Silicon Power is a Taiwanese hardware manufacturer founded in 2003. In enthusiast circles, they are well known for providing high-quality flash storage products at reasonable pricing. Silicon Power’s various product lines include DRAM modules, SSDs, flash drives, and portable storage.
Today, we are taking a look at the Silicon Power UD70, which is a highly affordable QLC-based M.2 NVMe SSD. The UD70 is based on a combination of a Phison E12 controller paired with QLC flash from Micron. A Kingston DRAM chip provides 512 MB of storage for the mapping tables of the SSD.
The UD70 is very similar to the Corsair MP400 and the Sabrent Rocket Q. They all use the same controller and flash chips—the difference is in the size of DRAM cache: 1 GB on the MP400, 512 MB on the UD70 we’re reviewing here, and 256 MB on the Rocket Q. Since they’re based on the Phison E12, all three of these drives take advantage of PCI-Express Gen3 x4, not the newer Gen 4 x4.
The Silicon Power UD70 comes in capacities of 500 GB ($55), 1 TB ($110), and 2 TB ($210). Endurance for these models is set to 120 TBW, 260 TBW, and 530 TBW respectively. Silicon Power includes a five-year warranty with the UD70.
The ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga is just half-inch thick computer that lags behind similarly priced competitors on productivity, but is supremely classy and convenient.
For
+ Extremely thin
+ Looks and feels classy
+ Great webcam
Against
– Priced for business, so more expensive
– Haptic touchpad can feel unresponsive
When it comes to portability, the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga ($1,684.99 to start) is all business. It’s an enterprise notebook that puts thinness above all else, including power.
This is a smaller than half-inch convertible that still manages to stay within spitting distance of other similar competitors on productivity while being even smaller than some detachables (with their keyboards attached, to be fair). Combine that with Lenovo’s excellent keyboard and a classy design that’s easy to feel proud of, and it’s clear how the Titanium Yoga could become a respectable daily driver for casual users or certain trendy businesses that don’t require heavy computing from their employees.
But for the price of the unit we reviewed, which had an Intel Core i5-1130G7, you could easily get a speedier competitor equipped with a Core i7 but without the business trappings of ThinkPad. You’ll have to choose if power or portability is more important for your money, as well as whether you need enterprise features like extra durability and security.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga Specifications
CPU
Intel Core i5-1130G7
Graphics
Intel Iris Xe Integrated Graphics
Memory
16GB LPDDR4x-4266
Storage
512MB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD
Display
13.5 inch, 2256 x 1504, IPS, Touchscreen
Networking
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201 11ax, Bluetooth 5.1
Ports
2x Thunderbolt 4, 3.5mm headphone/microphone combo jack
Camera
720p
Battery
44.5 Wh
Power Adapter
65W
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Dimensions(WxDxH)
11.71 x 9.16 x 0.45 inches (297.5 x 232.7 x 11.5 mm)
Weight
2.54 pounds (1.15 kg)
Price (as configured)
$1,684.99
Design of Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
Image 1 of 9
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
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)
From its silver color to its textured faux leather lid to its titanium, carbon and magnesium chassis, the ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga exudes class. Like a geeky version of a Rolex, this computer is clearly aiming to be a statement piece as much as a genuinely useful device, and for the most part, it succeeds.
That faux leather lid feels soft to the touch, and its texture almost gives the convertible a subdued glittery appearance. The lid’s detailing also makes the ThinkPad feel somewhat like a fancy moleskin journal, both to the eye and to the touch.
Decoration is otherwise minimal, with light ThinkPad branding on the lid and keyboard deck’s outer corners standing out the most. This serves to accentuate the case’s sturdy and solid build quality, which emphasizes the Titanium Yoga’s premium status.
The Titanium Yoga is also thinner than other Intel 11th generation convertibles we’ve tested, coming in at under half an inch of thickness. At 11.71 x 9.16 x 0.45 inches, it’s smaller than the HP Spectre x360 14 (11.75 x 8.67 x 0.67 inches) and the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 9310 (11.69 x 8.15 x 0.56 inches). It’s even smaller than the recent ThinkPad X12 Detachable with its keyboard attached, which sits at 11.15 x 8.01 x 0.57 inches.
This small form factor extends to weight as well. The Titanium Yoga is 2.54 pounds, whereas the Spectre x360 14 is 2.95 pounds, the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 is 2.9 pounds and the X12 Detachable is 2.4 pounds.
The small form factor approach doesn’t come without sacrifices, though. The Titanium Yoga is woefully low on ports, with the left side housing two Thunderbolt 4 connections and the right side simply giving you a single 3.5 mm combination microphone/headphone jack. The device doesn’t come with any dongles, so you’re either going to need to buy them separately or pick your accessories carefully.
The Titanium Yoga also comes with a Lenovo Pen, which magnetically attaches to the right side of the display. This is a secure fit, though it might take you a while to figure out that it can actually attach to the device if you don’t read the manual.
Finally, the Titanium Yoga has MIL-SPEC certification, meaning it can take a tumble or five. This isn’t always found on non-business laptops, giving the ThinkPad an edge up when it comes to durability.
Productivity Performance of Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
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)
Despite its stylish exterior, our review configuration of the ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga packs lackluster performance compared to similarly-priced 11th generation Intel convertibles. The Intel Core i5-1130G7 processor is the same one you’ll find in the tablet based ThinkPad X12 Detachable, and it’s outclassed by the Intel Core i7-1165G7 that powers both the HP Spectre x360 14 and the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1. Our configuration also only came with 16GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD.
It’s not too uncommon to see ThinkPads costing more, however, due to their business classification. And, you can configure the ThinkPad X1 Titanium with a Core i7, if you’re willing to pay a bit more.
On Geekbench 5, a synthetic benchmark for testing PC performance, the Titanium Yoga fell behind each of its competitors. It scored 1,328 on single-core tasks and 4,747 on multi-core tasks. That’s only slightly less performance than you’ll get from the ThinkPad X12 Detachable (1,334 single-core/4,778 multi-core), but other convertibles provide more serious competition with the higher-end chips. The HP Spectre x360 14 hit scores of 1,462 on single-core/4,904 on multi-core, while the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 9310 hit 1,532 on single-core/4,778 on multi-core.
The Titanium Yoga was largely on par with competition when we tested its file transfer speeds, where we tracked how quickly it transferred 25GB of data across its SSD. Here, it hit speeds of 409.26 MBps, which is slightly above the XPS 13 2-in-1’s 405.55 MBps and the X12 Detachable’s 408.39 MBps on the same test. The HP Spectre x360 14 was an outlier here, transferring its files at a speed of 533.61 MBps.
On our Handbrake benchmark, in which we use the free program to track how long it takes a computer to transcode a video file down from 4K to 1080p, once again saw the Titanium Yoga fall towards the bottom of the pack. It finished the task in 20:57, which was faster than the X12 Detachable’s 24:12 but slower than other convertibles. The Spectre x360 14 finished its transcode in 18:05, while the XPS 13 2-in-1 did so in 15:52.
We also ran the Titanium Yoga through Cinebench R23 for 20 runs in a row to simulate an extended intensive work session. Its average score was 3,397, while its CPU ran at an average clock speed of 2.1 GHz. During this time, the CPU hit an average 64.75 degrees Celsius (148.55 degrees Fahrenheit).
Display on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Like plenty of other recent ultraportables, the Titanium Yoga has a 3:2 aspect ratio screen, which means an image with more vertical headroom. This means more letterboxing on 16:9 content, but it also means you’re expanding your vertical resolution to display more, which is particularly useful for reading webpage content. The Titanium Yoga’s IPS touchscreen in particular has a 2,256 x 1,504 resolution image. That’s more detail than you’ll get on the more common 1920 x 1280 resolution found in the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 9310 and the ThinkPad X12 Detachable, but less detail than the HP Spectre x360 14’s 3000 x 2000 resolution.
When I watched the trailer for Nobody on the Titanium Yoga, I was impressed by how deep the blacks were, but not by much else. The screen was bright enough that I didn’t have to strain to view it, and while colors were accurate, they were not vivid. Viewing angles were also restrictive in a well-lit room, and I had to sit almost directly in front of the laptop to have a workable image. Turning off my lights solved this problem, but that’s not an applicable solution all of the time. I also noticed a mild glare on the screen even when holding it away from heavy light, but it was easy enough to ignore.
Of course, the Titanium Yoga’s aspect ratio is meant more for surfing the web or working on documents than watching a movie. In that respect, the Titanium Yoga exceeded, especially in tablet mode. Reading on it feels almost like browsing through a well put-together coffee table book.
Our testing found that, when it comes to color, the Titanium Yoga is roughly on par with competition. It covers 71.1% of the DCI-P3 color spectrum, which is about the same as the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1’s 70% DCI-P3 rating and the ThinkPad X12 Detachable’s 74.9% rating. The HP Spectre x360 14 stands as an outlier, hitting a vibrant 139.7% DCI-P3 rating.
The Titanium Yoga had a higher average brightness than most competitors in our testing. It registered at an average 425 nits, with only the XPS 13 2-in-1’s 488 nits beating it. The X12 Detachable had 376.2 average nits of brightness, where the HP Spectre x360 14 was the dimmest at 339 nits.
