Your beloved PCs deserve a regular clean as part of their maintenance schedule. If you miss a seasonal clean or two it is easy for dust to build up and transform from a slight blemish on the system's appearance to something that actually hinders cooling and performance. For all your dusty electronics cleaning tasks, a capable air duster can save the day, and we've spotted a limited-time deal on the powerful Wolfbox MF60 Compressed Air Duster. It is at one of its best prices ever, reduced by 39% from $49.99 to $30.39, for a limited time on Amazon.

• Check out this deal on Amazon

No matter how clean you keep your home, electrical equipment always attracts dust. With PC airflow cases pulling in air from outside to keep components cool, there's always a fresh intake of detritus every time it is used. Laptop fans can be an even worse dust magnet if they are regularly carried around in bags, rested on soft furnishings - an issue exacerbated by the small fans and vents on portables.

This is where a capable dust buster can be useful. It can make maintenance effortless and convenient. The Wolfbox MF60 Compressed Air Duster, for example, is a cordless rechargeable device weighing just half a pound. Users can select one of its three fan speeds, and its brushless motor will kick in to deliver up to 72.4 m/s wind speed using its 110,000 RPM fan.

For less strenuous dust busting work, or on more delicate items, users can dial in the fan at 25K RPM, or 60K RPM. On the lowest setting you'll get up to 240 minutes of air dusting from a single charge. Charging up from empty to full will take 3.5 hours. A USB charging cable is supplied in the box.

Another attraction of the Wolfbox MF60 Compressed Air Duster is the nozzle selection in the box. These include a flat nozzle for blowing dust off PC cases and desks, a long nozzle for deep cleaning computer keyboards and car vents, a round all-purpose nozzle, and there's a swim ring/air mattress nozzle for outdoor inflation and camping.

If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, gaming chair, or CPU Deals pages.

We've seen a keyboard with a built-in macro pad, and a keyboard with a touchscreen and a separate, add-on numberpad, but what if you want a keyboard with a numberpad and a built-in macropad without having to spend an extra $100?

I guess that's why there's the Turtle Beach KB5 — a full-size, wired mechanical keyboard with low-profile switches, an 8,000 Hz polling rate, and a built-in 2.4-inch touchscreen that functions as a mini macro pad (with six buttons). It's got the built-in numberpad, unlike the Corsair Galleon 100 SD and the Turtle Beach KB7, as well as the touchscreen / macro pad, though its version is about half the size. Still, maybe that's all you really need. The KB5 is also significantly cheaper than both of those keyboards, which retail for $300 and $200, respectively.

The Turtle Beach KB5 is available now, in black, for $149.99.

Design and Construction of the KB5

The KB5 is a full-size low-profile wired mechanical gaming keyboard with extra macro keys, a volume roller, and a full-color 2.4-inch touchscreen in the upper-right corner (above the 10-key numberpad). It has a roomy layout and is slightly larger than the average full-size keyboard, measuring approximately 18.78 inches (477 mm) wide by 6.89 inches (175 mm) deep. It's 1.06 inches (27mm) thick at its thickest point, including the keycaps.

The KB5 has a silver brushed-aluminum top plate with a coppery accent in the upper-left corner. It has a sturdy metal roller bar on the top toward the left side — though it's not really close enough to the left side to be in the corner, and I found it a bit awkward to have to reach over my function row to use the roller. I would have preferred it in a corner or even on the side, like the volume roller on the NZXT Function 2. It's a nicely-built roller, however — thick, metal, clickable, and with etched diagonal lines for grip.

The keyboard also has a row of five macro keys on the left side, as well as a 2.5-inch color touchscreen in the upper-right corner, above the 10-key numberpad. The touchscreen bumps up past the rest of the keyboard — the touchscreen side is just under 7 inches deep, while the other side is about 6.25 inches deep — so it doesn't cut into your keys. The KB5 has a full function row, a full 3x2 navigation cluster, arrow keys, and a full 10-key numberpad, along with the standard alphanumeric keys.

The KB5 features Turtle Beach's (formerly Roccat's) signature aesthetic — an open board with flat, shallow keycaps that leave the switch exposed, which makes for both easy cleaning and brighter, more visible RGB lighting. The keycaps are low-profile double-shot PBT, with shine-through legends; the board comes with four textured keycaps that you can use to replace the W/A/S/D keys (or, I guess, any four keys) for better recognition.

The bottom of the board is plastic, with six rubber anti-slip pads and two sets of plastic flip-out feet for angling the keyboard toward you. It's a fairly lightweight keyboard, weighing just under 2 pounds (1.96lbs / 887g), not including the wrist rest (which weighs an additional 7.5 ounces / 213g). This is about the same as the Logitech G515 Lightspeed, though the G515 is a TKL while the KB5 is full-size (plus a touchscreen and macro keys).

In the box, the KB5 comes with a plastic wrist rest, a 5.9-foot (1.8m) USB-C to USB-A cable, four textured keycaps for replacing the W / A / S / D keys, and a keycap puller.

Specs

Typing and Gaming Experience on the KB5

The KB5 comes with Turtle Beach's Titan low-profile linear switches, which are rated for up to 50 million keypresses and have an actuation point of 1.2mm and a force of 42gf. These are traditional low-profile mechanical switches — not magnetic Hall Effect switches like you'll find on the KB7 (and KP7). They're linear, which means a smooth keypress with no audible or tactile bump, and they're pre-lubed so they're pretty smooth.

While I'm not a huge fan of linear switches, the KB5's are quick and stable, and you get a decent little 'thunk' when you bottom out on the keyboard's aluminum top plate. The typing experience is very similar to that of the KB7, which is to say that it's very pleasant for a mainstream gaming keyboard with low-profile linear switches.

The keyboard has flat, shallow keycaps made of double-shot PBT. They have a slightly matte texture and should resist shine better than ABS keycaps, but I'm not fully convinced that'll be the case (maybe they just feel cheaper because they're thinner, overall, than regular keycaps, though). The keycaps are wide, with slightly curved tops, and the keyboard is roomy — I didn't have any problem getting used to the layout for the most part, though the extra row of macro keys on the left did throw me off a few times (this happens whenever there's an extra row of macro keys).

The touchscreen is located above the numberpad, and is fairly responsive. It responds to both taps and swipes (you can swipe through "pages" of controls / buttons), and I found the 2 x 3 layout a little more intuitive to navigate than the KB7's much larger layout — though still not as intuitive as it would be with tactile buttons, like the Corsair Galleon 100 SD has. In addition to the six customizable "buttons" on the touchscreen, there's also some other info displayed at the top — your current profile (you can switch between profiles by tapping this) and some keyboard info (e.g. numlock, caps lock, scroll lock).

The KB5 is also a solid keyboard for gaming, thanks to its quick, responsive linear switches and 8K polling rate. While it doesn't have magnetic switches like its pricier sibling, it does implement Turtle Beach's ReacTap, which is a software solution similar to simultaneous opposing cardinal directions (SOCD).

Features and Software of the KB5

Like all Turtle Beach products, the KB5 ships with firmware from 2001 (or at least it feels like it) and requires at least 16 mandatory updates before it can be used with the brand's Swarm II software. I'm exaggerating, of course — but not much.

Once I managed to get the KB5 up to date on firmware (and Swarm II up to date on software), I was able to customize the touchscreen, keyboard, and lighting. Swarm II is kind of mandatory for this keyboard, as you can't really customize the touchscreen without it — and the touchscreen is a large part of the selling point here. There's not a ton you can do with the touchscreen that you can't do with regular keys, at the moment. There are options for keyboard / Windows / multimedia functions, opening apps and websites, and assigning macros. And there are a couple of "dynamic" options such as a timer setting and performance monitoring, but it's not a robust ecosystem like that of Elgato or Loupedeck. Still, it's probably enough to get you started, and the Swarm II app includes a handful of templates in case you're out of ideas.

Keymapping is pretty straightforward, and you can map keys to do most of what you can map the touchscreen to do (save for visual things, such as performance monitoring, obviously). You can record and save macros in the app and configure ReacTap. You can also customize the lighting from a handful of presets (or per-key, if you so desire). The keyboard can save up to five onboard profiles, which you can switch between by tapping the profile number in the upper-left corner of the touchscreen.

The Bottom Line

The KB5 is actually a pretty nice compromise, and I like it better than the pricier (and fancier) Turtle Beach KB7. I love having a built-in numberpad that doesn't cost an extra $100 to snap onto the side of the board, and the smaller touchscreen is actually more manageable to use quickly and without (really) looking. The KB5 may not have magnetic Hall Effect switches, but its low-profile linear switches feel and sound pretty good for a mainstream gaming keyboard. And at $150, it's basically half the price of the combined KB7 keyboard and KP7 numberpad.

Of course, if you're really dedicated to making your keyboard a streaming deck substitute, the Corsair Galleon 100 SD is the only real option. Not only does it have physical buttons, it also has knobs — and it's supported by Elgato's Stream Deck software, which is still the real differentiating factor for macropad and touchscreen devices these days.

Noctua is known for making high-end, high-quality fans and air coolers, which it has been doing for over 20 years, recently expanding into AIOs. However, it appears that there were a few questions regarding its PC case compatibility database, which some PC DIYers say don’t match the data from the manufacturer’s website. The company cleared this up in a blog post, saying that it has undertaken its own measurements and it has determined that 56 of the more than 100 cases it has tested showed significant deviation from the details officially listed online.

The company gave two diverging situations of inaccurate official measurements. The first one is when the case is larger than what is actually written, which would allow PC builders to attach a larger cooler. Noctua said that the deviations aren’t minor, either. For example, the NZXT H2 Flow case is listed as being compatible with a maximum 75mm CPU cooler height, but the actual case can accommodate an air cooler up to 79mm. There’s also the Thermaltake TR100, which is 2.7mm larger than what the Thermaltake website says, and the Corsair Frame 4000D, which gives you 10mm of extra clearance.

This is a good thing, as any cooler you bought based on their website’s measurement means that it will definitely fit, but Noctua said that this is a missed opportunity. That’s because you could’ve bought a larger cooler that delivered more performance in the same case.

On the flip side, the company warned that there were also some cases that were actually smaller versus the numbers in their specifications. It cited two examples — the Asus Prime AP201 and the Lian Li B4-mATX. The former is 1.7mm shorter while the latter is 3.5mm shorter than what’s listed on their specific product pages.

This could to be a major issue, especially if you bought items that fitted the available space exactly, based on the manufacturer’s measurements. It would mean that these parts would either be touching the case panels, or worse, not allow them to close at all. If that’s the case, you’ll have to spend extra effort to return either the part or the case and get something that fits better.

The safest solution to this is for you to buy the PC case before you shop for the remaining parts of your build. This is especially true if you’re looking at the best mini-ITX cases, as the tight tolerances mean that you don’t have much margin if the numbers aren’t accurate. But by having the case physically available and measuring it yourself, you’re at least confident that what you’re buying will fit. Alternatively, you can check out Noctua’s compatibility search page, with the clearances of the cases in its database verified by its team.

This compatibility tool will give you peace of mind when shopping for the best cooler and is useful for confirming measurements even if you end up buying from another brand. But this begs the question — are the variations between official and actual measurements limited to the air coolers? Or are the numbers for other components, like the GPU, PSU, and other key components also inaccurate? Noctua’s website only covers coolers, so you’ll have to rely on other pages (or your own measurements) if you want some confirmation of a case’s specifications and clearances for other parts like GPUs and PSUs.

The fearless TrashBench has been testing direct die water cooling of graphics cards. The inevitable twist here is that they removed the metal waterblock from the equation. Despite initial leaky results and much concern of water damage to the expensive parts thrown into the mix, some of the end results are eyebrow-raising in a good way.

“In my pursuit of the perfect water block, I realized, why do we need metal at all?” queried the antipodean host of the punk-rock GPU death lab. “Why can't we just pump water directly over the bare silicon? Makes sense to me.”

TrashBench began this project well aware that leaks might be a problem. Thus, a non-working GeForce RTX 3060 was chosen for the initial feasibility tests. It was measured up for a 3D printed water block which would direct the coolant directly over the GPU die. Our hardware adventurer covered any surface-mount components beside the GPU with nail polish to prevent water damage/shorting.

