26 Jan
Blog

Nvidia RTX 3050 review: Budget GPUs are officially back

RTX 3050 graphics card under PC accessories.

Nvidia RTX 3050 review: Budget GPUs are officially back

RRP $249.00

"The RTX 3050 is a return to budget GPUs for Nvidia, with solid performance backed by DLSS."

benefits

  • Solid 1080p gaming performance

  • Low list price

  • Supports DLSS

  • Decent ray tracing

disadvantage

  • Prices will likely be high

  • Slight stuttering in memory intensive games

2022 is the year that budget GPUs will make a comeback – or at least it looks like it. I assumed that GPU class was dead; Nvidia eventually skipped the RTX 2050 and prices for the best graphics cards continue to rise. The $249 RTX 3050 is a return to form and could be the most affordable GPU this year.

I had a chance to test the card and while it holds its own against the rest of the Nvidia lineup and AMD's competition, it's its features that set the RTX 3050 apart from the rest. With rumors of increased supply and an attractive list price, the RTX 3050 could be an antidote to the GPU shortage that budget-conscious gamers have been waiting for.

Prices and Availability

RTX 3050 graphics card sits upright.Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

Nvidia hasn't released a reference design for the RTX 3050, but the company has still set a list price of $249. There are a number of options from board partners including graphics cards from EVGA, PNY, Colorful and Asus. I got my hands on the EVGA RTX 3050 XC Black, which is available now for $249.

My card arrived with the wrong BIOS intended for the slightly more expensive EVGA RTX 3050 XC. This BIOS offers a 68MHz boost clock speed. It's a difference, but no more than 3% at most, and you can easily compensate for it with manual overclocking.

Like all graphics cards in 2022, expect the RTX 3050 to sell out right away. The saving grace is that models are available at list price on launch day. That's cheaper than you can currently buy almost any graphics card, including options that are several years old.

On paper, the RTX 3050 is $50 more expensive than the recently released AMD RX 6500 XT. I haven't had a chance to test AMD's card yet, but the amount of benchmarks I've seen shows that the RTX 3050 deserves its higher price tag. Not only does the extra $50 buy you a more powerful GPU, it also gets Nvidia Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) and ray tracing, which isn't bad.

The RTX 3050 is cheaper than the RX 6500 XT.

If you can get an RTX 3050 for $250, you should – there's no better value in today's GPU market. However, that is not the reality for most. Once the starting stock gets into the hands of scalpers, you can expect to pay twice the list price. The RTX 3060, for example, costs around $750 on the used market.

For the RTX 3050 I expect used prices to be around $500. In that case, the RX 6500 XT is about $100-$150 less. Still, the RTX 3050 is better value for money in my eyes. The performance of the RTX 3050 isn't nearly as important as the fact that it's a 30-series GPU. Even as nothing more than a vessel for DLSS and ray tracing, it's still more impressive than AMD's competing graphics card.

specifications

The RTX 3050 is a true budget graphics card and has the specs to match. The card, which sits at the bottom of Nvidia's current lineup, slices off a number of cores from the RTX 3060, cutting power consumption by almost half and capping the amount of video memory. However, unlike some newer GPU versions I've seen, the RTX 3050 has no issues based on the spec sheet.

CUDA cores increase speed storage capacity TDP price
RTX3050 2.304 1.74GHz 8GB GDDR6 90W $249
RTX3060 3,584 1.77GHz 12GB GDDR6 170W $329
RTX 3060Ti 4,864 1.67GHz 8GB GDDR6 200W $399
RTX3070 5,888 1.73GHz 8GB GDDR6 220W $499

The most noticeable change compared to the RTX 3060 is the 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. The RTX 3050 pushes that memory through a smaller 128-bit bus, reducing memory bandwidth to 224 GB/s. Also, the RTX 3050 drops about 36% of the RTX 3060's CUDA cores.

In return, the card runs at a much lower wattage. 90W is all you need for the base spec, meaning you can buy with a 250W power supply. Performance limits continue to rise and for the first time we have an RTX 30 series graphics card running under 100W.

Ports on the RTX 3050 graphics card.The EVGA RTX 3050 XC Black includes three DisplayPort connectors and a single HDMI. Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

Compared to AMD, the RTX 3050 stands out with its PCIe interface. Like most current generation GPUs, the RTX 3050 supports PCIe 4.0. The RTX 3050 supports 16 tracks – in contrast to the recently released RX 6500 XT. That should give systems bound to PCIe 3.0 – any platform below 12th Gen Intel and AMD Ryzen 5000 – uninterrupted bandwidth.

gaming performance

The RTX 3050 stacked on another graphics card.Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

The RTX 3050's main competitor is AMD's RX 6500 XT. I don't have an RX 6500 XT to test at the moment – although I'll update this review with benchmarks once my unit arrives – but I still wanted to get an idea of ​​how Nvidia's latest budget attempt stacks up. I used AMD's RX 580. It's an older GPU, but the benchmarks I've seen show that it's about on par with an RX 6500 XT.

To eliminate the CPU, I ran my tests on the latest build of Windows 10 with a Ryzen 9 5950X and 32GB of memory. Here are my results at 1080p with the highest graphics preset:

RTX3050 RTX3060 RX6600 RX580
3DMark Time Spy 6,749 8,629 8,071 4,820
Red Dead Redemption 2 52 fps 65 fps 59 fps 35 fps
Fourteen days 79 fps 132 fps 98 fps 56 fps
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55 fps 64 fps 71 fps 42 fps
Battlefield V 92 fps 123 fps 120 fps 74 fps

Outside of the suite, the RTX 3050 only managed over 60 frames per second (fps) in Battlefield V and Fortnite. It's no big surprise, but the card failed to meet that coveted framerate target in Red Dead Redemption 2 or Assassin's Creed Valhalla. The RTX 3050 is a 1080p graphics card, but it doesn't target the highest graphics preset.

Lower graphics presets were much more impressive – 64 fps in Assassin's Creed Valhalla and 134 fps in Battlefield V. In 2022, most graphics cards won't let you choose a lower graphics preset with the right resolution. The RTX 3050 does, but that's not a bad thing. If anything, it shows how little the highest preset does and how much performance you can gain by turning the settings down.

Compared to the RX 580, you can see how much faster a budget GPU should be in 2022. The RTX 3050 was approximately 40% faster in 3DMark Time Spy, 41% faster in Fortnite, and 24% faster in Battlefield V. I haven't had a chance to test the RX 6500 XT yet, but I've seen enough to say that the RTX 3050 is the faster card.

The RTX 3050 is about 20% slower than the RTX 3060, but 25% cheaper.

That's what you see at the bottom of the barrel options though. Conversely, the RTX 3050 was about 20% slower than the RTX 3060 in Red Dead Redemption 2. In Battlefield V, the difference was even greater at 25%. The RTX 3060 hits a sweet spot that the RTX 3050 can't handle. However, the RTX 3050 is about 25% cheaper and only 20% slower.

There were issues outside of raw performance. Storage caused issues that aren't reflected in average frame rates. In Battlefield V, my first few runs resulted in minimum frame rates in the single digits, which manifested as stuttering during the playthrough. It depends on the smaller memory bus and 8 GB of VRAM. Titles with many high-resolution textures experienced stuttering when loading the game and assets were dragged into memory.

PX1 logo on the RTX 3050 graphics card.

nvidia rtx 3050 review 5

Still, the RTX 3050 lands where it should. And compared to the competition AMD is presenting right now, that's great. I still think the RTX 3060 and RTX 3060 Ti hit the price/performance mark better than the RTX 3050; However, there's a good chance the RTX 3050 will sell for significantly less than these cards on the used market.

Content Creation Performance

The RTX 3050 is a gaming graphics card and you should get something more powerful if you plan on using it primarily for 3D modeling or rendering. I still wanted to throw the card on a few content creation benchmarks to see how it fares, and while the results aren't terrible, they're not great either.

RTX3050 RTX3060 RX6600 RX580
Blender BMW (lower is better) 76 seconds 45 seconds 86 seconds 168 seconds
Blender Classroom (lower is better) 279 seconds 208 seconds 167 seconds 370 seconds
Blender Koro (lower is better) 227 seconds 162 seconds 156 seconds N / A
Pugetbench for Premiere Pro 766 703 605 603

On the three Blender renders, the RTX 3050 was about 32% slower than the RTX 3060 and similarly slow compared to the RX 6600. It had better performance in PugetBench for Premiere Pro, but as is the case with the RX 6600 and RTX 3060 , this benchmark relies heavily on the CPU and system memory.

Nvidia RTX 3050 graphics card sits on the back.Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

Compared to the RX 580, it's no competition. The RTX 3050 can use CUDA for rendering, unlike the RX 6600 and RX 580, resulting in faster render times than OpenCL. I've seen significantly higher render times with the RX 580, and in the case of the Koro renderer, I couldn't even complete the test.

Make no mistake: the RTX 3050 is not a good graphics card for content creation. It holds its own, but upgrading to a higher class of graphics card — either from AMD or Nvidia — will pay off exponentially.

DLSS and ray tracing

GeForce logo on the RTX 3050.Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

For the first time in a while, Nvidia differentiates itself not with raw performance but with a list of features. DLSS is an essential feature for the most demanding games, and last but not least, the RTX 3050 offers a way to use DLSS in games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Control. It also offers hardware-accelerated ray tracing, which works significantly better than AMD's competition.

RTX3050 RTX3060 RX6600
Control (no RT) 58 fps 76 fps 67 fps
control (high RT) 35 fps 47 fps 27 fps
Control (High RT + DLSS) 62 fps N / A N / A
Cyberpunk 2077 (no RT) 47 fps 59 fps 46 fps
Cyberpunk 2077 (Ultra RT) 23 fps 28 fps 10 fps
Cyberpunk 2077 (Ultra RT + DLSS) 47 fps N / A N / A

My results above were run using the same testbench at 1080p with the highest graphics preset. I've included the RTX 3060 and RX 6600 for reference, not as competition for the RTX 3050. These two cards are in a class above the RTX 3050, and unsurprisingly they perform better across the board.

However, I didn't expect how close the RTX 3050 would be to the RX 6600. With ray tracing enabled, you can see how quickly the RX 6600 is falling apart. In Control, where the two GPUs hit almost identical average frame rates, the RX 6600 sunk much lower than the RTX 3050 with ray tracing turned on.

DLSS is the best feature of the RTX 3050 – no competition.

It's a testament to how solid Nvidia's ray tracing cores are, but really, you wouldn't play any of the above games at their ray tracing frame rates. This is where DLSS comes into play. Even in modest Balanced mode, the RTX 3050 maintained performance as if ray tracing was turned off. In the case of Control, the average framerate was actually higher.

DLSS isn't present in every game, but the list of supported titles keeps growing. For a large chunk of major AAA releases that wouldn't otherwise be playable on the RTX 3050, DLSS makes it possible to play new games with all the visual bells and whistles. It's the best feature of the RTX 3050 – no competition.

Our opinion

The RTX 3050 is a graphics card that wins by default. Compared to the tragic RX 6500 XT, Nvidia could have released almost any graphics card and prevailed. On its own, the RTX 3050 is a good graphics card that manages to deliver performance that scales with its price, and that's all I can ask for.

It earns an extra point on the back of DLSS, which catapults the RTX 3050 from a good – but not great – GPU into a top choice for gamers on an extreme budget. Prices are inflated now, but hopefully we'll see plenty of $250 RTX 3050s by the end of the year – quite unlike Nvidia's recently released 12GB RTX 3080.

Are there alternatives?

Not now. Nvidia jumped that price point with the previous generation, and AMD's RX 6500 XT falls woefully behind the RTX 3050. The only alternatives are the premium GPUs from Nvidia. Hopefully by the end of 2022 you can find something like an RTX 2070 or RTX 2060 Super for around the same price.