Keyboard, Touchpad and Stylus on the LenovoThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga doesn’t make any changes to the classic ThinkPad keyboard design, which makes it a great typer, but its unconfigurable haptic touchpad leaves it feeling unresponsive elsewhere.
The ThinkPad style keyboard is an old favorite among techies, and it works well on the Titanium Yoga. This keyboard has concave keycaps to help you easily touch-type without having to look at its buttons, which feel like they have reasonable travel distance for such a thin machine. I regularly hit between 80 – 85 words per minute on this keyboard, which is between five to ten points higher than I usually score.
The trackpoint nub is also back here, and you can press on it like an analog stick to move your mouse cursor. It’s kind of an old-fashioned solution, but it works well and is decent if you don’t like taking your fingers off home row. I even found myself using it a few times, despite generally preferring touchpads, since I found the Titanium Yoga’s touchpad lacking.
While my finger smoothly glides around the Titanium Yoga’s touchpad and multi-touch gestures are easy to perform thanks to its precision drivers, the touchpad uses haptic feedback and has no travel when you press it in. We’ve seen this option before on MacBooks and certain other PCs, but it’s unconfigurable here, and the amount of force I needed to actuate the touchpad feels awkward to me. Sometimes presses register, and sometimes they don’t. Sometimes I right click when I mean to left click, and vice versa.
There are physical left, right and even middle click buttons above the touchpad, though those exist more for trackpoint users and are inconvenient to reach for when using the touchpad. Additionally, the 3.5 x 2.5 inch touchpad dimensions leave it feeling a little small, and it wasn’t uncommon for my finger to bump up against its sides.
The Titanium Yoga also comes with a Lenovo Pen, which tracks writing well and has three programmable buttons. One of those buttons is where you’d normally place an eraser, but unfortunately isn’t touch sensitive. Palm rejection is impressive here, as I could fully place my palm on the display while writing or drawing with the pen without having the ThinkPad pick it up. The only time palm rejection failed was when I tried to use Windows’ built-in feature that translates handwriting to text when you click on a text box with your stylus. In these situations, my cursor bounced all over the place.
Audio on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
Audio on the ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga is loud and accurate, if not what I’d use to DJ my first post-lockdown party. The convertible has two top-firing speakers, one on each side of its keyboard, which I tested by listening to Leave the Door Open by Bruno Mars, Anderson .Paak and Silk Sonic.
This song’s full of drum beats and smooth vocal performances all over the pitch spectrum, but despite that, nothing sounded inaccurate, tinny or dropped on the Titanium Yoga. It could have sounded richer or fuller, but for such a thin device, not losing the bass tracks is enough for me.
As for volume, I could understand the song’s lyrics across most of my 2-bedroom apartment, though they did become muffled at the very edges of my space. When just sitting by myself in front of the Titanium Yoga, I tended to keep the volume at around 60%.
Upgradeability of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
The ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga is easy to open, though there’s not much point to doing so. All you have to do is loosen, but not remove, the six Phillips head screws on the convertible’s underside and gently lift off the case. Inside, you’ll see the battery as well as the networking chip. The M.2 SSD is hidden under a black flap, though it’s in an uncommon size (it looks like a 2242 form factor to us, though we don’t have official word on that) and there’s no slot for a second SSD.
You may be able to change out your SSD in the future, but for the other components, consider that you won’t be able to replace them.
Battery Life of the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga hit just under 10 hours of battery life in our testing, which while not the absolute minimum for an ultraportable, does put it behind most of its similarly powered competition.
Specifically, the Titanium Yoga had 9:58 of life on our battery benchmark, which continuously streams video, browses the web and runs OpenGL tests at 150 nits of brightness. That’s about an hour less life than we got on both the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 9310, which hit 10:52, and the ThinkPad X12 Detachable, which hit 11:05.
Heat on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
For such a thin device, the ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga impresses on cooling. After 15 minutes of streaming video, the device’s touchpad only registered 73.4 degrees Fahrenheit (23 degrees Celsius), while the center of its keyboard in between the G and H keys only hit 81.5 degrees Fahrenheit (27.5 degrees Celsius). Its underside was just slightly hotter at 84.6 degrees Fahrenheit (29.22 degrees Celsius).
The only part of this laptop that even came close to pushing any boundaries was the keyboard deck, right above the f5 key. This hit 93.6 degrees Fahrenheit (34.22 degrees Celsius), which typically isn’t too concerning, but could get warm to the touch after a few seconds here.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga Webcam
The ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga comes with a single front-facing 720p webcam that’s usually color accurate and tends to avoid artifacting, but doesn’t always hold up to dark or overly lit rooms.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
During late afternoon in my office, the Titanium Yoga’s camera captured my face with no visible grain and no major alterations to my natural skin tone. All aspects of the photo are properly in focus, as well.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
In my much dimmer hallway, shots lost focus and fidelity and heavy grain started to appear. Colors still appear accurate, however.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Colors started to take a hit when I stood in front of my office’s window. Here, my face appears much paler than in real life. You also can’t see much of the scenery outside my window, though artifacting seems to be at a minimum.
Overall, that’s pretty impressive performance for a laptop webcam — no 720p webcam is going to perform perfectly under dim conditions or heavy light. And of course, the typical ThinkPad physical camera shutter is also here on the Titanium Yoga.
Software and Warranty on the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga
The ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga is mostly free of bloat, excluding typical Windows pre-installs like Skype and the Microsoft Solitaire Collection. Otherwise, the Titanium Yoga’s built-in software suite largely focuses on genuine utility.
Most of the Titanium Yoga’s functions are inside Lenovo Commercial Vantage, which is where you’ll update your BIOS and drivers, check your warranty, view your storage and RAM usage, find documentation and check Wi-Fi security.
There’s also Lenovo Pen Settings for programming various aspects of your Lenovo Pen, as well as Dolby Access, which lets you choose between equalizer and postprocessing presets for your display and audio settings.
The one program that does feel excessive here is Glance by Mirametrix, which you can turn on to try to get your computer to move windows to where your eyes are looking or go to sleep if someone looks over your shoulder.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga Configurations
Our configuration of the ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga came with an Intel Core i5-1130G7 CPU (with integrated Intel Iris Xe graphics), 16GB of LPDDR4x-4266 RAM, a 512GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD and a 13.5 inch 2256 x 1504 IPS touchscreen. All of this currently costs $1,685 on Lenovo’s website.
That $1,685 is also the current starting price for this unit, though other configurations can reach up to $2,429. For these other configurations, your display will stay the same, but you’ll be able to select CPUs up to the Intel Core i7-1180G7 with vPro and RAM capacities ranging from 8GB to 16GB. Storage options range from 256GB to 1TB.
All configurations also come with the Lenovo pen.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium Yoga Bottom Line
The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Titanium’s focus on size and aesthetics makes this device especially appealing to casual users, but puts it behind other, similarly-priced convertibles when it comes to productivity.
In our performance tests, our Core i5-powered X1 Titanium Yoga fell behind some non-business competitors that have Intel Core i7-1165G7 CPUS and sell for similar prices (you can also get the Titanium Yoga with Core i7 for more money). These rivals also had thicker chassis, which allowed for longer battery life.
But that thickness does count harm portability, and the Titanium Yoga has the advantage of being a business-class device while those rivals are not. That means it comes with added durability, like MIL-SPEC certification, plus extra security and manageability features like vPro.
It also comes with an included stylus. While the HP Spectre x360 14 also has an included pen, the Dell XPS 13 2-in-1 does not. You also get Lenovo’s excellent keyboard with the Titanium Yoga, plus a fashionable design and a moleskin-like finish.
Those features make the Titanium Yoga a great casual usage device, though thanks to its aesthetics, it will look equally at home in the boardroom, the classroom or the living room.
The Asus ZenBook 13 UM325SA packs some of the best value we’ve seen in an ultraportable yet, outperforming much more expensive Intel options thanks to new Ryzen 5000U chips.
For
+ Strong and cheap
+ OLED display
+ Surprisingly good audio
Against
– Need a dongle for a headphone jack
– Touch-based numpad feels gimmicky
The Asus ZenBook line usually tends to be a series of plain, mid-range ultraportables that hit respectable performance for strong value. The ZenBook 13 UM325SA ($749 to start, $999 as tested), is also somewhat unassuming and still maintains strong value, but its performance is anything but mid-range.
That’s thanks to its new Ryzen 5000U processor options, which bring the power of AMD’s latest CPU line to ultraportables and into competition with Intel’s 11th Gen “Tiger Lake” processors. The result is a stunningly strong computer that’s priced well below Intel and Apple alternatives, yet usually outperforms the former while coming within spitting range of the latter.
Asus ZenBook 13 Specs
CPU
AMD Ryzen 7 5800U
Graphics
AMD Integrated Radeon Vega Graphics
Memory
16GB DDR4-3733 MHz
Storage
1TB M.2 SSD
Display
13.3 inch, 1920 x 1080, OLED
Networking
802.11ax Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.0
Ports
2x USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C, 1x USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A, 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x microSD card reader
Camera
720p, IR
Battery
67Wh
Power Adapter
65W
Operating System
Windows 10 Pro
Dimensions(WxDxH)
11.97 x 7.99 x 0.55 inches
Weight
2.5 pounds
Price Range
$750 – $1000
Design of Asus ZenBook 13
Image 1 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 8
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Zenbook 13 is still a thin, light and minimally decorated machine that looks neither ostentatious nor exciting. Fitting that, color options include a blackish gray and a lighter, more metallic silver — the one we tested was gray.