Some tried and trusted plumbing measures were then applied, with the design incorporating washers, gaskets, and hose clamps (worm-screw equipped jubilee clips). Water pipe fittings were melted into the block, which was fastened using the retaining clamp mechanism that the air cooler had previously used.

This initial test sprang a leak, or two, so TrashBench decided to add epoxy adhesive to secure and seal the 3D printed block to the GPU. This worked, but then some water was spotted oozing from the tube fittings, so they got a dose of epoxy too. At last, we had the first non-leaky prototype…

After some live runs using a powered-up GTX 980 were successful, it was time for the main event with fitting, testing, and benchmarking using an RTX 2060 Super. On the way, it was noticed that the choice of 3D print material used on TrashBench’s Bambu Lab 3D printer wasn’t trivial. Some materials leaked from the edges, and others were actually slightly porous. During live power tests, the TechTuber wisely used a PCIe riser cable so any leaks wouldn’t immediately drip onto the motherboard.

Was it worth it?

If you like to live dangerously, it could be argued that the TrashBench results show some value in this cooling methodology. The headlining technique was compared against the stock cooler and a clamped-on AiO cooling solution.

Going by the numbers above, you can see that direct water cooling could be interesting, as long as you can ensure long-term confidence about leakage. In the video, you can also see some interesting extras, like running this system using -28°C coolant. The same trick is also tested using an Intel i5-7600K CPU. That was chosen as “it’s not a particularly hot CPU, but if it dies, I don’t care.”

The eventual conclusion was that chamber size matters (most clearly illustrated by the CPU cooling test), but pumping water directly over silicon can work.

Most megafactories usually take years to go from conceptualization to construction, but a recent drone flyover of the Terafab showed that progress has already started on the ground less than five months after Musk unveiled it. However, the video doesn’t do justice to the true scale of its footprint, so X user Nic Cruz Patane created a visualization to help us understand how large the chip manufacturing facility is.

The site will reportedly have a floor space of at least 100 million square feet, making it larger than Giga Texas (10 million sq. ft), the Pentagon (6.6 million sq. ft), Apple Park (2.82 million sq. ft), and the Mall of America (5.6 million sq. ft), combined. This also makes it significantly larger than New Century Global Center in Chengdu, China, with has an interior space of “just” 18.9 million sq. ft.

While this might seem like an absurd amount of space for chip manufacturing, it appears that the Terafab will need it because it’s going to be more than just a chip fab making AI processors — instead, it will be an all-in-one facility that will produce logic and memory chips, as well as have lithography, packaging, and testing under one roof.

Elon Musk started talking about building his own chip manufacturing facility in late 2025 and officially announced the project in March of this year. The reasoning behind this project is that both SpaceX and Tesla will require at least 1TW of compute, which is more than ten times that current global chip supply.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang warned that a project like this will be an “extremely hard” challenge, but it appears that Musk is willing to put his massive resources on the line for this. Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan even said that he can “think of no better partner than Elon Musk” to explore “unconventional” ways of chip manufacturing.

Musk is no stranger to both leading and funding projects that otherwise seemed impossible. Although he did not found Tesla, his investment and leadership in the company led it to become an industry trailblazer in EVs. He fundamentally changed commercial space travel with SpaceX; something that used to be the purview of NASA and other national governments, and he also broke a record when he set up 100,000 Nvidia H200 GPUs in just 19 days back in 2024 — a process which Huang said usually takes four years.

It seems that Terafab is Musk’s biggest project to date, which is estimated to require up to $119 billion in investments. But even though it seems that this project already has a secure customer base in SpaceX and Tesla, the former acknowledges that there’s a risk that this ambitious megafactory may not be successful.

A developer has ported Microsoft Word for Windows 1.1a to x64 so it can now run natively on Windows 11 PC systems. JMarshall23 on GitHub stresses that this is a fully working native Windows x64 port using “original Word source and resources together with modern replacements for the 16-bit assembly, segmented-memory, and Win16 platform boundaries.” It also includes some extra features for “research purposes.” Microsoft Word for Windows 1.1a was originally released over a quarter of a century ago.

This release of Word marked a milestone in the word processing market, as it pioneered genuinely useful feature additions like WYSIWYG editing, graphics, and table insertion on Windows. It would spearhead the momentum in shifting users from DOS productivity monsters like WordPerfect to complete dominance in Windows-land. Word for Windows 1.1a added all its frills while remaining very efficient, running on systems with CPUs that ran in single-figure MHz speeds, and with as little as 1MB of RAM.

Another notable feature of this version of Word for Windows is that Microsoft permitted its source code to be released in full. You can still grab that code via the Computer History Museum (CHM). There you will find a 7MB bundle of C source, x86 assembly, build tools, and documentation. These 1,021 files in 33 folders are what JMarshall23 started with.

GitHub doesn’t have Windows x64 binaries ready for the casually curious on the lookout for a free, lightweight word processor to download and use. Instead, you’ll need access to Visual Studio 2022 with Desktop development with C++, a Windows 10 or Windows 11 SDK installed through Visual Studio, CMake 3.25 or newer, and PowerShell, notes Marshall. Then simply follow the GitHub instructions to build and run Word1.

It will be interesting to see if more comes from this x64 port, but Microsoft’s Word for Windows 1.1a code release carries a license that “permits only non-commercial use and does not give you the right to license it to third parties by posting copies elsewhere on the web,” says the CHM.

Two new Geekbench listings for Nvidia's upcoming RTX Spark laptop superchip have surfaced, confirming a second, cut-down SKU exists with 18 CPU cores, at least in the testing phases. Both parts score remarkably close to each other, posting impressive multi-core numbers, but their single-core performance isn't special. Still, these are preliminary results on unreleased hardware, so take these numbers with a grain of salt.

The model name for the 20-core (10+10) SKU was shown as "OEMQAJ 766_MIS Product Name DV" with its clocks reported at 4.0 GHz. This chip scored 2,570 points in the single-core test and 23,126 points in the multi-core test. The second listing showed up as "OEMQAJ OEMQAJ Product" with this SKU's 18 cores divided across 10+8 core clusters, clocked at 3.9 GHz. It scored 2,541 points in the single-core test, so within 1% of the 20-core part, while the multi-core was 21,776 points, which is about 6% faster than the full-fat chip.

When you compare these numbers to other Windows-running SoCs on the Geekbench database, these multi-core numbers are among the best. The Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme currently holds the record for the highest multi-core score with 25,075 points, so both SKUs of the RTX Spark lose to it. But when we switch to the AMD AI Max+ 395, which scores 20,609 on average in the same test, even the 18-core Nvidia chip is 5.6% faster here, and the 20-core variant is about 12% faster.

Compared to Apple's lineup, the 20-core RTX Spark is 3.3% faster than the 14-core variant of the M3 Max, which scores 22,385 points in the multi-core bench. Considering that this is pre-release hardware with unoptimized drivers, we can expect it to even beat the maxed-out M4 Pro and the base M4 Max (which hover around 25,000 points) when it officially launches. Moreover, the 18-core SKU's 21,776 points are equal to, if not more than, the base M4 Pro, which also nets around 21,700 points in the multi-core test.

That being said, the swan song falls apart when we bring up the single-core numbers. Every Apple Silicon chip from the base M3 onwards beats the 2,570 points the 20-core RTX Spark achieved in this run. Only the M2 Max with its 2,477 points is bested by the Nvidia offering, and that too by just 3.75%. Apple's current-gen base M5 is a whopping 41% faster here. On the Windows side, the Snapdragon X2 Elite and X2 Elite Extreme score roughly 3,000 points, but AMD and Intel's top-end models take a beating.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 only achieves 2,429 points in the single-core test, making the 20-core RTX Spark 5.8% faster, and the 18-core variant 4.6% faster. The same goes for the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 because its 2,432 points are within the margin of error of the Strix Halo chip. Intel's highest single-core score is achieved by the Core Ultra 9 275HX at 2,467 points, making it 3% slower than the 18-core RTX Spark and 4.2% slower than the 20-core SKU. However, Intel's actual fastest chip, the Core Ultra X9 388H, scores 2,767 points, making it about 7% faster than even the 20-core RTX Spark.

All in all, this is a much better showing for Nvidia's upcoming laptop Superchip than previous leaks. It's clear that driver optimization is slowly unlocking the full potential of the silicon, and by the time RTX Spark is in the hands of reviewers, we expect it to compete fiercely with every Windows machine. Nvidia is working hard to ensure a proper launch with a commitment to making DRM and anti-cheat work on day one.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is moving to ban drones with LiDAR obstacle-avoidance features, a move that would remove a number of popular consumer drones from US shelves. In a public notice published in the Federal Register on August 3 (DA 26-758), the agency proposed retroactively banning the import and sale of any foreign-made drone on its Covered List that “contains or integrates” a LiDAR sensor, categorizing the technology under a broad “military-grade” umbrella.

The proposal builds on a ban the FCC set in motion late last year. On December 22, 2025, the agency added all foreign-made drones and their critical components to its Covered List — a roster of communications equipment that a U.S. national-security authority has determined poses an unacceptable risk. The listing blocked any new foreign drone model from receiving the FCC authorization it needed to be sold in the U.S., effectively banning sales of new models.

However, models that had already cleared authorization before the listing could continue to be imported and sold. The new DA 26-758 proposal seeks to retroactively strip sales clearance from previously approved drone models that ”escaped” the initial ban, starting with those it deems military-grade. The proposal is open for public comment until September 2, 2026, and if adopted as written, the ban on imports and sales would take effect roughly 180 days after publication.

LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) is a remote sensing technology that uses laser pulses to measure exact distances and build precise 3D maps of objects and environments. Drones, delivery bots, and self-driving cars all rely on it for obstacle avoidance. A ban would mean that popular consumer models such as DJI's Air 3S and Mini 5 Pro — both of which use LiDAR for obstacle detection — would no longer be available for sale in the US. The proposal would not affect existing owners, who could keep flying the drones they already have, but as DJI has warned, those owners could find official spare parts increasingly hard, or eventually impossible, to source over time.

Under the FCC's broad ”military-grade” classification, the ban would also reach drones that carry thermal imaging sensors, can dispense agricultural sprays (”economic poison” in the notice's language), weigh 55 pounds or more, include docking stations, integrate a defense article, or operate in coordinated swarms — a category the FCC defines widely enough to include synchronized drone light shows. U.S.-made drones and other drones not on the Covered List are not touched by the ban, regardless of whether they carry any of these features.

The FCC frames the move purely as a national security issue, leaning on an executive-branch determination that foreign-made drones pose an “unacceptable risk.” It tentatively concludes that the economic hit would be minor, as military-grade models are a small minority in a market dominated by recreational fliers. Conversely, the notice also details the billions that domestic drone makers like Skydio, which has committed $3.5 billion to US manufacturing, have raised since the original ban.

DJI, one of the manufacturers affected by the ban, has argued that the “military-grade” label is a category error, sweeping in civilian tools that first responders, farmers, and hobbyists rely on. Its core objection lands on the LiDAR clause, specifically arguing that the technology is a safety feature, not a weapon. DJI had earlier sued the FCC to overturn the December ban, claiming the agency exceeded its statutory authority.

A new Amazon data center is set to become the single largest source of environmental pollution in the U.S., according to a New York Times report on August 8. The tech giant — which already operates the most data centers worldwide — is reportedly building a natural gas power plant in Pecos County, Texas, to power its new data center at the same site. According to project permits, the plant would generate up to 7.65 gigawatts of power using 35 natural gas turbines. The new plant — which burns natural gas to generate electricity — has been authorized to release 33 million tons of CO₂ annually, more planet-warming gases than any other power plant in the country, says the NY Times report.

Conversely, Amazon had pledged to achieve net-zero carbon emissions across all its global business operations by 2040. The company made the promise in 2019 when it initiated and co-founded The Climate Pledge — a voluntary coalition of over 700 companies and partners — aimed at addressing its own corporate footprint and rallying global supply chains. However, the company has seen its emissions rise each year for the past several years, something analysts attribute to a spike in data centers to support the AI boom. The company is currently building several additional AI data centers globally, including the one that the new gas plant would power in Texas.

Amazon has acknowledged the impact of its intense AI ambitions on its earlier climate pledges but insisted the company remained committed to them, despite obvious struggles. “The world looks different now than when we co-founded the climate pledge,” said Margaret Callahan, an Amazon spokeswoman. Still, “our commitment hasn’t changed,” she said, echoing similar statements by Microsoft, which is struggling to fulfill its 2030 sustainability promise amid carbon-heavy AI expansion, but insists it remains committed to it.