How long it will take?

The RTX 3050 is not built for the future. It barely hits the mark for 1080p AAA gaming right now, and within a few years you'll be struggling to hit sustained frame rates at the highest graphics settings. If you're okay with turning your settings down, or you mostly play less demanding games, it should last four to five years.

DLSS also helps a lot. Assuming the list of DLSS games continues to grow, you'll be able to enjoy the power of the RTX 3050 for many years to come.

should you buy it

If you can find the RTX 3050 at list price, buy it. After launch, it comes down to what price you can find the RTX 3050 at. It's a solid graphics card, but you're better off with the RTX 3060 or RTX 3060 Ti if you can find one for a reasonable price.

Editor's Recommendations



06 Jan
Blog

Roborock Dyad Review: Powerful Wet-Dry Vac at a Budget Price

Roborock dyad

Roborock Dyad in the test: An inexpensive wet-dry vacuum cleaner for everyone who hates dirt

RRP $ 449.00

"The Roborock Dyad has tackled the big task of tidying up after two dogs, two cats, and a handful of kids."

benefits

  • Edge-to-edge cleaning

  • 180 degree swivel head

  • Sufficient battery to clean the whole house

  • Space-saving all-in-one design

  • Payable

disadvantage

  • Charging time of four hours

  • On the heavy side

  • Limited self-cleaning

  • May not fit under counters

With two dogs, two cats and a handful of children, I have the ideal environment to try out a wet and dry vacuum cleaner. Every day brings a seemingly endless stream of dirt, dust and hair into my kitchen and living room. When Roborock introduced the new Dyad wet and dry vacuum cleaner, I couldn't wait to see how this cordless stick mop handles everyday dirt and more.

Space-saving all-in-one design

Roborock Dyad wet and dry vacuum cleaner

My typical arsenal of cleaning tools includes a dustpan, broom, small stick vacuum, Swiffer mop for easy cleaning, and steam mop for heavy cleaning. All of these items take up a lot of space in my closet and leave little room for anything else. It was with great pleasure that I cleared the closet and replaced all my brooms and mops with the only Roborock Dyad. It is an all-in-one in function and weight. At 11 pounds, the Roborock Dyad is heavy to carry. Fortunately, the rollers help move the device around when you are actively vacuuming.

The Roborock Dyad replaced a handful of cleaning tools, which saved me space, time and money.

The dyad saved space in my closet, saving me time and money. Instead of using multiple tools and tons of cleaning supplies, I was able to sweep and mop with one device. I didn't have to worry about finding the dustpan. I didn't have to buy expensive refills for the Swiffer or pads for my steam cleaner. All I needed was some water and I was ready to go. The Dyad is equipped with an LCD that monitors battery life as well as clean and dirty water levels.

Excellent for daily cleaning

Roborock Dyad LCD

The dyad did a reasonable job cleaning my dirty kitchen floors. It picked up all of the pet hair and dirt on my floor as long as I was vacuuming every day. The front and rear rollers can rotate in opposite directions and help pick up even the toughest of dust and dirt. If I waited a few days, the animal hair would build up and I had to lightly sweep before continuing with the dyad. Likewise, it did a good job on everyday stains but struggled with deep stains like those found under and around the refrigerator or stove. The rollers provide some scrubbing to help with light stains, but those stubborn, ground-in stains require a lot of elbow grease that the dyad just can't apply. Battery life was as expected. It routinely took up to 25 minutes so I could vacuum multiple rooms.

Reaches almost all corners and edges

The Roborock Dyad is definitely not a standard vacuum cleaner with the head square and securely aligned with the body of the vacuum cleaner. Instead, the Dyad has a head that can be swiveled 180 degrees, which gives the device an initially unsettling, easy-going feeling. With the dyad, the head can articulate itself freely in a semicircle. You press the vacuum cleaner and the head moves according to the contour of the room.

Roborock dyad height

It also has an edge-to-edge roller that allows the vacuum cleaner to get deep into the nooks and crannies of your room. The dyad is tapered to fit under counters, but only on one side. One side is low enough to fit under the counter, but the other side is too bulky. I could easily clean edge to edge between counters, but I had to be extra vacuum cleaning if I wanted to reach all the way under.

The rollers were great at picking up dirt, but the rimless design meant I couldn't vacuum under all of my counters.

Practical, but not self-cleaning

I love how the Roborock Dyad handles dirt. The dyad sucks all the dirt and water off the floor and directs it into a dirty canister. No need to wash a cloth or buy a Swiffer refill. When you're done wet and dry vacuuming, simply empty that single container and you're ready for the next round of cleaning.

The self-cleaning function cleans the rollers so that you can wipe immediately.

After docking, the Dyad has a self-cleaning function that automatically rinses the rollers over the fresh water tank. It only takes a few minutes to wash the rollers and collect the dirty water in the dirt bin. In contrast to the LG CordZero, which empties the dirty water into the base, the Dyad does not empty itself. You have to drain the dirty water before you can start cleaning again.

Our opinion

The Roborock Dyad is an affordable wet and dry vacuum cleaner for anyone looking for a two-in-one floor cleaner without spending a fortune. It thoroughly cleans your floors and stores all debris in a single, easy-to-empty tank.

Is there a better alternative?

The Roborock Dyad is great value for money. It cleans your floor and doesn't cost an arm or a leg. It's not cheap, but at under $ 500, it is achievable for most people. However, not everyone will like the feature set and stick form factor. If you don't mind spending a little more, you can upgrade to the LG CordZero which does a great job at cleaning your floors and has a full self-cleaning mode that even drains the dirty water for you. Those who prefer the autonomy of a floor-based robotic vacuum cleaner should consider the Ecovacs Deebot Ozmo N8 Pro +, which itself vacuums and mops quietly.

How long it will take?

The Roborock Dyad has a solid construction that can withstand everyday household use. Roborock's limited warranty covers all problems caused by defects in material and workmanship when used under normal conditions for one year from the date of purchase. Just make sure you use the wet and dry vacuum a lot for the first year to try it out.

Should you buy it?

Absolutely. For $ 449, the Roborock Dyad is a powerful, affordable wet and dry vacuum that picks up dirt, dust, and grime. Just measure out your kitchen cabinets to make sure the Dyad will fit underneath.

Editor's recommendations



23 Dec
Blog

Govee Immersion Kit Review: More Colorful TV On a Budget

The Govee Immersion Kit improves the content of the screen.

Govee Immersion Kit Review: How to Make TV a More Colorful Experience

RRP $ 150.00

"The Govee Immersion Kit is a solid option for someone who wants to enhance their home theater experience without breaking the bank."

benefits

  • Inexpensive

  • Easy to use and customize

  • Looks great when connected

  • Long enough to work with the biggest televisions

disadvantage

  • Tricky setup process

  • The camera is sensitive to light from other sources

I've always loved the idea of ​​immersive lighting. There's something about the way the colors displayed on your TV are reproduced that makes the content come to life, almost like it's bleeding from the screen and on the walls around it. When Govee asked if I wanted to check out his Immersion Kit with Light Bars, I took the chance.

The results blew me away. While it's not a perfect product, the lighting looks great and creates a cool effect on the wall. I don't know if it improves the viewing experience or not, but it definitely improves the look of my living room TV setup – especially when displaying content with strong color contrasts, like the first home screen from Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart or that great scene on End of Avatar: The Last Airbender.

It definitely improves the look of my living room TV setup.

The Govee Immersion Kit improves the content of the screen.

What's in the box?

The Govee Immersion Kit contains a lot of the accessories you will all need. Take the time to set it up as it isn't the easiest process in the world.

The box contains two light strips and one LED light strip. It also includes a camera, sync box and mounting hardware. I installed it on the back of a 65-inch TV and the LED strip was still almost too long. It went over the top, down both sides, and over the bottom, almost to the edges of the TV. So it's not too short.

The setup instructions give you the option to mount the camera either on top or on the bottom of your TV. I decided to mount it at the bottom, but the instructions and all of the graphics still showed it from the top – that's a bit confusing, to say the least. The box also contains a set of orange adhesive squares that you attach to the four corners of your TV and then place a square across from the camera. These are used to ensure that the camera can capture the entire screen. They are useful because the way your phone looks at the camera is incredibly distorted due to the shape of the lens.

The instructions also warn against peeling the squares straight off to avoid damaging your TV. The question arises, if this requires temporarily mounting something on my screen that could damage it, is it necessary? I think the squares could be done without, but they actually came off easily. Just pull it sideways instead of straight back.

You place the light strips on either side of your TV. The light bars, LED strip, and camera cable all attach to a single hub that can be mounted to the back of your TV so that it is hidden from view. One cable supplies the entire setup with power.

All in all, it wasn't a difficult process to set up, but it was fraught with minor annoyances.

Light, sound, action

The Govee Immersion Kit works by capturing the colors on the screen and reflecting those colors through the lights. This does it pretty well, although the color accuracy felt multiple times. What the lights projected and what was displayed on the screen weren't perfect representations of each other.

Avatar: TLA shows ambient colors on a TV better than many shows.

The overall color also plays a role in how the lights are perceived. I tested it while watching Rosewood only to see that the lights were always yellow in color because the show itself is being shown with a sepia filter on everything.

Fortunately, the Govee app allows the lights to be adjusted and tweaked. The app allows you to choose custom settings for the lights. You can choose to have the entire setup display the predominant color no matter what you see, or you can choose to display each light bar in a separate color. You can also choose whether the light bars are segmented (each one being able to display multiple colors at the same time) or that each light bar is one color while the LED strip displays different colors.

If I could add a feature it would be to turn off the lights when the TV is off.

You can also adjust the frequency of color changes. The Dynamic setting results in more frenetic shifts, while the Quiet setting is a slow, gradual transition that works well for movies. If you really want to step up the stakes, turn on sound effects. The lights change based not only on the color shown on the screen, but also based on the volume.

Of course, you can also choose a separate color for the entire setup, entirely based on your preferences and what isn't on the screen. You don't need to use the camera.

The Govee Immersion Kit enhances your viewing experience.

If I could add a feature it would be to turn off the lights when the TV is off. The Govee Immersion Kit camera is sensitive to light. When the TV is off, the lights will stay on, indicating any detected hue. Even in the middle of the night, when there is no other light on anywhere in the house, it glows pale blue. Since the lamps cannot be plugged into your TV's power supply, you will have to turn them on and off yourself.

This is of course easier as Govee connects to intelligent assistants. It is very easy to link and control the Govee Immersion Kit with Alexa or Google Assistant.

The Govee Immersion Kit is a fun, affordable option for an immersive lighting kit.

The sensitivity of the camera means that the brighter your TV, the better – especially when viewing content during the day or with the lights on in your home. Sitting down to see something while all the lights in your home are off (except for the Govee Immersion Kit, of course) is a pretty magical experience. The colors come from the screen and onto the wall around the television. I would recommend going for something particularly colorful, like a Pixar movie. It's a great way to experience these smart lights.

Our opinion

The Govee Immersion Kit is a fun, affordable option for an immersive lighting kit. The main drawbacks are the camera's sensitivity to outside light and the irritating set-up process. If the camera had a screen at the top that blocks all light except that from the television, this would improve color accuracy.

Is there a better alternative?

The Hue Play HDMI Sync Box will also match the colors on the screen, and probably more accurately, since the input is being fed through the box itself. However, it is a much more expensive alternative. The sync box alone is $ 230, and it doesn't include the cost of the lights.

The Govee Immersion Kit does a good job for a much cheaper price of $ 150.

How long it will take?