The laptop’s lid is probably its most heavily decorated part, with a reflective, silvery Asus logo sitting off-center towards the laptop’s charging port side. A slight radial texture surrounds and emanates from the logo, although a glossy surface means it’s often covered by fingerprints. There’s also a small “Zenbook Series” logo on the laptop’s outer hinge.
Opening the laptop reveals a focus on functionality, as there’s not too much going on here visually aside from the chiclet-style keyboard and large touchpad. The keyboard does sit inside a sloping tray, which is nice, but what’s more noticeable is that opening the laptop’s lid also lifts the keyboard off your desk at up to a three-degree angle for easier typing.
The left side of the laptops houses two USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C ports and one HDMI 2.1 connection. The right side similarly has just a single USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A port and a microSD card reader. The big missing port is a 3.5 mm audio jack; you get a USB Type-C dongle in the box for that. You also get a USB Type-A dongle for RJ-45 Ethernet. Those adapters cut into the device’s portability. For instance, plugging in both dongles as well as the charger will use up all of your ports.
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The Zenbook 13 is on the smaller and lighter side when it comes to portability. At 11.97 x 7.99 x 0.55 inches and 2.5 pounds, it edges out similarly specced competitors on most measurements. The 13 inch MacBook Pro with an M1 chip is 11.97 x 8.36 x 0.61 inches and 3 pounds, while the HP Spectre x360 14 is 11.75 x 8.67 x 0.67 inches and 2.95 pounds. The Dell XPS 13 9310 comes the closest to giving the ZenBook decent competition on size, hitting 11.6 x 7.8 x 0.6 inches and 2.8 pounds.
Productivity Performance of Asus ZenBook 13
Image 1 of 4
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
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 ZenBook 13 UM325SA is our first time looking at a Ryzen 5000U series chip, which brings AMD’s latest CPU generation to the ultraportable market. While our Ryzen 7 5800U ZenBook 13 configuration with 16GB of RAM and 1TB M.2 SSD didn’t quite beat Apple’s new M1 chip, it generally outperformed Intel Tiger Lake ultraportables like the i7-1165G7 HP Spectre x360 14 and XPS 13 9310. The Ryzen 7 5800U has eight cores and 16 threads, while Intel’s U-series Tiger Lake processors go up to four cores and eight threads.
In Geekbench 5, which is a synthetic benchmark that attempts to capture general performance, the Asus ZenBook 13 hit 6,956 points in multi-core tests and 1,451 points in single-core tests. That’s above the 5,925 multi-core/1,316 single-core scores earned by the MacBook Pro with an M1 processor running Geekbench via Rosetta 2 emulation. The M1 running a native Geekbench test performed much higher, although native M1 Geekbench isn’t exactly comparable to what we ran on the ZenBook. The ZenBook also generally beats our Tiger Lake competition. For instance, the HP Spectre x360 14 earned 4,904 multi-core/1,462 single-core scores and the Dell XPS 13 9310 earned 5,319 multi-core/1,521 single-core scores. Those single-core scores are closer to our ZenBook’s output, but the laptops fall far enough behind on multi-core to outweigh that benefit in most cases.
The ZenBook 13 led the pack in file transfer speeds. When transferring 25GB of files, the ZenBook 13 did so at a rate of 1,068.21 MBps, while the XPS 13 9310 followed behind at a rate of 806.2 MBps. The MacBook Pro M1 hit a rate of 727.04 MBps, and the Spectre x360 14 trailed behind with a score of 533.61 MBps.
The ZenBook 13 and MacBook Pro M1 were significantly faster than our Tiger Lake machines in our Handbrake video-editing benchmark, which tracks how long it takes a device to transcode a video from 4K to FHD. The ZenBook 13 completed this task in 9:18 and the MacBook Pro M1 did it in 7:44. Meanwhile, the Spectre x360 14 and XPS 13 9310 were much slower with scores of 18:05 and 18:22, respectively.
We also ran our ZenBook 13 through Cinebench R23 for 20 runs in a row to stress test how well it operates under an extended load. The average score among these tests was 7,966.40, and the CPU ran at an average clock speed of 2.43 GHz and average temperature of 66.72 Celsius (152.1 Fahrenheit).
Display on Asus ZenBook 13
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Aside from a new Ryzen 5000U chip, the ZenBook 13 UM325SA also packs a new 1920 x 1080
OLED
display. That’s an improvement over 2020’s
Tiger Lake model
, which had an
IPS
-level screen.
I tested this display by watching The Falcon and the Winter Soldier and was impressed by the color and brightness, but a little disappointed by the screen’s viewing angles and reflectivity. While the red on Falcon’s outfit popped and shadows and other blacks were deep, I found that the image tended to wash out when looking at the screen from over 45 degrees away horizontally. Vertical angles were more generous, but the issue with horizontal angles persisted regardless of whether I watched in a high or low-light environment. I also found that even in low light environments, reflectivity was an issue, as I could frequently see my outline on the screen. Still, this didn’t outweigh the excellent color and brightness for me.
Our testing backed up my experience, with the ZenBook 13’s color only being beaten by the HP Spectre x360 14, which also had an OLED screen when we tested it. The ZenBook’s DCI-P3 color rating was 96.5%, while the Spectre’s was 139.7%. The MacBook Pro M1 had a much lower 78.3% DCI-P3 color rating, while the Dell XPS 13 9310 followed behind with a 69.4% DCI-P3 color rating.
The ZenBook was closer to the bottom of the pack in terms of brightness, though given that all of our competitors were also packing bright screens, this isn’t really a mark of low quality. It had 375 nits of average brightness, which is above the Spectre’s 339 nits, but below the MacBook Pro M1’s 435 nits score. The XPS 13 led the pack with a score of 469 nits, but any of the screens are still plenty bright.
Keyboard and Touchpad on Asus ZenBook 13
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA boasts a chiclet membrane keyboard that’s not too different from what you’ll find on most other ultraportables, but is nonetheless comfortable to use thanks to a slight angle and a cushiony feeling on keypresses.
The Zenbook’s lid is designed to lift its keyboard off your desk at up to a three-degree angle when opened, and while it doesn’t sound like much, that slight elevation helps for both comfort and typing accuracy. I wasn’t any faster than my typical 75 words-per-minute when typing on this keyboard, but I did find myself making fewer typos and my fingers didn’t feel as strained.
That comfort comes from keypresses that feel satisfyingly soft and pillowy, as well as wide keycaps that keep your fingers from feeling cramped or getting lost.
What’s perhaps more interesting than the keyboard is the touchpad, which is a generous 5.1 x 2.5 inches. It uses precision drivers and is perfectly smooth yet has enough friction for precise input, plus it tracks multi-touch gestures without issue. But that’s not what makes it interesting. What stands out here is the toggle-able touchscreen numpad built into it.
By holding the touchpad’s top-right corner for about a second, a numpad overlay will appear on the touchpad. You can still move your mouse cursor as usual in this mode, but you’ll also be able to tap on the overlay to input numbers as well as simple arithmetic commands like addition, subtraction and multiplication. Further, by swiping the touchpad’s top-left corner, your laptop will automatically open the calculator app.
This isn’t our first time seeing these features on a ZenBook, but they still remain novel here. The idea is to make up for the keyboard’s lack of a number pad, but unfortunately, this solution leaves much to be desired. The simplest issue is that touch input is unreliable and often requires users to self-correct by looking at what they’re touching. It also tends to lack comfort due to a lack of tactile feedback. Those two problems take away the major strengths tenkeys tend to have over number rows, but they’re not the only issue here.
While the numpad shortcut works well enough, the swipe to either bring up or dismiss the calculator can be finicky, and it’s not too unusual for it to not register a few times before working. It’s also unusual from a user experience perspective that the calculator shortcut uses a different input method than the numpad, and that the logo indicating where to swipe bears no resemblance to a calculator, but instead looks more like a social media share button.
While you can safely ignore the touch-based numpad without losing any utility over competitors, it doesn’t add much convenience to the device and comes across like a gimmick. At the very least, it does result in a larger touchpad than usual.
Audio on Asus ZenBook 13
The Asus ZenBook 13 UM325S comes with bottom-firing Harman Kardon speakers. And despite the ultrabook’s small size, they work well for both bass and volume.
I tested the ZenBook’s speakers by listening to Blinding Lights by The Weeknd, and they got loud enough at max volume to fill my whole 2-bedroom apartment, even through doors. Bass was also plenty present, capturing both the song’s drum beats and low synth without losing too much information. I couldn’t exactly feel it in my chest, but I also didn’t feel like part of the song was getting cut or drastically losing its impact, which is impressive on a laptop this size.
Unfortunately, the compromise here is that high notes did tend to get a little tinny as the volume got louder. While I had a decent listening experience at volumes lower than 60%, the distortion became noticeable and eventually annoying as I got higher than that level.