As detailed in our data center power roadmap, an increasing number of hyperscalers and data center operators are switching from grid connections to dedicated on-site power generation. The “behind-the-meter” moves are being triggered mainly by the long timelines required to set up new power infrastructure to connect new power-hungry data centers to the grid, but also by growing anti-data center sentiments over irreversible hikes in the electricity bills of nearby communities.

While many companies are also pursuing nuclear and renewable energy options — examples being Microsoft’s Three Mile Island nuclear deal and Meta’s agreement to secure up to 1GW of orbital solar energy capacity — gas appears to be the leading preference due to its scalability and speed of availability. The Trump administration has thrown its weight behind such projects for data centers, promoting oil, natural gas, and coal over renewable energy sources.

The city council of Emporia, Kansas, the same council that had a teacher arrested for clapping in support of the opposition, announced that it will move its meetings online after its members received death threats. According to 404 Media, Emporia announced this move two days before the meeting set for August 5, 2026, and will also affect the one set on August 19, 2026.

“In the interest of public safety, the Emporia City Commission meetings scheduled for Wednesday, August 5, 2026, and Wednesday, August 19, 2026, will be conducted virtually. No public comment period will be provided during either meeting,” the city said on its Facebook page.

“The City remains committed to conducting the public’s business in an open and transparent manner while taking reasonable measures to protect the safety of elected officials, City staff, and members of the public. The City appreciates the public's understanding and cooperation as it implements these temporary measures while ensuring the continuity of City business.”

The move to a virtual meeting is an understandable move given the death threats on some of the city leaders. However, it also canceled public comments and instead directed citizens to an email address and phone number where they can air their concerns privately. This led to some citizens airing their complaints in a protest outside the Emporia municipal auditorium.

“While I don't doubt that there are credible threats, my big question is on how many there are and from where they are coming. Mayor Smith did mention in yesterday's meeting that the threats don't seem to really be coming from locals but ‘it only takes one’ to ruin a meeting so they went virtual. I feel like we're being punished for the actions of outsiders,” Lux Claridge, the person arrested in the previous council meeting, told 404 Media.

“I'm not so upset about going virtual, it makes sense, but back it up with examples of these threats. I'm more upset that they opted to close public comment and I don't understand why.”

One of the things that the council considered during the meeting was the petition to put a data center ban on the ballot, with the members voting unanimously to send it for judicial review. The council claimed that doing otherwise could open the city to a lawsuit from either side, although it did not elaborate on the reason why this would happen.

While we haven’t heard of a local jurisdiction getting sued for passing a data center ban, one Texas senator warned a county in the state that it cannot legally impose this. So, the commissioners are likely being careful to avoid legal issues, even if they’re in another state.

The mid-range CPU segment has become more competitive than ever, with both Intel and AMD refreshing their lineups and pushing aggressive pricing. In one corner, we have the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, an important reset for Intel that prioritizes class-leading productivity performance over efficiency, while also offering solid value. In the other corner is AMD's newly launched Ryzen 7 7700X3D, a more affordable, slightly lower-clocked alternative to the 7800X3D.

This faceoff is particularly interesting because the two chips take very different approaches despite costing about the same price. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus packs 24 cores and excels in productivity workloads, while also delivering Intel's strongest gaming performance in years. The Ryzen 7 7700X3D, meanwhile, relies on AMD's proven 3D V-Cache technology to deliver gaming performance within 5% of the 7800X3D, although it trails significantly in single- and multi-threaded workloads.

While the Ryzen 7 7700X3D is aimed at gamers looking for X3D performance at a lower price, it faces stiff competition from Intel's aggressively -priced Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, as well as its own sibling, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, which is often available for only a little more.

So, is AMD's gaming-focused approach enough to beat Intel's well-rounded Arrow Lake Refresh processor, or has Intel finally found the right balance of price and performance to reclaim the mid-range crown? In this six-round faceoff, we compare these two sub-$350 CPUs to find out which one comes out on top.

Features and Specifications: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

Taking a look at the technical specifications, it's clear that each chip adopts a distinct strategy for the mid-range market. While Intel has optimized its architecture for a higher core and thread count along with improved interconnect speeds, AMD continues to leverage its stacked cache to maintain gaming dominance on a long-lived platform.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is based on the original Arrow Lake-S family, utilizing the same microarchitecture that we saw on the 265K, built using TSMC’s 3nm process. It matches the flagship 285K with a 24-core configuration (8 Lion Cove P-cores and 16 Skymont E-cores) and operates with a 125W TDP. The chip can scale to a 250W Maximum Turbo Power (MTP), which is the maximum power limit that this CPU can consume for short periods when running at maximum turbo boost frequencies

Intel has also standardized several enthusiast-level performance tweaks for Arrow Lake Refresh, most notably a 900 MHz increase in die-to-die frequency and a 400 MHz fabric speed boost. It also officially supports faster DDR5-7200, along with 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 5 and 76MB of total cache. Possibly the only major concern with the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the LGA 1851 platform. With Intel's next-generation Nova Lake processors expected to launch later this year, the current platform will have a relatively short lifespan, restricting any future upgrade options.

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D serves as a more affordable, lower-clocked variant of the 7800X3D, featuring the same eight Zen 4 cores with a peak boost clock of 4.5 GHz. Its primary architectural strength is its 104MB of total cache including 64MB of vertically stacked L3, which is specifically tuned to eliminate memory latency bottlenecks.

The chip is rated at a 120W TDP with a 162W Package Power Tracking (PPT) limit, though it frequently operates well below these levels during gaming. A major selling point for Team Red is motherboard flexibility as the 7700X3D can be used with existing AM5 motherboards (600 and 800-series chipsets), and AMD has committed to supporting the socket through at least 2029.

⭐ Winner: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

While AMD offers a more stable platform and superior gaming efficiency thanks to its large cache size, Intel’s hardware package is more comprehensive for the price. The 270K Plus offers triple the core count, significantly higher frequencies, and faster memory support.

Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs Ryzen 7 9700X

To evaluate the gaming performance of these two chips, we conducted our testing at 1080p resolution using an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090. We used this setup to prevent the GPU from becoming the bottleneck, allowing each CPU's gaming performance to shine through. By removing the graphics card as a limiting factor, we can see exactly how the 7700X3D’s 3D V-Cache stacks up against the higher core count and clock speeds of the 270K Plus.

Across a comprehensive 16-game geomean, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D holds its position as the superior gaming chip, delivering a 174.3 FPS average. This represents a 5.3% performance lead over the 270K Plus, which produced a 165.6 FPS average. While Intel's latest flagship has significantly narrowed the gap compared to the original Arrow Lake silicon, AMD’s 3D V-cache architecture continues to provide a higher performance in the majority of tested titles.

Even when examining the 1% low frame rates, which is the perceived smoothness while gaming, the 7700X3D maintains a slight edge with a 118 FPS average compared to the 115 FPS from the 270K Plus.

AMD's stacked cache gives the 7700X3D a clear edge in games that are sensitive to memory latency. For instance, in Minecraft RT, the 7700X3D delivered 144.5 FPS average, dwarfing the 89.7 FPS produced by the 270K Plus for a massive 61.1% performance advantage. We see similarly dominant leads for AMD in F1 2024, where it leads by 30.4% (201.8 vs. 154.7 FPS), and in Final Fantasy XIV, where it holds a 21.7% lead (177.7 vs. 146.0 FPS). Even in esports titles like Counter-Strike 2, the 7700X3D maintains a comfortable 7.3% lead with 707.9 FPS over Intel’s 660.0 FPS.

Intel’s Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is no slouch, however, as it leverages its higher boost frequencies and the new iBOT runtime translation layer to take the lead in several games. Intel manages a win in Hogwarts Legacy, producing 135.3 FPS for a 9.1% advantage over AMD’s 124.0 FPS, a result directly attributed to iBOT. Team Blue also edges out victories in The Last of Us Part 1 with 175.6 FPS (6% lead) and Spider-Man 2 with 207.2 FPS (5% lead).

In many other modern titles, the two processors are essentially locked in a dead heat. For example, in DOOM: The Dark Ages, the 270K Plus delivers 200.4 FPS while the 7700X3D is right beside it at 200.0 FPS. The story is similar in Flight Simulator 24, where Intel's 120.5 FPS and AMD's 114.9 FPS result in a negligible difference during actual gameplay. These results indicate that while the 7700X3D is the more consistent gaming choice, especially in cache-heavy titles, the 270K Plus is a highly competitive gaming chip that delivers impressive results for its $300 price tag.

The biggest difference between these two architectures is noticeable when analyzing power consumption and efficiency metrics. Based on our 16-game CPU power geomean, the 7700X3D is clearly way more efficient, drawing an average of just 60.9 watts while gaming. In comparison, the 270K Plus consumed 107.3 watts on average, which is a significant 76.2% increase in power. This results in a massive gap in gaming efficiency where the 7700X3D delivers 2.86 FPS per watt, making it roughly 85.7% more efficient than the 270K Plus, which trails at 1.54 FPS per watt.

Intel does take the lead when it comes to raw frequency, with the 270K Plus maintaining an impressive 5,247 MHz average clock speed across our gaming suite. This is over 700 MHz faster than the 7700X3D, which averaged 4,505 MHz. Despite the much higher clocks and power draw of the Intel chip, its thermal management remains surprisingly competitive when paired with the right cooling solution. The 270K Plus averaged 59°C during gaming, though it still runs warmer than the 7700X3D, which stays at a cooler 55°C average.

When factoring in the cost of the silicon, the competition for the best bang for your buck is incredibly tight. The Ryzen 7 7700X3D provides a value of 0.53 FPS per dollar, narrowly edging out the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, which sits at 0.52 FPS per dollar.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

The 7700X3D’s overall higher average frame rates and excellent efficiency makes it the more attractive option for a dedicated gaming build. Since raw gaming performance, efficiency, and thermals all favor Team Red in this category, the Ryzen 7 7700X3D takes the win for this round.

Productivity Performance: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

AMD's X3D processors are widely known for their gaming prowess. However, they have historically struggled to maintain the same level of dominance in productivity performance. The Ryzen 7 7700X3D is no exception, as its cache-focused architecture and lower clock speeds result in relatively weak single- and multi-threaded results.

In contrast, Intel has managed to maintain its standing in the productivity segment even when its gaming performance faced challenges. The 270K Plus is a productivity workhorse that is capable of delivering excellent productivity performance making it a standout choice for users who need a balanced system for both work and play.

In multi-threaded workloads, the performance gap between these two processors is pretty massive, primarily driven by Intel's higher core count advantage. Across our multi-threaded performance ranking geomean, the Intel chip delivers a score of 626 compared to the 272 produced by the 7700X3D, representing a staggering 130% performance lead for Team Blue. This level of parallel processing power places the 270K Plus in a completely different performance tier, making it more comparable to much more expensive flagship processors.

Individual benchmarks further highlight this lopsided victory for Intel across various professional tasks. In Cinebench 2024’s multi-core test, the 270K Plus scores 2,509 points, which is roughly 135.6% faster than the 1,065 points achieved by the 7700X3D. This trend continues in POV-Ray, where Intel leads by approximately 169.5% (15,697 vs. 5,823 PPS), and in V-Ray 6, where it maintains a massive 129.5% advantage (45,016 vs. 19,615). Even in intensive video encoding tasks via HandBrake x265, the Intel chip more than doubles the performance of its AMD rival, delivering 29.9 FPS compared to just 14.3 FPS for the 7700X3D. These results demonstrate that for heavy rendering or data-crunching workloads, Intel is the undisputed leader in this price bracket.

A similar trend can be seen when examining single-threaded performance, a crucial metric for general system responsiveness and applications that do not scale across multiple cores. In our single-threaded geomean, the 270K Plus scores 278 points, which is 42.5% faster than the 195 achieved by the 7700X3D. Specific tests like Cinebench 2024’s single-core benchmark show the 270K Plus maintaining a 39.7% lead over the 7700X3D (145 vs. 103.8 points), while the lead grows to a staggering 82.6% in POV-Ray’s single-core test (1,138 vs. 623 PPS). Even in audio encoding, the Intel chip finishes the Lame Extended task in 68.61 seconds, whereas the 7700X3D trails at 91.53 seconds.