All components make a solid and robust impression. I have several Govee lights in my house and they all still work fine after over a year. Should something happen, the Govee Immersion Kit includes a one-year warranty.

Should I buy it?

Yes. Despite my complaints about aspects of the kit, overall it's great value for money that I look forward to every time I sit down to relax at the end of the day.

Editor's recommendations



10 Sep
Blog

Jabra Elite 3 Review: All Of The Basics On A Budget

Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbuds.

Jabra Elite 3 review: all the basics on a budget

RRP $ 80.00

"Jabra's Elite 3 are a good selection of basic buds that want us to have a few more features."

advantages

  • Super comfortable fit

  • Excellent controls

  • Excellent call quality

disadvantage

  • Fewer functions than the competition

  • No AAC codec support

For years, Jabra's elite family of true wireless earbuds has been some of the best you can buy. But they were never particularly affordable, with regular prices often starting at $ 180. So to think of a set of Jabra earbuds that keep the brand's reputation for great sound, great fit, and great features at well under $ 100 is very appealing. That's the premise behind the new $ 80 Jabra Elite 3.

The price is certainly right, but has Jabra ditched too many of the Elite's signature features to achieve such cost savings? Let's check them out.

What's in the box?

Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbuds included.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Jabra has done an exemplary job reducing its product packaging, and the Elite 3 are further proof that you don't need to use plastic or foam to protect your product. The cardboard is 100% recyclable and the only touch of plastic (which is also made from the easily recyclable PET variety) is the small protective cover for the two optional earbuds. (You get a total of three sizes.) Inside you will find the Elite 3 earbuds, their charging case, a short USB-A to USB-C charging cable and a printed warranty brochure.

draft

Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbuds alongside the Jabra Elite 75t.Jabra Elite 3 (left) and Jabra Elite 75t. Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

If it isn't broken, the saying goes, don't fix it. And Jabra has clearly followed this cliché with the Elite 3. The design of the earbuds is very similar to the Elite 75t and Elite 85t in that they maintain the ultra-comfortable ergonomics of these more expensive earbuds. But the Elite 3 also improves on these designs by increasing the size of the physical multi-function buttons and tilting the scale at a slightly lighter weight.

The charging case is also a near-perfect carbon copy of the 75t, albeit a bit shorter, and places the LED display on the front instead of the back. Jabra introduced this on the 85t and it's great to see it's been kept on the Elite 3.

They fit my ears perfectly – almost as if they were made just for me.

The case lid is easy to open and close, with a small notch in the hinge arm to keep it open when removing or reinserting the earbuds. There's no way an earbud can accidentally come off once in the case – a strong set of magnets conveniently grips the earbuds as they get close to their charging jacks, holding them firmly in place. Thanks to the shape of the buds, despite the power of the magnets, they're surprisingly easy to remove.

Jabra has also given the Elite 3 the same IP55 water and dust resistance as the Elite 75t, which should protect them from damage as long as you don't immerse them in water.

Comfort, controls and connections

Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbuds.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Jabra's earbuds have always been some of the most comfortable you can buy, and the Elite 3 continues that tradition. They fit my ears perfectly – almost as if they were made just for me. There were no pressure points and they remained securely in place after insertion. Thanks to their small size and light weight, they are hardly noticeable. You shouldn't have a problem using them on your walks, runs, or other activities.

The Elite 3's buttons are Jabra's best yet.

Jabra's physical button controls are also some of the best in the true wireless world, and the Elite 3's buttons are the company's best yet. Since they occupy the entire outer surface of the bud, it's impossible to miss, and their precise click response means you'll get that tactile feedback every time you press it.

The click patterns (single, double, triple and click-and-hold) give you access to playback, call management, track skip, volume and voice assistant, as well as a one-click function to activate transparency mode (which Jabra calls HearThrough). ). I like the patterns Jabra chose for these controls and that you can use both earbuds solo if you want. But what I miss is the MyControls option that is available on the Elite 75t and 85t Buds, which gives you the ability to reassign which key clicks do those actions.

Another feature that is missing in Action is the automatic pause. Jabra's more expensive headphones use in-ear detection to pause and resume sound when you remove or reinsert them, but the Elite 3 lacks that capability.

Pairing the Elite 3 is a breeze. especially if you are an Android user thanks to the integration of Google's Fast Pair technology. After connecting, the bluetooth signal stayed strong and stable. I was able to put 30 feet of space between the buds and my phone before I noticed a disconnection.

It's a bit of a disappointment that they don't sound better than the competition.

The Android-only features don't stop there. You can also use Amazon Alexa instead of the Google Assistant, and with Jabra, Android users can swap voice assistant controls for double-tap access to Spotify. Use this option and your Spotify songs will start playing right away.

Unfortunately, Jabra decided to drop one of its signature features with the Elite 3: unlike other Jabra earbuds and headphones, you cannot connect the Elite 3 to more than one device (such as a smartphone and a computer) at the same time. It's a super-handy feature, especially for people who regularly switch between voice calls and video calls.

Sound quality

Man with Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbuds.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

For the occasional listening, the Elite 3 are good performers. The factory sound signature is balanced, preferring neither highs nor lows, and there is decent detail and separation of the mids. It's the kind of vibe that works well with almost every genre of music, from hip-hop to classical, though it's not really stellar in any of them.

The bass response is satisfactory, although I think it doesn't quite live up to Jabra's "strong bass" promise. It's definitely strong enough to let you feel the beat – my test track, Billie Eilish’s Bad Guy, had a lot of oomph – but if really big bass is your passion, then you should look elsewhere.

However, when comparing the Elite 3 to other earphones in this price range – like the Soundcore Life P3, Wyze Buds Pro, and Earfun Air Pro and Air Pro 2 – the Elites definitely feel like they're lacking some energy.

Jabra's set-up feels almost conservative compared to these other models, with a not-so-clear high-end and a relatively narrow soundstage. It's not dramatic, but considering how many features Jabra left out to bring these Buds to their $ 80 price point, it's a bit of a disappointment that they don't sound any better than the competition.

Thinking this might be the result of the Elite 3's lack of AAC Bluetooth codec support, I switched from my iPhone 11 to a Google Pixel 5 to try out the Qualcomm aptX codec. Warmth and detail have improved slightly, but the clarity in the highs, especially with female vocals, has remained mellow.

Jabra gives you several EQ presets to play with in the Sound + app – like Bass Boost, Treble Boost, and Energize – but none of them added as much to the overall quality as I hoped. And right now there is no way to create your own custom EQ (Jabra says this will come with a firmware update).

Battery life

Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbud charging case.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Jabra claims the Elite 3 can get you 7 hours on a charge. If anything, that number could be more conservative. With HearThrough turned off and the volume set to 50%, I ended up with 7.5 hours before the batteries ran out.

A quick charge option adds an extra hour to your listening time with just 10 minutes of charging, and the case holds three full charges for a total of 28 hours before you need to find a USB charger.

Transparency mode

Jabra's HearThrough mode has always been one of my favorite features in the Elite series. They do an excellent job at passive noise isolation so it is really valuable to direct the outside world for conversation or just general awareness. Turning HearThrough on and off is almost instantaneous, and the Elite 3 won't bother you with verbal feedback like other earbuds – instead of a message like “HearThrough On,” you'll get a quick and discreet tone to let you know that mode has itself changed.

The quality of transparency isn't quite as good as Apple's AirPods Pro or Jabra's Elite 85t – your own voice still sounds a bit muffled – but it's fine for most external noises.

Call quality

Jabra Elite 3 true wireless earbuds.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Achieving good call quality with a set of real wireless earbuds can be a big challenge. Even buds that cost more than three times what Jabra charges for the Elite 3 – like the Klipsch T5 II ANC for $ 299 – can end up producing less than great results.

And yet the Elite 3 are great for making calls. Not only do they excellently block out background noise, they also deliver excellent speech reproduction. There's none of the usual wobble or compression noises that plague these devices, and when you're in a quiet area, your callers will be treated to a comfortably warm tonality that may even sound better than the microphone built into your phone.

When sidetone is on, you can hear yourself more clearly when you speak. All of this makes the Elite 3 a great accessory for those who make a lot of voice calls.

What is missing?

At this price point, it might not be reasonable to expect a brand like Jabra to offer all of the features of their high-end models, but there's no denying that the competition does just that. the Soundcore Life P3, Earfun Air Pro 2, and Wyze Buds Pro all cost $ 80 or less and include features like wireless charging and active noise cancellation (ANC). The Earfun and Wyze models also have an automatic pause.

But I'm more surprised at the lack of app-based features that the Jabra usually has, like sleep mode (which allows you to turn off the earbuds after a preset time), soundscape (a collection of sounds like rain, ocean waves, songbirds, etc. .), the ability to see how much battery life is left in the charging case, and the ability to automatically mute your audio when HearThrough mode is selected.

Our opinion

With the Elite 3, Jabra shows its strengths with first-class design, comfort and fit, controls and call quality. But given what the competition is offering for the same price or less, they're not quite as easy to recommend as the company's more expensive models.

Is there a better alternative?

In terms of call quality and convenience, I don't think you will find a better set of earbuds at any cost, but given the lack of advanced features on the Elite 3, these models should definitely be considered:

  • Soundcore Life P3: Better sound quality, ANC, customizable controls, customizable EQ, longer battery life, wireless charging, low latency gaming mode and Find My Earbuds.
  • Wyze Buds Pro: Better sound quality, ANC, Amazon Alexa compatibility, auto-pause and wireless charging.
  • Earfun Air 2 Pro: Better sound quality, ANC, longer battery life, wireless charging and automatic pause.

How long will they last?

Jabra products are very well made and use high quality materials. With an IP55 protection class against water and dust, the Elite 3 should prove to be quite robust, and Jabra supports this water / dust protection with a two-year guarantee that gives you great security.

Should you buy it?

Yes sir. You might not throw it off the beaten track in terms of features, but they do Elite 3 are still a great set of true wireless earbuds that are especially good for those who are struggling to find a comfortable seat and / or make a lot of calls.

Editor's recommendations



15 Aug
Blog

Xiaomi Roidmi Eve Plus Review: Self-Empty Base on a Budget

The Xiaomi Roidmi with charging station / dust collector.

Xiaomi Roidmi Eve Plus Robot Vacuum Cleaner Review: A Roomba Rival That Makes The Cut

RRP $ 450.00

"The Xiaomi Roidmi offers straightforward cleaning and an intelligent app that offers the user many customization options."

advantages

  • Precise real estate mapping

  • Excellent cleaning performance

  • Solid battery life

  • An intuitive app

disadvantage

  • Instructions and app can be difficult to understand

  • Occasionally gets stuck on furniture

No longer the niche figureheads that scoured the homes of the most serious tech hounds, robotic vacuums are now ubiquitous. While big names like Roomba and Dyson stand out for their performance, reliability, and customization features, the O.G. Labels are also known for their high prices.

If you look at Amazon, you'll find that there are hundreds of robot vacuum brands out there that promise high-performance cleaning from top brands at great prices, but unfortunately, many models just don't. Every now and then, however, a non-brand contender will come to the surface to compete against the biggest names in Clean Town. One such vacuum robot is the Xiaomi Roidmi, the subject of our test today.

Is that a worthy vacuum robot? As a matter of fact. Does it hold up against the best in vacuuming? Yes and no. Let's take a closer look.

Out of the box

Top view of the Xiaomi Roidmi vac.

I often worry that the boastful designs and finishes of certain brands of robot vacuums clash with my home decor. Call me crazy but it drives me crazy While browsing around on the Roidmi a little before it got to my house, I wasn't sure if the product stills I saw would carry over to the Vak's personal demeanor. I'm happy to say I was pleasantly surprised.

