreen display than the Luxe and Charge 4 and it has a physical button on the side, making for a less streamlined design than the other two models.
All models being compared here are waterproof and they all feature a PurePulse heart rate monitor on their underside, as well as charging pins. The Charge 4 has an SPO2 monitor too however.
Features
All: Steps, distance, calories, heart rate, advanced sleep, Active Zone Minutes, Auto exercise reognition, smartphone notifications
Luxe: Adds stress monitoring, Mindful Minutes
Charge 4: VO2 Max, NFC, Smart Wake
Many of the basic features offered by Fitbit are available across the Inspire 2, Charge 4 and Luxe fitness trackers, though there is some variation.
All three trackers being compared here offer steps taken, distance travelled, calories burned and heart rate monitoring. They also all offer advanced sleep tracking with Sleep Score, swim tracking, Active Zone Minutes and they are able to automatically recognise some workouts with Fitbit’s SmartTrack, whilst offering the ability to specifically track others using the Multi-Sport Mode.
You’ll also find silent alarms on all the trackers, Reminders to Move, smartphone notifications with Quick Replies for Android users, Guided Breathing and female health tracking.
Beyond those features, things change a little between the devices. The Fitbit Charge 4 has NFC on board for Fitbit Pay, while the Inspire 2 and Luxe miss this off. The Charge 4 and Inspire 2 offer Cardio Fitness Level – which is a VO2 Max measurement – though it isn’t clear if the Luxe also offers this. The Charge 4 also offers Smart Wake, which uses machine learning to wake you up at an optimal time.
The Luxe meanwhile, has stress management like the Fitbit Sense, offering a Stress Score within the Fitbit app. It also launches a feature called Mindful Minutes, though this will come to the other Fitbit trackers and smartwatches.
The Fitbit Luxe has Connected GPS on board, which means you’ll need to bring your phone with you in order to map a walk or a run. It offers six-day battery life, but as we mentioned above, there is no NFC for Fitbit Pay.
At the time of writing, we didn’t know if the Luxe has an altimeter to measure elevation, though we would expect it to.
The Charge 4 has built-in GPS, enabling you to map your route without your phone. It also comes with NFC on board and it features a seven-day battery life. It has an altimeter on board for measuring elevation.
The Inspire 2 has Connected GPS like the Fitbit Luxe. It comes with a five-day battery life and like the Fitbit Luxe, it doesn’t offer NFC for Fitbit Pay. There is no altimeter on board.
Conclusion
The Fitbit Luxe offers many of the same features and benefits as the Charge 4, though it trades built-in GPS and NFC for a more stylish and fashionable design.
There are a couple of extra features on the Luxe compared to the Charge 4 and Inspire 2, such as Stress Monitoring and Mindful Minutes, though the Charge 4 is likely to get some of these through a software update.
The choice between these devices will likely come down to which features are most important to you. If you want built in GPS and NFC, the Charge 4 is the one you’ll want. If you want a stylish tracker that is packed full of features but misses off a couple then the Luxe appears to be a great option. If you want most of the features Luxe offers but in a cheaper package with a more basic design, then the Inspire 2 will likely be adequate.
With a Ryzen 9 5900X and an RTX 3080, both liquid-cooled for quiet operation in a compact case, Corsair’s One a200 is easy to recommend–if you can afford it and find it in stock. Just know that your upgrade options are more limited than larger gaming rigs.
For
+ Top-end performance
+ Space-saving, quiet shell
+ Liquid-cooled GPU and CPU
Against
– Expensive
– Limited upgrade options
For a whole host of reasons, AMD’s
Ryzen 9 5900X
and Nvidia’s
RTX 3080
have been two of the hardest-to-find PC components since late last year. But Corsair has combined them both in a handy, compact, liquid-cooled bundle it calls the Corsair One a200.
The company’s vertically-oriented One desktop
debuted in 2018
and has since been regularly updated to accommodate current high-end components. This time around, the options include either AMD or Intel’s latest processors (the latter called the One i200), and Nvidia’s penultimate consumer GPU, the RTX 3080.
Not much has changed in terms of the system’s design, other than the addition of a USB Type-C port up front (where an HDMI port was on previous models). But with liquid cooling handling thermals for both the CPU and graphics in a still-impressively compact package, there’s really little reason to change what was already one of the
best gaming PCs
for those who want something small.