There’s also DTS audio software on board that lets you swap between different presets for music, movies and games, and lets you access a custom mode to boost certain parts of your audio like treble and bass. This mostly tended to affect sound mixing rather than quality, but helped me keep my general system volume down, which reduced tinniness to a minimum.
Upgradeability of Asus ZenBook 13
The ZenBook line has a history of being difficult to upgrade, and that’s the case here as well. That’s because some of the screws you’d need to remove to open up the device are hidden under the laptop’s feet. There’s no guarantee you’ll be able to get these feet back on after removal, so we skipped opening up the laptop for this review.
When we reached out to Asus, we were told that the ZenBook 13 UM325SA uses soldered RAM, though you can access and swap out the M.2 SSD if you wish.
However, given that you might end up having to replace your laptop’s feet in the process, we’d suggest being careful about your configuration choices before buying.
Battery Life of Asus ZenBook 13
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA enjoyed a long 13 hours and 36 minute battery life in our benchmark, which continuously streams video, browses the web and runs OpenGL tests over Wi-Fi at 150 nits of brightness. That put it well above the HP Spectre x360 14’s 7:14 score and the Dell XPS 13 9310’s 11:07, with only the MacBook Pro M1 beating it. That laptop lasted for 16:32.
Heat on Asus ZenBook 13
We took the ZenBook’s temperature after 15 minutes of YouTube videos, and found that the touchpad registered 73.4 degrees Celsius (164.12 Fahrenheit), the center of the keyboard between the G and H keys hit 83.3 degrees Celsius (181.94 Fahrenheit) and the laptop’s underside was mostly 84.7 degrees Celsius (184.46 Fahrenheit).
That said, the underside as a whole has a lot of surface area, and its rear-center (just in front of its underside vent) did hit 94.6 degrees Celsius (202.28 Fahrenheit).
Webcam on Asus ZenBook 13
The ZenBook 13 UM325SA has a single 720p webcam with IR capability for Windows Hello. While it has strong color accuracy, I found that photos I took with it suffered from low quality and a lot of artifacting. It also didn’t adjust well to heavy or low light.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
The colors were natural, but it still almost feels as if I have a filter on. I’d be nervous taking an important work call on this device.
Software and Warranty of Asus ZenBook 13
The Asus ZenBook 13 UM325SA comes with minimal utility software, excluding the extended McAfee total protection trial that’s turned on by default when you get the system. We uninstalled this fairly early on, as some antivirus programs can lower benchmark performance.
Aside from that, you have DTS audio processing for swapping between different presets that tune the speakers for music, movies or gaming. You also have AMD Radeon software, where you can adjust your PC’s power mode, view usage stats for different components and launch games.
Most of Asus’ utility software limited to the MyAsus app, which lets you run diagnostics, troubleshoot, perform updates and the like, all from one place.
There’s also typical Windows pack-ins like Spotify, the weather app, and Microsoft Solitaire Collection.
Configurations of Asus ZenBook 13
We reviewed the ZenBook 13 UM325SA with a Ryzen 7 5800U processor, integrated Radeon Vega graphics, a 13.3-inch 1920 x 1080 OLED display, 16GB of LPDDR4X-3733 memory and a 1TB M.2 SSD. That’s the top configuration for the AMD version of this laptop.
Official pricing info is still a little undefined at the moment, though we’ve been told that the price range for this line of Zenbooks is $750 – $1000. We’d assume that our laptop would come in closer to the top of that range. CPU options for this laptop include the Ryzen 5 5500U, the Ryzen 5 5600U, the Ryzen 7 5700U and the Ryzen 7 5800U. Some of those CPUs are split between the UM325UA and UM325SA models, though there isn’t much difference on these devices other than that CPU selection.
You can also choose to lower your RAM and SSD capacities for a cheaper price, although Asus hasn’t given us details on available options as of publishing.
Bottom Line
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
AMD’s Ryzen processors have, as of late, had a reputation for strong productivity performance and value, and those features stand out in how the latest Asus ZenBook 13 leverages the new Ryzen 5800U chip. Despite costing a maximum of $1,000 at its highest configuration, it easily stands above Intel Tiger Lake competitors that reach as high as $1,600, all while touting a gorgeous OLED display.
In our productivity tests, the only ultraportable that beat the ZenBook 13 was the M1-equipped MacBook Pro 13, which we tested in an $1,899 configuration (and starts at $1,299). Yet despite costing slightly more than half of that price tag, the ZenBook was still in the MacBook’s general range, and never once lost to an Intel competitor.
Granted, some of those Intel competitors have special features. The HP Spectre x360 14 is a convertible, and the Dell XPS 13 has a premium design and a 1920 x 1200 resolution. But they also perform worse while costing more, and even though this ZenBook is still largely plain when it comes to bonuses, it does have a beautiful new OLED display.
There are a few quibbles here and there, like the slim port selection or the near-useless touch-based numpad. But overall, this device is the definition of punching above your weight class.
Microsoft has started inviting Xbox Game Pass Ultimate subscribers to test its Xbox Cloud Gaming (xCloud) service on iPhones and iPads today. The service works through web browsers, allowing it to also run on PCs and Macs on Edge, Chrome, or Safari. We’ve managed to get an early look at this beta and see how Xbox Cloud Gaming works on an iPhone or iPad.
The web interface for xCloud (yes, we’re going to keep calling it xCloud) is very simple to use. It scales across devices like the iPhone, iPad, or even a large monitor attached to a PC to provide quick access to games. Microsoft has even included a search interface, which is something that’s strangely missing on rival service Google Stadia.
You don’t need to install any apps or extensions; it works natively in Chrome, Safari, or Edge. All you need is a compatible USB or Bluetooth controller. Some games even work with Xbox Touch Controls, so a controller isn’t required if you’re happy to tap on the screen and play. I managed to quickly start games using an Xbox Elite 2 controller paired to an iPhone 11 Pro.
Once you launch a game, you’ll have to wait a fair amount of time for it to actually load. Much like xCloud on Android, the backend servers for Microsoft’s Xbox game streaming are actually Xbox One S consoles. This older Xbox hardware isn’t powered by a modern CPU or SSD, so game loads are affected as a result. Microsoft is planning to upgrade xCloud servers to Xbox Series X hardware at some point this year, though.
Microsoft’s Xbox Game Streaming on an iPhone.
I’ve only been playing xCloud via the web for a few hours, so it’s difficult to judge the experience, but I’ve certainly run into a lot of connection issues both wireless and wired with my desktop PC. Microsoft says it’s working on a routing issue with this beta, but it’s worth pointing out this is a test service, and it’s only just launched, so hiccups like this are to be expected.
Once the connection settles down, it’s very similar to xCloud on Android. If you run this through a web browser on a PC or iPad, you’ll even get a 1080p stream. It feels like I’m playing on an Xbox in the cloud, and there’s a dashboard that lets me access friends, party chats, achievements, and invites to games. This is all powered by Xbox Game Pass, so there are more than 100 games available — and even some original Xbox and Xbox 360 titles that can be streamed.
You can search and easily launch Xbox games in a browser.
Xbox Touch Controls can be used for certain games.
Microsoft hasn’t said when the company plans to roll this out more broadly yet, but given the early connection issues, there’s clearly still some work to be done until the web version is available for everyone. Still, it’s impressive how well this scales across multiple devices and opens up the ability to stream Xbox games to virtually any device that has a Chromium or Safari browser.
I also tried this xCloud browser version on the new Edge app for Xbox consoles, but it’s not fully supported yet. Both the service and the browser are in early beta right now, so full support might come at a later date. Either way, I imagine that xCloud will arrive on Xbox consoles through the ability to quickly stream a game while you’re waiting for it to download in the background. That’s really where xCloud makes sense on a console that can already play Xbox games.
This browser-based version of xCloud does open up the service to many more possibilities, too. Xbox chief Phil Spencer has previously hinted at TV streaming sticks for xCloud, and Microsoft has already committed to bringing the service to Facebook Gaming at some point. It’s easy to imagine Xbox Game Streaming apps for smart TVs, coupled with the ability to access the service from web browsers to ensure almost any device can access an Xbox Game Pass subscription. That’s clearly Microsoft’s goal here, and this beta feels like just the beginning.
Apple is continuing its move from Intel to Arm on the desktop, putting its M1 processor new line of iMacs and in the iPad Pro. Both were announced at Apple’s “Spring Loaded” virtual event, and are the first time each of those product lines is using the new chip. Previously, the iPad Pro used Apple’s custom A-series chips, while the iMac used Intel processors.
iMac
The new iMacs come in seven colors: blue, green, pink, silver, yellow, orange and purple, and are somewhat reminiscent of the iMac G3. They are built from the ground up for the new chips, unlike the 13-inch MacBook Pro, MacBook Air and Mac Mini, which used existing chassis. The new iMac has a redesign with a much-smaller logic board with two tiny fans. Apple says these small fans will keep the computer under 10 decibels, which the human ear shouldn’t be able to hear. It’s just 11.5 millimeters thin. Apple says the iMac is 85% faster than the previous 21-inch model, which used Intel chips. It also says graphics are up to 2x faster than previous models. In Final Cut, Apple is claiming up to four streams of footage in 1080p, or one in 4K. The company took time to focus on iOS apps working on macOS, as well as the broad range of compatible apps that have come to M1 since it launched last year. The new display is 24-inches diagonally and has narrow bezels, with a 4480 x 2520 resolution and 500 nits of brightness. It also uses TrueTone, like the laptops, to change color temperature based on your surroundings.