The traditional puck-shaped shell of many robotic vacuums is fully present here, but the hard white casing and rounded black trim keep things minimalist and go with most furnishings.

The Roidmi is also ready for use straight out of the box. My model had an already existing charge of about 68% after unpacking, the battery level was quickly increased by a few minutes of basic charge. The Roidmi comes with the plug-in vacuum cleaner and charging station, replacement mop heads, an additional filter (with a QR code that you have to scan to add the vacuum cleaner to your app) and an operating manual.

Adaptive cleaning that gets the job done

The Roidmi's carbonless motor generates a solid 2,700 Pa of adjustable suction power. My apartment has three types of floors – carpeting, laminate and tiles – all of which Roidmi viewed as a professional. By default, the vacuum cleaner is set to the "Standard" suction setting, but Quiet, Power and a powerful Max mode are also available, which can be found in the companion app under the "More" tab (more on this below).

Bottom view of the Xiaomi Roidmi with mop attachment.

To see how the Roidmi would pile up against the rubble, cat litter was purposely placed over my carpet. For the laminate and tiles in the kitchen, I decided to use granules made from cat food. The bot's rotating main brush did the lion's share of the dirty work, handling even the deepest points of the test throw with ease. Same goes for the food, where the two side silicone brushes also did a good job of catching stray pieces of meow mix along the baseboards.

The change from one floor surface to the other was handled smoothly by the two drum wheels, with the Roidmi climbing my carpet sleepers with ease. I could also hear the suction power automatically change when the vacuum cleaner hit my carpeted floor from a hard surface.

The bot's rotating main brush did the lion's share of the dirty work.

The vacuum cleaner uses 18 sensors to control the Roidmi through your whole house, avoiding your walls and furniture while the house is getting clean. My Roidmi moved from room to room and did an excellent job, but its performance was not perfect. Every time I used the vacuum cleaner there were several moments when I had to get it out of a corner it got trapped in or out of some furniture it couldn't steer away from.

In terms of wiping, the Roidmi has three water dispensing presets to choose from (in-app), ranging from small to large quantities. As soon as you attach the mop head, the bot automatically recognizes that you have switched from vacuuming to mop mode. In use, the Roidmi did a decent job of deliberately tackling soda spills, but I had to finish the job on my own elbow grease. I would say that wiping with your Roidmi should be reserved for less serious spills and dirt / grease stains.

Self-draining and a lot of power

As soon as the Roidmi finishes cleaning or you order it to return to its base, the rear-facing dust connector on the vacuum cleaner connects to the dust collector. The collector then picks up all the dirt, deodorises and filters the contents as it flows into the dust bag. The dust collector emptied my Roidmi efficiently and at a reasonable volume. In fact, the only complaint I have about the collector is that regardless of where I placed it in my apartment, the Roidmi would take its sweet time to find it.

The Xiaomi Roidmi with charging station / dust collector.

Oddly enough, the bot would move only a few inches from the base, drive backwards, and then bump forward five or six times. Only then does the vacuum cleaner properly dock on the dust collector.

The Roidmi's 5200 mAh battery is said to provide up to 250 minutes of continuous operation. I ran my vacuum cleaner through a handful of full home cleans (1,100 square feet) and at the end of each cycle I had about a third of the battery left to play with. Not too shabby if you ask me.

An intuitive app that can be difficult to understand

While you can simply turn the vacuum on to send the Roidmi out for a whole house clean, be sure to download the Roidmi Companion app (available for iOS and Android devices) for an expanded set of controls and map options .

The Roidmi's apartment scan was so detailed that it even included rooms and cupboards that were behind closed doors and walls.

As soon as I switched on the Roidmi, the LDS laser on board immediately scanned my entire apartment. The resulting card is logged directly on the main page of the Vac in the Roidmi app. Here you will also find some basic functions such as start / stop controls, a load command that sends the Roidmi back to its base, and various suction and wiping settings. There is also a battery level indicator, a tracker of how long the vacuum cleaner has been in use in the current cycle and how much living space has been covered.

The Roidmi's apartment scan was so detailed that it even included rooms and cupboards that were behind closed doors and walls. When the bot is active, you can easily track it in the app (it's a tiny gray circle with a glowing blue ring around it). With four filters at the top of the home page, you can customize the cleaning experience.

If "Entire Map" is selected, the Roidmi will search your entire mapped residence. The partition allows you to define no-clean zones that the vacuum cleaner should avoid. The area allows you to pinpoint specific spots in the house that require careful attention. If you need to specify exactly which parts of a room to hit, you can tap and drag the cleaning square to enlarge or shrink it. When Area is selected, you can use the "Add" icon in the lower menu ribbon to add up to five different deep cleaning zones to which the Roidmi will react one after the other. With a final filter, Point, you can send the Roidmi into a 1.6 meter long pre-measured cleaning zone. You can add more point zones, but you cannot adjust their size.

While none of these tabs and drop-down menus have been difficult to use and navigate, there is some language separation with the entire app that can pose a challenge for some. For example, a quick menu where you can adjust the suction sensitivity has an Enter / Save button labeled "Set". It's a big, red button at the bottom that probably leads most to believe that after making your adjustments, you'll tap it – which is correct. However, Determine may not end up with all users. I even questioned it for a moment before just tapping the button because I had nothing to lose.

Our opinion

The Xiaomi Roidmi definitely does the job when it comes to what a vacuum cleaner does best – vacuuming. Strong suction and effective brushes dig deep for the dirt your old stand just can't find. There's even support for Alexa and Google Assistant to control the vacuum with a handful of voice commands. That said, if you're looking for the seamless app experience you find on titans like Roomba, you can find a good app that could use a bit of polishing here and there instead.

At around $ 449, the Roidmi holds up well on its sticker, though inventory for the product appears to be low on both digital and stationary shelves – so much so that it doesn't even seem to be available for purchase on Roidmis Side.

Is there a better alternative?

Yes, but you'd pay more to get a robotic vacuum cleaner that requires less supervision. Roborock has two outstanding options to choose from: the intelligent S6 MaxV with its built-in camera for superior obstacle avoidance and the S7 with its sound wiping function.

There is also the iRobot Roomba i3 Plus with its self-draining dock. It's an efficient cleaner that somehow manages to avoid most of the household obstacles and potential pitfalls. In any case, you will still be spending more money to pick up one of them through Xiaomi's offer.

How long it will take?

It's reasonably constructed, but comes with a one-year limited warranty that protects it from failure.

Should you buy it?

Yes, because for the price it offers a lot of value to combine the functions of vacuum cleaner and mopping device. The inclusion of the self-draining docks only sweetens the package.

Editor's recommendations



23 Jul
Blog

Sennheiser CX True Wireless Review: Budget Audiophile Buds

Sennheiser CX True Wireless Earphones.

Sennheiser CX True Wireless

RRP $ 130.00

"They offer the best sound you can find in an affordable set of earbuds."

advantages

  • Excellent sound quality

  • Customizable EQ

  • Precise and customizable controls

  • Sidetone for telephone calls

  • Good battery life

disadvantage

  • No in-ear sensors

  • No transparency mode

  • Could be difficult to get a secure fit

True wireless earbuds have always been a dilemma. Unlike their wired cousins, wireless earbuds require a variety of components such as batteries, charging cases, bluetooth radios, amplifiers, etc. All of these drive up costs and make it difficult to deliver high quality sound at affordable prices. Sennheiser – a brand with an enviable reputation for great sound – is experimenting with the line between quality and affordability.

Its first recording was the $ 200 CX 400BT it launched in 2020, a set of true wireless earbuds that did deliver sound but missed a lot of the features we'd expect at this price point. Sennheiser's second act is the $ 130 CX True Wireless. Are these buds achieving that magical balance between price and performance? We put them to the test to find out.

What's in the box?

Scope of delivery of the Sennheiser CX True Wireless earphones.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Sennheiser is one of a growing list of companies that have made their packaging highly recyclable. The box of the CX True Wireless consists of plain printed cardboard and even the small packaging that protects the included earplugs is paper-based. You won't find a hint of plastic or foam anywhere. Inside you will find the earphones, their charging case, earbuds in four sizes, a short USB-A to USB-C charging cable and some paper documentation.

design

Sennheiser CX True Wireless earphones next to the Sennheiser CX 400BT True Wireless earphones.Sennheiser CX 400BT (left) and CX True Wireless Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Visually, the CX True Wireless can hardly be distinguished from the CX 400BT. Both the charging case and the earphones have identical proportions. On closer inspection, there are small differences: the CX True Wireless have a more subtle branding that some will no doubt prefer, and their charging case has removed the dedicated pairing button from the case of the CX 400BT. The touch controls now use a matte plastic surface instead of a glossy surface.

If you pull one off this review, here it is: The CX True Wireless are a sound bargain.

The earbuds stay a bit bulky and won't win any awards for style. But the rounded box shape makes it easier than many other earbuds to insert into your ears without accidentally triggering a control path – it also makes it easy to remove and reinsert in their charging case.

One thing that has changed from the CX 400BT is the addition of an IPX4 rating for water resistance. This means that the CX True Wireless is on par with other earphones such as the AirPods Pro. They won't survive a swim in the pool, but now you can at least take them to the gym, on the track, or wherever you sweat without worrying about your earplugs.

Comfort, controls and connections

Unfortunately, since the CX True Wireless inherited its size and shape from the CX 400BT, they also inherited the fit of these earbuds, meaning they may not be comfortable. In order to get a really comfortable and secure fit, I have set myself a set Comply foam earplugs – the same ones I ended up using on the CX 400BT to deal with the same situation.

Sennheiser is still one of the few companies that really understands what is important when it comes to touch control.

To be fair, the silicone earbuds that Sennheiser included with the CX True Wireless are likely to work for a lot of people and I would never say they are uncomfortable. But they definitely don't fit as securely as foam, nor do they seal your ear canals as effectively. If you run into the same thing, just buy some comply tips from Amazon for a few dollars – you'll thank me for that.

The touch controls on the CX are excellent. Sennheiser is still one of the few companies that really understands what is important when it comes to touch control. The control surfaces are large and clear – it's effortless to get consistently accurate taps. As a bonus, a subtle tone confirms that you typed correctly.

You can adjust these controls with the Sennheiser Smart Control app. Single, double and triple taps can all be assigned to the function you want, and you can choose a different function for each earbud – handy when you want to use the earbuds independently (which you can do for both music and calls). You get everything you need: play / pause, skip tracks forwards / backwards, trigger your voice assistant and increase / decrease the volume. The only feature that can't be changed is the volume, which the long tap gesture requires when you want to use it.

Pairing with iPhones or Android devices is easy, even if the CX doesn't come with Google's Fast Pair – a few taps and you're done. If you're on an iPhone, you're limited to the good but lossy AAC codec, while Android users can enjoy the slightly higher quality aptX codec. But regardless of your source device, you can't hike very far. The CX has one of the shortest wireless signals I've ever tested – they started to dissipate when I placed just 6 meters between me and my phone. If you have your phone with you, this shouldn't be a problem. But if you want to leave your phone in a pocket or locker, be ready to stay around.

Sound quality

Sennheiser CX True Wireless earphones next to the charging case.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

With the included silicone earbuds, I found the CX True Wireless a bit anemic for the bass, but that was a purely fit function. After I swapped them for the foam tips, the sound improved dramatically. If you pull one off this review, here it is: The CX True Wireless are a sound bargain. They deliver impressively detailed and precise performance that comes incredibly close to earbuds from Sony, Bose, JBL, and Master & Dynamic, which can cost anywhere from $ 250 to $ 350.