The only real concern is pricing. At $3,799 as tested (including 32GB of RAM, a 1TB SSD and a 2TB HDD), you’re definitely paying a premium for the compact design and slick, quiet cooling. But with the scarcity of these core components and the RTX 3080 regularly
selling for well over $2,000 on its own on eBay
, it’s tough to discern what constitutes ‘value’ in the gaming desktop world at the moment. You may be able to find a system with similar components for less, but it won’t likely be this small or slick.
Design of the Corsair One a200
Just like the
One i160
model we looked at in 2019, the Corsair One a200 is a quite compact (14.96 x 7.87 x 6.93 inches) tower of matte-black metal with RGB LED lines running down its front. To get some sense of how small this system is compared to more traditional gaming rigs, we called
Alienware’s Aurora R11
“fairly compact” when we reviewed it, and it’s 18.9 x 17 x 8.8 inches, taking up more than twice the desk space of Corsair’s One a200.
The 750-watt SFX power supply in the a200 is mounted at the bottom, pulling in air that’s expelled at the top with the help of a fan. And the heat from the CPU and GPU will mostly be expelled out either side, as both are liquid cooled, with radiators mounted against the side panels.
The primary external difference with the updated a200 over previous models is the replacement of an HDMI port that used to live up front next to the headphone/mic combo jack and pair of USB-A ports. It’s been replaced with a USB-C port. That makes for three front-facing USB ports, a surprising amount of front-panel connectivity for a system so compact. But there are only six more USB ports around back (more on that shortly).
Overall, while the design of the One a200 is pretty familiar at this point, it still looks and feels great, with all the external panels made out of metal. Just note that the matte finish does easily pick up finger smudges.
Front: 2x USB 3.2 Gen 1 (5 Gbps) Type-A, 1 USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) Type-C ; Combination Mic/Headphone Jack; Rear: 4x USB USB 3.2 Gen 1 (5 Gbps) Type-A, 2x USB 3.2 Gen 2 (Type-A, Type-C), Ethernet, HD Audio, 3x DisplayPort, 1x HDMI
Video Output
(3) DisplayPort 1.4a (1) HDMI 2.1
Power Supply
750W Corsair SFX 80 Plus Platinum
Case
Corsair One Aluminum/Steel
Operating System
Windows 10 Home 64-Bit
Dimensions
14.96 x 7.87 x 6.937 inches (380 x 200 x 176 mm)
Price As Configured
$3,799
Ports and Upgradability of the Corsair One a200
Since the Corsair One a200 is built around a compact Mini-ITX motherboard (specifically the ASRock B550 Phantom Gaming-ITX/ax), you won’t quite get the same amount of ports that you would expect with a larger desktop. Since we already covered the three USB ports and audio jack up front, let’s take a look at the back.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Here you’ll find four USB 3.2 Gen 1 (5 Gbps) Type-A ports, plus two USB 3.2 Gen 2 (one Type-A and one Type-C). Also here is a 2.5 Gb Ethernet jack, three analog audio connections and connectors for the small antennae. The ASrock board also includes a pair of video connectors, but since you’ll want to use the ports on RTX 3080 instead, Corsair has blocked them off behind the I/O plate so most people wouldn’t even know they’re there.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The video connections from the RTX 3080 graphics card live next to the Corsair SF750 power supply, and come in the form of three DisplayPort 1.4a ports and a single HDMI 2.1 connector.
As for internal upgradability, you can get at most of the parts if you’re comfortable dismantling expensive PC hardware. But you can’t add any RAM or storage without swapping out what’s already there (or at least without removing the whole motherboard, more on that soon). That said, the 32GB of Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3200 RAM, 1TB PCIe 4.0 Force MP600 SSD and 2TB Seagate 2.5-inch hard drive that’s already here are a potent cadre of components. If you need more RAM and storage (as well as more CPU cores), there’s a $4,199 configuration we’ll detail later.
To get inside the Corsair One a200, you don’t need any tools, but you’ll want to be a bit careful. Press a button at the rear top of the case (you have to press it quite hard) and the top, which also houses a fan, will pop up. But before you go yanking it away in haste, note that it’s attached via a fan cable that you can disconnect after first fishing the plug out from a hole inside the case.