⭐Winner: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

Ultimately, the 270K Plus simply blows the competition out of the water when it comes to productivity. While the 7700X3D is a highly efficient and specialized CPU for gaming, it cannot match the raw horsepower that Intel offers. For any user whose daily routine involves video editing, 3D rendering, or heavy multitasking, the 270K Plus is the obvious choice and should be the clear favorite for a multi-purpose system.

Overclocking: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

While both manufacturers provide tools to squeeze extra performance from their silicon, the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is built as an enthusiast-friendly, fully unlocked processor. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D, on the other hand, is a more restricted processor designed primarily for out-of-the-box gaming efficiency.

For the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, overclocking is a centerpiece of the experience. As a fully unlocked K-series SKU, it offers users granular control over per-core voltages, power limits, and clock speeds via an unlocked multiplier. While these changes can be done by entering the BIOS, one can also download the Intel XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility) software to fine tune the CPU.

One of the most significant changes seen on Arrow Lake Refresh is that Intel has standardized several high-end performance tweaks including the 900MHz die-to-die frequency bump and the 400MHz fabric speed increase. This means users receive enthusiast-level interconnect performance without necessarily needing a premium Z-series motherboard. That said, Z890 boards are still necessary as they offer sophisticated tools for manual tuning and pushing the CPU to its limits.

In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D follows the same path as previous Zen 4 X3D processors including a locked multiplier, which prevents traditional manual overclocking. Users are instead limited to automated and semi-automated features like Precision Boost Overdrive 2 (PBO2) and Curve Optimizer. PBO2 allows the CPU to dynamically adjust its frequencies based on available power and thermal headroom, while Curve Optimizer enables more advanced fine-tune voltage offsets for each of the eight Zen 4 cores.

While these tools can lead to sustained higher boost clocks, the sensitive nature of the 3D V-Cache stack leads to thermal challenges that limit frequency headroom. Thus, overclocking gains on the 7700X3D are often minimal compared to the flexibility offered by the Intel chip.

⭐Winner: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

The 270K Plus is a far more overclocking-friendly product. It offers a vast suite of features that AMD simply cannot match due to its architectural restrictions and locked multiplier.

Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

This is a crucial section of the faceoff as it highlights the most significant architectural divide between these two processors. While the 270K Plus prioritizes raw performance throughput, the 7700X3D focuses on extreme efficiency. This is immediately evident in their official power ratings where Intel specifies a 125W TDP with a massive 250W Maximum Turbo Power (MTP), while AMD utilizes a 120W TDP with a 162W Package Power Tracking (PPT) limit.

In synthethic multi-threaded workloads, the difference is quite evident. While running HandBrake x265 10-bit encode, the 270K Plus consumes an average of 226W, which is more than triple the 72W required by the Ryzen 7 7700X3D. A similar trend appears in VP9 encoding, where Intel draws 184W compared to AMD’s efficient 65W. Even in lighter tasks like single-threaded y-cruncher AVX workloads, the Intel chip requires 55W while the AMD chip stays at a modest 32W. Idle power consumption also favors Team Red where the 7700X3D idles at 19W and draws 22W during YouTube playback, whereas the 270K Plus sits higher at 29W and 38W, respectively.

When we translate these power figures into efficiency metrics, AMD’s lead tends to stay ahead in most traditional benchmarks. In Cinebench 2024, the 7700X3D produces 14.4 points per watt, significantly outperforming the 10.4 points per watt from the 270K Plus. In HandBrake x265, AMD achieves a superior efficiency rating of 5W per FPS , while Intel trails at 7.56W per FPS.

However, the efficiency scatter plots provide a more nuanced look at how performance scaling impacts total energy consumption. In the Blender Classroom scatterplot, the 270K Plus delivers a much higher performance of roughly 135 samples per minute, but it consumes over 33,000 kJ of task energy. In contrast, the 7700X3D finishes with only around 60 samples per minute but uses significantly less total energy at roughly 4,500 kJ.

The HandBrake x265 scatterplot shows a similar trade-off where Intel reaches 30 FPS but consumes over 55 kJ, while AMD provides 14 FPS at roughly 36 kJ. Interestingly, the Linpack scatterplot shows the 270K Plus reaching over 850 GFLOPS with roughly 11WHr of energy, making it slightly more efficient in terms of performance-per-energy than the 7700X3D, which delivers roughly 340 GFLOPS for 10Whr.

From a cooling perspective, the 250W MTP on the 270K Plus means that it requires a robust cooling solution, like a 360mm AIO, to avoid thermal throttling during extended all-core loads. The 7700X3D is far easier to manage, remaining remarkably efficient and manageable with a mid-range air cooler. While the 270K Plus delivers class leading performance, it does so by significantly compromising efficiency in heavy workloads compared to AMD.

⭐Winner: AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

Pricing: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus was initially introduced with a justified $300 price tag, but you'll now find it between $300 and $320. The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D made its debut just last month and carries a $330 MSRP, placing it right under the 7800X3D. Essentially, there is not a major difference when it comes to the chips themselves, however, the true financial divide becomes apparent when we look at the total platform cost.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus demands a more substantial investment to reach its full potential. While one can opt for a B860 motherboard, a compatible Z890 motherboard is necessary in order to access premium overclocking and tuning features. These typically start around $150-$200, and can go as high as $600 packed with premium features. To handle the processor′s 250W Maximum Turbo Power(MTP) during heavy productivity tasks, a high−end 360mm AIO liquid cooler ($100-$150) or a dual-tower air-cooler ($50-$100) is recommended.

In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D offers a much more budget-friendly entry point. A solid B650 motherboard can be found for around $120-$150 and the chip can be effectively cooled with a modest $50 air cooler.

Unfortunately, both platforms are held back by the ongoing global shortage of memory, which has caused prices to shoot up significantly. Since both CPUs require DDR5 RAM, builders are stuck in a RAMpocalypse where a basic 32GB kit costs over $400. This extra cost is bad news for both sides as it cancels out any price advantage.

Overall, the lower upfront platform cost makes the 7700X3D a slightly more attractive option for users prioritizing their budget. Furthermore, the AM5 socket offers a clear upgrade path through at least 2029, ensuring that your motherboard investment remains viable for future CPU generations. That is not the case with Intel, as the LGA 1851 socket is expected to be replaced once the next-generation of Nova Lake CPUs arrive.

⭐ Winner: AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

Ultimately, while both the chips are available at a very similar price range, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D is the smarter financial play for a majority of users. Its significantly lower platform costs, superior gaming efficiency, and guaranteed platform longevity provide a level of value that the more power-hungry Intel refresh cannot quite match.

Bottom Line: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus vs AMD Ryzen 7 7700X3D

The Ryzen 7 7700X3D and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus are designed for very different users, even though they sit in roughly the same price range. Like previous X3D chips, AMD's latest processor is built with gaming in mind, using its large 3D V-Cache to deliver excellent frame rates while keeping power consumption impressively low. Intel, on the other hand, combines a 24-core design with higher clock speeds and platform improvements to create one of the strongest productivity processors in its class without giving up much gaming performance.

The final score is tied at three rounds apiece. AMD comfortably wins gaming performance, power efficiency, and platform value, three factors that matter a lot for buyers shopping in this price segment. The AM5 platform also provides a significantly longer upgrade path, allowing users to drop in future processors without replacing their motherboard.

Intel, however, deserves recognition for what it has accomplished with the 270K Plus. It delivers outstanding single- and multi-threaded performance, offers a fully unlocked overclocking experience, and narrows the gaming gap to just a few percentage points in many modern titles. If your workload includes video editing, software development, 3D rendering, or other heavily threaded applications, the 270K Plus is the obvious choice and justifies its higher power draw.

For everyone else, the Ryzen 7 7700X3D is the more compelling CPU. It offers faster gaming performance, exceptional efficiency, lower platform costs, and a future-proof AM5 ecosystem. Unless your workload regularly extends beyond gaming into demanding productivity applications, AMD's latest X3D chip is the easier processor to recommend.

⭐ Winner: Tie

More CPU Faceoffs

• AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 vs Ryzen 9 9950X3D
• Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X
• AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D vs Intel Core i9-14900K
• AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D vs Ryzen 7 9800X3D

From the outside, the Phantom Drive, created by Rootkit Labs, appears like a boring old USB. It has that classic, cheap plastic-feeling look to it that would never make you second-guess its intention; when you plug it in, it shows up as just an 8GB drive. However, under the hood, the Phantomdrive is powered by a microSD card that only unlocks itself when you specifically create a new text file, after which it mounts the secret partition, which comes with AES-256 encryption. It's made for situations and places where you might be forced to reveal the contents of a storage device.

The Phantomdrive is built using the CH569 microcontroller that has a bunch of different hardware blocks — this project uses the USB3, SD/eMMC, and the AES block. There are no NAND chips directly onboard the custom PCB because of the ongoing component crisis. Instead, the Phantomdrive relies on a simple microSD card (that you provide; it doesn't come with one) for both its 8GB decoy partition and the hidden partition. The creator does say they'll make a version with eMMC modules once prices come down.

Of course, if someone were to open up the drive, they'd be able to physically rip the SD card out. However, it still wouldn't be a dead giveaway since many cheap USBs are powered by microSD cards, and SD card adapters are also a thing. Anyhow, the finished drive looks pretty simple from the inside; it comprises a USB port, two buck supplies, a button for firmware update, the microSD card, UART test points, and some support components. The custom firmware now comes into play.

The name of the game is interception. The firmware doesn't know it's being used to handle file transfers; it just reads raw packets of data being sent over the USB bus as is. It's coded to always look for a "password" string, so as soon as you create the unlock.txt file with "password:xyz" inside, it detects the "xyz" bit and copies it over to SRAM, while overwriting the raw data with a bunch of zeroes before it's written to the SD card. The operating system thinks it's created the new file, but the firmware intercepted it midway and sent essentially nothing to the physical storage cells.

The firmware uses the unique internal hardware ID of the microcontroller as the salt, combines it with the password you just typed, and runs the pair through PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA-256 hashes 100,000 times (you can also select 600,000 times) to create a key. Each run induces an intentional 2-3 second delay to deter brute-force attacks that would try to crack the password. The key is used to unlock and lock the hidden partition, and since it's tied to the silicon itself, putting the SD card into another Phantom Drive will not unlock it.

Even if you try to access it directly through a microSD card slot, it will stay hidden, and the 8GB decoy will actually appear like a broken partition. The creator has also provided the option to recompile the firmware on your own to spoof specific vendor IDs, so that the USB appears like it's from different brands. You can make the Phantomdrive pretend to be a cheap 16GB Kingston Datatraveler at the hardware protocol level, at which point no scanning software will flag it as anything more than a cheap USB.

There are Linux-based C tools you can use in case of emergency, however, to recover your data, such as physical damage to the board. The transfer speeds are also very limited because the project is built over USB 2 — 20 MB/s reads and 9 MB/s writes in AES-CTR mode. The speeds fall to 10 MB/s reads and 6 MB/s writes in AES-XTS, but at least you have the freedom to choose between the two according to your needs.

You can buy the Phantomdrive from Rootkit Labs for $50, but you can also build your own, since this is an open-source project. The prebuilt device comes with two extra shells because the pins wear off and break quickly. Otherwise, the GitHub repo provides all the resources, including the PCB layout files and schematics, the BOM for every part, and the custom firmware, alongside its related tools.

The creator of Phantomdrive, Ryan Walker, explains the goal behind the project as both utilitarian and political. It's built using entirely open-source software and with inexpensive, easily accessible components. They wanted to create something that could "slip past authoritarian government representatives, corrupt police, and anyone else that doesn't respect basis encryption rights."

Champion coder Yusuke Endoh has been flexing their esoteric programming muscles on social media. Their latest confection is a Piet Quine – a GIF image that prints itself. In other words, the GIF is both the code and the precise result after running the code.

If you haven’t quite grasped the enormity of this feat from the title, it is worth breaking down the respective definitions of both Piet and Quine in a computer programming context. Piet is an esoteric programming language in which programs look like complex, colorful, tiled artwork. Inventor David Morgan-Mar named it after Piet Mondrian, the famous founder of the neoplasticism artistic movement. Such artwork is immediately recognizable with its bold squares and rectangles bordered by heavy black lines. Smaller Piet GIFs look a bit more Mondrian-y to me, but also look more like colorful QR codes than paintings.

