20 Nov
Blog

Mash for GAINZ: 4 Simple Recipes for Performance

Success in achieving your exercise and body composition goals consists of 80% diet and 20% exercise. We discuss these exact percentages, but I think we all agree that diet plays a bigger role in achieving our goals than most of us think it can.

I originally created these Mash for Gainz recipes for myself after being injured for nine months. I figured if I could figure out my diet it would aid my recovery and prevent further loss.

How it works

The following four Mash for Gainz recipes will give you a head start when creating your own meals. You need three macronutrients in one main meal:

  1. Carbohydrates – your main source of energy
  2. Protein – For growth and repair
  3. Fat – for energy

The main macronutrient in the recipes is carbohydrates. We all need carbohydrates to function properly, so why not make this cheap, easy, and delicious?

The recipes are straightforward and easy to adapt to everyone – except for people who hate sweet potatoes. Experiment with the recipes and add different herbs and spices. Preparing fresh food can be easy, so enjoy it and have fun.

Remarks:

  • The preparation and preparation of the recipes should take about twenty minutes.
  • The recipes are very easy to follow and the ingredients can be bought in any supermarket.
  • Sweet potato is a complex carbohydrate. In contrast to simple carbohydrates (for example potatoes, white bread and fruit) it releases energy over a long period of time. This steady release of energy will keep you from craving candy.

Here are three easy steps to create your own meal:

  1. Choose a recipe.
  2. Choose your protein: Chicken breast / leg, sirloin steak, pork loin, turkey breast, tinned tuna or salmon fillet.
  3. Choose a mix of low-carb vegetables: Broccoli, spinach, tomatoes, kale, cucumber, bell pepper, watercress or rocket.

Example:

Creamy mashed sweet potato recipe

+

130g sliced ​​grilled chicken breast

(Marinade: rosemary, garlic, lemon juice, salt and pepper)

+

100g broccoli and 50g baby plum tomatoes

Creamy sweet potato mash

340kcal – Carbohydrates: 48g Fat: 13g Protein: 6g

Ingredients:

  • 200g sweet potato
  • 100g spinach
  • 100g red onion
  • 40ml cream
  • 5g coconut oil
  • 1 clove of garlic (optional)
  • Salt and pepper to taste

Method:

  1. Cut the sweet potato into small pieces (cm cubes).
  2. Pour into the saucepan and then add boiling water from the kettle.
  3. Cook sweet potatoes for up to 10 minutes or until tender.
  4. Finely chop the red onions and spinach. Once the sweet potato is tender, add the red onions and spinach to the saucepan.
  5. Cook another 2-4 minutes, then drain the ingredients in a colander.
  6. Put the ingredients in the saucepan and mash them.
  7. Add the whipped cream, coconut oil, 1 finely chopped clove of garlic or ground garlic and season with salt and pepper to taste.
  8. Mix and puree it.
  9. Serve with some meat or fish with vegetables.

Sweet potato and mushroom puree

340kcal – carbohydrates: 52g, fat: 11g, protein: 6g

Ingredients:

  • 200g sweet potato
  • 100g chestnut mushrooms
  • 100g red onion
  • 10g cashew nuts
  • 1 teaspoon arrowroot (every supermarket sells it in the baking department)
  • 20-40ml water
  • 5g coconut oil
  • 1 teaspoon fresh rosemary
  • Salt and pepper to taste

Method:

  1. Cut the sweet potato into small pieces.
  2. Pour into the saucepan and then add boiling water from the kettle.
  3. Cook the sweet potato for up to 10 minutes or until tender.
  4. Preheat the frying pan and add coconut oil.
  5. Add finely chopped red onions and mushrooms to the pan. Let the ingredient sweat and then add 1 teaspoon of arrowroot with 20-40 ml of water.
  6. Mix the arrowroot into the red onion and mushroom with a spoon until it begins to thicken. Add more water if the sauce is too thick. Then add the chopped / ground cashew nuts and finely chopped rosemary to the pan.
  7. Once the sweet potato is tender, drain it with a strainer and place it back in the saucepan.
  8. Add the red onion, mushroom and cashew nut sauce to the saucepan.
  9. Season to taste with salt and pepper.
  10. Mix and puree it.
  11. Serve with some meat or fish with vegetables.

Sweet potato and beetroot mash

Porridge, recipes, meals, meal planning, sweet potatoes, nutrition

395kcal – carbohydrates: 54g, fat: 17g, protein: 5g

Ingredients:

  • 200g sweet potato
  • 50g cooked beetroot
  • 100g red onion
  • 80g avocado
  • Small handful of coriander
  • 1/4 lemon juice
  • Salt and pepper to taste

Method:

  1. Cut the sweet potato into small pieces.
  2. Pour into the saucepan and then add boiling water from the kettle.
  3. Cook sweet potatoes for up to 10 minutes or until tender.
  4. Finely chop the red onions. Once the sweet potato is tender, add the red onions to the saucepan.
  5. Cook another 2-4 minutes, then drain the ingredients in a colander.
  6. Return the ingredients to the saucepan and mash them.
  7. Add sliced ​​beets, avocado, finely chopped coriander, lemon juice to the saucepan.
  8. Mix and puree it.
  9. Serve with some meat or fish with vegetables.

Sweet potato and carrot puree

326kcal – carbohydrates: 55g, fat: 9g, protein: 5g

Ingredients:

  • 200g sweet potato
  • 100g carrot
  • 100g red onion
  • 50ml cream
  • Handful of chives and basil
  • 1/4 lemon
  • Salt and pepper to taste

Method:

  1. Cut the sweet potato into small pieces.
  2. Pour into the saucepan and then add boiling water from the kettle.
  3. Cook sweet potatoes for up to 10 minutes or until tender.
  4. Finely chop the red onions and grate the carrot. Once the sweet potato is tender, add the red onions and grated carrot to the saucepan.
  5. Cook another 2-4 minutes, then drain the ingredients in a colander.
  6. Return the ingredients to the saucepan and mash them.
  7. Add the cream, 1/4 lemon juice, finely chopped chives and basil.
  8. Season to taste with salt and pepper.
  9. Mix and puree it.
  10. Serve with some meat or fish with vegetables.

More like that:

  • Filled and sexy: 3 sweet potato recipes for post-workout meals
  • Goodness, Grace, Great Balls of YUM: 2 paleo treats for athletes
  • 7 Habits to Success: How To Achieve Your Nutritional Goals
  • New to muscle building today

The post Mash for GAINZ: 4 Simple Recipes for Performance first appeared on Breaking Muscle.

02 Sep
Blog

Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED Review: The Performance You Need

Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED sits on a tabletop.

Asus Vivobook Pro 16X

RRP $ 1,099.00

“The Asus Vivobook Pro 16X offers everything a content creator needs in a laptop. And the price is right. "

advantages

  • Incredible battery life

  • Gorgeous OLED screen

  • Powerhouse performance

  • Great value

  • A decent slot machine

disadvantage

  • Boring design

  • DialPad feels tricky

Asus has set itself the task of making OLED laptops accessible to the masses. The ZenBook 13 was the cheapest 1080p OLED panel we'd seen earlier this year, and now the Vivobook Pro 16X does the same for 4K OLED.

The high-resolution screen is available in a basic configuration starting at $ 1,100. In a world where OLED is typically reserved for laptops over $ 2,000, the Vivobook Pro 16X is a big step in the right direction.

Paired with a Ryzen 9 5900HX processor and an RTX 3050 Ti graphics card, the ingredients for an excellent content creation machine are available at an affordable price. As it turns out, it is just that – and so much more.

draft

Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED laptop bezels.Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

The design of the VivoBook Pro 16X is not its strong point. This shows the laptop's low price. It's not an unattractive laptop in and of itself, just a very simple one. The dark gray case is not noticeable and the rather large plastic bezels ensure that it does not feel up-to-date. The few design flourishes that it has, such as the orange Esc key and the name tag on the front with the words "#BeExplorers", seem a little weird.

The design just doesn't have the premium look of some of its competitors, like the Dell XPS 15, MacBook Pro 16-inch, or even the HP Envy 15. But this, too, is significantly cheaper than many of these other options. Ultimately, the Vivobook Pro 16X is intended for those who prefer a cheaper laptop without sacrificing performance. Design is not in the foreground.

Fortunately, that doesn't mean the Vivobook Pro 16X is a poorly built device. It's a lot durable. The only weak point is in the middle of the lid along the hinge, but that's typical. It's an otherwise sturdy laptop that can be used and moved around.

Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED sits on a tabletop.Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

Asus has also made no compromises in terms of portability. Despite being a very large laptop, the chassis is 0.74 inches thick and 4.3 pounds – slightly thicker than the XPS 15 but half a pound lighter than the HP Envy 15. The Razer Blade remains one of the thinnest Options for laptops of this size and performance level.

A similarity between the Vivobook Pro 16X and the Razer Blade is that both are absolute fingerprint magnets. The lid, in particular, was quickly covered with hard-to-remove fingerprints.

advertisement

The Vivobook Pro 16X has a super-glossy OLED display, which is still relatively rare on laptops. You can find it as an option on the most expensive Creator-based laptops, such as the Dell XPS 15. This laptop lets you configure an OLED screen at the cheapest cost for $ 2,300. HP can get you one for its Specter x360 15 for $ 1,580. But $ 1,100? It's unheard of, and yet that's exactly what the Vivobook Pro 16X does.

If you've seen one of the OLED screens on these laptops, you know what you're getting with the Vivobook Pro 16X: jet black, insane contrasts and a warm hue. Reds and oranges are turned up, but not unrealistic. With the “Vivid” color mode in the MyAsus application, you can make the colors stand out even more. You can also adjust the color temperature, either cooler or warmer. I always found these Samsung OLED panels a little too warm for my taste, so being able to cool them down a bit is perfect. This software also comes with some OLED care tips, including pixel shifting, pixel updating, and the ability to automatically hide the taskbar. In theory, these should prevent any possible burn-in that you might experience.

I used a Spyder colorimeter to measure color saturation, brightness, gamma, and color accuracy – and I was impressed across the board. Again, this is almost identical to what you'll find in other OLED laptops like the HP Specter x360 15 or Dell XPS 15, and that's a good thing. In the P3, AdobeRGB, and sRGB color spaces, it is near perfect, and the color error is small enough for more precise color correction. It may be the best laptop screen I've ever tested – especially at this price point.

In addition, the Vivobook Pro 16X is the first laptop with a larger 16:10, 16-inch screen with OLED functionality.

Ports

Connectivity on the right side of the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED laptop. Headphone connection, micro SD slot, micro USB connection, HDMI connection, USB

Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

Connectivity on the right side of the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED laptop. Headphone connection, micro SD slot, micro USB connection, HDMI connection, USB

Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

Connectivity on the left side of the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED laptop: Two USB ports.

Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

Asus keeps the port selection pretty simple, although it's decidedly old school. That means you get three USB-A ports, HDMI, a barrel connector and only one USB-C port. Although the USB-C port can supply power, Asus unfortunately decided to place it on the same side as the standard power connector.

The Vivobook Pro 16X also has a microSD card slot instead of a full-size slot. This is a little less convenient when uploading content directly from a camera, which seems to be one of the main uses for a laptop like this one. That's too bad.

The take-up of the barrel plug is also not optimal. Laptops like the XPS 15 rely solely on USB-C power, and that seems to give the entire laptop enough juice overall without sacrificing performance. Not only is USB-C more convenient, it also allows full charging on both sides of the laptop.

Keyboard and touchpad

Asus did a good job with the palm deflector, but accidental clicks do occur every now and then.

Asus has adopted the same keyboard from its higher-end ZenBook range. The keystrokes feel snappy and the keycaps don't wobble too much. There isn't a lot of travel here but I found it to be a pretty enjoyable typing experience.

Close up on the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED keyboard

Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

Orange keycap on the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED keyboard.

Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

In addition to the orange keycap, the keyboard also has a racing stripe on the Enter key and some color differences in between. The keyboard includes a number pad, which makes sense for a laptop of this size. Laptops with a number pad often off-center the touchpad as you type to match the position of your wrists as you type, but the Vivobook Pro keeps it centered. It's visually nice, but it means that your right hand rests on the touchpad while typing. Asus did a good job with the palm deflector, but accidental clicks do occur every now and then.

Asus has experimented with new touchpad functions in recent years – be it with the integration of a calculator or with the installation of a second screen. There's something new on the Vivobook Pro called the DialPad. When you swipe over the small icon in the upper right corner of the touchpad, a small digital clock face will appear on the left side of the touchpad. As soon as you slide your finger over the watch face, a screen dial is triggered, with which you can control various system-wide and app-specific settings. The default controls are just volume and screen brightness, but there are a few more options in the ProArt software that can be added. None of these were particularly useful, and certainly no more convenient than just using the keyboard.

However, its actual use is to set certain controls in applications such as the Adobe Creative Suite. It's all based on the same dialing system developed for the Surface Dial that Microsoft introduced for the Surface Studio All-in-One. The new premium creative laptops from Asus in the StudioBook range make much more use of the dial with physical controls and accessories. I could see someone using the DialPad for the occasional control change, but the combination of the swipe to trigger and the digital watch face makes for a clunky experience that would require considerable habit formation to use effectively.

I didn't find the DialPad particularly useful, but it never got in the way either. Since it requires a swipe, I've never had accidental starts.

Close-up on the dialpad of the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED.Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

power

The Vivobook Pro 16X deserves its "Pro" designation with two components. First the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX. This is a 45 watt 8 core processor with lots of power, especially for multithreaded tasks. It's the same CPU we've seen in a number of excellent gaming laptops in 2021 and been a winner across the board. Cinebench R23 multi-core results are impressive, stomping on Intel's 11th generation H-series laptops like the Dell XPS 15. Single-core performance is still a bit higher in Dell's XPS laptop, but the Vivobook Pro is not far behind there either.