To access the rest of the system you’ll have to remove two screws from each side. But again, don’t be careless, as radiators are attached to both side panels via short tubes, so the sides are a bit like upside-down gull-wing doors. You can’t really remove them without disconnecting the cooling plates from the CPU and GPU.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
It’s fairly easy to remove the RAM, although the 32GB of Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3200 occupies both of the slots. The 2TB Seagate 2.5-inch hard drive is also accessible from the left side, wedged under the PCIe riser cable that’s routed to the GPU on the other side.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
At least the 1TB Force MP600 SSD on this model is mounted on the front of the motherboard under a heatsink, rather than behind the board on the i160 version we looked at a couple years ago.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
You can open the right panel as well, though there’s not much to do here as the space is taken up by the GPU, a large radiator and a pair of fans mounted on the heatsink to move the RTX 3080’s heat through the radiator and out the vents on the side.
As with previous models, you should be able to replace the RTX 3080 with an air-cooled graphics card at some point, provided it has axial rather than blower-style cooling, and that it fits within the physical constraints of the chassis. But given that the RTX 3080 is the
best graphics card
you can buy, you may be ready for a whole new system by the time you start thinking about swapping out the graphics card here.
Aside from wishing there were more USB ports on the motherboard, I have no real complaints about the hardware here. If I were spending this much, I’d prefer a 2TB SSD, but at least the 1TB model Corsair has included is a PCIe 4.0 drive for the best speed possible. Technically the ASRock motherboard here has a second PCIe 3.0 M.2 slot, where you could install a second SSD. But it’s housed on the back of the motherboard, which would mean fairly major disassembly in cramped quarters, and remember that you’d have to disconnect the pump/cooling plate from the CPU before even attempting to do that.
Gaming Performance on the Corsair One a200
With AMD’s 12-core Ryzen 9 5900X and Nvidia’s RTX 3080 running the gaming show inside Corsair’s One a200 — and both of them liquid-cooled — we expected Corsair’s compact power tower to spit out impressive frame rates.
We pitted the a200 against
MSI’s Aegis RS 11th
, which also has an RX 3080 but an 8-core Intel Rocket Lake Core i7-11700K, and a couple other recent gaming rigs we’ve tested.
Alienware’s Aurora Ryzen Edition R10
sports a stepped down Ryzen 7 5800X and a
Radeon RX 6800XT
. And
HP’s Omen 30L
, which we looked at near the end of 2020, was outfitted with a last-generation Intel Core i9-10900K and an RTX 3080 to call its own.
While the Corsair One a200 didn’t walk away from the impressive competition, it was almost always in the lead in our gaming tests. And that’s all the more impressive given most of the systems it competes with are much larger.
Image 1 of 5
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
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)
On the Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmark (highest settings), the game ran at 147 fps at 1080p on the One a200, and 57 fps at 4K. The former ties it with the Aegis for first place here, and the latter beats both the Aegis and the Omen 30L, just slightly, giving Corsair’s system an uncontested win.
In Grand Theft Auto V (very high settings), the Corsair system basically repeated its previous performance, tying the MSI machine at 1080p and pulling one frame ahead of both the Omen and the MSI at 4K.
On the Far Cry New Dawn benchmark, the MSI Aegis pulled ahead at 1080p by 11 fps, but the One a200 still managed to tie the MSI and HP systems at 4K.
After trailing a bit in Far Cry at 1080p, the One a200 pulled ahead in Red Dead Redemption 2 (medium settings) at the same resolution, with its score of 117 fps beating everything else. And at 4K, the Corsair system’s 51 fps was again one frame ahead of both the MSI and Alienware systems.
Last up in Borderlands 3 (badass settings), the Corsair system stayed true to its impressive form. Its score of 137 fps at 1080 was a frame ahead of the MSI (and ahead of everything else). And at 4K, its score of 59 fps was only tied by the HP Omen.
Aside from the One a200’s gaming performance being impressive for its size, this is also one of the quietest high-end gaming rigs I’ve tested in a long time. Lots of heat shot out of the top of the tower while I played the Ancient Gods expansion of Doom Eternal, but fan noise was a constant low-end whirr. The large fan at the top does its job without doing much to make itself known, and the radiators on either side help move heat out of the case without adding to the impressively quiet noise floor.