Endoh has created a Quine, graphically. In computer coding, a Quine is a program that produces a copy of its own source code without any external input. This can be quite a tricky feat, even when confined to the world of ASCII text. A requirement of this coding art is that the output is a character-for-character identical representation of the input. It must not simply read its own file to do the duplication task.

When merging the two ideas above, together, things get a whole lot more complicated. However, the top-linked blog and the embedded video shine a light on the task at hand and how Endoh succeeded. Specifically, the video shows Piet Quine running. The Piet interpreter scans the source GIF image in a ‘load data’ phase, followed by a read of the GIF file header and palette info. The challenge here, raising the task above text Quines, is that the GIF folds in binary data, compression, and an awkward flow – they must all be handled deliberately to end up with the desired result.

A key thing to understand about the source image is that it includes a separately interpreted data part, compressed with an adaptive run-length encoding, and a code part. Endoh says that they managed to actually first achieve this way back in 2009, but the GIF was very tall, so not ideal for visual appreciation. The developer decided to ask Claude Code to analyze and reconstruct the original script and build a ‘landscape’ Piet Quine. Even with AI's help, it wasn’t easy to refine the design to the compact finished GIF seen in this article and video. Only after much work on shrinking the visuals and coaching Claude was the GIF shoehorned into the finished 4:3 landscape image (252 x 189 pixels).

Finally, Endoh reveals that a driving force behind their Piet Quine development efforts was the wish to raise awareness of the 2026 Obfuscated Programming Language Design Contest, which is running right now. If you can, please design an esoteric programming language and submit it! Endoh is one of the judges, and you have until October 1 to make your submission(s).

Micron used to produce some of the best RAM available to mainstream users through its Crucial brand. Despite the company's exit from the consumer market through its now-defunct Crucial brand, Micron had pledged to continue honoring warranties on existing Crucial products. A recent case on Reddit, however, highlights ongoing challenges with Micron's warranty process, where it reportedly offered a customer a ludicrous payout for an RMA. Only after further communication did Micron provide an improved offer. Another user also chimed in with a similar story about an SSD return with Micron. We have reached out to Micron for comment.

Redditor Key_Tailor6948, who shared the email exchange with Tom's Hardware, recently shared their RMA experience with Micron's warranty process after encountering a failing memory module from a 48GB (2x24GB) DDR5 memory kit. While the Redditor did not specify the exact model of the memory kit, Crucial used to sell two such kits in this capacity: the Crucial Pro DDR5-6000 C48 and the Crucial Pro DDR5-5600 C46. The last known pricing for the memory kits was $489.99 and $459.99, respectively, during the memory shortage.

According to the Redditor, Micron allegedly said in an email that the company is no longer offering replacement products for warranty claims. Instead, Micron purportedly stated it would provide a refund based on the original purchase price, including taxes where applicable. However, the proposed refund amount was $241.86.

The major issue at hand is that the reimbursement Micron offered was based on the cost of the 48GB memory kit purchased before the recent memory shortage and the resulting price hikes. Nowadays, the most affordable 48GB DDR5 memory kit available on the market, such as a DDR5-6400 C32 one, which is faster than Micron’s discontinued offerings, starts at a staggering $649.99. The refund Micron proposed amounts to just 37% of the current market value for a somewhat comparable product. The Redditor's math about being 17% of market value and estimating similar-capacity memory kits going for “roughly $1,400" is a bit off based on verifiable pricing, but the proposed payment was still well short of current market value.

Beyond the disappointment over the low reimbursement, the Redditor expressed frustration that they had to send back the entire 48GB memory kit, even though only one of the two modules was faulty. This meant parting with a memory module that was still fully functional. Unfortunately, this is a common industry practice. Most manufacturers require the return of the full memory kit for warranty claims. It is exceedingly rare for companies to allow returns or replacements of only a single memory module from a multi-module kit, regardless of whether the other module is working perfectly.

The Redditor was also not happy about covering the shipping costs to return the defective memory module. This is another policy that varies widely among brands: some manufacturers cover all shipping fees, others split the cost, so you cannot really single out Micron in that aspect.

It would seem that Micron subsequently offered a more favorable resolution. The company agreed to send the user three Crucial Pro DDR5-6400 C32 16GB (CP16G64C32U5B) memory modules as a replacement. This solution matches the original capacity of 48GB and also delivers better performance than the user's original memory kit. The user accepted the offer.

Meanwhile, Crucial SSD owners are seemingly experiencing similar RMA practices from Micron. A Reddit user named LeanaIsTheBest highlighted in the same thread that Micron is allegedly refusing to provide direct replacements for a failing 4TB SSD. Instead, the company ostensibly offered a gift card equivalent to the original purchase price of the 4TB SSD as compensation. However, the company provided an alternate option to receive the same amount in cash through PayPal or Venmo with the condition that the user pays the 6% transaction fee.

Micron wound down its consumer business back in December 2025. It is reasonable to think the chipmaker has reshaped its manufacturing factories to cater to more profitable markets, such as data centers and the AI sector. Micron probably is not maintaining inventory or production lines for consumer products, so direct replacements are unlikely. For a company that reported revenue of $41.46 billion in its last earnings call, it isn't a great look for Micron to not reimburse the replacement cost for loyal customers who have purchased its Crucial products.

The owner of what is claimed to be “the original engineering copy of the Intel 8080 rubylith mask” has shared a social media shout-out, looking for a skilled restorer. From the shared photograph, this important artifact from the history of computing looks like it would benefit from remounting and reframing. Hopefully, the hand‑crafted, large‑scale sheet of red film (Rubylith) has remained in good condition under glass, though. The framed artifact is likely genuine and original, as its current owner is thought to be related to Internet Hall of Fame inductee Dan Lynch, a pivotal figure in the early Internet’s success.

In you unfurl the tweet above, you can see Tom Lynch, a self-described arborist and the owner of an AI infrastructure startup, standing behind the framed chip artwork. Folks comment on the Rubylith looking just like the one that the Intel Trinity: Andy Grove, Robert Noyce, and Gordon Moore, were photographed beside in 1978.

Rubylith is simply an adhesive, peelable red film that found favor in graphic arts and chip design before designers went digital. Engineers could cut away parts of the film to define where light would be exposed during photolithography processes. Rubyliths would often be marked with pens, tape, and overlays, especially as designs were iterated and refined ahead of tape-out.

The Intel 8080’s primary architect was Federico Faggin, and it was manually drafted in the age before modern CAD. This human-scale draft is likely 100x magnification compared to the finished processor die. Even scaled this large, it would still be quite an intricate drawing as it had to map around 5,000 transistors, traces, etc., into an approximate 20- x 16-inch sheet. The commercial Intel 8080 release ended up being manufactured on a 6 μm silicon gate process. It originally ran at 2.0 MHz clocks, but later revisions would boast clock speeds up to 3.125 MHz.

Intel’s 8080 was an important 8-bit microprocessor for both the company and the advancement of personal computing. This 8-bit CPU was the one chosen for the Altair 8800, was the original target architecture for the CP/M operating system, and would be a big influence on the later x86 architecture. We also recently wrote how the 8080 bottlenecked the Space Invaders arcade design, unintentionally resulting in the space shoot-em-up’s thrilling increase in pacing as aliens were zapped from the sky.

Some announcements arrive with fireworks, while others show up as a single easily missed tweet during a flurry of QuakeCon announcements to quietly close one of the longest-running oddities in PC gaming. After roughly 25 years, Return to Castle Wolfenstein (RTCW) is finally available in Germany in its original, uncut form. Bethesda Deutschland dropped the news amidst its QuakeCon announcements, bringing an end to a censorship saga regarding Nazi symbolism that stretches all the way back to the game's original 2001 release.

If you weren't around for PC gaming in 2001, it's hard to overstate how different the landscape looked. NVIDIA's GeForce 3 had only recently introduced programmable shaders to consumer graphics cards, the ATI Radeon 8500 was fresh competition, Windows XP was brand new, and legendary pioneers 3dfx had just disappeared after being acquired by NVIDIA. Broadband internet was becoming more common, but plenty of multiplayer sessions still happened over LANs, and a Pentium III or Athlon paired with 256 MB of RAM was enough to run one of the latest engine technology showcases.

Built on id Tech 3, perhaps better known as the tech that powered the incredible Quake III Arena, Grey Matter's Return to Castle Wolfenstein looked fantastic for its day, and it also inherited the series' unmistakable identity. See, ever since Castle Wolfenstein in 1981, and even more so after Wolfenstein 3D essentially invented the first-person shooter as we know it a decade later, the games have been about one thing above all else: shooting Nazis.

That identity created a problem in Germany. For decades, games depicting Nazi symbolism faced legal and regulatory hurdles that films did not, resulting in a heavily modified German version. In RTCW, swastikas disappeared, Nazi organizations were renamed, Heinrich Himmler became the fictional "Heinrich Höller," and references to the Third Reich gave way to the equally fictional "Wolf Clan."

At first glance, that sounds like the sort of censorship that simply strips away context, yet RTCW was already a strange game. The opening hours suggest a relatively grounded World War II action title. You wake up in a prison with a knife, you fight Nazis in a castle, and things seem normal for about a whole hour before rapidly veering into supernatural pulp. Within a few missions, you're fighting zombies, exploring haunted crypts, and watching the SS dabble in increasingly implausible occult experiments.

By the end, the final boss isn't Hitler (mech suit or no) or a secret superweapon, but Heinrich I, historically known as Henry the Fowler. He was a real 10th-century German king, supposedly resurrected in the game through dark ritual. He's also somewhat infamously a surprisingly manageable final boss, making for a finish both absurd and anticlimactic after the game's escalating parade of undead knights and bizarre experiments.

Seen through that lens, the censored version accidentally became a different story. Instead of Nazis attempting to exploit medieval occult power, it played more like an ancient secret society preserving itself across the centuries before trying to resurrect its long-dead founder. It's arguably a cleaner fantasy premise. The "Wolf Clan" makes more narrative sense once the game fully commits to gothic horror. However, it does make the opening chapters, where an OSS Ranger is somehow investigating a shadowy organization seemingly unrelated to the wider war, a bit awkward.

The catch, of course, is that it stops feeling much like Wolfenstein. The series' DNA is inseparable from infiltrating Nazi strongholds and sabotaging increasingly desperate attempts to turn the tide of World War II. Remove that element, and the title itself starts to feel like an artifact from another game series altogether.

It's a curious example of something that occasionally happens with censorship across entertainment. More often than not, edits simply leave a work feeling diminished. Every so often, though, these constraints produce something unexpectedly memorable. The Texas Chain Saw Massacre owes much of its enduring reputation to how much horror it leaves to implication rather than explicit gore, and that decision was made due to the ratings board. Similarly, action film edits for TV often cut gory death scenes, which can ironically improve the pacing of the film.

Return to Castle Wolfenstein belongs in that same conversation, albeit for different reasons. The German version wasn't a better version of the game in any objective sense, but it accidentally shifted the genre. Instead of occult Nazis, it became a story about an ancient cult whose descendants had survived into the modern era. That's a premise that I personally find more appealing and even internally consistent, even if it comes at the expense of the series' defining theme.

So, after a quarter of a century, German players can finally buy the same uncensored game that much of the rest of the world has had since 2001. It's ironic, and it's about time, too. While Germany relaxed its gaming rules in 2018, allowing modern entries like The New Order to go uncut in 2019, Grey Matter's 2001 classic remained stuck in censorship limbo until now. For game preservation, historical authenticity, and simple consumer choice, that's unquestionably the right outcome. Yet it also marks the quiet retirement of one of gaming's strangest alternate versions; a release that, through a combination of legal necessity and narrative coincidence, accidentally stumbled into telling a very different and potentially more compelling story.

Folks in Germany should now be able to pick up the uncensored version of the classic game on sale for just two dollars at Steam and GOG, or you can get a bundle that includes the original Wolfenstein 3D for just a dollar more. If you grab it, make sure to check out the RealRTCW overhaul mod that radically improves the game with modern features like proper widescreen support and cleaner OpenAL audio.

The AI-driven memory apocalypse has made computer parts so expensive that the average buyer has stopped building PCs. Multiple research firms have already said that, but we’re now seeing it in action in the market. Uniko’s Hardware shared on X four crazy combos of RTX 5090 GPUs being sold on the Taiwanese e-commerce platform PChome24h.