The Vivobook Pro also beats the XPS 15 in all PCMark 10 benchmarks, which include testing basic tasks like web browsing and video conferencing, as well as more difficult workflows like multitasking and photo editing. It's only 4% ahead overall – but keep in mind that this is a much cheaper laptop we're talking about. The Vivobook Pro is fast and nimble whether you're doing basic administrative tasks, playing games, or rendering a video timeline.

Laptop 3DMark time spy Cinebench R23 Underdog bench 5 PCMark 10 Fortnite (1080p Epic) Civilization VI (1080p Ultra)
Asus Vivobook Pro 16X (RTX 3050 Ti) 4601 1486/11478 1544/8299 6287 57 fps 68 fps
Acer Swift X (RTX 3050 Ti) 4073 1437/10135 1287/6663 6247 43 fps 66 fps
Dell XPS 15 (RTX 3050 Ti) 4540 1513/9979 1556/7692 6024 50 fps 73 fps
Dell XPS 17 (RTX 3060) 7039 1525/10145 1568/8801 6209 78 fps 104 fps

Even ultra-thin 16-inch laptops like the LG Gram 16 don't do well because they use a weaker 25-watt processor and integrated graphics. Gaming laptops like the Ryzen-powered Razer Blade 14 or Lenovo Legion 5 Pro, although often far more expensive, have a similar performance range. The significantly larger XPS 17 is also a better one-to-one comparison in PCMark 10 with its RTX 3060 graphics.

For a similarly expensive competitor, the Acer Swift X achieves the performance of the Vivobook Pro in these benchmarks with a smaller 14-inch size. The Acer Swift X also has a Ryzen 5000 processor and the RTX 3050 Ti for graphics.

Seeing all of this in real applications is of course the most important thing. And the Vivobook Pro didn't disappoint. The great multi-core performance of AMD's Ryzen 5000 chips enables really fast video rendering, which makes the Vivobook Pro super fast in applications like Handbrake and Adobe Premiere Pro. How fast? Well, according to its own tests, the Vivobook Pro 16X has set a new record for laptops when rendering in Handbrake.

These tests were all run with the system's default "Standard" fan profile, which means you can likely see improvements with the built-in "Performance" mode in the Asus software.

The only exception I saw was timeline playback in Adobe Premiere Pro. This is one area where Intel’s optimization has an advantage over AMD. That means a laptop like the XPS 17 will do better overall in Premiere Pro. You'll also see a slightly better overall Premiere Pro experience with a gaming laptop like the Lenovo Legion 5 Pro, which has more powerful GPU performance with its RTX 3070.

But these are not fair comparisons either. When was the last time you heard of a $ 1,100 laptop that can handle 4K video edits like a breeze? This is the Vivobook Pro for you.

Gaming performance

Of course, you can't try out some games with an Nvidia RTX 3050 Ti. And the Vivobook Pro 16X does better than you might think. The Vivobook Pro 16X does much more with the RTX 3050 Ti than some other laptops with this graphics card. In games, it achieves significantly better frame rates than smaller laptops with the same GPU as the Acer Swift X and the Asus ROG Flow X13.

You shouldn't buy this laptop just for gaming, but it's certainly powerful enough to handle modern games on the side.

In Fortnite, for example, the Vivobook Pro 16X is 25% faster than the Acer Swift X, averaging 57 frames per second (fps) in 1080p at epic settings. This even exceeds the 50 fps that the Dell XPS 15 gets, even with the RTX 3050 Ti. This is not bad, especially since the screen only has a refresh rate of 60 Hz.

The XPS 15 got the upper hand in Civilization VI, the other game I tested on the Vivobook Pro. While the Dell system can play the game in 4K Ultra with a smooth 55 fps, the Vivobook Pro 16X got stuck with a choppy 39 fps. This advantage is less obvious in 1080p, where both systems easily landed at over 60 fps.

That makes the Vivobook Pro 16X a decent gaming machine, but of course not as good as an RTX 3060 laptop like the Dell XPS 17. You shouldn't buy this laptop just for gaming, but it's certainly powerful enough to run on the side cope with modern games.

Loudspeaker and webcam

Close-up of the bezels and webcam on the Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED laptop.Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

There are two main locations for speakers in laptops – either towards the top right of the keyboard deck or along the edges facing the surface below. However, Asus chose a unique position for the Vivobook Pro 16X – right on the front. If you sit back while watching a movie or video, you will get decent quality sound from these speakers. It's not the richest, most full-bodied audio I've ever heard, but it's not bad.

Oddly enough, if you hear something while typing or using the laptop, your arms are undoubtedly blocking the sound. An odd choice no doubt, but they'll get the job done during a video conference. Asus even offers some "AI-supported" noise-canceling for the microphones.

Speaking of video conferencing, the webcam here is only 720p, so don't expect the crisper image quality of any of the rare 1080p laptop webcams out there. I have to say, however, that the Vivobook Pro's imaging isn't as bad as many of the other 720p webcams I've tested. This is an example where the larger top bezel can accommodate a higher quality sensor than laptops with a thin bezel like the Dell XPS 15.

Battery life

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw how long it was taking.

A 16-inch laptop with an RTX graphics card and a 4K screen with amazing battery life? Yes that's it. The Asus Vivobook Pro 16X achieves an incredible battery life, although all of these factors work against it.

Asus didn't go into the details, but this new OLED panel in the Vivobook Pro uses different materials when it comes to power consumption. The battery life improvements from using AMD's Ryzen 5000 platform probably won't hurt either. Whatever the secret sauce is – it works.

Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED sits on a tabletop.Luke Larsen / Digital Trends

In our light web browsing test, the Vivobook Pro 16X lasted over 16 hours on a single charge. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw how long it was taking. It revolves around laptops like the Dell XPS 15, which was dead after just five hours in the same test. It even beats the lightweight LG Gram 16, which was previously a battery life champion in this test.

In our lightest test, which repeats a local video file, the Vivobook Pro 16X even earned 30 minutes more.

Don't necessarily expect two full days of work with the Vivobook Pro, especially if your typical workload is using the discrete GPU. But you will have a hard time finding many laptops, especially none with that much power, that can outlast the Vivobook Pro 16X on a single charge.

Our opinion

The Asus Vivobook Pro 16X OLED occupies a wonderful niche in the laptop market. It's boldly said that powerhouses and high-end displays don't have to be reserved for people with deep pockets. There are still elements that set this "midrange" laptop apart from the more expensive options, but none that will slow your workflow or make you regret your purchase.

Are there alternatives?

There are a variety of larger laptops sold to a "content creation" audience. The HP Envy 15 is most similar in price and performance, although it is not as powerful and a bit more expensive.

The 14-inch Acer Swift X is a good alternative. Although smaller, it offers similar performance for almost the same price. Of course, the huge OLED screen is missing.

After all, if you have the money, the XPS 15 or XPS 17 won't let you down – they only cost you an arm and a leg.

How long it will take?

The Vivobook Pro 16X OLED should be a solid laptop for five or six years, although you can't get a warranty for that long. However, the components inside are high-end and should be able to adequately supply workloads, games and applications for many years to come.

Should you buy it?

Yes sir. It's a laptop with high-end components at an amazingly affordable price.

Editor's recommendations



26 Aug
Blog

Acer Swift X Review: Top-notch Performance For Cheap?

The Acer Swift X sits on a desk.

Acer Swift X review: content creation cheap?

RRP $ 1,100.00

"The Acer Swift X is a powerful laptop that many students and creatives appreciate."

advantages

  • Outstanding performance

  • Very good battery life

  • Excellent keyboard and touchpad

  • Solid entry-level gaming

  • Thin and light frame given the strength inside

disadvantage

  • Build quality could be better

  • Display is not sufficient for the target market

Creative professionals need more than anything in a great laptop. First, they need power, and lots of it – preferably both a fast CPU and a fast GPU. Second, they need a display with wide and accurate colors and lots of contrast and brightness. Acer's Swift X is aimed at these developers, though it does offer configurations starting at $ 1,100. Is that possible at this price?

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800U, the RTX 3050 Ti and the 14-inch display of the Acer Swift X certainly seem up to the task. After putting it through its paces, the Swift X is far from a perfect machine – but its fantastic performance and value for money set it apart from its competitors.

draft

The Acer Swift X has an all-aluminum chassis that was a bit flexible in the lid and suffered from a slight flexing of the keyboard. It's nothing monstrous. but Asus, Dell, and HP laptops tend to have stiffer builds. The MSI Prestige 14 Evo, Dell XPS 13, and HP Specter x360 14 are three laptops that feel more solid in the hand. The Swift X's hinge is capable of almost one-handed opening and holds the display firmly in place while you work. If the Swift X were more expensive, I'd have more of a build quality issue. However, we are only just on the edge of the premium class for a well configured machine, so I like to overlook a bit of flexibility.

The Acer Swift X sits on a desk.

Aesthetically, the Swift X is a conservative laptop that only encompasses a few angles, including along the back of the case to make some difference. It's available in three creatively titled colors, Safari Gold (my test device), Steam Blue, and Prodigy Pink. The XPS 13 and Specter x360 13 are more outstanding laptops in terms of looks, with the Dell leaning towards business-like elegance and the HP offering a bold, gem-cut design. But there's plenty of room for a more traditional design that doesn't attract too much attention, and that is the Swift X.

I'll be faulting it for its plastic display bezels that spoil the overall look. They're not particularly small either, with a screen-to-body ratio of 85.73% – to be considered truly modern, that number should exceed 90% and the display should be made entirely of glass. The display's 16: 9 aspect ratio is also old-fashioned, with competing laptops using higher ratios like 16:10 and 3: 2.

Compared to some other 14-inch laptops, the Swift X is a reasonable size. For example, it's a bit wider than the HP Envy 14, while it's thinner due to the HP's tall 16:10 display. The Swift X is 0.70 inches thick compared to the Envy 14's 0.71 inches and weighs 3.06 pounds, while the Envy 14 is slightly heavier at 3.3 pounds. The MSI Prestige 14 Evo is closer in width and depth, while it's thinner at 0.63 inches and lighter at 2.85 pounds. The Specter x360 14 is even narrower, but slightly deeper, with its 13.5-inch 3: 2 display, and it's just 0.67 inches thick and 2.95 pounds. It might not be the thinnest or lightest laptop, but the Swift X is still comfortable enough to carry around – especially considering how much power you're packing in.

The Swift X offers ample connectivity with a proprietary power connector, a USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 port, a full-size HDMI 1.0 port, and a USB-A 3.2 Gen 1 port on the left to connect to another USB A 3.2. go to Gen 1 port and 3.5mm audio adapter on the right. Unfortunately there is no SD card reader or, given the AMD chipset, Thunderbolt support. Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.2 offer wireless connectivity.

power

As mentioned earlier, the Ryzen 7 5800U is a fast, thin, and light laptop processor that by far beats the Intel equivalent for CPU-intensive tasks. If we just compare the processors, we should expect AMD's offering to be much faster for things like encoding videos and processing large images. Throw in a separate GPU, even the entry-level Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 Ti, and you get additional support for applications that can use the GPU to speed up certain tasks, such as: B. Adobe's suite of creative applications. The Acer therefore promises to be a powerhouse in a thin and light package.

You probably won't find a faster, thin, and light laptop in this price range.

According to our benchmarks, Acer did just that – for the most part. In our Handbrake test, which encodes a 420MB video in H.265, the Swift X led our comparison group, including several other laptops with Ryzen chips. It even (barely) beat the Asus ROG Flow X13 with the faster Ryzen 9 5900HS processor. In fact, the Swift X is one of the fastest laptops we tested in Handbrake, and even outperforms some machines with Intel 45-watt CPUs. The Swift X also did exceptionally well in the Cinebench R23 benchmark and even took the lead by a clear margin with the Ryzen 9 in the mix. Both benchmark results show that the Swift X delivers when you have to perform tedious tasks like encoding video that are CPU draining.

The Swift X wasn't that dominant in Geekbench 5, but I'd like to note here that Acer includes a utility to change performance modes. The utility didn't make much of a difference when I switched to performance mode in most tests, and the results in the table reflect standard mode. However, Geekbench 5 was a test where the performance mode made a difference – the Swift X scored 1,406 single-core and 8,030 multi-core in that mode, taking first place in the multi-core test. The Swift X also took first place in the PCMark 10 Complete Score (the performance mode made hardly any difference here) and did well in the Essentials, Productivity and Content Creation scores.

Acer Swift X sits on a desk.

I also ran the PugetBench benchmark, which uses Adobe Premiere Pro to perform various viewing and encoding tasks. The benchmark shows the effect of a discrete GPU, as the Swift X scores 333 points in the benchmark. Interestingly, this is not as high as I expected and ended up behind the HP Envy 14, for example, which uses an Intel Core i5-1135G7 and an Nvidia GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and scored 432 points. The Samsung Galaxy Book Pro 360 with an Intel Core i7-1165G7 and integrated Iris-Xe graphics scored 241 points, while the Asus ZenBook 13 OLED with a Ryzen 7 5800U and integrated Radeon graphics scored 180 points. These results show that Intel has built in some optimizations that give its chips a better result here in the benchmark. The benchmark is broken down into several sections including Export, Playback, and GPU, and the Intel machines did worse on Export and GPU, but much better on playback, which likely bloated their results.

Despite the confusing PugetBench results, the Swift X is a great machine for anyone who needs a lot of CPU power and a GPU that can speed up intensive tasks. It's also extremely fast as a productivity laptop and tears up everything I threw on it during the review process. You are unlikely to find another thin and light laptop that is faster in this price range.