Image 1 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 2 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 3 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 4 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 5 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 6 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 7 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 8 of 8
(Image credit: Apple)
The camera, microphones and speakers are also getting upgraded. The camera is a 1080p FaceTime sensor, higher than the 720p we see in the MacBook laptops. The microphones use beam forming to focus on your voice and avoid background noise. This should all help out in work-from-home situations.
The speakers have increased amounts of power, with increased bass response. The full system is six speakers, including tweeters and woofers. With Dolby Atmos, it supports surround sound.
(Image credit: Apple)
The M1 iMac has 4 USB-C ports, including 2 Thunderbolt ports, with support for a 6K display. There’s a new magnetic power connector, with a woven cable, that connects to the power adapter. If you want wired connectivity, Ethernet connects to the power adapter and is routed to the system.
The keyboard has new emoji, spotlight, and do not disturb keys. A separate model will have Touch ID on the desktop for the first time. The Magic Mouse and Magic Trackpad will also have new color-matched aluminum.
(Image credit: Apple)
The new iMac starts at $1,299 and will be available to order on April 30, shipping in May. At that price you get an 8-core CPU, 7-core GPU, 8GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD, as well as two Thunderbolt ports. At $1,499, that bumps up to an 8-core GPU and also adds two USB 3 Type-C ports.
iPad Pro
(Image credit: Apple)
iPadOS will take advantage of M1 as well, being the first non-macOS device to use the new design. Apple said it will offer a 50% jump over the previous iPad Pro. The GPU will be a 40% increase over the last model.
This replaces the A-series chips that Apple previously used in the iPad Pro (and currently uses in the iPhone and other iPads).
Additionally, Apple is touting storage access that is twice as fast as its predecessor, as well as a new 2TB configuration. Notably, the new iPads will have the same 8GB and 16GB RAM options as other M1 devices.
The USB-C port has been upgraded to Thunderbolt with USB 4 support, with four times more bandwidth over the the USB-C port on the previous iPad Pro. It supports more displays and storage as well.
Image 1 of 2
(Image credit: Apple)
Image 2 of 2
(Image credit: Apple)
Apple has also added 5G to iPad Pro, making this the first M1 device to feature the technology, and it will support millimeter wave in the United States.
There’s a TrueDepth camera in the front, and the iPad Pro has a LiDAR camera on the back for AR applications. The TrueDepth shooter has a 12MP ultra wide camera, which can keep people in view from a distance on video calls, using machine learning to move the frame.
Apple is changing up the display technology, too. It’s moving the 12.9-inch iPad to the same tech as the Pro Display XDR. It’s called Liquid Retina XDR, with 1,000 nits of brightness and 1,600 nits at its peak. It also has the same 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio.
The 12.9 inch iPad Pro will use a mini-LED display, and the screen is comprised of 10,000 of them. This is Apple’s first time using the technology, which is also rumored to move into MacBooks later in the year. It will also support HDR formats like Dolby Vision and HDR 10. The 11-inch iPad Pro is sticking with an LED “liquid retina” screen.
The 11-inch iPad Pro will start at $799. The 12.9-inch model with the XDR display starts at $1,099. Orders open April 30, with shipments starting in the second half of May.
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.
EA and Codemasters revealed the F1 2021system requirements for the upcoming PC launch on Steam. The long-running annual series looks set to add a few extra twists and turns this round, with enhanced ray tracing visuals. That means you’ll likely benefit even more from having one of the best graphics cards driving the game, alongside one of the best CPUs for gaming powering the engine. The game currently has a launch date of July 16, 2021. Here are the minimum and recommended PC specs:
OS: Windows 10 64-bit (1709 or later, 2004 or later for ray tracing)
Both the minimum and recommended system specs are relatively tame until you add in ray tracing. For the CPU, Codemasters lists a relatively ancient Core i3-2130 or an FX-4300. Intel’s CPU is a 2-core/4-thread chip running at 3.4GHz, while AMD’s old FX-4300 is a 4-core/4-thread chip running at up to 4.0GHz — though the FX-series used a CMT (Clustered Multi-Threading) approach that shares some resources between pairs of CPU cores. Most likely, older CPUs could also suffice, though there’s no mention of expected performance. The recommended CPUs meanwhile are far more capable: 6-core/6-thread 4.6GHz for Intel, and 6-core/12-thread 4.2GHz for AMD, with updated architectures compared to the minimum spec.
The GPU will likely play a bigger role, particularly if you want to dip your toes into the ray tracing waters. The GTX 950 and R9 280 hail from 2015 and 2014, respectively, with Nvidia’s card roughly matching a GTX 1050 and AMD’s card coming in a bit ahead of an RX 560. Recommended graphics hardware easily more than doubles performance, with the GTX 1660 Ti and RX 590. And if you want ray tracing, you’ll need at least an RTX 2060 and preferably an RTX 3070 from Nvidia, or an RX 6700 XT and preferably an RX 6800 from AMD.
The remaining F1 2021 system requirements look pretty standard: 8GB RAM, 16GB recommended, 80GB of storage (preferably on an SSD), and of course Windows 10 64-bit — build 2004 (the May 2020 update) is needed for ray tracing, or 2017’s Creators Update build 1703 will suffice for standard rendering.
Our big question regarding the graphics overhaul is how ray tracing will be put to use. Codemasters published Dirt 5 late last year, with a patch adding AMD-promoted ray tracing in March 2021 (press were provided a preview build in December). Unfortunately, the RT effects are only for shadows — one of the least important uses of ray tracing in our opinion. We’d like to see options for RT reflections and lighting as well, but of course that requires more powerful RT hardware.
Given F1 2021 will also launch on the latest consoles, which are less potent than high-end PC graphics cards, we’re not expecting much in the way of dramatically enhanced graphics thanks to ray tracing. Perhaps we’ll be pleasantly surprised this summer.
Lexar has made a name for itself in the portable storage market—they are very well known for their SD cards and USB sticks, so it’s natural for them to expand into other areas of flash storage, like consumer SSDs. Lexar was founded as a subsidiary of Micron, but was sold to Longsys in 2017 and has been operating quite independently since.
Lexar announced the NM620 SSD last month, on March 11th. It is based on the combination of a Lexar DM620 flash controller and Micron 3D TLC flash. A DRAM chip is not available, due to the drive being designed for entry-level, light workloads. Lexar building their own flash controller “DM620” made big waves in the industry. Everybody wondered whether it is based on some existing IP, or if Lexar’s parent company Longsys could become a major player in the SSD flash controller market soon. As always—competition is good, because it drives innovation and brings down pricing for us customers. For the case of the Lexar NM620, it looks like the controller is a rebranded Innogrit IG5216 “Shasta+” controller, possibly with custom firmware. The Lexar DM620 controller has support for NVMe 1.4, over four channels.
The Lexar NM620 is available in capacities of 256 GB ($45), 512 GB ($90) and 1 TB ($160). Endurance for these models is set at 125 TBW, 250 TBW and 500 TBW respectively. Lexar includes a five-year warranty with the NM620.
Specifications: Lexar NM620 1 TB
Brand:
Lexar
Model:
LNM620X001T
Capacity:
1024 GB (953 GB usable) No additional overprovisioning
Controller:
Lexar DM620 / Rebranded Innogrit IG5216
Flash:
Micron 64-Layer 3D TLC NW964 / MT29F1T08EMCAGJ4-5M:A
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.
Matthew Wilson 1 day ago Featured Tech News, Software & Gaming
Viper Gaming is back in the headlines this week with a new PCIe Gen 4 NVMe SSD. Boasting write speeds of up to 7,400MB/s and up to 2TB capacity, the Viper Gaming VP4300 SSD looks to be a significant upgrade over previous generations.
This week, the Viper VP4300 M.2 SSD was announced, featuring the latest Innogrit Gen 4×4 high-speed controller and DDR4 DRAM cache, this SSD offers peak performance for PCIe 4.0 capable systems. In terms of speeds, 4K random read and wire speeds reach up to 800K IOPS and sequential read/write speeds reach up to 6,800MB/s and 7,400MB/s respectively.
Cooling is becoming increasingly important for M.2 SSDs to avoid thermal throttling and maintain peak speeds for longer periods of time. To tackle this, the Viper VP4300 comes with an aluminium heatshield and a graphene thermal pad to improve heat transfer and heat dissipation. The pad carries heat away from core components and the heat shield then spreads it out to be carried away by system fans.
Here is the full feature list for this new SSD:
Built with the latest Innogrit IG5236 PCIe Gen 4 x 4 NVMe controller to unlock ultra-fast sequential Read and Write speeds up to 7.400MB/s and 6,800MB/s.
Thermal Throttling Technology and built-in thermal sensor to provide additional protection and sustain the best performance under intense workloads.