The soundstage is wide and deep, and purists will like that Sennheiser's factory EQ settings give you a flat / neutral signature. But I usually find neutral EQ sounds boring at my preferred volume levels, so I love that the Smart Control app gives you two ways to visualize and change the emphasis of lows, mids, and highs, and create presets when You can find a setting that you like. You can clearly energize the lows and highs without losing details in the mids.

I've spent quite a bit of time switching from one genre to another, and whether it was jazz, pop, metal or hip-hop, the CX True Wireless did them wonderfully. If you've never really listened to decent earbuds, the CX will also bring you one of my favorite experiences: hearing a detail on one of your favorite tracks that you've never heard before, or rendering it to make a smile on your face.

When conditions are relatively calm, your voice will be nice and clear, with very little compression or wobble.

One track that certainly did this for me is Melanie Martinez ’High School Sweethearts. After a minute, Martinez goes from her breathy and F-bomb-laden intro to the main part of the track, and at this point you can hear someone writing on a blackboard. The CX places this unmistakable scratchy sound behind Martinez's voice so precisely, as if you could look over her shoulder and see the person writing. It gave me goosebumps.

Battery life

Sennheiser CX True Wireless earphones next to the charging case.Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

The CX 400BT promised seven hours of battery life per charge, with a total of 20 hours including the charging case – acceptable, but hardly worth mentioning, especially for earphones without Active Noise Canceling (ANC). But the CX True Wireless are a step up, with nine hours on a full charge and a total of 27 hours on the case.

With a quick charge of 15 minutes you get an extra hour of playtime. This puts the CX True Wireless on par with some of the best earbuds in terms of endurance – a welcome improvement.

Call quality

Making calls with the CX True Wireless is about average for True Wireless earbuds. When the outside conditions are relatively calm and there is no wind, your voice will be nice and clear, with very little compression or wobble. This must be the “voice-optimized sound” that Sennheiser refers to in its description of the earphones.

However, this does not apply to times when wind or loud noises are nearby. At these times, the microphones struggle to keep your voice consistently clear. Since so few earbuds do this excellently, I can hardly blame Sennheiser for anything, but remember: These are earbuds for making phone calls at the desk or when waiting for the flight – not for jogging, cycling or walking near heavy traffic.

These were also my observations when testing the CX 400BT, but here the CX True Wireless improves its more expensive predecessor once again: The CX True Wireless has an adjustable sidetone, which means that you can hear your own voice much more clearly when making calls. It works really well, but I found it difficult to adjust the amount of sidetone during a call.

Something missing?

The CX True Wireless really hit a sweet spot in terms of price and sound performance, and even managed to deliver really good battery life, but there are still some features you may be missing. There is no listening mode (transparency), which is surprising given the eavesdropping feature – these two often go hand in hand.

There are no in-ear sensors that can automatically pause your music when you pull out an earbud. Given the lack of transparency mode, this is what you will often do when you want to talk to someone in real life.

The charging case lacks wireless charging – maybe a minor annoyance, but it's becoming standard on many earbuds that cost less than the CX.

ANC does not exist either, but that is a feature that Sennheiser will do without at this price.

Our opinion

For people who love high-end sound quality but don't have the money to indulge in the best of true wireless earbuds, the CX True Wireless are a great buy. As long as you can forego a few features like the transparency mode and are willing to buy third-party earbuds if the sound or fit doesn't work for you, I think you'll be really happy.

Is there a better alternative?

There are tons of great True Wireless earbuds available anywhere between $ 100 and $ 130 that can outperform the CX True Wireless in terms of features. The Second generation Amazon Echo Buds come to mind as well as that Soundcore Life P3, and the Jabra Elite 75t. But none of these can beat the CX in terms of sheer sound quality.

Ironically, Sennheiser now apparently has that CX 400BT to just $ 100 – it just might be the best alternative. Same great sound, but with a shorter battery life, no water protection and no audible tone for calls. If you're willing to give these up for a $ 30 savings, you're cheating!

How long will they last?

While hard to predict, the CX True Wireless looks better than many other True Wireless earbuds. The fit and workmanship are excellent and Sennheiser supports them with a two-year guarantee, which speaks volumes for the company's confidence in its product. The industry standard is only one year. With IPX4 protection and a good starter battery capacity, they should last you for years to come.

Should you buy it?

Yes sir. The CX True Wireless solves the problem of getting great sound on a budget.

Editor's recommendations



18 Apr
Blog

Acer Aspire 5 2021 Review: Budget laptop takes a step back

Acer Aspire 5

"The horrific display on the Acer Aspire 5 ruins a decent, inexpensive laptop."

  • Solid connectivity

  • Superior expandability

  • Good keyboard and touchpad

  • Cruel display

  • Chassis is too flexible

  • Mediocre battery life

  • Poor performance

The Acer Aspire 5 has been one of our favorite laptops for a few years now and has earned a spot on our list of the best budget laptops. Currently, the 2020 version of the Aspire 5 is listed as the best Windows 10 laptop under $ 500, a major segment that the computer dominates. Acer has introduced a slightly redesigned Aspire 5 for 2021 that features the latest 11th generation Intel Core CPUs and makes some significant changes to the case design.

I received an entry-level model with a Core i3-1115G4 CPU with Intel UHD graphics, 8 GB of RAM, a 256 GB PCIe solid-state drive (SSD) and a 15.6-inch full HD display (1,920 x 1,080). This Aspire 5 configuration is priced at $ 480, which is in the sub-$ 500 segment that previous models owned. Can Acer keep its track record with the latest Aspire 5?

design

Acer has optimized the design of the Aspire 5 for 2021. The biggest change is a new hinge that angles the case back several degrees to allow better airflow and to support the keyboard. It's a welcome change from an otherwise mundane design.

As before, the lid is made of aluminum, while the rest of the housing is made of plastic and the rigidity is the same as before. The lid is curved quite a bit, while the keyboard deck and the bottom of the case are a bit stiffer, but still yield to light pressure. Some other budget laptops, like the Lenovo Yoga C640, Lenovo Flex 5 14, and Acer Swift 3, have solid build quality.

Acer Aspire 5Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Aesthetically, the Aspire 5 is pretty bland, with an all-black color scheme punctuated with some chrome-plated Acer logos. If you don't care about the looks of a laptop and are solely focused on the price, the Aspire 5 will satisfy your taste. But it is by no means noticeable. Other colors will be available, including a silver scheme, which is probably more attractive than my boring black review unit.

The Aspire 5 is not a small laptop as the bezels are still too big for modern machines. The side bezels aren't too thick, but the top and bottom bezels could be made smaller, resulting in a laptop that is wider and deeper than usual. The Aspire 5 weighs 3.64 pounds, down from 3.97 pounds in the previous version and is 0.70 inches thick, which is reasonable for a 15-inch laptop.

A particularly nice design feature that the Aspire 5 has in common is its expandability. Accessing the inside of the computer is relatively easy, allowing users to swap out RAM and SSD. Acer also includes a kit for adding a 2.5-inch drive to an empty bay, making it easy to expand storage with an SSD or rotating hard disk drive (HDD). This kind of expandability is rare and welcomed here.

Acer Aspire 5 side viewMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 USB portsMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 closed side viewMark Coppock / Digital Trends

As with many budget laptops that aren't as thin and light as some previous models, connectivity is mostly a strength. On the left, you get an Ethernet port, a full-size HDMI port, two USB-A 3.2 ports, and a USB-C 3.2 port (no Thunderbolt 4 support here). On the right side you will find a Kensington lock slot, a USB-A 2.0 port and a 3.5 mm audio jack. Wireless connectivity is cutting edge with Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1.

performance

Acer Aspire 5Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

My test device was equipped with a Core i3-1115G4, an 11th generation dual-core CPU that operates at a full TDP of 12 to 28 watts, but contains Intel UHD graphics instead of the newer Intel Iris Xe. According to our series of benchmarks, this is a slow laptop. Starting with Geekbench 5, only 1,215 points were achieved in single-core mode and 2,544 points in multi-core mode. This is well below the usual Tiger Lake value, which usually exceeds 1,500 in the single-core and 5,000 in the multi-core area. In fact, it is beaten by some newer Chromebooks running the Android version of Geekbench 5, which is usually on the slow side. Even the Samsung Galaxy Chromebook 2 with an Intel Core i3-10110U got close to 1,003 and 2,179.

In our handbrake test, which encodes a 420MB video as H.265, the Aspire 5 took exactly five minutes, which is at best 50% slower than the slowest Tiger Lake laptops we tested. This is the first 11th generation Core i3 that we tested. Therefore, faster CPUs run on all of our comparison laptops. For example, the Lenovo ThinkPad X12 Detachable, a Windows 10 tablet with a Core i5-1130G7 (a slower Core i5), took just over three minutes to complete the test. The same applies to Cinebench R23, another video rendering test in which the Aspire 5 only manages 1,247 in single-core mode and 3,128 in multi-core mode. The difference between the Aspire 5 and the detachable ThinkPad X12 (1,125 and 3,663) wasn't that big, but most other Tiger Lake laptops were again significantly faster.

The Aspire 5 only achieved 3752 points in the PCMark 10 Complete test, our lowest score ever. In the Essentials part of the test, only 8,220 were achieved, in productivity 5,975 and in content creation only 2,921. The detachable ThinkPad X12 scored 4,443, 9,999, 5,936 and 4,157, respectively. As in our other tests, the Aspire 5 is well behind the field.

I found the Aspire 5 to be fast enough for basic tasks like surfing the Internet and working with office documents in real-life use. For $ 480, these aren't terrible results. We didn't test the previous versions of the Aspire 5 using the same set of benchmarks, so we can't directly compare their performance.

display

Acer Aspire 5 screenMark Coppock / Digital Trends

I'm not going to crush words here: this is the worst ad I've ever reviewed. This fact was evident when I first started the Acer Aspire 5 and logged into Windows 10. The display has a noticeable bluish cast which I believe is the result of a cruel contrast and elements on the screen may be difficult to see.

My colorimeter agreed. The brightness was very low at 211, which means you'll struggle to see the screen in a bright office setting. The contrast was confirmed to be extraordinarily poor at just 60: 1 (our threshold for a great display is 1000: 1 and an average budget display is 600: 1). The colors were also poor at just 53% of sRGB and 40% of AdobeRGB – both of which are the lowest in our database, and the typical midrange and premium displays score 95% and 70% or more, respectively. To add insult to injury, the accuracy was also among the worst I've seen with a DeltaE of 10.7 (less than 1.0 is considered excellent and most laptops are below 3.0 in the worst case) ). Only the gamma of the display was where it should be at 2.2.

Nobody will like this display.

In actual use, the colors were washed out, the black text was rather gray, and the display was completely uncomfortable. It's my new standard for "terrible display" and it left a terrible taste in my mouth as a result. Nobody is going to like this display unless they've never used a laptop before and I would pity them for getting such a poor impression of the state of the art. Acer has to get another panel because this is just terrible. The 2019 and 2020 versions of the Aspire 5 were much better.

The audio wasn't much better than the display. The volume was inadequate for all but the occasional YouTube videos, although there was no distortion when turned all the way up. The mids and highs were clear enough, and as always, there was little to no bass. The two speakers aren't bad, mind you, they just don't offer much better than budget quality.

Keyboard and touchpad

The Aspire 5 has a fairly typical island-style keyboard with backlighting, black keycaps and white letters. The keys are a bit small, but also offer a comfortable spacing with the dedicated (but tiny) numeric keypad. The switches are very light weight, with a nice push button and a comfortable bottom effect. This is one area where the Aspire 5 shines and offers a typing experience that is better than many budget laptops.

Acer Aspire 5 keyboardMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 close up of keyboard and screenMark Coppock / Digital Trends

Acer Aspire 5 trackpadMark Coppock / Digital Trends

The touchpad is surprisingly good too, as it's pretty big and responsive. It is a Microsoft Precision touchpad and therefore offers reliable support for the multitouch gestures of Windows 10. It also exceeds the household norm.