Some of the GPUs that come with a lot of "freebies" include the Asus ROG Astral GeForce RTX 5090, Gigabyte Aorus RTX 5090 Master, MSI GeForce RTX 5090 Gaming Trio OC, and a Gigabyte Aorus RTX 5090 AI Box external graphics card. These items are priced in NTD, but we’ll list them below, including their retail prices in dollars (NTD 32.25 = USD $1 exchange rate) and the included items.

As we can see, even though GPU prices are quite inflated, many of them come with enough freebies that you can start building one high-end system and three to five entry-level gaming rigs. They’re still priced relatively high compared to Amazon or Newegg in the U.S., though, but we have to keep in mind that Taiwan is a different market, so there will likely be variations in prices plus VAT.

While this might be an amusing piece of trivia for some people, it’s actually evidence of a disturbing trend in the PC building industry. Multiple research firms have been saying that the market will contract by double digits this year, with the entry-level PC market being hit the hardest, and that it’s not expected to bounce back until 2029. These combos are just evidence of that, at least in Taiwan.

That’s because sellers often put slow-moving products in a combo to help get their inventory moving. Given the number of motherboards, entry-to-mid-range GPUs, and other components included in these combos, it’s safe to say that these items aren’t selling and retailers are doing all these crazy deals just to free up capital.

As the AI-driven memory crisis has pushed up the prices of memory and graphics cards, many have already paused or delayed their purchases and upgrades. Only those with deep pockets who can afford to spend thousands of dollars on parts and combos like these are still buying PC parts.

A powerful processor is at the heart of every exceptional gaming PC, and nothing rivals the performance of AMD's Ryzen 7 9800X3D. If you are building a new system or updating an existing one, this Ryzen 7 9800X3D bundle, which includes an MSI B850 Gaming Plus WiFi motherboard and an MSI MAG Coreliquid A13 240 AIO liquid cooler, is for you. This curated package is available for $458.99, a massive $160 off the regular price of purchasing the components separately.

• Check out the Ryzen 7 9800X3D bundle deal on Newegg

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the best gaming processor that money can buy right now. With an octa-core, 16-thread design and a massive 96MB of L3 cache, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D not only delivers top-notch gaming performance, but it also excels in productivity tasks. Whether you are assembling a system for gaming or serious work, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D provides a rock-solid platform for your build.

While the exclusive bundle does not include any DDR5 memory, it is not a big drawback. Thanks to its design, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D maintains stellar gaming performance regardless of whether you pair it with slow memory or even a single memory module. Therefore, you do not need to spend a fortune on premium memory, which is a big plus in this ongoing memory shortage.

On the motherboard side, Newegg's premium bundle includes a feature-rich MSI B860 Gaming Plus WiFi motherboard. It boasts a 12+2+1-phase power delivery subsystem that maximizes the Ryzen 7 9800X3D's performance while also offering ample headroom for overclocking for those who want to extract extra performance.

The B860 Gaming Plus WiFi comes equipped with four DDR5 memory slots that can accommodate up to 256GB of memory with blazing data rates up to DDR5-8200. Meanwhile, storage options arrive in the shape of three high-speed M.2 slots (one at PCIe 5.0 and two at PCIe 4.0) and four standard SATA III ports. The motherboard also has a PCIe 5.0 x16 expansion slot for pairing the Ryzen 7 9800X3D with one of the best graphics cards.

While the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is not a processor that runs very hot, you can never have too much cooling. The MSI MAG Coreliquid A13 240, a solid 240mm AIO liquid cooler, uses a high-performance pump, a thick radiator with wider water channels for a higher flow rate, and two pre-installed 120mm PWM fans that are quiet and performant.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D bundle will be available on Newegg for the entire month. The massive 26% discount translates to real, tangible savings, bringing the bundle down to just $458.99. It is a rare opportunity to secure the best gaming processor with a very decent motherboard and 240mm AIO liquid cooler at a price that you probably will not find elsewhere. Given the popularity of the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, the bundle will likely sell out very fast, so do not think too much before swiping your credit card.

If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, gaming chair, or CPU Deals pages.

The community of Gilroy, California, about 30 miles southwest of San Jose, was surprised when an Amazon data center started construction in their town last month. But as many projects like these have been suffering from opposition and delays across the country, the Wall Street Journal reports that this specific site avoided scrutiny by adhering to local zoning rules set 45 years ago.

Amazon’s Gilroy project sits on a 56-acre piece of farmland between a Walmart Supercenter and the Gilroy Premium Outlets. The company and the city didn’t exactly keep the project secret when it started its application in 2020. In fact, there were disagreements between the tech giant and the city government during the process. The publication noted that some Amazon officials were frustrated by slow permitting progress, which was delayed by at least one year. At the same time, the city pushed back on some of the company’s requests, especially if they were no longer up for discussion.

Roger Wehner, Amazon Web Services vice president of economic development, told WSJ that the site had gone through a long approval process, which required public notices and public-comment periods. However, when Gilroy resident Rosa Rodriguez wanted to state her concern about the damage a data center can do to a region suffering from drought, she was told that the comment period had already lapsed in 2024, long before data centers became a hot topic across the country.

Gilroy City Mayor Greg Bozzo said that other industrial projects that had a similar scale to the Amazon data center have previously been approved without resistance.

“It didn’t bother them that a food-distribution center came to Gilroy without their engagement, but now it bothers them that a data center is coming to Gilroy without them having the possibility of engagement,” Bozzo said.

Still, he conceded the people are now more aware about data center developments and added, “We…have an opportunity to change the way that we do business in Gilroy. We’re adapting to the times.”

The tech giant also said that it’s engaging more with the community, with Amazon officials claiming that they met residents directly and even hosted an open house where people can ask questions and leave comments. It also addressed fears that the development would cause a water shortage, which other data centers have already caused, saying the company is constructing a wastewater recovery system to supply its water needs and will even build a pipeline to bring wastewater from the source to its plant.

Bozzo also highlighted the benefits that Amazon will bring to the city, especially increased tax revenue, construction jobs, and a million-dollar donation towards a new fire truck. He also pointed out that the tech giant has been giving grants to non-profit organizations in the city, as well as sponsoring the annual Gilroy Garlic Festival.

But at this point, it’s not the Amazon data center the people of Gilroy are having an issue with. Instead, it’s the fact that a major project that has the potential to have a major impact on the community has been approved without the knowledge of many residents.

There are plenty of ultra-lightweight gaming mice in our best gaming mice picks — but there aren't any that have a built-in hand cooler.

Pulsar recently released a collaboration with infamous air-cooling advocate Noctua — a beige and brown mouse full of top-tier hardware and holes and a built-in 40mm NF-A4x10 fan. For cooling your hand, not the hardware. This eSports-oriented gaming mouse features Pulsar's XS-2 sensor, which has a maximum resolution of 42,000 DPI and a maximum speed of 800 IPS, and can handle up to 70 G's of force. It also features up to an 8,000 Hz polling rate, and, of course, the built-in fan. It retails for the same price as the original Feinmann F01 gaming mouse, which is to say, it's pretty pricey at $179.99.

Design and Comfort of the F01 Noctua Edition

The F01 Noctua Edition is a lightweight wireless eSports gaming mouse with an ergonomic right-handed shape and a hole-filled chassis with a built-in fan. It comes in Noctua's signature beige-and-brown color scheme: The top part of the chassis is light beige, while the bottom and accents (side buttons, scroll wheel, Noctua's logo plate, and some interior elements) are brown.

The F01 Noctua Edition has a right-handed, ergonomic shape with contoured primary mouse buttons and an off-center hump. It's a little smaller than most mainstream gaming mice, measuring 4.79 inches (121.7mm) long by 2.62 inches (66.5mm) wide and 1.7 inches (43.3mm) high at its thickest point. It weighs 2.57 ounces (73g), which is on the heavier side for what is supposed to be an ultra-lightweight eSports mouse. It's about an ounce heavier than the regular Pulsar Feinmann F01, which weighs 1.62 ounces (46g), thanks to the built-in fan.

The mouse features a matte chassis made of a carbon composite material for durability. The chassis is full of holes, but at least they serve a purpose (sort of) other than reducing weight and triggering your trypophobia: they're also there to keep your hand cool. In the center of the mouse you'll see a mini Noctua fan that directs air upward — toward your palm. You can activate this fan by holding down both side buttons and scrolling up. There are four different fan speeds, indicated by the small LED indicator light on the left side of the mouse, which you can cycle through by scrolling up or down with both. Holding down both buttons and scrolling down turns the fan off.

Button-wise, it's pretty standard: primary mouse buttons, two side buttons, a power button / DPI switch on the bottom, and a ridged, notched scroll wheel made of aluminum alloy. The mouse feels sturdy and the metal scroll wheel makes it seem a little fancier — it definitely looks and feels pretty premium. I did think the side buttons felt like they were placed a little too far back, but after comparing the F01 Noctua Edition with other mice, the actual issue is that the side buttons are larger than average — and this results in the back button sitting further back on the chassis. It wasn't a dealbreaker, but I found it mildly uncomfortable.

The bottom of the mouse features two large PTFE mouse feet at the top and bottom, as well as a strip of PTFE around the sensor. There are five geometric cutouts surrounding the sensor, as well as the power button / DPI switch.

The mouse comes with a separate 8K polling dongle, which has two buttons (a programmable profile switch button and a DPI switch), and a 6-foot (1.8m) detachable, braided USB-C to USB-A cable. Both the dongle and the cable come in Noctua's signature colors (the dongle is brown and the cable has a beige fabric covering with brown accents).

Specs

Performance of the F01 Noctua Edition

The F01 Noctua Edition mouse features Pulsar's XS-2 optical sensor, which has a maximum resolution of 42,000 DPI and a maximum speed of 800 IPS, and can handle up to 70 G's of force. The mouse also features Pulsar's optical switches in its primary buttons (rated for up to 100 million clicks), and can get up to an 8,000 Hz polling rate. The sensor doesn't disappoint — its tracking was accurate and speedy in my tests, and it worked perfectly across a variety of surfaces (including glass). The only thing I can see affecting performance in this mouse is its weight — it's not heavy, but it's heavier than most of its competition.

As I mentioned earlier, at 73g the mouse is on the heavy side for an ultra-lightweight eSports mouse — and it's an entire ounce heavier than the fan-less version. I guess that makes sense considering... there's a fan inside it, but still. If you're looking for an ultra-lightweight gaming mouse and you're not particularly intrigued by the fan, there are lighter, cheaper mice out there, such as my favorite Razer DeathAdder V4 Pro, which weighs 56g and costs $169.99.

I'll admit I was a bit skeptical about the fan — I'm not really a person who suffers from sweaty palms while I'm gaming, however, so I'm aware I'm not the target audience. But as someone who is not the target audience, I have to say that the fan is actually pretty cool (pun intended). It's small, yes, but you can definitely feel it — and even though I don't sweat much, it still felt pretty good. The fan has four speeds, and the first two are practically silent. You can hear the two fastest speeds, but it's not particularly loud — you'll notice it, but those around you probably won't.

Activating the fan using the two side buttons and scroll wheel was easy enough, though the side buttons will activate when you press them, so it's not perfect. You can also turn on and adjust the fan speed in the software and/or you can program one of the buttons on the dongle to cycle through speeds.

If you do get sweaty palms while gaming, or you just happen to live and game in a hot environment, the fan in this mouse definitely works. It takes a toll on battery life, of course, but you can always plug it in. That said, that part of the mouse is practically non-existent, the holes are so big (it's even more full of holes than the Corsair Sabre v2 Pro Wireless MG). The structure of the mouse honestly keeps your hand — or at least your palm — pretty cool, even without a fan.

Features and Software of the F01 Noctua Edition

The F01 Noctua Edition is largely controllable via the hardware, which is nice. The fan can be activated and adjusted by holding down the two side buttons and scrolling, and DPI can be cycled through using the DPI switch button on the bottom of the mouse or the DPI switch button on the wireless dongle. The dongle also has a function button that cycles through onboard profiles by default — so you will need to connect to Pulsar's web-based peripheral software, Bibimbap, if you want to take advantage of this.