We also subjected the Corsair One a200 to our Metro Exodus stress test gauntlet, in which we run the benchmark at the Extreme preset 15 times to simulate roughly half an hour of gaming. The Corsair tower ran the game at an average of 71.13 fps, with very little variation. The system started out the test at 71.37 fps on the first run, and dipped just to 71.05 fps on the final run. That’s a change of just a third of a frame per second throughout our stress test. It’s clear both in terms of consistent performance and low noise levels that the One a200’s cooling system is excelling at its job.
During the Metro Exodus runs, the CPU ran at an average clock speed of 4.2 GHz and an average temperature of 74.9 degrees Celsius (166.8 degrees Fahrenheit). The GPU’s average clock speed was 1.81 GHz, with an average temperature of 68.7 degrees Celsius (155.6 degrees Fahrenheit).
Productivity Performance
While the Ryzen 9 5900X isn’t quite as potentially speedy on paper as the top-end 5950X (thanks to a slightly lower top boost clock and four fewer cores), it’s still a very powerful 12-core CPU. And paired with Nvidia’s RTX 3080, along with 32GB of RAM and a fast PCIe 4.0 SSD, the Corsair One a200 is just as potent in productivity and workstation tasks as it is playing games.
Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 3
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
On Geekbench 5, an overall performance benchmark, the Corsair system was just behind the leading systems in the single-core tests, with its score of 1,652. But on the multi-core test, it’s 11,968 was well ahead of everything else.
The Corsair PCIe Gen 4 SSD in the a200 blew past competing systems, transferring our 25GB of files at a rate of 1.27 GBps, with only the HP Omen’s WD SSD also managing to get close to the 1GBps mark.
And on our Handbrake video editing test, the Corsair One a200 transcoded a 4K video to 1080p in an impressive 4 minutes and 44 seconds, while all the other systems took well more than 5 minutes to complete the same task. Video editors in particular will be able to make good use of this system’s 12 cores and 24 threads of CPU might.
Software and Warranty for the Corsair One a200
The Corsair One a200 ships with a two-year warranty (plus lifetime customer support) and very little pre-installed software. Aside from Windows 10 Home, you get the company’s iCue software, which can be used to control both the lights as well as the system fans. The company even seems to have avoided the usual bloat of streaming apps and casual games like Candy Crush, which ship with almost all Windows machines these days.
Configuration Options for the Corsair One a200
If you’re after the AMD-powered Corsair a200 specifically, you have two configuration options. There’s the model we tested (Corsair One a200 CS-90200212), with a 12-core Ryzen 9 5900X, 32GB of RAM, a 1TB PCIe Gen 4 SSD, 2TB hard drive, and an RTX 3080 for $3,799. Or you can pay $400 more ($4,199) to step up to the 16-core Ryzen 5950X and double the RAM and SSD to 64GB and 2TB respectively (Corsair One Pro a200 CS-9040010). The latter configuration is overkill for gaming, but the extra storage, RAM and four more CPU cores are well worth the extra money if you can actually make use of them.
For those who aren’t wedded to AMD, there’s also the Intel-based Corsair One i200, which now includes 11th Gen “Rocket Lake” CPU options, with up to a Core i9-11900K and an RTX 3080, albeit running on a last-gen Z490 platform. It starts a little lower at $3,599. But that model is currently out of stock with any current-generation Intel and Nvidia components, leaving exact pricing up in the air as of publicatioon.
We tried to do some comparison pricing, and were able to find a similarly equipped HP Omen 30L, as HP often sells gaming rigs on the more-affordable side of the spectrum. But when we wrote this, all Omen 30L systems with current-generation graphics cards were sold out on HP’s site. We were able to
find an Omen 30L on Amazon
with an RTX 3080 and an Intel Core i9-10850K, along with similar RAM and storage as our Corsair a200, for $3,459. That’s about $340 less than the a200, but the Omen 30L is also much larger than the a200 and has a now last-generation CPU with fewer cores, plus a slower SSD.
Bottom Line
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
With one of
the best CPUs
and graphics cards, both liquid cooled and quiet, in an attractive, compact package, Corsair’s One a200 offers a whole lot to like. The $3,799 asking price is certainly daunting, but in these times when that graphics card alone is selling on eBay regularly for more than $2,000, the Ryzen 9 5900X often sells for close to $800, and even most desktops with current-gen graphics cards are mostly sold out, it’s tough to which high-end gaming rig is more or less of a bargain than something else.