Geekbench (single / multiple) Handbrake
(Seconds)		 Cinebench R23 (single / multiple) PCMark 10 3DMark time spy
Acer Swift X (Ryzen7 5800U) 1287/6663 99 1437/10135 6247 4073
HP Pavilion Aero 13
(Ryzen7 5800U)		 1373/6430 112 1381/8304 5756 1212
Asus ZenBook 13 OLED
(Ryzen7 5800U)		 1423/6758 124 1171/7824 6034 1342
Asus ROG Flow X13
(Ryzen9 5900HS)		 1415/7592 102 1420/9701 5756 4503
Dell XPS 13 (Core i7-1185G7) 1549/5431 204 1399/4585 n / A 1380
HP Specter x360 14 (Core i7-1165G7) 1214/4117 236 1389/3941 4728 1457
Razer Book 13 (Core i7-1165G7) 1548/5374 210 1508/4519 4878 1776
MacBook Pro 13 (M1) 1707/7337 n / A 1487/7547 n / A n / A

Gaming was good for a laptop that wasn't specifically designed for gaming, with the Swift X doing well in the 3DMark Time Spy test (but behind the game-centric Asus ROG Flow X13). It reached 116 frames per second (fps) in Civilization VI at 1080p and medium graphics and 66 fps with ultra graphics switched on. That's actually a few fps faster than the ROG Flow X13, which surprised me. In Fortnite, the Swift X achieved 64 fps at 1080p and high graphics performance compared to the ROG Flow X13 at 67 fps and 43 fps with epic graphics compared to 47 fps with the ROG. The Swift X is a good entry-level gaming device that can handle modern titles with the right resolutions and graphical details.

advertisement

Close up on the Acer Swift X screen.

From a performance perspective, the Swift X is designed for creative professionals. As we've seen, it has the speed that a very portable workstation can handle for editing videos and photos on the go. However, an important part of that equation is the display – does it offer wide and accurate colors, lots of brightness, and high contrast for creative work? In short, the answer is unfortunately no for the 14-inch IPS Full HD display (1,920 x 1,080) of the Swift X in 16: 9 format. The subjective viewing experience during my tests was a mixed picture, with colors that seemed accurate and pleasant, and with just enough brightness to accommodate the lighting in my house. Blacks on white backgrounds didn't show up, however, which made copy-writing a less pleasant experience than I'd like.

So I turned to my familiar colorimeter for a more objective perspective. The results didn't surprise me at all. Initially, the color width was 72% of AdobeRGB and 96% of sRGB, which is the average of premium laptops, but falls far short of the displays required for creative work. Color accuracy was good with a DeltaE of 1.63 (1.0 or less is considered excellent), so that's a plus.

The brightness was a bit low at 283 nits, below our 300-nit threshold, and the contrast was 730: 1, well below our preferred 1,000: 1 ratio for premium laptops. On another recently tested 14-inch laptop, the Lenovo ThinkPad Carbon X1 Gen 9 (certainly a more expensive device), we see similar colors at 76% AdobeRGB and 96% sRGB, better color accuracy at 0.99, and higher brightness at 306 nits. The contrast of the ThinkPad was still below our threshold at 970: 1, which you could see from the black text. The Dell XPS 13 Full HD + display achieved 75% AdobeRGB and 98% sRGB with a color accuracy of 1,21,458 nits of brightness and a contrast ratio of 1,350: 1.

That's a lot of numbers, but the conclusion is simple. The Swift X allows creatives to get their work done on the go at some speed, but they don't want to use the laptop for final production. Productivity workers will be more satisfied with the display, but even then the low contrast ratio will be disappointing and the old school 16: 9 contrast ratio cannot be compared to today's higher panels. It's a shame that Acer doesn't offer a higher quality display with wider colors and better contrast for the Swift X. That would really make the laptop a highly portable creative production machine.

In terms of audio technology, the two downward-facing speakers weren't exactly great. The maximum volume was on the low side, enough for system sounds and a YouTube video, but not nearly enough for music or Netflix bingeing. The mids and highs were clear, but there was no bass (not surprising for a laptop) and there was no distortion when turned all the way up. You need headphones or a bluetooth speaker.

Keyboard and touchpad

The Acer Swift-X keyboard.

The Swift X has a keyboard with nice-sized silver keycaps and full-size spacing. The key switches are light and clicky, with a comfortable floor motion that provides a precise feel. I still prefer the HP Specter keyboard, which offers a touch more feedback, but the Swift X keyboard comes with the best that Windows 10 has to offer. It's backlit, of course, but I found that the light shining through the gay letters was distorted and difficult to read. However, this is a minor matter. Most touch typists will love this keyboard.

The touchpad takes up most of the available palm rest space, but the top of the keyboard deck is pushed back by an extension that houses the hinge and rear ventilation. That means the touchpad is a bit smaller than it could be. However, it has a comfortable interface and Microsoft Precision touchpad drivers, so using Windows 10 multi-touch gestures is efficient and precise. There is no touch display option, which is disappointing.

A fingerprint reader in the upper right corner of the palm rest offers Windows 10 Hello password-free support. It worked quickly and responsively during my tests, which has become the norm with modern laptops.

Battery life

Acer packed 59 watt hours of battery into the Swift X, a decent – but not great – amount for a 14-inch laptop with such powerful components. The Full HD display would help, I expected, but I wasn't expecting great battery life.

I was surprised. In our web browser test, the Swift X lasted for almost 12 hours, which is a strong score. The MSI Prestige 14 Evo achieved a little more than seven hours in this test, while the HP Envy 14 was better than both with just over 12.5 hours. In our video test, which repeats a local Full HD Avengers trailer, the Swift X reached 12.75 hours, well below the 16.3 hours of the Prestige 14 Evo and 14.5 hours of the HP Envy. I've noticed that Ryzen laptops don't have the same increase from the web browsing test to the video test, which shows that Intel machines are more efficient at playing videos.

In the battery benchmark PCMark 10 Applications, the best indicator for the longevity of productivity, the Swift X does well with just over 12 hours. The Prestige 14 Evo did not quite manage 10.5 hours in this test, while the HP Envy 14 would not complete the benchmark. In the PCMark 10 gaming battery test, the Swift X shut down after just under 1.5 hours, which is the lowest result we have ever seen. The Prestige 14 Evo lasted just 10 minutes longer, while the HP Envy 14 is the other laptop to score the Swift X's. This test seems to show how much a laptop is throttled on battery power, which means that the Swift X works hard when turned off and therefore burns its battery up pretty quickly.

Overall, these results suggest that the Swift X will last you a full day of work with a few hours to spare. If you drive the CPU and GPU hard enough, you will get a lot less battery life, but that's to be expected. If you encode video on the go, take your power adapter with you.

Our opinion

The Acer Swift X does what it promises to pack a lot of power into a thin and light frame. It's one of the fastest 14-inch laptops we've tested, and it's a great choice for creative professionals who need power on the go. Battery life was also a strength, which makes this notebook a great productivity laptop for on the go.

The biggest downside to the Swift X is the display. Getting rid of it entirely by creative professionals isn't bad enough, but they should have a better external display in the office to complete their work. Acer would have been smart about offering a higher quality display for those who want it the most.

Are there alternatives?

There aren't many laptops that combine a fast Ryzen CPU with a discrete GPU. One that has recently become available is the Asus ROG Flow 13, which is a smaller machine but almost as fast. Aside from the Asus' gaming aesthetic, it's a great alternative for anyone who needs portable performance.

The HP Envy 14 is an option for someone who can live with an Intel Core CPU to work with separate graphics, and it has performed well in Adobe applications. It also suffers from a smaller display, but offers good performance and better build quality.

How long it will take?

The Swift X is so well built you can expect it to hold up on high-performance computing for years. The components are modern and should keep up with the times, demanding users should get their money's worth. As always, the industry standard one-year warranty is disappointing.

Should you buy it?

Yes, for performance and battery life. Just make sure you can live with the display before pulling out your credit card.

Editor's recommendations



24 Mar
Blog

OnePlus 9 Review: Ultimate Performance And a Middling Camera

oneplus 9 review 5

"It's disappointing with a bland design and a camera that just can't compete with other devices in the same price range."

  • Excellent performance

  • Smooth software

  • Stunning display

  • Boring design

  • Camera still needs work

  • Rising prices

A lot has changed in the smartphone industry over the past year. While OnePlus was once the go-to place for those who wanted a flagship experience a few hundred dollars less than the competition, others got it. The Samsung Galaxy S20 FE, for example, took the best things about the Galaxy S20 but sold them for just $ 700. Then came the Samsung Galaxy S21, which starts at $ 800, $ 200 less than its predecessor. Google's Pixel 5 is only $ 700, the iPhone 12 a palatable $ 800.

In other words, the price alone makes the OnePlus 9 not a flagship killer. The price is on the lower end of the flagship range and as such it has to compete on its merits.

I'm not trying to imply that it's not competing. With features like the latest and greatest processor, a beautiful screen, and a great software experience, the OnePlus 9 brings a lot to the table. Not to mention that there is also a OnePlus 9 Pro that we tested separately. He takes the OnePlus 9 and expands its features to 11. But let's get into that the OnePlus 9.

If you are interested in the OnePlus 9 Pro, which is more expensive but also technically a bit more powerful, read our in-depth review.

Design and display

The OnePlus 8T represented a number of changes for the company, but the OnePlus 9 is a lot more iterative. It's not the same as the 8T – but you'll be forgiven for thinking it. It has the flat screen of the OnePlus 8T and a rectangular camera module on the top left on the back. Both differ from the OnePlus 8 a year ago.

It's not a bad look, but it's a boring look. It looks like a Samsung Galaxy S20 – which is fine, but not that exciting in a world where Samsung has made a number of design improvements to the Galaxy S21 that help make it both unique and incredibly elegant looks like.

The OnePlus 9 has a glass back, but it feels a little cheap to me, and I thought it was plastic at first, although maybe that's because of its light weight. It is also easy to fingerprint and, as such, quickly loses its glossy appearance. To be honest, I prefer the look and feel of the Galaxy S21's plastic, which can be seen as frosted glass at a glance.

However, there are aspects of the OnePlus 9 design that I love. The most important among these is the physical ringtone switch. Yes, it's a small feature, but I wish more Android phone manufacturers would adopt it. I wish it had been swapped for the left-mounted volume rocker, as you'll likely use the power button more than the ringtone button, but that's a minor complaint and you will get used to the layout easily.

However, there are aspects of the OnePlus 9 design that I love. The most important among these is the physical ringtone switch.

Another thing I love about the OnePlus 9 is the display. It's a 6.55-inch AMOLED display with a refresh rate of 120 Hz and it looks great. Thanks to the high refresh rate and modern processor, the phone looks and feels incredibly responsive. So much so that you don't really notice that the display has a resolution of 1,080p rather than the 1,440p of the OnePlus 9 Pro. You can tell a little difference between the phones when placed next to each other. However, the OnePlus 9 proves that a high refresh rate is more important than high resolution for good reason. Samsung has found that out too.

The display also gets nice and bright and is easily visible outdoors. According to OnePlus, the display brightness is 1,100 nits, which is slightly less than the 1,300 nits of the OnePlus 9 Pro. Still, it's very bright and I never really wished it would get lighter.

Unfortunately, the device doesn't have the 1 Hz to 120 Hz variable refresh rate that is available on the OnePlus 9 Pro, but it does go from 60 Hz to 120 Hz, which is still great and helps reduce battery consumption a bit.

There is a fingerprint sensor under the display that works great. The sensor is fast and accurate and makes it easy to access your phone. The display is a bit low, which makes it a bit awkward to bend your thumb to reach – but you will get used to the placement.

Power, battery and charging

OnePlus phones were never really about their looks. It was about features for the price – and that includes the technical data under the hood. As you'd expect from a flagship phone in 2021, the OnePlus 9 has a Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 processor that is paired with 8GB or 12GB of RAM and either 128GB or 256GB of storage, depending on the model. I'm reviewing the model with 12GB of RAM

Thanks to the combination of high-end processor, high refresh rate and relatively light software, the OnePlus 9 works like a dream. In mobile gaming, it loaded quickly and rarely skipped a frame. During the heavy multitasking, the device responded quickly and quickly. If you are looking for a high performer, the OnePlus 9 is for you.

The battery life of the OnePlus 9 is okay. It has a 4,500 mAh battery that can keep you working a full day, and possibly a few hours until the next day if you miss a charge overnight. It's not a sucker, but it's not a multi-day phone.

However, it doesn't have to be a multi-day phone. OnePlus' Warp Charge technology is getting better and better and can now charge the OnePlus 9 from 0 to 100% in around 30 minutes. In other words, if you toss it on the charger during a morning shower, it should get most of its battery life back. This is pretty amazing and removes the fear of other phones battery life. Of course, the OnePlus Warp charger must be used, but you get one that came with the phone. Additional stones will be Reset $ 65 each.

For the first time, the base model of a OnePlus phone also supports wireless charging, which was previously limited to the “Pro” models. The OnePlus 9 supports up to 50 watts of wireless charging. However, to take full advantage of this, you'll need to purchase OnePlus' new Warp Charge 50 wireless charger for a whopping $ 70. Fortunately, you can still use standard Qi chargers even though they charge more slowly.

Camera quality

If you look at the back of the OnePlus 9, you'll see the name of another brand: Hasselblad. The two decided on the color matching of the OnePlus 9 camera. There is a difference between the color matching on the OnePlus 9 and the previous generation OnePlus 8, but the OnePlus 9 also has new hardware that makes it a little difficult to tell the differences.

The OnePlus 9 has a triple camera system with a 48-megapixel main camera, a 50-megapixel ultrawide camera, and a 2-megapixel monochrome camera that is used for depth and level of detail. It's really unfortunate that there isn't a telephoto camera here, especially when you consider that the Galaxy S21 manages to fit one into its setup (although it is referred to as a "telephoto") for a similar price.