With Bibimbap — which you can connect to wirelessly — lets you remap keys (there are five programmable buttons, including the scroll wheel click) and has a built-in macro recorder. You can also adjust various settings, including DPI steps (up to 6), polling rate (ships with 1,000 Hz and goes up to 8,000 Hz), LOD or liftoff distance, and debounce time. You can also turn on the fan from this app, if you want. You can save up to five profiles directly on the mouse and cycle through them with the function button, or you can remap the function button to cycle through polling rate, LOD, debounce time, motion sync, turbo mode, and fan mode. That last one just does the same thing that holding down both mouse buttons and scrolling does, but it doesn't accidentally activate the side button functions.

Wireless Experience and Battery Life of the F01 Noctua Edition

The F01 Noctua Edition features two forms of connectivity: 2.4GHz wireless and wired (via USB-C). It doesn't have any RGB lighting, but it does have a built-in 40mm 5V PWM NF-A4x10 fan with four different speed settings. Oh, and an 8,000 Hz polling rate. Needless to say, its battery life varies quite a bit, depending on how you have it set up. Its built-in battery is 500mAh, which is... well, don't expect much when it comes to battery life. Based on my observations as I tested the mouse, I think you'll still be able to eke out a full day's worth of usage if you have the fan running at top speed, which is not a lot compared to most wireless mice, but not bad, considering.

Bottom Line

The F01 Noctua Edition is a very well-built lightweight gaming mouse, but its main selling point is definitely the built-in fan. And the built-in fan works pretty well — I was definitely impressed, even if I don't see myself using it very often (or at all, really). But if you don't need a mouse with a built-in fan, it's hard to recommend the F01 Noctua Edition over just about any other lighter, more affordable mouse, including Pulsar's own fan-free Feinmann F01. The Corsair Sabre v2 Pro Wireless, for example, weighs just 56g and has a shell full of holes, gets up to an 8,000 Hz polling rate and retails for $149.99.

The best RAM on the market generally utilizes integrated circuits (ICs) from industry giants such as SK hynix, Samsung, or Micron. Recently, however, Chinese chipmaker ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) has emerged as a strong competitor amid the ongoing global memory shortage. In Colorful's latest overclocking exhibition, CXMT's ICs achieved speeds up to DDR5-8800 on AMD's X870E platform, keeping pace with the best overclocking ICs, such as SK hynix's A-die and M-die.

Many often regard CXMT as an underdog in the memory industry, particularly when compared to the "Big Three." Founded only a decade ago, the ambitious Chinese chipmaker eventually became China's largest domestic memory manufacturer and is now the fourth-largest memory maker globally.

The recent memory shortage has accelerated CXMT’s rise to fame. The chipmaker has been silently gaining ground in the memory market. Its momentum has been especially evident in the DDR5 segment despite the company having only unveiled its first DDR5 ICs in November 2025. Many top Chinese memory brands, including Asgard, Colorful, Gloway, and KingBank, are widely using CXMT ICs, and even Corsair has done so to a certain extent.

Colorful showed off an incredible overclock with its iGame Shadow II DDR5-6000 C34 memory kits, pushing both the 32GB (2x16GB) and 48GB (2x24GB) configurations far beyond their rated speeds. These kits reached DDR5-8812 and DDR5-8817, respectively, on Colorful's iGame X870E Vulcan W OC motherboard. Unfortunately, the screenshots provided by Colorful were too blurry to discern detailed specifications such as memory timings or DRAM voltage. For context, some high-end DDR5-8800 memory kits typically operate at timings around 42-55-55-140 with a voltage of 1.45V.

The noteworthy aspect is that Colorful achieved the overclocking feat on 16GB memory modules. Most, if not all, DDR5-8600 and faster memory kits currently on the market come with 24GB memory modules. The reason is that many use SK hynix’s 24Gb (3GB) M-die ICs, produced on the chipmaker's advanced 1a-nm (~14nm) process node with Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) lithography. These M-die ICs are the go-to choice for memory vendors thanks to their superior density, power efficiency, and ability to scale to higher frequencies.

In comparison, CXMT’s accomplishments are notable when considering the technological challenges. Due to U.S. export restrictions on China, CXMT does not have access to cutting-edge EUV equipment, so its 16nm node, which it uses for DDR5 ICs, leverages Deep Ultraviolet (DUV) machines instead. CXMT’s 16nm process is roughly in the same alley as the 1z nm (~14–15nm) nodes previously used by the Big Three, so CXMT is easily a few years behind the top-tier process nodes.

The reality is that CXMT will have to make do with what it has. The chipmaker is already developing a 1a-nm node but on DUV. It is far from prime time, though.

In addition to seeing CXMT ICs in mainstream memory kits, companies such as HP, Asus, and Acer have already started selling consumer devices, such as laptops or desktops with CXMT memory. Even Apple reportedly wants to buy memory chips from CXMT.

CXMT recently went public via IPO and saw its stock price skyrocket by 466%, raising over $8.6 billion. Without access to EUV machinery, CXMT will focus primarily on memory production and is rapidly building factories across China. The ambitious Chinese chipmaker hopes to steal 30% of the market share from the Big Three by 2030. It is just a matter of time before we start seeing CXMT ICs in all the prominent consumer memory brands.

An extensive Atari ST floppy disk database can now easily be accessed by all netizens. Originally created to serve floppy images to the owners of the SidecarTridge multi‑function hardware add‑on for the Atari ST family (ST, STE, Mega ST, TT, Falcon), anyone can now browse, search, and download the .ST files to use with other hardware, emulators, or even to rewrite the disk images to actual floppies.

After reading the announcement, I decided to check out the online repository. My favorite old platformer series was there, with more than one disk featuring the legendary Turrican and Turrican II releases. I also checked and confirmed public domain/shareware favorites like Gravity Force were available, as was Llamatron, and the mono high-resolution Bolo. Some things I looked for, like the Stupendous Demo, seemed to be missing, as were serious art and DTP tools I used to dabble with in the 90s.

The database is pleasingly new and regularly maintained, though. For example, it has 41 Atari ST disks flagged as recent arrivals. These are a mix of old releases being added, and some extremely new titles like new homebrew games, and a collection of demos released at Sommerhack 2026 just last month.

As indicated in the intro, this disk database was originally collated for direct access via hardware designed to bring several modern conveniences to those who still cling to original Atari ST-family computers. The SidecarTridge slots into the computer’s cartridge port, hence the name. It is much more than a ‘Gotek-style’ flash card floppy loader, though. This Raspberry Pi Pico W RP2040 microcontroller-powered device can also load different ROMs (the Atari ST’s entire OS and GEM desktop were loaded from ROM for super-fast,t no-disk-needed booting) via its microSD card slot. It also provides hard disk emulation, networking features (Wi-Fi for downloading Atari ST Public Floppy Database disks), access to RTC, and modern keyboards, mice, and other peripherals.

We tested gaming performance with both NVMe and SATA SSDs across 11 games to determine if upgrading to a faster drive is worth it. Solid-state drives (SSDs) have been a staple of PC gaming for years, but their importance grew significantly with the launch of the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S in 2020. Both consoles feature high-speed NVMe SSDs and storage architectures designed to fully leverage their capabilities, enabling faster asset streaming and reducing traditional storage bottlenecks.

As a result, game developers have increasingly developed their titles for SSDs, with many modern games now listing them as a minimum system requirement. But how exactly do games use SSDs during gameplay, and does upgrading to a faster SSD actually improve gaming performance? In this article, we'll examine SSD activity in modern games and determine whether higher storage speeds translate into a better gaming experience. Given the surge in SSD prices, will a slower drive deliver comparable gaming performance to high-end alternatives?

Load Times

Load Times

While this article focuses primarily on SSD activity and performance during gameplay, loading times remain one of the most significant advantages of solid-state storage. It's well known that games can take several minutes to load from an HDD, whereas modern SSDs typically reduce load times to just a few seconds.

The gap between SSDs is much smaller. In some titles, PCIe NVMe drives can load games several times faster than SATA SSDs, but in many cases, the difference is relatively small. Naturally, different generations of PCIe SSDs have even smaller differences, with flagship drives often delivering only marginal improvements to loading times despite their substantially higher sequential throughput.

Disk I/O Operations in Games

Disk I/O Operations in Games

Before examining the performance results, it's important to understand the types of disk I/O operations that games typically generate. Two key metrics are block size and queue depth. The block size of an I/O operation defines the size of the chunk of data a game will read at one time, while queue depth is the number of pending I/O requests that a storage device has queued at any one time.

During gameplay, the vast majority of storage activity consists of random read operations as game assets are streamed from storage into memory. Sequential reads are less common, and write activity is generally minimal.

Microsoft provides several storage optimization recommendations for developers in its DirectStorage documentation. Although these guidelines are intended for DirectStorage-enabled titles, many of the underlying principles apply to games in general, even if they do not use DirectStorage. Among Microsoft's recommendations are the use of block sizes of at least 32k and sufficiently high queue depths to maximize storage throughput.

Modern games typically employ 32k or 64k random I/O requests. However, despite Microsoft's recommendations, most games continue to operate at relatively low queue depths.

Performance Comparison

Performance Comparison

Now we will examine SSD activity and compare performance across different SSD generations. The games included in our testing were selected because they either exhibited higher storage bandwidth than usual, had greater peak or average SSD utilization, had support for DirectStorage, or because they are popular titles that many gamers would be interested in seeing analyzed from a storage-performance perspective.

To place as much stress as possible on each SSD, all testing was conducted with 16GB of system memory. Using a smaller memory capacity reduces the amount of game data that can be held in RAM, forcing games to rely more heavily on the SSD than they would in a 64GB configuration. It also better reflects the configurations found in many mainstream gaming PCs. That said, we observed little difference in SSD activity when comparing 16GB and 64GB memory configurations.

When interpreting the SSD activity data below, it is important to understand that 100% utilization does not necessarily mean an SSD is reaching its maximum rated bandwidth. For example, a PCIe 4.0 SSD reporting 100% utilization is unlikely to be delivering its full 7.5 GB/s of sequential read throughput. In gaming workloads, SSDs can become fully utilized while transferring data at significantly lower bandwidths.

This is because the speeds advertised by SSD manufacturers are based on sequential read performance, whereas games primarily rely on random reads. While random-read throughput can approach sequential-read speeds under certain conditions, doing so requires sufficiently large block sizes and high queue depths. Although modern games often use relatively large block sizes, they typically do not use the high queue depths needed to fully saturate an SSD's theoretical bandwidth.

We have also chosen not to test any traditional hard drive disks. There are many documented examples of modern games performing poorly, taking an unbearably long time to load, or having visual issues when installing the game on an HDD. There are some games where this may not be an issue, but we still do not recommend playing modern games on an HDD.

The testing was conducted in gameplay. No built-in benchmarks were used. We found that SSD activity increases with higher settings, so that is where we focused our testing. We set each game to its absolute maximum settings.

We used HWiNFO to measure SSD activity and set it to the lowest polling rate possible to capture activity accurately without incurring overhead.

Test system

• MSI GeForce RTX 5090 Vanguard SOC
• Ryzen 7 9800X3D
• 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 DDR5 6000 MHz CL30
• Crucial T700 Gen5 SSD
• Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus-G Gen4 SSD
• Adata XPG SX8200 Pro Gen3 SSD
• Samsung 870 EVO SATA III SSD
• Asus ROG Strix B850-F Gaming WiFi
• Corsair Nautilus 360 RS AIO Cooler
• MSI MPG Ai1600TS PCIe 5 PSU
• HAGS enabled
• Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8737)
• Nvidia driver 610.62

Forspoken

Forspoken

Forspoken was the first game to support DirectStorage on PC. DirectStorage is a feature that aims to allow games to make full use of high-speed storage devices while reducing the CPU overhead associated with making reads from disk.

Looking at the table below, you can see that it does exhibit a fairly high peak and average bandwidth. In fact, it’s the highest average bandwidth we have seen in any game we have tested. Average utilization is also quite high, and the game hits 100% SSD utilization frequently.

How does this translate to performance?

While there is no difference in performance between the PCIe NVMe SSDs, you can see that having a PCIe SSD can give you a large boost in the 1% lows compared to a SATA SSD. We see a 39% increase in 1% lows at 4K, a 51% increase at 1440p, and a 22% increase at 1080p.

The higher peak and average bandwidth used by the PCIe drives resulted in higher 1% lows in this game, which makes for a smoother gameplay experience.