Delivers the perfect combination of overall performance, ultra-fast transfer speeds, and enhanced multitasking capabilities.
Built on a 10-layer PCB to guarantee excellent signal integrity for ultra-stability.
Two optional heatshields included in the package: Aluminum heatshield x 1, Graphene heatshield x 1
Must be on the latest AMD CPU and Motherboard, at time of release, to obtain optimal Gen4x4 speed. Other platforms will be backward compatible with Gen3x4
As usual, this SSD is backed by Viper Gaming’s five-year warranty. The Viper VP4300 will be available for $254.99 for the 1TB model and $499.99 for the 2TB version. We recently reviewed this SSD, so if you want to check out our benchmarks and analysis, you can do so HERE.
KitGuru Says: What do you all think of the latest SSD from Viper Gaming? Are you planning to make the jump to PCIe 4 this year?
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Acer planning a 49-inch Mini LED monitor to rival Samsung Odyssey G9
It looks like the Samsung Odyssey G9 already has some competition. A new curved gaming …
Christina Munro 1 day ago Featured Tech Reviews, Mouse, Reviews
Today we’re checking out ASUS’ latest lightweight wireless gaming mouse. The ASUS ROG Keris Wireless supports wired, Bluetooth and 2.4GHz wireless connectivity, while also sporting a PixArt PAW 3335 sensor with 400 IPS tracking and up to 16,000 DPI. Not only does it have hot-swappable switches, with spares included, you can also change the colour of the side buttons. Let’s see if this mouse is really worth the £89.99 asking price.
Watch via our Vimeo channel (below) or over on YouTube at 2160p HERE
Specifications:
Ergonomic, right handed design
Connectivity: USB 2.0
Bluetooth: RF 2.4GHz
Sensor ; PAW3335
Resolution ; 16000DPI
Max Speed ; 400IPS
Max Acceleration ; 40G
USB Report rate ; 1000 Hz
RF 2.4G Report rate:1000Hz
L/R Switch Type: ROG 70M Micro Switch
Button: 7 programmable buttons
Battery Type: 500mAh
Battery Life: 78 hours without lighting 52 hours with default lighting(Breathing)
Cable: 2.0m type-C ROG Paracord
Dimensions: 118(L)x62(w)x39(H) mm
Weight With Cable: 79g
Colour: black
You can purchase the ASUS ROG Keris Wireless from Overclockers UK for £89.99 HERE!
Discuss on our Facebook page HERE.
Pros
Lightweight.
Different coloured side buttons and spare switches included.
Built-in storage space for the USB dongle.
On the fly DPI adjustment.
Very comfortable in all grip styles.
Cons
Plastic attracts grease.
Not suited for those with larger hands.
KitGuru says: At £90 the ASUS ROG Keris Wireless certainly isn’t cheap but if you want a lightweight, wireless ergonomic mouse it’s definitely worth buying. Wireless performance is great, the shape is excellent for those with medium to small hands, and we love the hot-swappable switches.
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Patriot Viper VP4300 2TB SSD Review
Patriot’s latest PCIe 4.0 SSD doesn’t use a Phison controller – it’s from Innogrit instead
João Silva 2 days ago Featured Tech News, SSD Drives
Samsung is back with another PCIe 4 SSD – the PM9A1. The latest SSD is aimed at OEMs, but Samsung’s specifications suggest that it should offer very similar performance to the pre-existing 980 Pro SSD.
Similar to the 980 Pro, the Samsung PM9A1 uses the Elpis controller, DRAM cache, and V6 NAND memory (3D TLC). Available with up to 2TB of storage, it performs at about the same level as the 980 Pro, reaching speeds of 7,000MB/s in sequential reads and up to 5,200 MB/s in sequential writes. The rated 1,000,000 random 4K read IOPS are the same as the 980 Pro, but rated random 4K write IOPS are slightly inferior, set at 850,000 IOPS.
The PM9A1 SSD does not seem to come with a heat spreader, which is reasonable considering it has been designed to be used by OEMs. However, it features thermal control technology to prevent overheating and increase the drive’s lifespan.
Samsung’s new client SSD has been qualified by HP for its Z series of workstations, desktops, and laptops, and is already being shipped in these devices. Other OEMs should follow in early Q2. It’s unclear if these SSD drives will ever release to the DIY market, but given the fact that the similar 980 Pro SSD is widely available, this seems unlikely.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru says: If the Samsung PM9A1 were to hit the DIY market, it would probably be cheaper than the 980 Pro. Would you consider Samsung’s PM9A1 SSD if it was available at the usual retailers?
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Acer planning a 49-inch Mini LED monitor to rival Samsung Odyssey G9
It looks like the Samsung Odyssey G9 already has some competition. A new curved gaming …
Home/Software & Gaming/Days Gone PC features and improvements announced, releasing on May 18th
Matthew Wilson 2 days ago Software & Gaming
We’ve known for a while now that Days Gone is the next major PS4 console exclusive to be coming to PC. Now, we have a date and our first look at the PC version in action ahead of launch next month.
Days Gone is coming to PC on the 18th of May on Steam and the Epic Games Store. Similarly to last year’s Horizon Zero Dawn release, Days Gone will support 21:9 ultrawide displays, third-party controllers like the Xbox gamepad, as well as keyboard/mouse with remapping functions.
In the trailer above, we can see the PC version in action, running at 4K and 60 frames per second. The PC version will also include improved graphics over the PS4 version and unlocked frame rates, so you can run it well above 60 frames per second as long as you have the hardware for it. Speaking of hardware, below you will find the minimum and recommended PC specifications for the game:
Minimum:
Requires a 64-bit processor and operating system
OS: Windows 10 64-bit
Processor: Intel Core [email protected] or AMD FX [email protected]
The PC version includes increased level of detail, field of view and foliage draw distance, as well as the usual graphical customisation options we expect to balance fidelity and performance. The Photo Mode is also included for those who enjoy taking impressive screenshots.
Discuss on our Facebook page, HERE.
KitGuru Says: I skipped Days Gone on the PS4 but I’m really looking forward to picking up this PC version. Are any of you planning on grabbing this next month?
Become a Patron!
Check Also
Xbox controller ‘stick drift’ lawsuit will not go to trial
Last year, we learned that Nintendo isn’t the only company facing lawsuits over gaming controller …
The Intel Core i5-11600K vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X rivalry is a heated battle for supremacy right in the heart of the mid-range CPU market. AMD’s Ryzen 5000 processors took the lead in the desktop PC from Intel’s competing Comet Lake processors last year, upsetting our Best CPU for gaming recommendations and our CPU Benchmarks hierarchy. Intel’s response comes in the form of its Rocket Lake processors, which dial up the power to extreme levels and bring the new Cypress Cove architecture to the company’s 14nm process as Intel looks to upset AMD’s powerful Zen 3-powered Ryzen 5000 chips.
Intel has pushed its 14nm silicon to the limits as it attempts to unseat the AMD competition, and that has paid off in the mid-range where Intel’s six-core Core i5-11600K weighs in with surprisingly good performance given its $232 to $262 price point.
Intel’s aggressive pricing, and the fact that the potent Ryzen 5 5600X remains perpetually out of stock and price-gouged, has shifted the conversation entirely. For Intel, all it has to do is serve up solid pricing, have competitive performance, and make sure it has enough chips at retail to snatch away the win.
We put the Core i5-11600K up against the Ryzen 5 5600X in a six-round faceoff to see which chip takes the crown in our gaming and application benchmarks, along with other key criteria like power consumption and pricing. Let’s see how the chips stack up.
Features and Specifications of AMD Ryzen 5 5600X vs Intel Core i5-11600K
Rocket Lake Core i5-11600K vs AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 5 5600X Specifications and Pricing
Suggested Price
Cores / Threads
Base (GHz)
Peak Boost (Dual/All Core)
TDP
iGPU
L3
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
$299 (and much higher)
6 / 12
3.7
4.6
65W
None
32MB (1×32)
Intel Core i5-11600K (KF)
$262 (K) – $237 (KF)
6 / 12
3.9
4.6 / 4.9 (TB2)
125W
UHD Graphics 750 Xe 32EU
12MB
The 7nm Ryzen 5 5600X set a new bar for the mid-range with six Zen 3 cores and twelve threads that operate at a 3.7-GHz base and 4.6-GHz boost frequency. Despite AMD’s decision to hike gen-on-gen pricing, the 5600X delivered class-leading performance at its launch, not to mention a solid price-to-performance ratio. Things have changed since then, though, due to overwhelming demand coupled with pandemic-spurred supply chain disruptions, both of which have combined to make finding the Ryzen 5 5600X a rarity at retail, let alone at the suggested $299 pricing.
Intel’s Core i5-11600K also comes with six cores and twelve threads, but Team Blue’s chips come with the new Cypress Cove architecture paired with the aging 14nm process. Intel has tuned this chip for performance; it weighs in with a 3.9-GHz base, 4.9-GHz Turbo Boost 2.0, and 4.6-GHz all-core clock rates. All of these things come at the expense of power consumption and heat generation.