Ultimately, pictures taken with the OnePlus 9 aren't bad. They are not quite as colorful as those of a Galaxy S21, for example, and they also do not have as many details. Additionally, the camera isn't as consistent – sometimes it takes better photos than sometimes, despite being in a very similar situation. Still, they're not bad.

Unfortunately, at $ 730, not bad is still not good enough. In a world with the Galaxy S21, Pixel 5 and iPhone 12, the OnePlus 9 is still inadequate. But it seems like it will make things better – a software update during this verification process improved the camera quality quite a bit. Hopefully this trend will continue, although you should never buy a phone in the hopes that it will improve in the future.

The front-facing camera is 16 megapixels and is pretty good again – but by no means revolutionary. Photos taken with it appear to have decent contrast. They're not necessarily that detailed, but they do the job for an average selfie.

Unfortunately, at $ 730, not bad is still not good enough.

There are some things that I really appreciate about the OnePlus 9's camera. OnePlus has worked hard to take better photos in low light, and while the phone doesn't compete with any other device, it is leaps and bounds better than the OnePlus 8. Plus, the OnePlus 9 lets you take macro photos with the ultrawide camera like the Galaxy S21. This is a handy feature, and it means OnePlus can avoid shipping the inferior macro camera that other companies (including OnePlus previously) were fond of.

Software experience

If there's one thing that OnePlus has pinned down it's software. The phone comes with OnePlus OxygenOS 11 which is based on Android 11.

OxygenOS has moved further and further away from standard Android in general, but still offers a stripped-down experience that is smooth and easy to navigate. I like most of the improvements OnePlus has made to the software, such as the more consistent look and feel of the Settings app and the Quick Settings menu. Dark mode now looks and works great in both the core software and the OnePlus apps.

OxygenOS finally offers a solid always-on display. This feature was introduced on OxygenOS 11 and was available on OnePlus 8T. It provides an overview of information such as battery life, time and weather. It's similar to everyone else's permanent display, but it's still convenient that it is there in the first place.

OxygenOS also comes with a number of additional features. In particular, you get the App Locker, with which you need authentication to access certain apps. You also get parallel apps that allow you to install two instances of an app to log into two different accounts. This is great for apps that don't already let you sign in to multiple accounts. On OnePlus phones, you can still access the OnePlus shelf, which has quick information like the weather, deep links to some apps, the number of steps you took, and a lot more. For first-time OnePlus users, it may take a while to get used to using Shelf. However, if you do, it can be quite useful.

Our opinion

The OnePlus 9 is a strange version. It's a good phone. With top-notch performance, a fantastic display, and a great software experience, there is definitely a niche for it. But it's disappointing with a bland design and a camera that just can't compete with other devices in the same price range.

It really is a shame, especially given the software experience. You'll have a hard time finding another phone at a price that's as fast and as clean in terms of software as the OnePlus 9. This is in stark contrast to the Galaxy S21, which is fast but is cumbersome and more expensive bloated software.

At $ 730, the OnePlus 9 It's just not enough to have a full experience that is in line with the price. Hence, I recommend many users look elsewhere for this amount of money.

Is there a better alternative?

Yes. Chief among these alternatives is the Samsung Galaxy S21which has similar performance and display quality, looks much better, and has a much better camera. If you want an Android phone in the $ 700- $ 800 range, this is the place to go. On the clean and simple side, but with a smaller display and specs, you can buy the Google Pixel 5 for similar money. Alternatively, you can get the last generation Samsung Galaxy S20 FE, which isn't quite as powerful but still has a great display and probably a better camera than the OnePlus 9. It costs only $ 600.

Of course, there's another phone in this price range that's worth considering: The iPhone 12. It offers some of the best performance you can get from a smartphone, and it will probably work just as well in three years as we are used to from OnePlus phones. It offers a clean software experience in iOS and has an excellent camera. The only real downside is the display, which looks nice but doesn't have a high refresh rate like the OnePlus 9 and Galaxy S21. And switching ecosystems can be a deal breaker for some people.

Last but not least is the OnePlus 9 Pro. If you really like the OnePlus style, you can pay $ 970 for a higher resolution display and telephoto camera. You still get the same processing power and software experience. It is up to you to decide for yourself whether these things are worth the extra money.

How long it will take

The OnePlus 9 works just as well as any other flagship of 2021, so it should last at least three years before it really slows down. It's made of glass, so you should probably put it in a case to protect it from drops and bumps.

Should you buy one?

No. The OnePlus 9 is not enough to justify its price. Instead, you should get a Samsung Galaxy S21, S20 FE, iPhone 12, or Pixel 5.

Editor's recommendations




18 Feb
Blog

MSI GS66 Stealth (2021) Review: 1440p Performance, Tested

msi gs66 stealth 1440p review 09

MSI GS66 Stealth (2021) Review: Peak 1440p Gaming

"The MSI GS66 Stealth brings faster, sharper 1440p gaming to laptops."

  • Incredible gaming performance

  • 1440p 240Hz gaming is an achievement

  • Solid design and build quality

  • Good choice of ports

  • Solid battery life

  • Runs hot

  • Dull keyboard and touchpad

Switching from 1080p to 1440p is not an easy task. Playing games at higher resolutions without sacrificing frame rates requires a massive increase in graphical performance. This is exactly what the new mobile Nvidia RTX 3080 GPU is designed for.

The MSI GS66 Stealth is one of the first gaming laptops to support not only these new graphics, but also a 1440p 240Hz display. Lightning fast updates and high resolutions? Sign me up.

This is a sneak peek as the updated GS66 Stealth has not yet been launched in North America. But even without a confirmed price, my time with the updated GS66 Stealth got me excited for the potential of 1440p gaming laptops.

display

Internally, the display is the biggest change to the MSI GS66 Stealth this year. There is now the option for an IPS screen with a resolution of 2560 x 1440, measured diagonally at 15.6 inches. While 1440p screens are still a rarity on laptops, this is even more true of gaming laptops. The main reason, of course, is that the older GPUs were never capable of moving as many pixels around at frame rates fast enough to please gamers. A refresh rate above 60 Hz would never have made sense.

The MSI GS66 Stealth handles 1440p excellently in most games. 240 Hz is a bit over the top, but much more versatile than the 300 Hz 1080p models.

Since this is a new panel, I also wanted to test the image quality and make sure MSI wasn't cutting corners. There have been some surprises to say the least.

The color saturation is the real shock. With 100% sRGB and 98% AdobeRGB, this panel is significantly more colorful than your average 1080p gaming screen. Without the poor color accuracy, this would be a good photo and video editing machine. However, with a Delta E of 6.67, it is better calibrated for bold and bright colors in games than for precise color corrections.

I wish it was a little brighter which would help with the contrast as well. With 291 nits of brightness and a contrast ratio of 870: 1, it is a bit behind competitors like the Razer Blade.

Game performance

A faster screen is great, but without components to use it, it's useless. The GS66 Stealth has the Intel Core i7-10875H processor and the Nvidia RTX 3080 as well as 32 GB RAM and a 512 GB SSD. How does this deal with the promise of 1440p games? Let's just say there wasn't a title in our series of test games that I preferred to play in 1080p.

I saw some great results testing the game in the 3DMark Time Spy benchmark. The system achieved 9,907 points, which is a solid 18% ahead of the previous year's model with the RTX 2080 Super. This goes far beyond a normal increase in performance compared to the previous year. It was also only 8% behind the desktop version of the RTX 2070 Super that I tested in 2020. This is because the mobile RTX 3080 is technically the same GPU as the desktop RTX 3070.

At 1440p, it even beats the desktop RTX 2070 Super in some games.

I tested the game Battlefield V Next up, the GS66 Stealth impressed again, especially at higher resolutions. In this game, last year's model has already surpassed the Razer Blade. Now an average of 94 frames per second (fps) is displayed with 1440p Ultra settings or 126 fps with Medium. At 1440p, it even outperforms the desktop RTX 2070 Super – and keep in mind that this is a 215-watt desktop graphics card that costs $ 500 alone. This comparison did not apply to all games, especially CPU-bound games like Civilization VI. But Battlefield V was a notable high point for the GS66 Stealth.

The advantage in Fortnite wasn't that big, at least not compared to the desktop RTX 2070 Super. But take that comparison out of the equation for a moment and enjoy the glory of 1440p games at well over 60 fps. The MSI GS66 Stealth achieved an average of 81 fps in Epic settings and 115 fps in high with 100% 3D rendering. If you lower the resolution to 1080p, you get an additional 30 to 60 fps. Regardless, you never have to settle for less than 60 fps.

That was true of all of the games I tested, with the exception of Assassin's Creed Valhalla. With the in-game benchmark, Valhalla reached a top speed of 55 fps in Epic 1440p. The gameplay still looked smooth, but it barely fell below the 60 fps threshold. But in a game more known for immersive worlds and storytelling, I still preferred to prefer the sharper experience of playing in 1440p.

During long gaming sessions, surface temperatures remain manageable, resulting in a more comfortable gaming experience than on laptops like the Razer Blade. In contrast to this laptop, the MSI GS66 Stealth keeps the palm rests and keyboard cool even under less load. On the other hand, like the Zephyrus G14, the MSI GS66 Stealth always runs with a slight hum.

Ray tracing performance

Much has been said about the ray tracing capabilities of this new RTX 3080 graphic, but the performance loss is still too high in the two games I tried. Fortnite has a number of robust ray tracing features, including global lighting and shadows, each with different levels of detail. Unfortunately, despite the low setting, the game struggled to get smooth frame rates.

Heavy ray tracing effects aren't ready for prime time on gaming laptops just yet.

Of course, I also tried ray tracing along with DLSS, Nvidia's upscaling feature, to improve frame rates. DLSS helps a lot, even though I couldn't achieve the average frame rate over 60 fps even in performance mode. That was tested at 1080p Epic settings. In 1440p the situation is even worse.

I also wanted to try some ray tracing that was a little more subtle. Battlefield V was one of the first games to announce support for ray tracing and DLSS, and the effect isn't nearly as pronounced as it is in Fortnite. The MSI GS66 Stealth did a bit better here, but reaching 60 fps at 1080p Ultra was still unattainable without resorting to lower graphics settings. Story-driven or exploration games like Cyberpunk 2077 or Minecraft are slightly better suited for this performance compromise, but even there, strong ray-traced effects on gaming laptops aren't ready for prime time.

Creative achievement

The MSI GS66 Stealth uses a thoroughly boring, but satisfactory 10th generation Intel processor. The Core i7-10870H has eight cores and 16 threads with a boost clock rate of 5.0 GHz. Of course, the chip usually runs closer to its base clock of 2.2 GHz, except for burst workloads. As a gaming processor, it's more than capable and happy to leave the heavy lifting to Nvidia. However, this is a slightly slower processor than the Core i7-10875H used in the previous GS66 Stealth I tested in 2020.

Despite the high clock rates, the system doesn't look good in single-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23, almost all 25-watt Tiger Lake processors beat the GS66 Stealth and show how inefficient the old 14 nm processors from Intel are in comparison. This discrepancy was even shown in PCMark 10's Essentials test, which rates simple tasks such as surfing the Internet, video conferencing and word processing. Even these smaller and more efficient laptops – like the Razer Book 13 or the HP Specter x360 14 – outperform it.

The GS66 Stealth makes up for it in multi-core tests, scoring 6,133 in Cinebench R23 and 6,140 in Geekbench 5. You can thank the eight cores for that. The additional cores also mean this laptop does well on multithreaded tasks like content creation. The CPU-only video encoding performance in Handbrake is good, but does not get any advantage over previous iterations of the laptop. Laptops like the Dell XPS 17 or Ryzen-based system are even faster in this test.

If you really want to edit or stream video on the MSI GS66 Stealth, the performance of the RTX 3080 can save the day. The 7,949 points are a great score on the PCMark 10 Creation test, a big step up from what was possible with older gaming laptops.

Like many of its competitors, the GS66 Stealth is running hot.

Like many of its competitors, the GS66 Stealth is running hot. It's not uncommon for 97 degrees Celsius to be reached on cranking, resulting in an inevitable thermal throttling. If you want to avoid this problem, consider opting for a bulkier chassis with better airflow.

Fortunately, this isn't a huge problem in most games as the processor shares more of the available power with the GPU.

design

The MSI GS66 Stealth was an early adopter of the thin-and-light gaming laptop trend. When the design first hit the market, the 4.6 pound weight and 0.71 inch thickness were revolutionary. In 2021, it's a little more common. The Razer Blade is a bit lighter, as is the Asus ROG Zephyrus G15. There are now new ultra-thin gaming laptops such as the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 or the Acer Predator Triton 300 SE, which are the maximum for the RTX 3060.

The look of the laptop itself doesn't attract too much attention. It's a black aluminum plate with very few flourishes. Even the dragon logo on the lid is only visible when light is reflected from it.

However, MSI has cut a few more vents in the case than in the Razer Blade. There are some on either side of the laptop as well as on the top. That makes for a slightly less elegant appearance, although it certainly helps to keep temperatures lower.

The touchpad and keyboard are some of my least favorite aspects of the laptop. In an attempt to maximize the size of the touchpad, MSI made it significantly wider than normal. I would normally welcome this attempt. But, like in the past, it is unsettling when most of your palms are resting on the touchpad. I have encountered the problem of accidental touchpad clicks more than once.

The keyboard has some usability problems for me too. The layout is abnormal and changes the default positioning of the Fn, Ctrl, Atl, and Windows keys. Fiddling with the keyboard is never fun, and I've done that quite a bit here.

The buttons themselves are fine, but the action is a bit sloppy. The keystrokes lack the precise speed that many modern keyboards have assumed, although this style is still common on gaming laptops.