Unsurprisingly there is no touch display, and as always, I miss it. There is also no Windows 10 Hello support, neither face recognition nor a fingerprint scanner. This is something we've been seeing on budget laptops lately, and so its omission is noticeable here.

Battery life

Acer has equipped the Aspire 5 with a 48-watt-hour battery, which is not much for a 15-inch laptop. Even with the slower CPU, I was disappointed with the battery life on this version.

In our web browsing test, which ran through a number of popular websites, the Aspire 5 managed just under seven hours, two hours less than the 2019 version with a Core i3, but three hours longer than the 2020 version with a Core i5. In general, that's not a terrible score, but the Aspire 5 is still in the lower bracket of our database. In our video loop test, in which a Full HD Avengers trailer is played until the battery is empty, the Aspire 5 achieved 9.5 hours. That's about 3.5 hours less than the 2020 version and less than 10 hours that we would like to see in this test. Again not a terrible result, but not great either.

Mark Coppock / Digital Trends

Finally, I ran some PCMark 10 battery tests. The first, the gaming test, evaluates how long a laptop will last when the CPU and GPU are under stress. The Aspire 5 came in after 2.25 hours, an average score. In the application test, which is the best measure of the longevity of productivity, the Aspire 5 shut down after almost eight hours at the lower end of our database. The detachable ThinkPad X12, for example, managed over 10 hours.

Overall, the battery life of the Aspire 5 was mediocre. If you're doing typical productivity work, you can get through a work day for a fee. The laptop uses a proprietary charger, but you can charge USB-C in a pinch if you happen to have an adapter handy.

Our opinion

I would love to say that the 2021 Acer Aspire 5 retains its spot as our best budget under $ 500 laptop. Unfortunately not, thanks to slow performance and a poor display. The 2020 model is still on sale, and you'd better stick with it.

Is there a better alternative?

As I just mentioned, the 2020 Aspire 5 is a better choice than the 2021 version. You get a much better display and similar build quality for roughly the same money, and you won't be giving up much on performance and battery life.

If I were looking for a cheaper machine in this price range, I would consider a powerful Chromebook option, and there are plenty of that.

The Lenovo Flex 5 14 with its AMD Ryzen CPU is another alternative. The display is smaller at 14 inches but has better battery life, is much faster, and the display won't embarrass you in public.

How long it will take?

It's not the most rugged laptop, but I suspect it can be solidly used for a few years – and that's about what you would expect for the money. They have up-to-date components, including Wi-Fi 6, though Thunderbolt 4 isn't a bummer. The one-year guarantee is also no cause for celebration.

Should you buy it?

No. The display is really terrible which ruins the experience with this laptop.

Editor's recommendations




12 Nov
Blog

Amazon Fire TV Stick/Lite Review: Best Budget Streamers

Amazon Fire TV Stick (2020)

"Tiny, cheap, powerful: these sticks set new standards for budget streaming devices."

  • Affordable

  • Voice-based remote control

  • HDR and Dolby Atmos

  • Can be placed behind the TV

  • Quirky interface

  • Dolby Atmos support for apps inconsistent

For some people, nothing less than the best is enough. In the world of streaming devices, this means that an Apple TV 4K, a Roku Ultraor a Nvidia Shield TV. These set-top boxes cost between $ 100 and $ 200 and are equipped with the latest technology to help you get the most out of your 4K HDR television and home theater sound system.

But what if you're just looking for an affordable way to add streaming capabilities to your older TV, or what if you want a device for a second TV in your home?

Does this drive to save some money mean foregoing all of the cool features of the more expensive devices?

In the past, the answer was yes, but Amazon's $ 40 Fire TV Stick and $ 30 Fire TV Stick Lite redefined what we can expect from a budget streamer. Do they deliver the goods or should you look to more expensive equipment?

Here is our full report.

What's in the box?

Amazon Fire TV Stick (2020)Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Your first reminder that the Fire TV Stick and Stick Lite are budget devices is the plain orange box they come in. It's thin and little more than a cover to protect the components inside. As such, it is one of the most sustainable packages in the streaming world – easily recyclable and with just a few small plastic sheets to dispose of.

The stick design makes a lot of sense. It's tiny, portable, and completely disappears behind your TV.

Inside you will find everything you need: the stick, a remote control, two AAA batteries (fortunately not shrunk), a MicroUSB cable for the power supply, a USB power supply unit and an HDMI extender dongle for televisions with cramped spaces HDMI connections.

design

Amazon Fire TV Stick (2020)Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

The stick design makes a lot of sense. It's tiny, portable, and completely disappears behind your TV.

For a completely wireless installation, you can try plugging the MicroUSB power cord into an available USB port on your TV. However, since Amazon includes a power adapter, I recommend using it. This way, you are guaranteed to get the best performance and faster start-up as it gets consistent performance.

Both the Fire TV Stick and Stick Lite come with Bluetooth remote controls. In this way, you can not only communicate with the sticks without line of sight, but also have advanced functions such as voice access to Alexa.

The remotes look similar, but there are a few differences. The Fire TV Stick comes with a standard voice remote that includes a power button to control the stick, as well as the TV and all other HDMI-connected devices, as well as volume buttons.

The Stick Lite remote control lacks these two functions, but it has a dedicated guide button. Pressing it will bring up the live TV guide – but only if you subscribe to a live TV streaming service like Sling TV or YouTube TV. Otherwise, it just takes you to the live screen, which you may or may not find particularly useful.

To install

Amazon Fire TV Stick (2020)Amazon Fire TV Stick Remote Control (above) and Fire TV Stick Lite Remote Control Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Setting up both sticks is very easy. Once you plug it in and plug it into your TV, the on-screen instructions guide you through pairing the remote, accessing your WiFi, and signing in to your Amazon account.

Yes, an Amazon account is required to use a Fire TV device. So, if you don't already have an account, you might want to set up an account on another device, such as a laptop, before beginning the setup process.

You can choose from a few recommended apps to install – these vary by region – but don't worry if your favorite apps aren't among them. These are simply the apps Amazon is promoting, not the full list of apps available. After the setup is complete, you can install additional apps.

The Fire TV Stick has one extra step that the Lite doesn't: it walks you through a quick process of identifying your TV and / or soundbar or A / V receiver so that the power buttons and the Volume buttons are working properly.

There is one aspect of setting up these devices that could be improved a lot. Now whenever you download and launch apps like Netflix that require you to sign in, you'll need to use the on-screen keyboard to browse and search your credentials. It's a tedious process that Apple and Roku have made a little more bearable thanks to the ability to use your smartphone as a text entry tool. Although Amazon has the Alexa app – the de facto way to interact with a Fire TV device from a phone – there is no way to use it for text entry.

interface

Amazon Fire TV Stick (2020)Simon Cohen / Digital Trends

Amazon's Fire TV interface, which is the same for all Fire TV devices, has a heavy focus on curating content for you to watch.

That curation feels more like a persistent advertisement for Amazon's Prime Video content, however. It's also very repetitive. The same movies, shows and functions are shown over and over again in each of the main categories: Home, Your Videos, Live, Movies, TV Shows and Apps.

In theory, the UI is supposed to show results from a variety of services, but I've only seen a bunch of Netflix suggestions and none from Disney +, despite being signed into both apps.

Unfortunately, the workarounds for this presentation are not very satisfactory. A search function is available, but difficult to reach and global: a search for "Formula 1" returns results from all available content sources as well as from apps. There's no way to filter these results, and you can't access a tab-specific search for movies or TV shows.

There are some major streaming services that cannot be added to the Fire TV.

If you want to jump straight into one of your installed apps, the Apps tab isn't intuitively the way to go. Instead, it requires a long press of the Home button, which reveals the four main shortcuts: Apps, Sleep, Mirroring, and Settings. Selecting apps will take you to the full list of installed apps.

Speaking of apps, there are some key streaming services that can't be added to the Fire TV – HBO Max and Peacock are the biggest omissions. There's a workaround: Virtually any Android TV app can be loaded onto these devices, but it's a multi-step process that is probably best left to those with real tech skills.

A highlight, especially for cable cutters, is the Live tab. If you subscribe to YouTube TV, Sling TV, Philo, or Hulu + Live TV, you can use the Live tab to get content recommendations from these services and see the available channels on the guide screen.

performance

The Fire TV Stick and Stick Lite are identical from a hardware point of view. So you should rightly expect a similar, if not identical, level of performance, but I haven't found it to be.

The normal Fire TV Stick is significantly faster. Not so much in terms of response time – each model responded very quickly to keystrokes – but how quickly each new screen is filled with content.

For example, if you switch from the home screen to the live screen and then back again, the Fire TV Stick quickly populates the new page with thumbnails. The Stick Lite is slower and often takes twice as long to complete the same task.

It's not a deal-breaker – we're only talking about a few seconds here or there – but if you're impatient, the regular Fire TV Stick is probably a better choice.

The only notable lag time was when I started a new stream. However, this has occurred with almost every streaming device I have used. This is mostly related to the streaming service and / or your internet connection, not the hardware.

The conversation with Alexa was quick on both sticks, and reaction times were usually one to two seconds.

Both come with 8 GB of onboard storage, which should be enough for a serious collection of installed apps. There is a catch, however: you only get access to just over 5GB of that storage.

My 20 apps installed have used half that amount, which suggests that as a power user, you may have some tough decisions to make.

Audio and video quality

The audio quality is very good on both devices that support the two main streaming audio formats: Dolby Digital and Dolby Digital Plus. Dolby Atmos fans should be careful: Despite the fact that both Fire TV Sticks support Dolby Atmos over passthrough over HDMI, streaming app support for Atmos has been a hit and miss. It worked on both devices when Atmos titles were streamed on Amazon Prime Video (as expected), but Netflix only delivered Atmos to the Fire TV Stick and Disney + didn't deliver Atmos to both devices.

Possibly this problem is specific to my particular setup. I reached out to both Disney + and Amazon about this issue, but neither company was able to reproduce it.

Offering HDR without the higher price tag of a 4K device is a game changer.

For most people, the big advantage of these affordable streamers is that they can stream in HDR. In general, only streamers that support 4K resolution will offer HDR – this applies to both Apple TV and Roku devices.

As great as 4K is, HDR makes a much bigger difference in terms of perceived image quality because of its improved brightness, color, and contrast. Also, why would you want to stream 4K video with more bandwidth (potentially reaching your data cap faster) to take advantage of HDR?

The Fire TV Stick and Stick Lite are now the first streamers to bring you HDR without asking the higher price (and bandwidth) of a 4K device, and it's a game changer.

Granted, HDR10, HDR10 +, and HLG (the three HDR flavors these devices support) aren't quite as spectacular as Dolby Vision, but it's still a huge step up from what you'd get from devices in this price range a year ago could.

I tried HDR footage from Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Disney + and it all looked great. David Attenborough's Netflix film A Life On Our Planet is rich in color and detail.

If you're a fan of Plex and want to use these sticks to stream HDR content from your Plex media server, keep in mind that Plex will transcode that resolution to 1080p to stay in sync with it when your HDR footage is in 4K is the video capabilities of the Fire TV Stick. However, if you do this it will remove the HDR metadata, leaving you with just the old SDR.

Casting and screen mirroring

Casting (using your smartphone, tablet, or PC to send streaming content to a streaming device) and screen mirroring (the ability to see everything on your smartphone's screen in real time on a TV) are handled by both the Fire TV Stick and the Fire TV Stick supports Stick Lite with restrictions.