Intel specs the 14nm 11600K at a 125W TDP rating, but that jumps to 182W under heavy loads, while AMD’s denser and more efficient 7nm process grants the 5600X a much-friendlier 65W TDP rating that coincides with a peak of 88W. We’ll dive deeper into power consumption a bit later, but this is important because the Core i5-11600K comes without a cooler. You’ll need a capable cooler, preferably a 280mm liquid AIO or equivalent air cooler, to unlock the best of the 11600K.
Meanwhile, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X comes with a bundled cooler that is sufficient for most users, though you would definitely need to upgrade to a better cooler if you plan on overclocking. Additionally, a more robust cooler will unlock slightly higher performance in heavy work, like rendering or encoding. Still, you’d need to do that type of work quite regularly to see a worthwhile benefit, so most users will be fine with the bundled cooler.
Both the Core i5-11600K and Ryzen 5 5600X support PCIe 4.0, though it is noteworthy that Intel’s chipset doesn’t support the speedier interface. Instead, devices connected to Intel’s chipset operate at PCIe 3.0 speeds. That means you’ll only have support for one PCIe 4.0 m.2 SSD port on your motherboard, whereas AMD’s chipset is fully enabled for PCIe 4.0, giving you more options for a plethora of faster devices.
Both chips also support two channels of DDR4-3200 memory, but Intel’s new Gear memory feature takes a bit of the shine off Intel’s memory support. At stock settings, the 11600K supports DDR4-2933 in Gear 1 mode, which provides the best latency and performance for most tasks, like gaming. You’ll have to operate the chip in Gear 2 mode for warrantied DDR4-3200 support, but that results in performance penalties in some latency-sensitive apps, like gaming, which you can read about here.
For some users, the 11600K does have a big insurmountable advantage over the Ryzen 5 5600X: The chip comes with the new UHD Graphics 750 comes armed with 32 EUs based on the Xe graphics engine, while all Ryzen 5000 processors come without integrated graphics. That means Intel wins by default if you don’t plan on using a discrete GPU.
Notably, you could also buy Intel’s i5-11600KF, which comes with a disabled graphics engine, for $25 less. At $237, the 11600KF looks incredibly tempting, which we’ll get to a bit later.
Winner: AMD
The Ryzen 5 5600X and the Core i5-11600K are close with six cores and twelve threads (and each of those cores has comparable performance), but the 5600X gets the nod here due to its bundled cooler and native support for DDR4-3200 memory. Meanwhile, the Core i5-11600K comes without a cooler, and you’ll have to operate the memory in sub-optimal Gear 2 mode to access DDR4-3200 speeds, at least if you want to stay within the warranty.
The Core i5-11600K comes with integrated graphics, so it wins by default if you don’t plan on using a discrete GPU. Conversely, you can sacrifice the graphics for a lower price point. AMD has no high-end chips that come with integrated graphics, though that will change by the end of the year when the Ryzen 5000 Cezanne APUs arrive.
Gaming Performance on AMD Ryzen 5 5600X vs Core i9-11600K
The Ryzen 5 and Core i5 families tend to be the most popular gaming chips, and given the big architectural advances we’ve seen with both the Zen 3 and Cypress Cove architectures, these mid-range processors can push fast GPUs along quite nicely.
That said, as per usual, we’re testing with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 to reduce GPU-imposed bottlenecks as much as possible, and differences between test subjects will shrink with lesser cards, which you’ll see most often with this class of chip, or higher resolutions. Below you can see the geometric mean of our gaming tests at 1080p and 1440p, with each resolution split into its own chart. PBO indicates an overclocked Ryzen configuration. You can find our test system details here.
Image 1 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 18
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
At stock settings at 1080p, the Core i5-11600K notches an impressive boost over its predecessor, the 10600K, but the Ryzen 5 5600X is 7.8% faster over the full span of our test suite. Overclocking the 11600K brings it up to snuff with the stock Ryzen 5 5600X, but the overclocked 5600X configuration is still 3.6% faster.
As you would expect, those deltas will shrink tremendously with lesser graphics cards or with higher resolutions. At 1440p, the stock 5600X is 3.3% faster than the 11600K, and the two tie after overclocking.
Flipping through the individual games shows that the leader can change quite dramatically, with different titles responding better to either Intel or AMD. Our geometric mean of the entire test suite helps smooth that out to one digestible number, but bear in mind – the faster chip will vary based on the game you play.
Notably, the 11600K is 14% less expensive than the 5600X, and that’s if (a huge if) you can find the 5600X at recommended pricing. You could also opt for the graphics-less 11600KF model and pay 26% less than the 5600X, again, if you can find the 5600X at recommended pricing.
Winner: AMDOverall, the Ryzen 5 5600X is the faster gaming chip throughout our test suite, but be aware that performance will vary based on the title you play. This class of chips is often paired with lesser graphics cards, and most serious gamers play at higher resolutions. In both of those situations, you could be hard-pressed to notice the difference between the processors. However, it’s rational to expect that the Ryzen 5 5600X will leave a bit more gas in the tank for future GPU upgrades.
Pricing is the wild card, though, and the Core i5-11600K wins that category easily — even if you could find the Ryzen 5 5600X at suggested pricing. We’ll dive into that in the pricing section.
Application Performance of Intel Core i5-11600K vs Ryzen 5 5600X
Image 1 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 11
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
We can boil down productivity application performance into two broad categories: single- and multi-threaded. The first slide in the above album has a geometric mean of performance in several of our single-threaded tests, but as with all cumulative measurements, use this as a general guide and be aware that performance will vary based on workload.
The Core i5-11600K takes the lead, at both stock and overclocked settings, by 3.8% and 1%, respectively. These are rather slim deltas, but it’s clear that the Rocket Lake chip holds the edge in lightly threaded work, particularly in our browser tests, which are a good indicator of general snappiness in a standard desktop PC operating system. We also see a bruising performance advantage in the single-threaded AVX-512-enabled y-cruncher.
The Core i5-11600K is impressive in single-threaded work, but the Ryzen 5 5600X isn’t far behind. It’s too bad that the 11600K’s lead in these types of tests doesn’t equate to leading performance in gaming, which has historically been the case with processors that excel at single-threaded tasks.
Image 1 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 2 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 3 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 4 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 5 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 6 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 7 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 8 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 9 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 10 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 11 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 12 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 13 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 14 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 15 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 16 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 17 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 18 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 19 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 20 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Image 21 of 21
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
Here we take a closer look at performance in heavily-threaded applications, which has long been the stomping grounds of AMD’s core-heavy Ryzen processors. Surprisingly, in our cumulative measurement, the Core i5-11600K is actually 2.5% faster than the 5600X at stock settings and is 1.8% faster after we overclocked both chips.
These are, again, slim deltas, and the difference between the chips will vary based on workload. However, the Core i5-11600K is very competitive in threaded work against the 5600X, which is an accomplishment in its own right. The substantially lower pricing is even more impressive.
Winner: Intel
Based on our cumulative measurement, Intel’s Core i5-11600K comes out on top in both single- and multi-threaded workloads, but by slim margins in both categories of workloads, and that can vary based on the application. However, given that the Core i5-11600K has significantly lower pricing and pulls out a few hard-earned wins on the application front, this category of the Core i5-11600K vs Ryzen 5 5600X competition goes to Intel.
Overclocking of Ryzen 5 5600X vs Core i5-11600K
We have reached the land of diminishing returns for overclocking the highest-end chips from both AMD and Intel, largely because both companies are engaged in a heated dogfight for performance superiority. As a result, much of the overclocking frequency headroom is rolled into standard stock performance, leaving little room for tuners, making memory and fabric overclocking all the more important. There’s still plenty of advantages with overclocking the midrange models though in today’s Ryzen 5 5600X vs Core i5-11600K battle, but be aware that your mileage may vary.
Intel benefits from higher attainable clock rates, especially if you focus on overclocking a few cores instead of the standard all-core overclock, and exposes a wealth of tunable parameters with its Rocket Lake chips. That includes separate AVX offsets for all three flavors of AVX, and the ability to set voltage guardbands. Intel also added an option to completely disable AVX, though that feature is primarily geared for professional overclockers. Rocket also supports per-core frequency and hyper-threading control (enable/disable) to help eke out more overclocking headroom.
The Core i5-11600K supports real-time memory frequency adjustments, though motherboard support will vary. For example, this feature allows you to shift from DDR4-2933 to DDR4-3200 from within Windows 10 without rebooting (or any other attainable memory frequency). Intel also supports live memory timing adjustments from within the operating system.
Intel has long locked overclocking to its pricey K-series models, while AMD freely allows overclocking with all SKUs on almost any platform. However, we see signs of some improvement here from Intel, as it has now enabled memory overclocking on its B560 and H570 chipsets across the board. That said, Intel’s new paradigm of Gear 1 and Gear 2 modes does reduce the value of memory overclocking, which you can read more about in our review.
AMD’s Ryzen 5000 chips come with innovative boost technology that largely consumes most of the available frequency headroom, so there is precious little room for bleeding-edge all-core overclocks. In fact, all-core overclocking with AMD’s chips is lackluster; you’re often better off using its auto-overclocking Precision Boost Overdrive 2 (PBO2) feature that boosts multi-threaded performance. AMD also has plenty of Curve Optimization features that leverage undervolting to increase boost activity.