As for the ports, the MSI GS66 Stealth throws in the sink. These include HDMI 2.0, USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 (Thunderbolt 4), USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 and three USB-A 3.2 Gen 2 ports. The Thunderbolt 4 port can be used for both display input and charging. However, while you're playing, you'll want to take advantage of the full power of the old-school keg plug. The laptop even manages to push in an RJ45 Ethernet socket.

Unfortunately, the bandwidth of HDMI 2.0 is limited to 144 Hz at 1440p. So if you are planning on docking with a gaming monitor, this is something to consider. Currently there are very few monitors and laptops that support HDMI 2.1, which increases this bandwidth significantly.

Battery life

I never go into a gaming laptop review with high expectations for battery life. However, the MSI GS66 Stealth always had the best battery life of any gaming laptop I have ever tested. The introduction of a higher resolution screen made me fear that he might lose that crown.

Instead, the opposite happened. This year's model improved battery life in both tests, despite having the same 99 watt hour battery. With local video playback, the system lasted just under eight hours, which is almost an hour and a half longer than the previous model. That also beats the Razer Blade by half an hour.

For a more realistic workflow, I used a macro to automate light web browsing. In this test, the GS66 Stealth stayed alive for seven hours and 12 minutes, once again overtaking both last year's model and the Razer Blade. That easily makes it the 15-inch gaming laptop with the best battery life.

Laptops without powerful discrete graphics cards naturally have a much better battery life. However, I'm encouraged these high refresh rate 1440p screens don't take an even bigger toll.

Our opinion

There is no doubt that 1440p is the future of laptop gaming. More than ray tracing, higher fidelity makes every game you play look sharper, smoother, and more immersive. The MSI GS66 Stealth is finally a gaming laptop that can run at 1440p at reasonable frame rates. It might not be my favorite gaming laptop design, but the combination of a super fast, high resolution screen and great gaming performance makes it one of the best gaming laptops you can buy.

The price remains the last important piece of information in evaluating this laptop. I will update this review once pricing is confirmed.

Are there alternatives?

Few gaming laptops have announced 1440p models, and only the Razer Blade 15 matches the MSI in refresh rate. The right configuration of the Razer Blade costs $ 2,900. So, you can expect the MSI model to be just a few hundred dollars below if it follows historical pricing patterns.

The Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 combines its 1440p screen with a Ryzen processor and its refresh rate is limited to 165 Hz. Based on the games I tested, 165Hz is very fast when playing in 1440p. This means 1080p gaming is a little more limited, but it's likely fast enough for everyone but the most serious competitive gamers. At $ 2,500, the Zephyrus G15 may be a bit cheaper than the MSI GS66 Stealth.

How long it will take?

As with most laptops, you can expect the MSI GS66 Stealth to last four to five years. The high-end graphics card and the higher-resolution screen are future-proof, as are the Thunderbolt 4 ports. The lack of HDMI 2.1 is the only flaw in this regard.

Should you buy it?

Yes. As one of the few laptops with a 1440p screen and a refresh rate of 240 Hz, it offers one of the best gaming experiences you can get with a laptop.

Editor's recommendations




27 Jan
Blog

Moto G Play (2021) Review: Battery Life, Performance, Camera

motorola moto g play 2021 rating 4

"Motorola makes the best phone under $ 200 – just set your expectations before you buy."

  • Modern design

  • Great battery life

  • Good advertisement

  • Attractively priced

  • Below average camera

  • Limited software support

  • Mediocre performance

The Moto G series is back for 2021 and consists of the Moto G Power, Moto G Stylus and Moto G Play. While most might want to buy the Moto G Power or save up on the Google Pixel 4a for their competitor, the Moto G Play is great value for money and therefore only costs $ 170.

The phone looks great on paper. With a huge 5,000 mAh battery, a relatively modern design, and a lot more, it could be the ideal device for those looking for a decent phone under $ 200. Is it anyway? I've been testing the 2021 Moto G Play for a while to find out.

Design and display

The Moto G Play is an affordable phone. Hence, you shouldn't expect the design to look too expensive. That said, Motorola does a good job of making sure the phone looks modern enough in the age of edge-to-edge displays.

Gone are the holes in the more expensive Moto G models in favor of a small teardrop notch at the top. Honestly, the notch is as intrusive as the hole punch cutout anyway, and you'll soon forget about it after you've used the phone. The device also has a bigger chin than the other Moto G devices, and that might be more noticeable. Neither of these issues are real, but they do contribute to the fact that the device is a little less premium – which it is.

On the back of the device is the camera with two sensors and a back-mounted fingerprint sensor that appeared to be fast and accurate in our tests. In 2021, on phones like the Galaxy S21, the camera shock on this device is quite small and almost flush with the back of the phone, which is a nice touch. It's also centered so it doesn't wobble a lot on a desk.

On the edges of the phone are the standard volume rocker, power button, and USB-C port. You also get a headphone jack, which is especially good to see on phones in this price range.

The Moto G Play's display is a 6.5-inch 720p LCD display and does the job, but that's about it. Colors aren't particularly vivid and obviously don't have a high refresh rate here, but for things like scrolling Twitter and reading email, this is perfectly fine. It also gets quite bright, which is helpful in direct sunlight or brighter environments.

Power and battery

The Moto G Play is equipped with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 processor as well as 3 GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. This is a notable step up from the other Moto G-series devices, which come with 6-series chips and offer at least twice as much storage space. 32GB of storage is a bit weak in 2021, but something is expected from such a cheap phone. Fortunately, there is a microSD card slot so you can expand the storage if you want.

Despite the slightly underloaded processor, the phone works perfectly in daily use. There was little to complain about with basic tasks like emailing, browsing social media, and even multitasking. If you're doing more intense tasks like mobile gaming while playing games like Call of Duty: Mobile, you should expect some serious slowdowns, but despite the slower loading times and jittery menus, the in-game phone has mostly done itself with the occasional skip.

All of the Moto G-Series 2021 devices have good battery life, and the Moto G Play is no exception. The device comes with a powerful 5,000 mAh battery. Thanks to the lower resolution display, it can last two days even with heavy use. If you have a good charging capacity for your device, you won't have to worry about battery life with this phone – and if not, you will have plenty of time to plug it in. You'll have to plug it in but there isn't any wireless charging, though that's no surprise.

Cameras

On the back of the Moto G Play there is a dual camera system with a 13-megapixel main camera with an aperture of 1: 2.0 and a 2MP depth sensor. Despite the fact that great cameras are getting cheaper on smartphones, the Moto G Play doesn't give you the versatility of an ultra-wide or telephoto camera.

Unfortunately, the Moto G Play's camera is mediocre at best. With good lighting, you can take pictures that are … okay. They're not particularly vivid or detailed, but they will get it. However, if you add a bit of complexity to the shot, you don't get much. Low-light photos are either blown, very blurry, or both, and backlit scenes have little to no dynamic range.

If you didn't know you used a $ 170 phone, the Moto G Play's camera will remind you of it – every time.

Software and functions

The 2021 Moto G Play comes with Motorola My UX, which is based on Android 10, and it's a pretty good experience. Motorola is pretty good at providing scaled down software, and you get it on this device. Everything is pretty much where you'd expect it to be, and the user interface is generally easy to navigate.

Motorola has also been pretty good at delivering additional functionality in its software. The phone is equipped with the Moto app, which enables some handy gesture controls – for example, the ability to take a screenshot by touching the screen with three fingers, or turn the phone upside down to “do not disturb”. Other features like Gametime, for example, tweak notification settings while you play. The great thing about these features is that you can enable or disable them depending on which features you actually like. They're all included in the Moto app – instead of being spread across the My UX interface.

Now for the disadvantages (beyond the camera). The phone comes with the dated Android 10. Motorola has stated that it will receive Android 11, but has not yet stated when. Given that Motorola marketing says it will get "at least one software update", Android 11 is likely the end of the line for the 2021 Moto G Play. Fortunately, the device will receive software updates for two years, but it's still very disappointing to see such a lack of software support – which spans all Moto G devices.

Price and availability

Perhaps the best thing about the 2021 Moto G Play is how cheap it is. You can get a whole lot of phone for just $ 170. You can overlook many shortcomings at this price point if you probably won't be holding the phone that long in the first place.

The Moto G Play is available directly from the Motorola website as well as from a few select retailers such as Best Buy. Indeed the device was at the time of this writing Available at Best Buy for just $ 120 When you activate with a carrier, that's an incredible deal.

Our opinion

The Motorola Moto G Play (2021) isn't perfect, and you wouldn't expect it for the price either. The camera is really pretty bad, and while the device's performance is okay for everyday use, it does get slower with heavier multitasking and intense gaming. If you can afford to spend more, this is why you should. You can get it parent Moto G Power for $ 250. And the $ 350 Pixel 4a is more than twice as expensive, but it's also more than twice as good as a phone.

That said, if your budget is no more than $ 200, the 2021 Moto G Play is the way to go. Motorola continues to prove that you can get a solid phone at a super affordable price. As long as your expectations are set correctly.

Is there a better alternative?

No. In this price range, the Moto G Play is the best cell phone under $ 200. However, if you can afford to spend more, you can get the exact same recipe, only better, with this new Moto G Power for $ 250. For a phone that will last longer, perform better, and take better photos along the way, you can access the phone Google Pixel 4a.

How long it will take?

The Moto G Play should be in use for two years given its plastic construction. It's not water-resistant, so you'll need to keep it dry, and you should expect it to get seriously sluggish by the end of those two years.

Should you buy it?

Yes, but only if your budget is no more than $ 200. For $ 250, you get a Moto G Power that performs better in every way.

Editor's recommendations




22 Jan
Blog

Samsung Galaxy S21 Review: Cameras, Battery, and Performance

"The Galaxy S21 makes a wise bet on value with a lower starting price, but feels stuck in 2020. A good phone, but not a particularly exciting one."

  • Smooth and colorful hardware

  • Excellent advertisement

  • Improved fingerprint sensor

  • Lower price translates into great value

  • Plastic back on base S21

  • No 2021 flagship camera experience

  • Galaxy S21 + disappointing value at $ 1,000

When Samsung introduced the Galaxy S21, it took an incredibly rare step in the high-end smartphone space: it cut its prices. The Galaxy S21 series is cheaper across the board for $ 200 than the introductory prices of the Galaxy S20 phones. Given that sales of the Galaxy S20 were significantly lower than the S9 and S10, and that 2021 may not be as economically stable as originally hoped, this seems like the right move.

Samsung isn't taking this move for charity, however – it is cutting the price down hopefully to increase sales and making big bucks on every phone sold regardless of that. The reality of these prices is that the Galaxy S21 and S21 + are not full upgrades from the S20-series phones they've replaced – and that smartphone enthusiasts are scratching their heads.

At first glance, there is no reason for anyone with a Galaxy S20 to consider buying an S21. Samsung knew this for sure, considering the vast majority of people update their phone every two years at the earliest. For this reason. I'm not going to come to terms with how the Galaxy S21 is better than its predecessor – what matters is the assessment of whether the Galaxy S21 can stand on its own as a good phone for the money in 2021.

I have to note that this review focuses on the base Galaxy S21 that I've been using for a week. Much of my experience can also be applied to the Galaxy S21 +, which I've spent less time with but which has the exact same platform and which is simply bigger. Since the Galaxy S21 Ultra has so much going for it that is quite different from the S21 and S21 +, we have a full separate review of this phone.

Hardware, design and display

The design of a modern smartphone is so strongly influenced by the limitations that an incredible number of complex components – processors, a large battery, antennas, speakers and several cameras – fit into one another. This leaves us with phones that look roughly 90% identical on the market. The final 10% includes material choices, camera pod design, color choices, and tiny differences in the details of the surface. The Galaxy S21 looks absolutely different from the Galaxy S20, but honestly if you covered the new rear view camera pod it would look … like an S20 again.

Samsung Galaxy S21 colorsAndrew Martonik / Digital Trends

However, there are still nuances to appreciate here. The shiny metal frame looks and feels great. I like the way the camera pod is integrated into this frame – it's sleek and distinctive. My review unit is particularly impressive in the gold and purple colors, but it's not what I would choose. Thankfully the entire color palette is superb. Interestingly, it's the base S21 that has the widest range of color options, although the S21 + has a nice set of three to choose from.

I wouldn't call the S21 a "compact" phone, but it's refreshingly small compared to the S21 + and S21 Ultra. It's almost identical to the S20 and just a bit bigger than the iPhone 12 and Google Pixel 5. My larger-than-average hands wrap around the S21 with ease, and it's not a burden in my pocket. The story is different with the S21 +: it's a typical modern large phone that's 10mm taller, 4mm wider, and 18% heavier than the S21.

I appreciate the switch from Samsung to a matte back that is finally bringing the shiny (aka greasy and stained) back to rest of the old days. It is controversial that the Galaxy S21 uses a plastic back – yes, on an $ 800 phone. This is the same material we saw on the Galaxy Note 20 and Galaxy S20 FE, and it's an effective cost-cutting measure. From a distance, it looks identical to matte glass, but with a single touch of a button you know it's plastic.

From a practical point of view, I get it. It's cheaper, more damage-resistant than glass, and makes the phone lighter and easier to use. It's an $ 800 phone from a futile point of view, and it's absurd not to get quality materials. Using a case is likely to have the biggest impact on whether this bothers you – I just don't like how this phone feels without a case.

From a distance, it looks identical to matte glass, but with a single touch of a button you know it's plastic.

If the bigger Galaxy S21 + is faster, then this plastic conversation can be ignored – Samsung put Gorilla Glass Victus glass on the back of the larger model. It feels a lot better, which is around the price – and it should be, as the S21 + is $ 1000.

Although the Galaxy S21 has a smaller display than the Galaxy S21 Ultra (and the Note 20 Ultra) on paper, anyone would be incredibly excited to see it every day. Yes, it's "only" 1080p, but it doesn't matter. What is more important is that it is incredibly bright, clear, colorful, and has great angles. Samsung has also added a variable refresh rate that dynamically switches from 48 Hz to 120 Hz to keep everything as smooth as possible – while conserving battery life. Samsung is once again the king of mobile displays.