The casting on the sticks is determined app by app. For example, Netflix allows you to broadcast to the Fire TV Stick but not the Fire TV Stick Lite. YouTube supports casting on both devices, but you need to install the YouTube app first. Disney + does not support broadcasting to any device other than Nvidia Shield TV or Shield TV Pro (2019).

Given that the sticks contain native apps for virtually all popular streaming services, this shouldn't be a deal breaker. However, if casting is really important to you, make sure your favorite service supports it on the Fire TV Stick / Lite.

Screen mirroring mode is available on both sticks, but only works with Android smartphones and tablets.

Finally, iPhone users who want to take advantage of this feature will need an AirPlay 2 compatible device such as select 4K Roku players, Apple TV, or several smart TV models from LG, Samsung and Sony.

Our opinion

Though the user interface is heavily geared towards Amazon's Prime Video service, the Fire TV Stick and Stick Lite are the only devices to offer voice-based remote control and 1080p / HDR support for just $ 30. If your budget is tight but you want great picture quality from your streaming video services, these Fire TV sticks are hard to beat.

Is there a better alternative?

No at these prices. The $ 30 Roku Express has a better interface and user experience, and supports more streaming services. However, it cannot perform HDR functions, has no voice-based remote control and cannot be tucked behind your TV.

To get significantly more than what the Fire TV Stick Lite does for $ 30, you'll need to spend $ 50 on a Roku Streaming Stick +, Google Chromecast with Google TV, or Amazon's Fire TV Stick 4K.

How long will they last?

Amazon has updated its Fire TV devices very well over the years, and I don't expect this to change. That should keep these two Fire TV Sticks going for many years to come.

Should you buy it?

Yes. As long as you don't mind Amazon's tendency to use the Fire TV surface as a billboard for their own content and its (currently) lack of support for HBO Max and Peacock, these Amazon streaming devices will set a new benchmark for functionality in a sub – $ 50 device.

Editor's recommendations




24 Oct
Blog

iPhone XR Review: The ‘Budget’ XR is the iPhone to Buy

"The iPhone XR is a great choice if you want what iPhones do without the flagship price."

  • Beautiful, colorful design

  • One day battery life

  • Good performance

  • Strong camera

  • Easy to use software

  • The screen resolution could be higher

  • Portrait mode restricted to people

publisher's Note: Apple released the iPhone 12 which is now available for purchase. The iPhone 12 is the successor to the iPhone 11, which is itself the successor to the iPhone XR. It improves the quality and performance of the camera, but comes with a slightly higher MSRP of $ 799. We recommend stopping buying the iPhone XR. Instead, if you want to save money, consider buying one iPhone 11or the $ 400 iPhone SE. Here is our list of the best iPhones to buy.

The iPhone XR is the best iPhone of the year. Yes, the iPhone XS and XS Max have better screens and more versatile cameras, but none of them look as good as the XR in yellow, blue, or coral. The iPhone XR (pronounced "Ten-R") is also significantly cheaper and offers many of the best features of the flagship products. It is hands down great value at $ 750.

Colorful design, solid screen

We can't stop holding the iPhone XR the wrong way round. Sure, the screen is a window to our apps and notifications, but it's the glowing, bright yellow paint on the back that makes us smile every time we pull this phone out of our pockets. We feel like Gollum and we constantly admire the beauty of the one ring. It's perfection.

When you buy the iPhone XR – and you should – we can't envision the idea of ​​going black or white. For the first time since the iPhone 5C, you get a rich, colorful selection of Apple – red, blue, yellow, and coral in addition to black and white. This is a phone that you want to flaunt. We strongly recommend choosing the colors yellow, blue or coral. The product color (red) looks nice too, but we've seen it many times so it doesn't feel that special. The colors also mask any fingerprints that build up on the glass bottom.

Julian Chokkattu / Digital Trends

The edges around the phone are aluminum – a step up from the stainless steel of the iPhone XS and XS Max – but the color here is more metallic and offers a nice, complementary two-tone look. The buttons click as usual.

The iPhone XR looks a lot like the iPhone 8 from the back with its single camera lens, but flip it over and you get the full iPhone X treatment. There's a notch, no home button, and an edge-to-edge screen for the most modern iOS experience you can get at this price. The differences between the XS can be felt here as the black frames around the screen are thicker. However, the bezels are not so big that they clutter the device.

We feel like Gollum and admire the beauty of the one ring. It's perfection.

That's a good thing, because the XR has a large 6.1-inch LCD screen with a resolution of 1,792 x 828. Apple calls it the Liquid Retina Display, and while the screen resolution may sound a little low, it looks like the The distance you normally hold your phone at. If you take a closer look, pixels become visible. We think Apple could have added at least a 1080p screen here – there are hardly any Android phones with such a low-resolution screen in this price range. Even the OnePlus 6 for $ 530 has a resolution of 2,280 x 1,080.

Even so, it's difficult to find anything else wrong with the display. The black levels aren't as deep as the OLEDs on the XS and XS Max, but they're close to each other. The screen is colorful and bright enough to be used outdoors. We believe the screen is good enough for most people, but it's one of the XR's few shortcomings.

The iPhone XR has the advantage of being the perfect size for people who find the XS too small and the XS Max too big. At 6.1 inches, it is right between the flagships (slightly smaller than the Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus). It's not as easy to use one hand as the 5.8-inch iPhone XS, but we can still reach most parts of the screen. And it's not as cumbersome as the 6.5-inch XS Max, which is undoubtedly a two-handed phone.

Julian Chokkattu / Digital Trends

Face recognition is the primary method of unlocking your phone and it works just as quickly as it does on the iPhone XS. With a price range of $ 750, it's one of the few facial recognition tools you can use to log into secure apps. There's not a lot of competition here on the Android side, but that could gradually change.

The iPhone XR's stereo speakers are loud and sound good, although the sound isn't as dynamic or robust as the sound coming from the Razer Phone 2's speakers. You will be satisfied if you are in a quiet room, but you will fight outside when it is noisy. There's no headphone jack, and Apple has also decided not to include the 3.5mm headphone jack adapter in the box. You can opt for the included Lightning EarPods, which don't sound too good, or you can opt for wireless earbuds or headphones.

Great performance and iOS 12 is fluid

The iPhone XR is powered by the same chipset as its more expensive sibling, the A12 Bionic, although it offers less RAM (3GB instead of 4GB). We don't have any performance issues yet. The processor makes iOS 12 run smoothly and had no problem switching quickly through multiple apps. Games like Altos Odyssey and Tekken, and ARKit 2.0 games like AR Robot, run just fine.

  • Geekbench 4 CPU: 4,703 single core; 11,065 multi-core

In Geekbench 4, the iPhone XR rightly scores just below the iPhone XS and XS Max, but is faster than any Android smartphone tested so far. This phone can tackle just about anything you throw at it.

This is a phone that you want to flaunt.

We took a closer look at iOS 12, but the iPhone XR marks the first time Apple has brought several new features introduced on the iPhone X at a lower price. For example, thanks to the TrueDepth camera, you can create animojis or memojis in iMessage. Since there is no home button, it takes some getting used to the gesture navigation system, which is among the best on a phone.

The XR doesn't have 3D Touch, but Apple has replicated that with a feature called Haptic Touch. With 3D Touch on the iPhone XS, you can use the pressure-sensitive display to press and hold certain parts of the interface to see more actions. For example, if you press and hold an email notification, you can mark it as Done. Haptic touch is more limited. This only works in selected areas, e.g. For example, in the Control Center when you want to expand a tile, or on the lock screen when you want to turn the flashlight on or off quickly. How often you miss 3D Touch depends entirely on how often you use it. We suspect most people don't use it often.

Our iOS 12 guide will tell you all about the new features introduced in the latest version.

Strong camera

The iPhone XR has the same main camera on the back of the iPhone XS – a 12-megapixel lens with an aperture of f / 1.8 and optical image stabilization. It can record 4K video at 60 frames per second, record stereo sound, package Smart HDR and use portrait mode for the first time without the need for a secondary lens.

We tested the improvements in the iPhone XS main camera over the iPhone X. While not radical, groundbreaking changes, Smart HDR gives the new camera the edge. This function helps with high-contrast scenarios, minimizes hidden lights or sky and brightens the foreground in order to make it visible. It works as advertised on the iPhone XR and delivers great photos in extreme lighting, although it doesn't quite match the quality of HDR + on the Google Pixel 3.

Like the more expensive iPhones or flagship Android devices, the camera app has almost no shutter lag. This allows you to capture detailed, well-exposed photos that keep strong color. It can hold its own even in poor lighting conditions. However, you need to make sure you stay calm to avoid a blurry photo.

  • 1.
    Portrait mode selfie.
  • 2.
    Portrait mode.
  • 3.
    Portrait mode.
  • 4th
    Portrait mode selfie.

We miss the telephoto lens on the iPhone XS and XS Max. The 2x optical zoom lets you take shots that don't look as good when the iPhone XR is digitally enlarged. When we go back to a camera with a lens, we need to change the way we take some photos and physically move closer to the subject instead of standing some distance away. The lack of the secondary lens also affects Portrait mode, which allows you to take photos of a subject with a blurred effect that mimics a DSLR. We're really excited to see Portrait mode available on the XR, as Apple first incorporated it into a camera phone with a lens. Portrait lighting is also available, but there are only three options as opposed to the five options on the XS – Natural, Studio, and Contour.

The iPhone XR doesn't zoom in to take portrait mode photos like the XS, so you have more space to work. It's not as accurate as XS and XS Max, but we've been impressed so far. In low light conditions, the photos weren't as grainy as the iPhone XS.

Above: iPhone XR portrait mode, below: iPhone XS portrait mode

Portrait mode only works on people, however, and that's disappointing. On the iPhone XS, portrait mode can be used on food, people, objects, pets, and almost anything. The XR camera uses this mode, however, partly with the help of artificial intelligence and neural networks. It is trained to identify a face, and this is why it can outline people so accurately. When you try to take a portrait photo of a dog or object, the camera says "No Person Detected" and doesn't even try. Google's Pixel 3 smartphone has a single-lens camera and is great for using portrait mode on a variety of subjects. We hope Apple can expand Portrait Mode on the XR to get a bit more versatile with software over time.

The front-facing camera is the same TrueDepth camera system as the iPhone XS, so you can take great selfies in portrait mode here. It even worked with our dog. This 7 megapixel camera takes great shots even in standard mode.

While the iPhone XR's camera isn't as versatile as the iPhone XS or XS Max's, it's still top-notch and the photos it takes are excellent.

Don't worry about the battery

You don't have to worry about the battery of the iPhone XR. It's a 2,942 mAh unit, and we often ended a work day at around 50 or 45 percent by 6.45 p.m. It is taken from the charger around 7 a.m. and used to surf the Internet, take pictures, stream music and play games with the phone. On lighter days we reached 35 percent at 9.42 p.m. With this phone, you can easily get through a full day and have a few hours the next day if you forget to charge it.

The battery life of the iPhone XR doesn't worry you.

This day-long battery life is comparable to other phones on the market like the Galaxy S9 Plus and even outperforms the iPhone XS Max and iPhone XS. It lasts slightly longer than Google's Pixel 3 and 3 XL, which struggle to get through a day of moderate to heavy use.

It supports fast charging, but unfortunately the corresponding cable is not included. You can also charge this iPhone wirelessly, just like the XS series and last year's iPhone devices.

Price, availability and warranty information

The iPhone XR starts at $ 750 and is available now. The best deals and prices can be found in our buying guide.

Apple offers a one-year limited warranty that protects the device from manufacturing defects. You can purchase AppleCare for additional protection.

Our opinion

Undeniably outstanding value – this is the iPhone XR. Some features may be missing, but this is the iPhone that makes others yellow, blue, or coral with envy. The colors are stunning, the battery life is great, Face ID is still industry leading technology, iOS gestures are intuitive, the camera is superb, and the performance is fantastic. This is the iPhone to buy.