Much of the benefit of the Ryzen 500 series0 comes from its improved fabric overclocking, which then allows you to tune in higher memory overclocks. We hit a 1900-MHz fabric on our chip, allowing us to run the memory in a 1:1 mode at a higher DDR4-3800 memory speed than we could pull off with the 11600K with the same 1:1 ratio. It also isn’t uncommon to see enthusiasts hit DDR4-4000 in 1:1 mode with Ryzen 5000 processors. There’s no doubt that Intel’s new Gear 1 and 2 memory setup isn’t that refined — you can adjust the 5600X’s fabric ratio to expand the 1:1 window to higher frequencies, while Intel does not have a comparable adjustable parameter.
Winner: Tie
Both the Ryzen 5 5600X and the Core i5-11600K have a bit more overclocking headroom than their higher-end counterparts, meaning that there is still some room for gains in the mid-range. Both platforms have their respective overclocking advantages and a suite of both auto-overclocking and software utilities, meaning this contest will often boil down to personal preference.
Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling of Intel Core i5-11600K vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
Image 1 of 12
(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)
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 Core i5-11600K comes with the same 125W TDP rating as its predecessor, but that rating is a rough approximation of power consumption during long-duration workloads. To improve performance in shorter-term workloads, Intel increased the PL2 rating (boost) to 251W, a whopping 69W increase over the previous-gen 10600K that also came with six cores.
Power consumption and heat go hand in hand, so you’ll have to accommodate that power consumption with a robust cooler. We didn’t have any issues with the Core i5-11600K and a 280mm liquid cooler (you could get away with less), but we did log up to 176W of power consumption at stock settings during our Handbrake benchmark.
In contrast, the Ryzen 5 5600X sips power, reaching a maximum of 76W at stock settings during a Blender benchmark. In fact, a quick look at the renders-per-day charts reveals that AMD’s Ryzen 5 5600X is in another league in terms of power efficiency — you get far more performance per watt consumed, which results in lower power consumption and heat generation.
The 5600X’s refined power consumption comes via TSMC’s 7nm process, while Intel’s 14nm process has obviously reached the end of the road in terms of absolute performance and efficiency.
Winner: AMD
AMD wins this round easily with lower power consumption, higher efficiency, and less thermal output. Intel has turned the power up to the extreme to stay competitive with AMD’s 7nm Ryzen 5000 chips, and as a result, the Core i5-11600K pulls more power and generates more heat than the Ryzen 5 5600X. Additionally, the Core i5-11600K doesn’t come with a bundled cooler, so you’ll need to budget in a capable model to unlock the best the chip has to offer, while the Ryzen 5 5600X comes with a bundled cooler that is good enough for the majority of users.
Pricing and Value of AMD Ryzen 5 5600X vs Intel Core i5-11600K
AMD was already riding the pricing line with the Ryzen 5 5600X’s suggested $299 price tag, but supply of this chip is volatile as of the time of writing, to put it lightly, leading to price gouging. This high pricing comes as a byproduct of a combination of unprecedented demand and pandemic-spurred supply chain issues, but it certainly destroys the value proposition of the Ryzen 5 5600X, at least for now.
The Ryzen 5 5600X currently retails for $370 at Microcenter, which is usually the most price-friendly vendor, a $69 markup over suggested pricing. The 5600X is also $450 from Amazon (not a third-party seller). Be aware that the pricing and availability of these chips can change drastically in very short periods of time, and they go in and out of stock frequently, reducing the accuracy of many price tracking tools.
In contrast, the Core i5-11600K can be found for $264 at Amazon, and $260 at Microcenter, which is surprisingly close to the $262 suggested tray pricing. Additionally, you could opt for the graphics-less Core i5-11600KF if you don’t need a discrete GPU. That chip is a bit harder to find than the widely-available 11600K, but we did find it for $240 at Adorama (near suggested pricing).
Here’s the breakdown (naturally, this will vary):
Suggested Price
Current (volatile for 5600X)
Price Per Core
Core i5-11600K
$262
$262 to $264
~$32.75
Ryzen 5 5600X
$299
$370 to $450
~$46.25 to $56.25
Core i5-11600KF
$237
$240 (spotty availability)
~$29.65
The Core i5-11600K doesn’t come with a cooler, so you’ll have to budget that into your purchasing decision.
Winner: Intel
Even at recommended pricing for both chips, Intel’s aggressive pricing makes the Core i5-11600K a tempting proposition, but the company wins this stage of the battle convincingly based on one almost insurmountable advantage: You can actually find the chip readily available at retail for very close to its suggested tray pricing. With much cheaper pricing both on a per-core and absolute basis, the Core i5-11600K is the better buy, and if you’re looking for an even lower cost of entry, the Core i5-11600KF is plenty attractive if you don’t need integrated graphics.
AMD’s premium pricing for the Ryzen 5 5600X was a bit of a disappointment for AMD fans at launch, but the chip did offer enough advantages to justify the price tag. However, the arrival of the Core i5-11600K with its disruptive pricing and good-enough performance would probably merit a slight pricing adjustment from AMD, or the release of a non-X model, if these were normal times. These aren’t normal times, though, and instead of improving its value proposition, AMD is facing crippling supply challenges.
Bottom Line
Intel Core i5-11600K
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X
Features and Specifications
X
Gaming
X
Application Performance
X
Overclocking
X
X
Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling
X
Pricing and Value Proposition
X
Total
3
4
Here’s the tale of the tape: AMD wins this Ryzen 5 5600X vs Intel Core i5-11600K battle with a tie in one category and a win in three others, marking a four to three victory in favor of Team Red. Overall, the Ryzen 5 5600X offers up a superior blend of gaming performance, power consumption and efficiency, and a bundled cooler to help offset the higher suggested retail pricing, remaining our go-to chip recommendation for the mid-range. That is if you can find it at or near suggested pricing.
Unfortunately, in these times of almost unimaginably bad chip shortages, the chip that you can actually buy, or even find anywhere even near recommended pricing, is going to win the war at the checkout lane. For now, Intel appears to be winning the supply battle, though that could change in the coming months. As a result, the six-core twelve-thread Core i5-11600K lands with a friendly $262 price point, making it much more competitive with AMD’s $300 Ryzen 5 5600X that currently sells far over suggested pricing due to shortages.
The Core i5-11600K has a very competitive price-to-performance ratio compared to the Ryzen 5 5600X in a broad swath of games and applications. The 11600K serves up quite a bit of performance for a ~$262 chip, and the graphics-less 11600KF is an absolute steal if you can find it near the $237 tray pricing. If you don’t need an integrated GPU, the KF model is your chip.
Even if we compare the chips at AMD’s and Intel’s standard pricing, the Core i5-11600K is a potent challenger with a solid value proposition due to its incredibly aggressive pricing. While the Core i5-11600K might not claim absolute supremacy, its mixture of price and performance makes it a solid buy if you’re willing to overlook the higher power consumption.
Most gamers would be hard-pressed to notice the difference when you pair these chips with lesser GPUs or play at higher resolutions, though the Ryzen 5 5600X will potentially leave you with more gas in the tank for future GPU upgrades. The Ryzen 5 5600X is the absolute winner, though, provided you can find it anywhere close to the suggested retail price.
With the emergence of the Chia cryptocurrency, miners in China are reportedly frantically snatching up every hard drive and SSD they can find. Unlike other cryptocurrencies, you don’t mine Chia with a processor, graphics card or ASIC miner. Instead, you farm Chia with storage space, which is where hard drives or SSDs come in. Chia isn’t officially available for trading yet, therefore, it’s too early to start hoarding hard drives or SSDs.
Unlike Bitcoin, which is based on proof of work, Chia utilizes a proof of space and time model. Chia reportedly arrives as an eco-friendly cryptocurrency. Bram Cohen, who’s best known as the inventor of BitTorrent, created Chia to leverage the free space on storage devices. The basis behind Chia is that hard drives and SSDs use less power, are easier to come by and cheaper to purchase. By comparison, mining Ethereum or Bitcoin on a mass scale contributes to the electricity waste.
According to HKEPC’s report, miners are mass purchasing hard drives that span from 4TB to 18TB in capacity. The panic buying will ultimately lead to a hard drive shortage and price hikes. In Hong Kong, hard drive and SSD pricing is expected to increase between 200 HKD to $600 HKD (~$26 to $77). Due to the constant read and write operations, consumer SSDs aren’t the first choice for farming Chia. Nothing is safe from miners though when a profit is there to be made though.
Jiahe Jinwei, one of the big domestic manufacturers in China, told media outlet MyDrivers that the company’s Gloway and Asgard high-performance 1TB and 2TB NVMe M.2 SSDs are all sold out. The manufacturer plans to put restrictions in place to stop miners from buying enormous amounts of consumer SSDs. Subsequently, the company will also increase production to meet the demand. Apparently, Jiahe Jinwei is even developing a specialized SSD for mining operations.
Farming on a consumer SSD is viable, but the more serious miners will likely look to the enterprise side. Endurance is just as important as capacity and performance, and enterprise or data center SSDs typically meet these three criteria.
Many cryptocurrencies come and go so it’ll be interesting to see how Chia pans out. A few years ago, no one took Bitcoin seriously, and today it’s worth over $62,000.
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.