The new fingerprint sensor in the display is also remarkable. This is the Qualcomm second generation ultrasound machine. It's significantly bigger and faster than before – though that doesn't say much since the Galaxy S and Note phones have had a bad sensor for the past two years. Even so, we're cutting-edge in terms of the responsiveness of the sensors and unlike previous phones, I didn't get mad at tricky false negatives. How refreshing!

Performance, software and battery life

As is usually the case, a month ago Samsung rolled out the software update for Android 11 + One UI 3 on the Galaxy S and Note phones last year. Nothing has changed here, although I have to say this software is great – as long as you like Samsung's approach to Android. I still prefer the Google version on the Pixels, but I feel at home on a UI too.

This is a neutral, good looking interface with lots of nifty animations and subtle color uses. A UI still requires a significant amount of tweaking and tweaking to get set up the way you want – in terms of the multitude of settings, the default settings that need to be changed, and the duplicate apps that need to be managed. The fact that you can tweak so much is great, but it can be overwhelming at first.

Samsung Galaxy S21Andrew Martonik / Digital Trends

The Galaxy S21 uses the latest Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 chipset (or Samsung's internationally comparable Exynos 2100 chipset) and surprisingly offers exceptional performance. While I "only" had 8GB of RAM, I never had a single hiccup while multitasking or gaming, which shouldn't come as a surprise given the processing and graphics power of the 888.

The Galaxy S21 only has average battery life, but the S21 + should be significantly better.

With an unchanged 4000 mAh battery, it's not surprising that the S21 is just average in the battery life division. I did it every day without a charge but didn't leave a ton behind when I went to bed – between 15% and 25%. My usual day with 3 to 4 hours of on-screen viewing and no heavy use like 8K video recording or gaming got me familiar with the battery – but anything heavier, like a day of travel, probably takes an afternoon. above. This new variable refresh rate display and more efficient chipset save some battery, but don't make a big difference.

The Galaxy S21 + should shine here with its 4800 mAh battery. Given that everything else about the phone's functions is identical to the S21 and only a slightly larger display is available for power supply (with exactly the same resolution and refresh rate), I would expect a direct 20% increase in lifespan here. Based on my experience with the S21 Ultra, which has a 5000 mAh battery and a more power-hungry screen, but has a comparatively long battery life, I expect the S21 + to perform well.

Samsung is clearly happy with the charging speed as things haven't improved from the last generation. Although some models briefly flirt with 45W fast charging, the S21 series opted for 25W cable charging. This is paired with 15W wireless charging (assuming you can find a compatible charger) as well as reverse wireless charging for earbuds and smartwatches. So yeah, it's the same as before – that's enough for what we actually need, but it doesn't get things moving either.

Cameras

What Samsung did, or didn't do in this case, with the Galaxy S21 cameras is drawing the ire of smartphone enthusiasts. The camera system is, in simple terms, the same as the Galaxy S20 phones. Samsung claimed the S20's sensors and lenses had been changed so subtly, but there's no doubt that this setup is almost identical to the previous one. This means that a 12-megapixel main, a 12-megapixel ultrawide and a 64-megapixel zoom camera are grouped on the back.

Samsung claims that improvements in the ISP (image signal processor) of the new chipset combined with new processing software make better use of the raw data collected by these sensors. In practice I experienced an intense déjà vu – the Galaxy S21 takes photos more or less exactly like the S20, for better and for worse.

In general, the Galaxy S21 takes impressive photos. You get great colors and clarity from shot to shot, and Samsung's processing changes seem to have subtly reduced the overly warm and blown out HDR footage of the S20 series. These are still very punchy and bright shots as you would expect from a Samsung camera, but people generally seem to appreciate that. In good lighting, the S21 produced the shot I was expecting most of the time – and that goes for all three cameras as long as you don't try to zoom in past 3x. All of Samsung's claims about zoom quality in the S21 series lie in the S21 Ultra.

The S21 only shows its age in difficult lighting conditions. When the lights go out, the zoom camera becomes unusable – the phone quickly switches to a digital zoom on the main camera instead. The ultrawide sticks a little longer, but the quality also degrades in low light. With night mode turned on, you get solid, but not spectacular, main camera footage. S21 shots in low light are characterized by mottled, overprocessed grain and soft lines, with the sky being regularly over-brightened in landscape shots. Often times, the subject of your shot will look good, but the darker parts of the picture will be completely washed out. This is a complete step up from what the Google Pixel 5, iPhone 12, and Galaxy S21 Ultra can do in low light.

Where the S21 shows its age most is in the 10MP front camera. This is just … not a great camera right now. It's fine in daylight. Especially if you turn off the face smoothing beauty mode. And Samsung actually offers you the option of choosing between "normal" and "bright" selfies! The detail is seriously lacking, however – and in low light the camera is only useful for creating watercolor images of a scene.

As much as I get into photography, I don't put more than a toe into videography. Even so, I was happy with the video capabilities of the S21, which were mostly shot at 4K 60 and 4K 30, with the video being fluid, stable, and colorful. I also didn't see focus chase or frames dropped which is always a relief. The S21 can shoot 8K at 24 frames per second (fps), but the viewfinder is severely cropped, which is a bit irritating, and 24 fps just doesn't offer the silky smooth look most people want right now.

Most of the camera experience is solid, but at night you will be reminded that this is not a 2021 level camera.

The biggest criticisms of the S20's camera were poor indoor performance and sometimes uncomfortable processing of people's faces. The S21 still struggles with the former – indoor shots quickly become soft and overworked when the lighting isn't optimal, which isn't surprising given the size of the sensors. Samsung specifically pointed out the face processing in its announcement, but I didn't see any dramatic improvement either – even with beauty modes turned off, the excessive smoothing lacks detail in the faces compared to the Pixel 5 and iPhone 12. Once again, the problem is compounded by bad ones Exacerbated lighting conditions in which the overall camera tends to over-smooth textures.

It feels like I'm tough given the price, but it's reasonable to hold one Galaxy S. to a higher standard.

It feels like I'm overly tough with this camera given the S21's lower starting price, but it's reasonable to keep a phone named "Galaxy S" of a high standard. These cameras are good, but not significantly better than those on last year's S20 phones, and that's tough to work with. If not on the $ 800 Galaxy S21, then absolutely on the $ 1000 Galaxy S21 +.

The top-end S21 Ultra model has significant camera changes, but we'll cover those in the full review of this phone. Stay tuned.

Our opinion

The Galaxy S21 is a good phone, it's just not particularly desirable or exciting. You can argue about the decision to use a plastic back or remove the SD card slot, but even with those two choices, there is nothing wrong with the Galaxy S21. The biggest problem with the S21 is that it doesn't move the needle. It doesn't push things. And that's a first for the Galaxy S line.

The redemption is associated with the price. The Galaxy S21, with its name and predisposed idea of ​​what it should offer, is a really good value at $ 799. Aside from plastic, this is a strong bang for the buck. Samsung doesn't skimp on specs, the display is excellent, and the useful functions related to the experience are all here. The performance, software, and even battery life are all good. At this price point, you can even be forgiving of some of the shortcomings that haven't been addressed with the cameras from last year.

The equation changes a bit with the Galaxy S21 +. Obviously, the bigger screen, longer battery life, and glass back are pluses that justify the price hike to $ 999. At this price point, you just can't forgive the camera quality, and it's reasonable to expect more for your money.

How you view the Galaxy S21 and S21 + depends a lot on your current phone and how price conscious you are. Anyone upgrading from a phone two year old or older will see a lot of value here and will be especially happy with the display and speed of the experience. But smartphone fans, special nerds and avid photographers will be absolutely better off with another phone – maybe Samsung's own Galaxy S21 Ultra.

Are there any better alternatives?

If you look at the base Galaxy S21, Samsung's own Galaxy S20 FE is worth considering. For $ 600, it offers the same core experience. The processor isn't as fast and the camera isn't quite as good, but the everyday experience is basically the same – including the plastic back.

The biggest competitor for the larger S21 + is its direct predecessor, the Galaxy S20 +. Samsung sourced the S20 + from Amazon, Best Buy, and its own store, but assuming you can find new / old inventory, there are likely to be deep discounts. Ultimately, it's very similar to the S21 +, although the newer phone has fresh hardware and a nice, variable refresh rate display. Given that, you might not care if the nearly identical S20 + is available at a discount.

The elephant in the room is natural the iPhone 12This corresponds to the price of the S21 and is directly comparable in size, camera and functions. Very few people compare Androids and iPhones in any given upgrade cycle. So this isn't as big a factor as the nerds would lead you to believe. Choose an operating system (and ecosystem) first, then choose the phone – one of them is a good choice.

How long it will take?

You shouldn't have a problem with the Galaxy S21 for three years. This metal frame is sturdy, the plastic back is unlikely to crack like a glass jar, and water resistance means it is unlikely to get fried in an accident. Samsung is also committing to three years of software updates for its high-end phones.

Should you buy it?

Yes, for most people. If you've come from an older phone and are looking for a flagship phone without spending a lot of money, the S21 is a great choice. If you've got a newer phone or are looking for the best that Samsung has to offer, you'll need to upgrade to the S21 Ultra.

Editor's recommendations




17 Jan
Blog

Apple Mac Mini M1 Review: Mini Footprint, Max Performance

Apple Mac Mini M1 Rating2 04

"The Mac Mini M1 resets expectations of how fast a small, affordable desktop can be."

  • Bubble CPU performance

  • Incredibly fast SSDs

  • Excellent value

  • Compact, robust design

  • MacOS Big Sur is great

  • Below average gaming performance

The Mac Mini has often been viewed as the ugly duckling in Apple's Mac family. Without the sleek sophistication of the iMac or the portable beauty of the MacBook, it is often overlooked, categorized as a "niche", and viewed as a developer and data center only.

But now that it comes with Apple's M1 chip, the last thing you want to do is ignore it. Although it looks like the previous generation Mac Mini from the outside, from the inside it is nothing short of a revolution.

The Mac Mini is far from a serious competitor for your money – assuming you want a desktop computer and you already have all of the peripherals you need. It's still a niche, but it hits hard against the walls of this descriptor and is ready to break out.

design

The Mac Mini is by far the most compact desktop Mac from Apple. With a width of 7.7 inches and a height of 1.4 inches from top to bottom, this device can easily fit on your desk or slide under a monitor. The footprint is the same as the previous Intel Mini-based Mac Mini.

It's also one of Apple's most minimalist devices. Almost the entire surface of the device is covered in matte aluminum with just a large Apple logo on it to break up the evenness. There is no other branding or labeling, just a tiny white light on the front that comes on when the device is turned on. It's a Jony Ive fever dream, perhaps the ultimate expression of Apple's obsessive design mores.

As we are used to from Apple hardware, the build quality is excellent. The whole device is heavy and solid with no bends or bends to be found. It feels like a device that could take a few hits and still smile – not that you want that to happen.

However, there are some differences between the M1 and Intel models. Most obvious is the paintwork: the M1 model is available in silver and the Intel version in darker gray. The Intel Mac Mini is also a bit heavier, weighing 2.9 pounds compared to the M1 Mac Mini's 2.6 pounds.

A more significant difference is on the back. Apple long ago removed USB-A ports on its MacBooks, but its desktop Macs – including the Mac Mini – have caught on. While the Intel Mac Mini has four USB-A ports, the M1 version only has two (both with 5 Gbit / s). This is more of a limitation on the M1 than a plan by Apple to phase out the Mac Mini's USB-A ports, and I wouldn't be surprised if four ports were available again when more powerful Apple silicon chips come out. However, it's worth noting if you still rely on USB-A for your daily chores. An adapter or dongle may be required.

The M1 Mac Mini has an Ethernet jack, two Thunderbolt 3 / USB 4 ports with 40 Gbit / s, an HDMI 2.0 slot and a 3.5 mm headphone jack as well as a power switch and a slot for the power cord. This is all identical to the Intel Mac Mini.

What you don't get is a keyboard, mouse, trackpad, or other peripheral device. You'll need to provide all of these devices yourself, and a monitor to connect the Mac Mini to. If you already have these, the $ 699 starting price is all the more attractive. If you don't then you need to take them into account when purchasing.

performance

This is the first time the Mac Mini has come with an Apple-owned M1 processor. The basic version of the previous model was equipped with an Intel Core i3-8100H with four cores and 3.0 GHz and ran pretty well. Even on paper, the Apple M1 seems like a significant step up: Not only does it have twice the number of CPU cores than the old entry-level Intel Mini-based Mac Mini, but it also includes an eight-core and one GPU 16-core neural engine on the same system on a chip (SoC).

In addition, Apple uses a so-called "Unified Memory Architecture" (UMA), with which the CPU and GPU can draw from a single memory pool, which reduces the overhead for both. All of this jargon means that in theory everything should run a lot faster – something third-party developers have already told us.

We've already seen how well Apple's M1 chip performs in the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air. So we already have an idea of ​​what to expect: this is an incredibly powerful processor. The question, however, is whether the extra space in the Mac Mini compared to these portable laptops can keep the chip cooler and provide it with additional headroom. Does the Mac Mini outperform these devices too?

The answer is yes, and in some cases unequivocally. In GeekBench 5, the Mac Mini scored a single-core score of 1744 and a multi-core score of 7659 ahead of the 1707 and 7337 on the M1 MacBook Pro. These numbers may not mean much to you. Let me put that way: The Mac Mini's single-core score is the highest we've seen in GeekBench 5. The multi-core score is the eighth highest we have measured. This thing flies.