If you spend some time looking you can probably find a system with similar specs as the Corsair One a200 for a bit less. But unless and until the ongoing mining craze subsides, that system probably won’t cost substantially less than Corsair’s pricing. And with its impressively compact shell, quiet operation, and top-end performance in both gaming and productivity, the a200 is easy to recommend for those who can afford it. Just know that upgrading will be a bit more difficult and limiting than with a larger desktop, and if you need lots of USB ports, you may want to invest in a hub.
NASA’s Ingenuity helicopter nailed a successful debut test flight on Mars, engineers confirmed early Monday morning. The tiny spacecraft lifted itself 10 feet off the Martian surface for 39 seconds, marking the first powered flight on another world. The historic demonstration opens up tantalizing possibilities for a new mode of planetary travel that could send future rotorcraft far beyond the reach of traditional rovers.
The four-pound Ingenuity helicopter lifted its tissue box-sized body at 12:34PM Mars time (3:34AM ET, Earth time), spinning its twin rotor blades to achieve its first flight in the ultrathin atmosphere of Mars. Those blades spun faster than 2,500 rpm — much faster than the roughly 500 rpm helicopters need to fly on Earth. The craft hovered for about 30 seconds above the surface before descending for touchdown, concluding a fully autonomous 39.1-second flight test, NASA said.
The rotorcraft arrived on the Red Planet, 173 million miles from Earth, on February 18th, clinging to the underbelly of NASA’s Perseverance rover. It was deployed from Perseverance over a month later, on April 4th, starting a 31-day clock to carry out five flight tests. Monday’s successful flight sets the stage for more ambitious attempts in the next few weeks.
Engineers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory broke out in cheers upon confirmation that Ingenuity’s flight attempt appeared flawless. “Confirmed, that Ingenuity has performed its first flight of a powered aircraft on another planet,” Ingenuity chief pilot Håvard Grip declared, prompting applause inside JPL Mission Control. “We can now say that humans beings have flown a rotorcraft on another planet,” Ingenuity project manager MiMi Aung told NASA engineers in the room after confirmation of the helicopter’s successful flight test.
“This gives us amazing hope for all of humanity. I couldn’t be more proud,” Thomas Zurbuchen, associate NASA administrator for science, tweeted. Upon successful confirmation, Zurbuchen said NASA named Ingenuity’s flight zone Wright Brothers Field, as a nod to the Wright brothers’ revolutionary flight in 1903 and “in recognition of the ingenuity and innovation that continue to propel exploration.” The helicopter carries on its body a postage stamp-sized piece of the Wright brothers’ iconic plane.
A black-and-white image from Ingenuity’s down-facing navigation camera was the first visual confirmation of the copter’s flight, showing the experimental craft’s shadow from roughly 10 feet above the surface. Minutes after flight confirmation, a sequence of images taken by Perseverance, watching from about 211 feet away, arrived at Mission Control and put Ingenuity’s flight in motion for the first time.
Ingenuity soared 10 feet off the ground over Mars’ Jezero Crater.Video: NASA / JPL
The flight was delayed a few times from April 11th, with one delay last week requiring engineers to reupload Ingenuity’s entire flight software after running into a glitch during preflight tests. The helicopter has a running track-shaped flight zone at Mars’ Jezero Crater, the site of a dried-out lakebed that Perseverance will scour for signs of past microbial life.
Ingenuity’s main mission is to demonstrate flight, with no objectives to explore Mars or carry out science experiments. Those jobs are reserved for Perseverance, whose primary life-hunting mission involves caching Martian soil samples that a future rover will send back to Earth as early as 2031.
Engineers will analyze loads of data from Ingenuity’s first flight to set the parameters for its next four flights in the coming weeks, with the second one scheduled for April 22nd, NASA said. For those tests, Ingenuity will soar higher and travel across its flight zone.
“Like the Wright brothers at Kitty Hawk, we know that our time to make a difference at Jezero Crater, Mars is not yet over,” Aung told engineers in Mission Control. “This is just the first great flight.”
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.