Is there a better alternative?

publisher's Note: Apple released the iPhone 12 which is now available for purchase. The iPhone 12 is the successor to the iPhone 11, which is itself the successor to the iPhone XR. It improves the quality and performance of the camera, but comes with a slightly higher MSRP of $ 799. We recommend stop buying the iPhone XR. Instead, if you want to save money, consider buying one iPhone 11or the $ 400 iPhone SE. Here is our list of the best iPhones to buy.

Yes. If you want all the bells and whistles, buy the iPhone XS or iPhone XS Max. They're more expensive, but you get better build quality, a nicer and sharper screen, and a more versatile camera. If $ 750 is too high, Apple is still selling the iPhone 8 and iPhone 7 at discounted prices. They are excellent phones, if not that futuristic.

On the Android side, you are spoiled for choice. Our pick, however, is the Google Pixel 3. It costs $ 50 more, but you get a slightly better camera, great software with quick updates, and a high-resolution screen.

How long it will take?

Apple's iPhones typically last four to five years, if not longer. The iPhone XR has an IP67 rating instead of IP68. That means you can get it up to 1 meter underwater for 30 minutes and nothing more. While Apple says it's the most durable glass on the front and back, it is wise to buy a case to protect the phone. Apple sells a clear case for the iPhone XR in case you don't want to hide the gorgeous, colored body.

Expect software updates for the next four to five years. The iPhone 5S, released in 2013, is the oldest iPhone that can run iOS 12, so your device will last a long time.

Should you buy it?

Absolutely. Buy it in yellow. You will not be disappointed.

Editor's recommendations




22 Aug
Blog

Acer Aspire 5 (2020) Review: An Old-School Budget Laptop

acer aspire 5 2020 review 03

"The Acer Aspire 5 is an ultra-cheap laptop and it feels like one."

  • Comfortable keyboard and touchpad

  • Thin and light

  • Good choice of ports

  • The battery life is poor

  • Feels cheap and pliable

Windows laptops under $ 500 are usually sad, low-performing devices. But the Acer Aspire 5 has always been an exception.

Last year's model, which was just $ 400, combined impressive performance, battery life, and build quality to make it the best budget laptop you could buy.

Acer has a new model this year, but this time I'm testing a more expensive $ 550 version. The configuration includes a Core i5-1035G1 instead of a Core i3, 8 GB of RAM versus 4 GB, and a 256 GB solid-state drive (SSD) instead of just 128 GB. The same $ 400 configuration is still available, as is an option for AMD's Ryzen 4000 CPUs.

Time did not stand still. I've been reviewing some excellent budget laptops lately and the pressure on the Aspire 5 has increased. Does the new model keep its high status or has it fallen behind?

design

As before, the Acer Aspire 5 is mainly made of plastic. The aluminum lid supposedly adds stiffness, but there's still a lot of room for improvement. The lid is still very flexible and can easily be bent in the middle with light pressure. The keyboard deck has some yields that aren't that outrageous, and the bottom of the case also yields to light pressure. It's not uncommon to see laptops at this price point, like the all-plastic Dell Inspiron 14 5000 I recently reviewed for $ 650.

However, other devices like the Lenovo Yoga C640, Lenovo Flex 5 14, and Acer Swift 3 all cost the same price as the Aspire 5 I'm reviewing – although they are 13- and 14-inch laptops, and we don't have them seen a superior 15-inch budget laptop – but they offer much better build quality. With the Aspire 5 starting price at $ 400, that's not that big of a deal, but with only about $ 50 separating the models, the difference in build quality becomes a bigger issue.

(

There's no bling to speak of, which is good on a plastic laptop.

The aesthetics of the Acer Aspire 5 are okay for the price, at least in the silver color I tested. There's no bling to speak of, though that's not a bad thing on a plastic laptop. Too much counterfeit chrome can make a laptop look cheap if there are no authentic materials to secure it. The Aspire 5 is also available in red and black, which are more visually appealing and offer a little more interest.

One advantage of the Asprie 5, however, is its size. It's not thick for a budget 15-inch 0.71-inch laptop. At 3.97 pounds, it's not overly heavy either. That's in his favor. The display bezels may be narrow on the sides, but the top bezel is quite large by modern standards and the chin is just big, period. That gives the laptop more width and depth than more premium laptops – no surprise, but it has to be said.

Connectivity is a strength. You get a USB-C Gen 1 port (not Thunderbolt 3, which is unsurprising at this price point), two USB-A 3.1 ports, a USB-A 2.0 port, an HDMI 2.0 port with HDCP support, and an RJ-45 Ethernet connector. With the Aspire 5, you don't need many dongles.

The wireless connectivity is up to date with Wi-Fi 6 on board and Bluetooth 5.0.

performance

The Core i5-1035G1 in my review unit is a mediocre performer and is best for basic productivity, web browsing, multimedia consumption, and the like. They are the latest quad-core processors from Intel and are standard on portable laptops like this one. However, as I ran the Aspire 5 through our benchmark suite, it became clear that Acer's implementation is a bit slower than average here.

In Geekbench 5, for example, the Aspire 5 achieved 1.1129 points in the single-core test and 2.899 points in the multi-core test. This is a step behind the 1,169 and 3,197 points found on the Dell Inspiron 14 5000, and even further behind the 1,215 and 3,615 points managed by the Intel-based Acer Swift 3. Note that the Lenovo Flex 5 14 for $ 600 with an AMD Ryzen 5 4500U CPU scored 1,096 and 4,543 points, demonstrating AMD's new dominance in this price range. That's what you get with two additional cores and four threads.

It's not a speed demon, but the Aspire 5 is fast enough for its intended purpose.

The same was true for our more realistic test, which used Handbrake to encode a 420MB video as H.265. The Aspire 5 took a little more than five minutes to complete the test, while the Inspiron 14 finished almost 30 seconds earlier and the Spin 3 was almost a minute faster. The AMD-powered Flex 5 14 finished in less than three minutes and blew the rest of the field.

The Aspire 5 is fast enough for its intended purpose and certainly faster than the previous year's model with a dual-core Core i3. It's not a speed demon, however, and that's why you'll want to keep your expectations in check.

It also uses Intel's lowest UHD graphics so all but the lightest games are out of the question. Other laptops with 10th Gen Intel Core i5 processors have faster Iris Plus graphics, but Acer went for the cheaper option. If you want a faster (and more expensive) laptop but otherwise like the Aspire 5, consider the AMD Ryzen 4000 versions – you get much better performance.

display

I called last year's Aspire 5 display "better than budget". Nowadays that description feels less appropriate.

The 2020 Aspire 5 has a very similar touchless display to the last one. The brightness was 243 nits versus 238 nits, and the color gamut was equally narrow at 64% sRGB (versus 62%) and 47% AdobeRGB (versus 46%). Color accuracy was also close to 2.49 versus 2.42, and gamma was almost equally dark at 2.6 versus 2.7 (2.2 is perfect). The only significant difference was in contrast where the 2020 Aspire 5 only managed 720: 1 while the earlier model got a much better 890: 1.

This is still a fairly common finding for budget laptops, especially in terms of color gamut. However, we see that some budget devices do much better. For example, the Lenovo Yoga C640 achieved 96% sRGB and 73% AdobeRGB with a color accuracy of 1.07 (1.0 and less are considered excellent). This is the field of premium laptops, and while there are still few such devices around at this price point, there is a real possibility that the displays will gradually improve.

I can't fault this ad too much though. The panels offered by the Lenovo Flex 5 or the Dell Inspiron 14 5000 are just as inconspicuous. And in everyday use, it's good enough for productivity work and internet surfing – although the gamma is too dark for pleasant Netflix bingeing.

The audio remained a strength, with plenty of volume that wouldn't distort when turned up loud, and a bit of bass to match solid mids and highs. You can watch your Netflix binge and YouTube videos without headphones or bluetooth speakers, although the latter has been recommended as usual if you want to listen to your music.

Keyboard and touchpad

The Aspire 5's typical backlit keyboard offers a lot of clearance, although the keycaps are a bit small. The mechanism is on the crunch side, however, which is a plus. Button presses are registered without too much pressure, and there is a comfortable floor movement that helps with precision. I had no problem typing at full speed.

Like many inexpensive 15-inch laptops, the Aspire 5 also has a number pad on the right. This is useful for some, but the touchpad moves uncomfortably to the left.

The touchpad uses Microsoft Precision drivers and has a smooth surface with just enough grip to make swiping and scrolling comfortable. Multi-touch gestures are triggered exactly as they should. This doesn't always apply to the touchpads on budget laptops. I'll count this in favor of the Aspire 5. You don't get the glass touchpad of a premium laptop, but for the price, the Aspire 5 does the cut.

The fingerprint scanner in the upper right corner of the touchpad didn't impress me. It worked well enough for Windows 10 login without a password, but the location is distracting.

Battery life

Thanks to its energy-saving Core i3 CPU, the Aspire 5 received great praise last year for its long battery life. This year's Core i5 model has the same battery capacity of 48 watt hours and is nowhere near the performance of the previous version.

In our demanding Basemark web benchmark test, the 2020 Aspire 5 lasted just under three hours, compared to the previous year's model, which lasted four hours. The Lenovo Flex 5 with its Ryzen CPU also lasted almost an hour longer.

The 2020 Aspire 5 managed a little over four hours when switching to web surfing, a very disappointing score that is less than half of the 2019 model's nine hours. The Flex 5 outperformed again at eight hours, and the Acer Swift 3 with the same CPU lasted seven hours.

The battery life went from a strength to a weakness.

The 2020 Aspire 5 performed slightly better in the video loop test, which runs through a Full HD Avengers trailer, until the battery is empty. Here it took about 9.5 hours compared to the Aspire 5 2019 after 13 hours and the Flex 5 after 11 hours.

The bottom line is that battery life has gone from a strength to a weakness and it's not much better than the Dell Inspiron 14 5000 which had an even worse battery life. The Aspire 5 might get you through much of a day of typical productivity tasks, but you'll want to take your charger with you just in case. While I haven't tested it myself, the Core i3 model could get closer to last year's results.

Our opinion

The Acer Aspire 5 is much more attractive at $ 400 for a Core i3, 4GB of RAM, and a 128GB SSD. This pricing is still tough to compete with. At $ 550, however, we expect more. Better build quality, better performance, better battery life, and better displays are becoming the norm even at low prices.

Is there a better alternative?

I haven't tested a better 15-inch Windows laptop than the Aspire 5, but there are plenty of powerful Chromebook options out there.

On the Windows side, the Lenovo Flex 5 14 with its AMD Ryzen CPU is a good choice. It has a slightly smaller display but is much faster, has better battery life, and more robust build quality. It's a 2-in-1 game too, which makes it a more flexible option for just $ 50 more.

Acer & # 39; s Swift 3 Ryzen is another great option if you have $ 100 more to spend. It's also faster, looks better, has better battery life, and improved build quality.

Finally, if size isn't important at all, you can resort to a 13-inch model and get the Lenovo Yoga C640. The all-metal construction is superior and the battery life is much better. Performance will lag a bit thanks to the Core i3 CPU, but again, it's a very functional 2-in-1 for just $ 50 more.

How long it will take?

Despite the cheap chassis, the Acer Aspire 5 is built well enough to last a few years, there's no doubt about that. Apart from the fact that it lacks Thunderbolt 3, it has the latest components, including Wi-Fi 6. We always want more than the one-year warranty, however.

Should you buy it?

No. The cheaper configuration offers more attractive value, but there are cheaper laptops available.

Editor's recommendations




12