It's the same elsewhere. The SSDs are lightning fast with an average of 2,144.1 Mbit / s write speed and 2,775.1 Mbit / s read speed. In Cinebench R23, the Mac Mini was only beaten by the Falcon NW Talon, which packaged a Ryzen 9 5950X, a machine that will cost you at least $ 4,000. The Mac Mini we tested costs $ 699. This is just a yardstick of course, and this Falcon NW machine is far more capable of doing heavy duty tasks like gaming or video editing. Still, it is amazing value for money.

The starting price of $ 699 for the Mac Mini is an almost absurd feat.

Synthetic benchmarks can only tell you so much, however. How does the Mac Mini work in real life situations? In HandBrake 1.4 (an app optimized for the M1), the Mac Mini encoded a two-minute 4K video in two minutes and 36 seconds – the same length as the M1 MacBook Pro. In Adobe Premiere Pro, the Mini outperformed both the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro in the PugetBench benchmark. The Intel version of the Adobe app is used, which was translated with the Apple wizard for working on the M1.

If the Apple Silicon version of Adobe's video app comes out sometime this year, the performance will get even better. If this is your type of workload, the Mac Mini is going to make a world of difference, especially if you're currently using older Intel-based hardware.

The difference in performance between the MacBook Pro and the Mac Mini isn't that big. It's only 8% faster in Premiere. This should be considered when trying to decide between the two.

The Mac Mini is a workhorse and is great for CPU-intensive workloads. He's ahead of machines that cost twice (or more) as much. Oh, and it did it all without the fans turning. Not even. I had to put my head against the machine to hear something, and even then it was almost silent. Apple wasn't kidding when it said the M1 performed better in a more efficient way than anything Intel had to offer.

In fact, the $ 699 starting price of the Mac Mini feels almost absurd given the performance of the M1 chip. Sure, you don't get a screen, mouse, or keyboard and if you have to buy these the price goes up. However, if you already have a lot of peripherals on your desk, the Mac Mini is the cheapest way to get M1 performance.

Gaming performance

Despite all of this, the Mac Mini is not a slot machine. The M1 may have an integrated 8-core GPU, but it is still smoked by a computer with a discrete graphics card. That's not to say the gaming performance was terrible – it was respectable for a machine this size and price tag – but if you're looking for high frame rates, especially at higher resolutions, you have to look further.

The performance varied depending on the game. In games like Civilization VI that didn't put too much stress on the GPU, performance was acceptable with the right settings. At 1080p and medium quality, the Mac Mini averaged 48 frames per second (fps). At 1440p ultra, however, this value sank to 26 fps.

Gaming is an obvious weakness.

The tactical stealth game Desperados III ran smoothly on high settings, but the more demanding Deus Ex: Mankind Divided only managed 27 fps on 1080p medium. at 1440p ultra it barely cracked 12 fps.

So gaming is an obvious weakness, but I don't think there are many hardcore gamers out there who will buy a Mac Mini as their main device. If all you want to do is make a few easy games you should be fine, but don't expect too much more in this area.

App support

When Apple announced the M1 chip, it was clear that it had learned from the mistakes of its competitors as well as from its own past actions. When Microsoft introduced its own specially designed ARM chip in the Surface Pro X, it was in an app compatibility nightmare that it is still trying to break away from. Apple probably looked at it once and knew it had to be better.

The good news is that Apple has largely achieved this. If you buy a Mac Mini today, your favorite Mac apps will likely work fine, whether or not they are optimized for the M1. Many developers have already released M1-specific versions of their apps (e.g. Microsoft Office), but those who don't benefit from something Apple developed is called Rosetta 2.

This goes back to the last time Apple switched processor platforms and is translating Intel apps to work on the ARM-based M1. It's preinstalled on the Mac Mini and you won't even see it boot up – your Intel apps will just load with no issues. It's an exceptionally smooth process.

With apps optimized for the M1, the performance is likely to be much better than anything translated with Rosetta 2. For example, when I ran our HandBrake benchmark on version 1.0.7 of the app (which was developed for Intel systems), it encoded our 4K test video in 4 minutes and 44 seconds.

With an M1-optimized version of the app, this was possible in almost half the time. If you stick to Apple's own apps for most of your work, the performance is probably even better. Not everyone likes Apple's similar impact on their ecosystem, but hardware and software performance is one area where it really works.

There may be some apps that just don't work for some reason. When I first got the Mac Mini, Google Backup and Sync, which allows me to move work documents between my different devices, refused to load. It didn't end up being too bothersome – I switched to Dropbox, and a few weeks later, Google updated its app to fix the problem – but it's worth keeping in mind that you might have some app compatibility issues.

For the most part, however, I didn't have any problems with it. Google Backup and Sync was the only app I tried that didn't work right away.

Our opinion

The M1 Mac Mini is one of the most affordable desktop PCs money can buy right now. The performance is mind-boggling for a computer this small and affordable, and while it's not a gaming rig, it's nearly perfect for everything else.

Are there alternatives?

Some other companies offer miniature desktop PCs. There is the Intel NUC 10 with processor options from Intel i3 to i7. If you're looking for games, other companies like HP and Asus also have small PCs that might suit your needs.

Note, however, that all alternatives will run Windows. If you've got your heart on a tiny desktop computer running macOS, the Mac Mini is your only option.

How long it will take?

We're at the beginning of the Apple Silicon roadmap, so support for this Mac Mini will last for many years to come. Given the good performance compared to other items in the mount (and compared to devices way above the mount), it will be a long time before you notice that it is slowing down.

Apple doesn't update the Mac Mini as often as its MacBooks, but only one Apple Silicon Mac Mini model is currently available. So, Apple may bring out another option this year. That doesn't mean you will be disappointed if you buy this M1 Mac Mini, just that an even better model may be in the works.

Should you buy it?

Yes absolutely. The price-performance ratio is breathtaking. If you are looking for a desktop rather than a laptop in the market, the Mac Mini should be at the top of your list.

Editor's recommendations




22 Oct
Blog

TicWatch 3 Pro Review: Fast Performance, Long Battery Life

mobvoi ticwatch 3 pro review star face bag

"The latest Qualcomm processor and a clever second display system give the TicWatch 3 Pro good performance and long battery life, which fixes two common problems with the Wear operating system."

  • Three days of battery life

  • Latest Snapdragon Wear 4100 processor

  • Fast performance

  • The screen that is always on is now backlit

  • Wear OS is still frustrating

  • No color or strap selection

The most exciting thing about the Mobvoi TicWatch 3 Pro is what's inside. It is the first smartwatch available with Qualcomm's Snapdragon Wear 4100 processor. Many hope to be the savior of Wear OS with its higher performance and efficiency, and an incredible battery for serious endurance.

Yes, the Snapdragon Wear 4100 is a massive improvement over the geriatric Snapdragon Wear 3100 and really makes Wear OS more user-friendly than ever. However, it's not the magic bullet that helps kill the Apple Watch or the Samsung Galaxy Watch 3.

design

Mobvoi seems to have an aversion to changing the design of the Pro series. The TicWatch 3 Pro is a significant improvement over the first TicWatch Pro, but it's a shame that the knurled bezel and buttons from the Pro 4G / LTE model haven't been carried over. However, it's leaner and certainly not ugly. It's just a little bland with the single black color scheme. I'll be wearing this every day and the best wearables are an extension of your other fashion choices so I really would want more of a choice.

Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

The watch is relatively compact with a 47mm case that weighs 41.9 grams, but there is no question that it is a male form. I cannot see the watch for women or those with smaller wrists. The case and caseback are made of plastic and don't feel particularly expensive, while the bezel is made of stainless steel and the strap is made of silicone with an orange tinge. It's soft and comfortable, and it hasn't got sweaty either.

Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

There are two buttons on the housing, the upper one opening the menu and the lower one being assigned to the TicExercise app immediately. However, it can be changed in the app of your choice. The top button on my test watch is very stiff and has not come loose over time, making it awkward and uncomfortable to press. The bottom button is far better, which makes me a little concerned about the overall build quality. Nevertheless, the watch was otherwise reliable.

screen

The design is a bit damp, but the screens are masterpieces. That's right, screens. The TicWatch Pro 3 has a bright and colorful 1.4-inch AMOLED screen with a resolution of 454 x 454 pixels for Wear OS and a second FSTN LCD screen that acts as the permanent screen of the watch. You'd never know there are two screens, it doesn't add any extra size or weight, but it does reduce power consumption and is much more readable in different lighting conditions.

Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

It's the defining feature of the TicWatch Pro series, and Mobvoi redesigned the screen layout for the TicWatch 3 Pro to make it more consistent. Backlighting has also been added to ensure clarity in low light conditions. It makes a big difference.

Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

The FTSN LCD shows the time, date, battery level and step count and is all you need from a screen that is always on. I can see it in daylight and in the dark and it doesn't seem to be affecting battery life at all.

battery

Amazingly, the TicWatch Pro 3's 595 mAh battery lasts three days before it needs to be charged. At first I didn't quite believe this and took special care to check the settings, monitor usage, and count the days it worked on my wrist. Not only did I get three days of life from it repeatedly, including an hour of exercise tracking on two of them, but with less use it was still on the fourth day. The battery life of many other Wear OS smartwatches rarely whistles beyond a full day. So having three days is something to celebrate.

Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

This is hardly known in earlier TicWatch Pro models and the Casio Pro Trek WSD-F30, which also uses the hardware approach for the second screen to ensure an always active view. It's sad that we don't see the dual-screen hardware setup for more smartwatches as it's clearly effective. The Snapdragon 4100 also plays a big role. Qualcomm claims to have reduced electricity consumption by 25%. Both Mobvoi and Qualcomm have really teamed up and improved the smartwatch's battery life significantly.

Qualcomm and Mobvoi really came together and significantly improved battery life.

If you want even more, there's Essential Mode, which turns off the OLED screen and leans on the LCD for the time, but continues to count steps and monitor sleep. Mobvoi claims this offers an excellent 45 days of usage versus 30 days claimed by other smartwatch manufacturers. You can really take the TicWatch 3 Pro with you for a long weekend without the hassle of grabbing the charger and still using both screens, or disappearing into the wild for a month and still having time on your wrist in the end.

The only downside is the charging, which is slow compared to some other Wear OS watches, taking around an hour and 40 minutes to go from 5% to full. That being said, the TicWatch 3 Pro's battery life really impresses with the hardware and improved Essential mode, and is a real reason to buy this smartwatch over many others.

Performance and software

Everything works quickly. If that sounds obvious with modern technology, you've never used a Wear OS watch with 512MB of RAM. The combination of the Snapdragon Wear 4100 and 1GB of RAM means everything works when you want it to. Apps open quickly, you can scroll through Google Maps and switch faces in no time. It's a world apart from the worst Snapdragon 3100 watches and a really good omen for the future of Wear OS.

The increase in performance should mean an all round better experience, right? I thought so, but the TicWatch 3 Pro needs to be optimized. With no rotating crown or bezel, the menus need to be wiped, and there's something pretty muddy about the TicWatch software. It doesn't flow like it should and usually requires a lot more wiping than I'd like. Sometimes taps and swipes are also misinterpreted, which leads me to options that I haven't selected and then slows down because it's confused.

You'll also have to play around with the settings a little to make them more user-friendly. Tilt-to-wake is not active by default and is essential. Otherwise, when notifications come in, you'll have to physically tap the screen to switch from the constantly on second screen. Mobvoi has created its own Wear OS launcher standard. While this is fine, I prefer the look of the default Google launcher, and you'll need to check the settings to change it.

The software still needs to be optimized – there are usability problems.

Then there are the many Mobvoi apps that are installed. There's Ticbreathe, TicExercise, TicHealth, TicHearing, TicOxygen, and TicKitchenSink (maybe). All of them require you to create a Mobvoi account. The general accounts only offer Google Fit. However, you need the TicOxygen app to measure the blood oxygen content (Sp02). It's attractive and fast, although the accuracy and usefulness of this metric continues to be in question for most people.

The notifications from Wear OS are terrible too, perhaps even worse on the TicWatch than on others I test. I received a small percentage of notifications when connected to the LG Wing and the OnePlus 8T. It's such a hit or miss too. Without the Outlook app installed on the watch, I won't get any Outlook notifications, but even if it's installed I still don't get all of them. Incredibly frustrating. I wore the TicWatch Pro 3 right after checking out the Apple Watch Series 6 which came in with 100% notifications, so the silence from Wear OS just got worse.

Health tracking

Most of Mobvoi's apps are related to health and activity tracking, and many replicate the capabilities of Google Fit. However, there are some advantages to using it. TicHealth has more data on your wrist than Fit without having to visit the app on your phone. I like the overall design of TicBreathe and TicZen, although the stress test takes a long time to run. There's a sleep tracking app too, but I didn't find the watch comfortable enough to wear all night.

mobvoi ticwatch 3 pro review workouts "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn7.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/ticwatch-3-pro-workouts-640x640.jpg " srcset = "https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

mobvoi ticwatch 3 pro rating tracking "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn3.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/ticwatch-3-pro-tracking-640x640.jpg " srcset = "https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

mobvoi ticwatch 3 pro review ticexercise app "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn8.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/ticwatch-3-pro-ticexercise-app- 640x640 .jpg "srcset =" https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAAndy Boxall / Digital Trends

mobvoi ticwatch 3 per evaluation blood oxygen "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn9.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/ticwatch-3-pro-blood-oxygen- 640x640. jpg "srcset =" https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAAAndy Boxall / Digital Trends

The TicWatch 3 Pro has a heart rate sensor, an integrated GPS, IP68 waterproofness for use in the pool and Sp02 blood oxygen measurement. Google Fit works with all of these sensors and is attractive and easy to use. The data collected is logically arranged in the Fit app on your phone, but isn't detailed enough for the really dedicated fitness fan, and Mobvoi's own collection of apps doesn't change that.

Overall, the TicWatch 3 Pro does a good job as an casual fitness tracking system, and I really like the way you can focus your daily goals on heart points rather than steps that seem like a better way to measure your effectiveness assess daily activities.

Andy Boxall / Digital Trends

What the TicWatch 3 Pro doesn't offer is much more than any other smartwatch when it comes to activity tracking or additional sensors. It's knowledgeable and perfectly acceptable to someone like me who wants quick digestible data and quick-to-activate workout tracking, but not someone who wants comprehensive hardcore sports training data.

Price and availability

The TicWatch 3 Pro is priced at $ 299 or £ 289 is now available from Amazon.

Our opinion

The TicWatch 3 Pro shows that Wear OS hardware is a lifetime, but it also reminds us that Google's software holds back even the most powerful watch. Mobvoi's smartwatch isn't the prettiest you can buy, but it does a lot of things right, from the second always-on screen to using the Qualcomm Snapdragon Wear 4100. This means more convenience, longer battery life and faster apps for you.

Is there a better alternative?

If you want the Snapdragon Wear 4100, the TicWatch 3 Pro is your only choice. That situation means it stands on its own right now and just an aversion to the design should make you consider another Wear OS smartwatch.

However, Wear OS is still frustrating and you can buy better smartwatches that don't use Google software. We recommend the Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 for owners of Android phones and the Apple Watch SE or Series 6 for iPhone owners.

How long it will take?

With the Snapdragon Wear 4100, Qualcomm's latest smartwatch platform, you get the only smartwatch currently available. Hence, in terms of performance, it is the best choice in terms of longevity. The watch is IP68 waterproof and the reinforced nylon case should prove to be very robust. The quick release strap is easy to change if you don't like it or if it breaks.

The only question mark is above the software. Google provides updates for Wear OS regularly, but rarely includes important new features. However, due to the large amount of Mobvoi software on board, the watch needs ongoing support from both companies in order to stay up to date. Regardless, you can buy the TicWatch 3 Pro with the confidence that it will last two years or more.

Should you buy one?

Yes, the Snapdragon Wear 4100's perks, the superb screen that always shows up, and the long battery life outweigh the software frustrations.

Editor's recommendations




13 Aug
Blog

Samsung TU8000 Crystal UHD TV Review: Good Design, Good Enough Performance

Samsung Tu8000 Crystal Led UHD TV Rating 1

"The Samsung TU8000 is roughly on par, which is great for a budget-friendly set."

  • Attractive, slim bezel design

  • Excellent 1080p upscaling

  • Good color rendering

  • HDMI eARC support

  • Aggressive vignette

  • The contrast is clouded in complex scenes

  • Not particularly bright

It might not be QLED, but the Samsung TU8000 Crystal UHD HDR TV promises amazing colors, high contrast ratios, and great HDR playback for just $ 55 for a 55-inch device. That is promising for not a lot of money, especially since the design of this TV features a very attractive thin bezel.

Samsung promises a top-notch 4K upscaling system thanks to its 4K processing and an auto-game mode that is claimed to optimize the screen and minimize input lag. For a clearly budget-friendly television, Samsung met the TU8000 with many expectations. But does it deliver?

Out of the box

I always appreciate a TV that comes with minimal setup, and the TU8000 delivers on that. With just the remote control, batteries, two feet, two cable management locks and a power cable, this Samsung was thankfully easy to take out of the box and assemble. No screwdriver required, the feet simply slide into position and hold in place. These feet are plastic and don't feel particularly great, but from a distance they look nice and definitely get the job done. Once you are on your media stand, the TV feels safe and stable.

Samsung Tu8000 crystal led UHD TV rating 8 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn2.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/samsung-tu8000-crystal-uhd-tv -review-8-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAAAThe feet are simple but effective. Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

Samsung Tu8000 crystal led uhd TV rating 5 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn3.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/samsung-tu8000-crystal-uhd-tv -review-5-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAAAThis removable plastic fastener isn't particularly attractive. Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

Samsung Tu8000 crystal led UHD TV rating 4 "class =" m-carousel - image dt-lazy-no "src =" https://icdn4.digitaltrends.com/image/digitaltrends/samsung-tu8000-crystal-uhd-tv -review-4-640x640.jpg "srcset =" https://www.digitaltrends.com/://www.digitaltrends.com/R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAAAYou can stick the cable in these grooves too, but they don't stay particularly well. Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

However, I'm less enthusiastic about the cable management claps mentioned above. They're lightweight plastic clips that sit on the back of the TV's feet and aren't particularly sturdy to the touch. Plus, they're pretty unattractive. This is a bummer considering how good the rest of this TV looks from the front. You can hide the cable and fasteners pretty well, but it's certainly not perfect and I wanted a better solution here. There are also some grooves on the back of the TV for the cable to plug into, but it doesn't stay very well and the power cord is also quite short, which further limits your options here.

Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

The voice remote control supplied with the TU8000, like other modern Samsung remote controls, has a slim and curved profile that only houses the buttons that are absolutely necessary. I appreciate how small it is, yet still give me everything I need to enjoy content. It's a voice remote that works with apps like YouTube when you're in a search bar. It also acts as a smart assistant with Google Assistant, Bixby or Amazon Alexa (depending on what you choose during setup).

Features and design

It's not a top-of-the-range Samsung and definitely a plastic model, but the TU8000 manages to improve the looks of a Samsung for the most part. The back of the TV isn't particularly impressive, with a fully rounded plastic back that doesn't scream "high end," but luckily, you'll rarely look there. From the front, the sleek design of the TV on the left, right, and top is crisp and attractive. The base is a bit thicker, but lined with a silver plastic that blends in well and looks expensive, at least from a distance.

From the front, the sleek design of the TV on the left, right, and top is crisp and attractive.

Like other Samsung televisions, the TU8000 is powered by the Tizen smart TV system. Setup was easy and enjoyable and, thanks to the connection with the Samsung SmartThings app, extremely fast. Although you don't need the app, setup times are significantly reduced as you have access to a full keyboard (instead of having to type in your email address and WiFi password letter by letter with the remote control).

Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

The TU8000 has three integrated HDMI inputs, only one of which has an eARC connection. Samsung has not taken into account the beautiful workmanship of its high-end models like the Q90T, so unfortunately you won't see any reduced artifacts or banding with content with a low bit rate. More on this and further information on image quality in a moment.

The largest bezel is on the bottom of the TV and is still relatively narrow, with a subtle logo placement. Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

user friendliness

The Tizen Smart TV experience is … okay. As we've said before, it's a perfect example of "good enough," though it doesn't always do its best on that particular TV. Oddly enough, navigating to different apps or content in the Tizen UI shows some lag and is therefore slow and fast, but the performance of the apps themselves is snappy and pleasant. While I didn't like turning on the TV and choosing the app I want to use, I liked the user interface when I got to know Netflix, Amazon Prime, or YouTube. The other downside to Tizen is that it isn't as robust as other streaming platforms like Roku or Android TV. For example, there is no Crunchyroll app. This probably won't bother the majority of people as it has a full breakdown of the most popular apps.

While Tizen does the job, it's generally also overflowing with lots of unnecessary and irrelevant suggestions to look at. You can largely avoid this, but due to the input delay in Tizen navigation, I sometimes accidentally hit "down" too many times and was inundated with a full screen of poorly suggested content. Part of what makes Tizen so beautiful is that it generally only takes up a quarter of your screen when switching between apps, changing your source, or adjusting your picture. If Tizen breaks off from it, it shows its mistakes.

And as we have already mentioned with other Samsung Smart TVs and as I mentioned above, while it supports intelligent assistants that are (thankfully) not only Bixby, the voice integration is not as good as, for example, with an Android TV. It's a bit clunky and disjointed here, but it works.

picture quality

It should come as no surprise that if we found screen uniformity issues on a high-end Samsung TV this year, they would also appear in the lower TU8000 range. There is some particularly aggressive vignetting on this TV that is very inconsistent around every corner. For example, the top left corner on my test unit showed some of the worst vignetting, with the bottom left being a little less aggressive. Nevertheless, all four corners clearly have problems here. The vignette was also clearly visible in the mailbox contents.

This television does not use local dimming zones, but is edge-lit. This is an older, cheaper technology that offers less control over brightness and black levels. As a result, there is considerable bloom, predominantly from the lower part of the television, when there is a light subject on a dark background. With particularly high-contrast images, the scenes can be washed out by this flower.

The halo effect also occurs on bright objects, but it's not as bad as I expected. With small sources like subtitles, you can see about half an inch of halo around the letters, while with larger sources it can grow to about an inch and a half. It's not particularly noticeable in most cases, but it's there.

Edge-lighting induced bloom can really wash out what the panel is trying to do and makes for a generally muddy view.

The contrast of the TU8000 is only okay overall. I think the panel is capable of good black levels, but in too many scenes the edge-lit blooming mentioned above really washes out what the panel is trying to do and makes for a generally muddy view. The Mandalorian, with whom I also tested strips with a low bit rate content thanks to the many wide shots in a clear sky, seemed less powerful than I'm used to, since black and white somehow merge into a medium gray. However, it by no means makes the content uncontrollable.

Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

In less challenging scenes where the area between highlights and shadows is more compact, the TU8000 performs much better. There's a 12K aerial video of a night flight over New York that we like to use as a base, and the slow panning of Times Square looked very good on this TV. Darks were well represented, and when the bright lights came in from the top of the screen, the TU8000 did a pretty good job of keeping the image where it should be.

In other challenging scenes, the TU8000 was able to smooth out shadows and bring out details pretty well. It may border washed-out borders again, but the detail has not been lost; At least the TU8000 doesn't crush black people. The quality is not what we expect from top-notch TVs, but for the price I was happy.

Samsung rightly touted 1080p upscaling: it's fantastic.

Out-of-the-box color accuracy is pretty good even in Standard (but stay away from Dynamic). The film mode reduces Samsung's sharpness to zero, which is very easy to see, and the contrast is better in this mode than in standard. In both Standard and Movie, skin tones could use some work as many of the nuances seem lost, but green and blue are pretty nice.

The TU8000 tends to be more yellow and more blue in film mode, while it is sharpened far too much in standard mode. In both cases the balance is thrown off a bit, but is bearable. This can likely be fixed with a special calibration, but since this TV is aimed at the more general consumer and not a pixel peeper, I say, I don't mind. Most will be perfectly happy with this TV in standard (the horror!) Or movie mode, and that's honestly a relief to report. This TV has to look great right away as the average customer doesn't touch a single setting, and I have to say that it works fine in that regard (although you really need to turn motion smoothing off).

Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

The brightness is sufficient, but some of the particularly gritty content like Netflix 'Dark is a challenge during the day. Certainly doable, but I had to squint. However, shows like The Mentalist (via Amazon Prime Video) look fantastic no matter when I've watched them. Speaking of the mentalist: The TU8000 has wonderfully demonstrated its outstanding capabilities there, as this 1080p stream looks fantastic on the 55-inch set. Samsung rightly touted 1080p upscaling: it's fantastic.

Gaming performance

This is a good TV to play with, at least for now. According to Samsung, the TU8000 has gamer functions that reduce latency. However, this TV does not have a variable refresh rate, so it cannot remove the jerking. In addition, the display of content is limited to 60 Hz.

I can confirm that while the input delay is less than most TVs in game mode, it is not as fast as a gamer would want to see in a competition where you need split second response times. It's certainly good enough for the occasional single player game, but still a little slow for more intense, action-oriented online games like Apex Legends, top-tier Fortnite games, or Call of Duty.

The performance here is likely good enough for most current generation console games, but it won't be able to play at maximum specs with the next generation due fall 2020.

Sound quality

We don't usually talk too much about the sound quality of modern flat screen TVs, and I didn't want to consider that at all when I submitted this TV for review. However, I was very impressed with the TU8000. Not only can it get damn loud, but the sound quality is shockingly balanced. I strongly recommend buying a soundbar or sound system for any TV (my personal favorite is The Fives by Klipsch), but honestly, if you forego it, you honestly might not feel bad about this choice.

The sound works best in a smaller room. So if you plan to pick one up for a guest room or bedroom, you will be happy with the audio.

Jaron Schneider / Digital Trends

Our opinion

I used the TU8000 for about a week and became more interested in it than I thought. The thin bezel, mixed with great upscaling and surprisingly good sound quality, made for a really pleasant viewing experience. Sure, it has its downsides and the vignetting can be distracting at times, but overall, it does a very satisfactory job with its laundry list of promises. Samsung really had its job cut out for itself when it set such standards with its marketing, but the company is doing well enough in all of these categories for the most part. It isn't and shouldn't be an industry leader. For a fairly budget-friendly TV, many people will be perfectly happy with the Samsung TU8000, especially if you can find it on sale.

Is there a better alternative?

We're still waiting to test out the 2020 TCL 5 Series which seems to be a real head-turner, but despite being a year old, the 2019 5 Series is still a pretty comparable choice to the TU8000. You may also want to consider the new Vizio M or V series, as both sets offer a price close to or lower than the TU8000 for the same size or larger. We'll update this post when we've had the opportunity to rate the entire competition and provide clearer guidance.

How long it will take?

With three HDMI ports and one of them eARC, I'm confident this TV can get you a lot of work done. It's technologically built to last well into the future, and the quality feels solid.

warranty

Samsung offers a one-year parts and labor warranty for home use and a 90-day parts and labor warranty for commercial use.

Should you buy it?

I will reserve a judgment here. I think this is a good TV that is pretty good value at $ 500 for a 55-inch unit. If I didn't know that Vizio has two potential competitors soon, and if TCL doesn't look really promising with its 2020 5 Series, this could be an easy call. There is a lot of competition for the Samsung TU8000 this fall, however. So if you can wait a little to make your decision, this is probably your best bet right now. We will update this recommendation as soon as we have a chance to fully evaluate the field.

Editor's recommendations




123