Alan Wake 2

Alan Wake 2

Alan Wake 2 makes extensive use of modern rendering technologies, including path tracing, mesh shaders, and RTX Mega Geometry. In a recent interview, Remedy explained that the game operates with a fixed memory budget, continuously streaming the assets required for the current scene from the SSD while evicting assets that are no longer needed. This approach keeps memory usage under control despite the game's highly detailed textures and geometry, making Alan Wake 2 one of the most storage-intensive titles available today.

The SSD activity increases with resolution in this game. We see an average of over 200 MB/s on each drive at 4K, which is rare for a game. We also see a whopping 5.1 GB/s of peak bandwidth on a PCIe 5.0 SSD at 4K.

How does this impact performance?

Unlike Forspoken, we do not see any difference in performance here for any of the drives tested.

Although the faster SSDs reach higher peak bandwidth, these peaks are only brief bursts rather than sustained transfers. In other words, the game is not continuously streaming multiple gigabytes of data every second. Instead, it transfers smaller amounts of data over very short intervals, resulting in high instantaneous bandwidth readings. As a result, the average bandwidth is the more meaningful metric, and it remains relatively similar across all of the SSDs we tested.

The average utilization on the SATA SSD can reach over 80% at 4K, but it is not enough to degrade its performance in comparison to the PCIe drives.

Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart

Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart

The disk bandwidth through this sequence is actually lower than the previous two games. This makes sense, as the game uses GPU decompression, which increases the effective bandwidth flowing through the PCIe bus beyond what CPU decompression would. However, this increase in effective bandwidth is not reflected in the data that is being read from disk.

When reading the performance charts below, it is important to note that PCIe SSDs reduce portal transition times by roughly 2-3 seconds compared to SATA SSDs. On SATA drives, Ratchet therefore spends more time within each portal sequence. As a result, average performance and 1% lows can generally be slightly higher on SATA SSDs, since there is less active rendering during these extended transition periods. However, there is one exception.

While the SATA SSD has an advantage at 1440p and 1080p due to the extended time spent inside of each portal, the 1% lows take a hit at 4K. The SATA drive does not handle the first portal transition in the sequence particularly well at 4K, and so the PCIe drives have about a 38% advantage in 1% lows.

This portal sequence is the most storage-intensive part of the game. In normal gameplay, the game uses significantly less bandwidth, and so there is no difference in performance at all between the SATA SSD and the PCIe SSDs.

Spider-Man 2

Spider-Man 2

Spider-Man 2 was the second game to use GPU decompression of assets on PC. This is the third DirectStorage title we have tested so far.

Since the game uses GPU decompression, the effective bandwidth after decompression will be considerably higher than what we see here, but none of the SSDs we tested are being stressed in this game.

Performance is virtually identical on all drives in this game.

Starfield

Starfield

Starfield is an open world game that constantly reads data from disk. It also frequently hits 100% disk utilization as you traverse the world.

In previous games, 100% SSD utilization was accompanied by much higher peak bandwidth. Here, the lower peak bandwidth suggests the game uses a very low queue depth for its read operations. As you move through the open world, it continuously streams data from the SSD in frequent, small transfers, keeping average bandwidth very low.

Once again, we see no improvement in performance going from the SATA SSD to any of the faster PCIe NVME SSDs.

DOOM: The Dark Ages

DOOM: The Dark Ages

DOOM: The Dark Ages was the first game to list an NVMe SSD as a requirement. Not only is it listed as such on the PC system requirements, but Bethesda has a support page that reiterates that installing the game on an NVMe SSD is required.

The developers at idSoftware mentioned that the game uses a proprietary ultra-fast continuous sector streaming tech that virtually eliminates load times between levels.

The drives we tested are hardly being stressed in DOOM: The Dark Ages.

Given the disk utilization figures, it comes as no surprise that all of the tested drives deliver identical gameplay performance.

Although this article focuses on in-game performance rather than loading times, we also found little difference in load times when using a SATA SSD. Loading screens were not noticeably longer, and we observed no visual artifacts or streaming issues while playing on the slower drive.

Based on our testing, it is unclear why Bethesda lists an NVMe SSD as a requirement. A SATA SSD provided an indistinguishable gameplay experience, with no measurable performance drawbacks or observable streaming issues.

Dead Space Remake

Dead Space Remake

Dead Space Remake made headlines when it launched with abhorrent performance and stuttering issues. But how much of that was due to streaming from slower storage? Does a faster SSD help performance?

Although average disk utilization and bandwidth are relatively low, the game frequently reaches 100% utilization. Yet even during these periods, peak bandwidth remains well below what PCIe SSDs can achieve under high-queue-depth random workloads. This indicates the game is issuing read requests at a very low queue depth, leaving much of the SSD's available performance untapped. Additionally, the difference in average bandwidth between the SSDs is minimal.

All drives provide the same performance. There is nothing to be gained from a faster SSD in this title.

Cyberpunk 2077

Cyberpunk 2077

We included Cyberpunk 2077 in our testing because the game features a large and seamless open world, and it is one of the most popular games ever released.

The average bandwidth is by far the lowest we have seen in the games tested so far. This is not entirely surprising. Although the game was released in the same year as the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S, development began well before those consoles were released. As a cross-generation title, it also needed to run on the previous generation of consoles, which relied on mechanical hard drives. As a result, the game's streaming system was designed to perform well on significantly slower storage devices.

There is no noticeable difference in performance across the drives tested.

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Remastered

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Remastered

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion Remastered modernizes the look of the original game with improved visuals. Built on Unreal Engine 5, it utilizes Nanite virtualized geometry, Lumen global illumination, and virtual shadow maps. This is an open-world game, and our first UE5 title is tested in this article.

None of the SSDs we tested reached 100% peak utilization and average utilization is extremely low, too.

As is the case with most of the games we have tested, the SATA SSD holds its own and there is no difference in performance across all of the drives.

007 First Light

007 First Light

007 First Light is a recently released game that uses DirectStorage. In a recent interview, the developers at IO Interactive revealed that the real-time level streaming system in the Glacier engine was redesigned for 007 First Light. The new system uses dynamic loading and unloading to allow for seamless transitions between sequences.

It’s clear that this new streaming system does not place a heavy burden on storage devices.

Given the I/O activity in this game, it is not surprising to see that all SSDs we tested perform the same.

F1 25

F1 25

We included F1 25 because it exhibits higher peak bandwidth and utilization than most games. The game’s high-speed driving requires rapid streaming of trackside assets, as the environment changes quickly and the player covers large distances in very short periods of time.

The game exhibits higher peak and average bandwidth than many of the games we have tested, but it is still not enough to truly stress a SATA SSD.

Once more, all of the drives show identical performance.

What About the Visuals?

What About the Visuals?

Many readers may be wondering if playing on a SATA drive resulted in any visual anomalies, such as slower loading textures, additional pop-in, or other visual artifacts. We did not notice any such issues in the 11 games we tested. There are some games that exhibit pop-in, but that is consistent across all storage devices. All of the drives we used in our testing provided an identical visual experience.

The Verdict

The Verdict

Out of all the games tested, only two showed measurable performance differences between SATA and PCIe SSDs: Forspoken and Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart.

In Forspoken, moving from a SATA SSD to any PCIe SSD – regardless of generation – resulted in a significant improvement in 1% lows.

Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart showed more nuanced results. During the portal sequences at 1440p and 1080p, average framerate and 1% lows were slightly higher on the SATA SSD, as slower loading increased the time spent inside the portals. Since the portals contain less on-screen complexity, framerates are naturally higher within them. However, at 4K resolution, PCIe SSDs delivered better 1% lows. Outside of the portal sequence in normal gameplay, there was no measurable performance difference between any of the drives.

Across all other titles, PCIe SSDs provided no meaningful performance advantage, and there were no observable differences between PCIe generations. In the vast majority of games tested, a SATA SSD delivers comparable performance.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

An Intel patent application published on August 6, spotted by Patentlyze, describes an orbital data center architecture that moves some of the computing used to operate massive satellite constellations off the ground and into space. The architecture proposes a two-tier satellite network in which a small number of more powerful satellites in higher orbits manage large constellations of relatively simple satellites in low-Earth orbit, handling much of the computing and constellation coordination normally performed by data centers and network operations centers on the ground.

The application, US 2026/0230175 A1, is a continuation of an earlier Intel filing that was granted as US 12,542,604 B2 in February.

Intel’s proposed architecture is a different proposition from the orbital AI data centers now being pursued by companies such as SpaceX and Google, which aim to move AI compute itself into low-Earth orbit. SpaceX’s planned AI1 satellite and Google’s Project Suncatcher both envision running large-scale computing workloads in space, with the resulting data beamed back to Earth over high-bandwidth optical links. Intel’s orbital data centers, on the other hand, are designed primarily to serve the satellite network itself, acting as higher-orbit compute and control hubs for the much larger constellations operating below them.

In large LEO constellations such as Starlink, Telesat Lightspeed, and Amazon’s Project Kuiper, thousands of satellites are constantly moving relative to one another and the Earth. While the satellites perform their individual tasks, the network itself still has to determine how traffic is routed, which satellites and links should communicate, how spectrum is allocated, and how the constellation responds to failures, interference, weather, and other changing conditions. Much of that network planning and control processing is traditionally handled by computers on the ground, with routing and operational instructions calculated at terrestrial network operations centers and then transmitted back up to the satellites.

Intel says that this constant dependency on terrestrial infrastructure delays time-sensitive decisions, increases reliance on ground stations, and makes management harder as constellations grow into the thousands of satellites. Intel’s solution is to move part of that control and compute layer into orbit. Its architecture places more powerful satellites — which contain much more compute and storage capability than the individual LEO satellites — in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (GEO), or highly elliptical orbits, where they can maintain a broader and more persistent view of the LEO constellation below and take over tasks such as routing, mission planning, scheduling and network coordination without continually sending those workloads back to Earth.

The proposed setup does not eliminate the need for ground stations. It just keeps satellite network control processing in space. Intel specifically describes moving mission planning and scheduling operations into orbit. The company also argues that offloading heavier network-management tasks to a smaller number of powerful satellites could allow operators to build simpler, cheaper LEO spacecraft. Under current architectures, individual satellites still have to actively participate in network-control functions, requiring additional onboard compute and communications hardware. There’s currently no indication that Intel is actively building the satellites.

To optimize how software runs on hardware, instruction latency analysis looks at the time it takes for low-level instructions to execute on a processor, either to optimize the architecture or to optimize applications to run on a particular architecture. One hardware researcher, Christopher Domas (@xoreaxeaxeax on GitHub), is taking a different approach with the CPU Deoptimization leaderboard, which looks not to make Assembly instructions run as fast as possible, but as slow as possible to measure the single instruction with the highest latency.

The winner here is fxrstor64, which took 62 seconds, or over 198 billion cycles, to complete. This instruction restores the state of registers used for SIMD calculations to a 512-byte memory location. To achieve the highest (slowest) score, Domas first used their own mmiotic tool to find a high-latency area in the internal PCIe fabric, then forced the CPU to load a 512-byte state from MMIO (Memory-Mapped I/O), essentially processing all of those 512 bytes as slow as possible. That took 74 billion cycles or just over 23 seconds to complete.

Then, they went further "by starving the fabric while the load is in flight." They did so by using a series of 4-byte reads from another high-latency MMIO register, overwhelming the CPU's PCIe root complex and forcing the state restore to queue behind frivolous read ops. The next step is to use the AMX instructions available in Intel's Sapphire Rapids for xrstore64. The state area is increased from 512 bytes to 8KB, which could cause the instruction to hang for more than 1 trillion cycles.

The x86 leaderboard is live on GitHub now, and it looks like Domas has ARM and RISC-V leaderboards planned, as well. There are a few rules for the runs. Domas says any setup is fine, so long as only the execution of a single instruction is scored. Interruptible instructions aren't allowed, nor is scoring emulated instructions run on the handler. All times are normalized based on the CPU's base clock, and the platforms were all run without hardware modifications.

We're dealing with assembly code here, so the ranking is less about the specific instruction and more about what you're doing with that instruction.

Domas primarily used two CPUs for testing: the Intel Core i7-8559U and AMD Ryzen 7 5800H (inside the Trigkey S5). For the rdmsr instruction, however, they used a VIA Eden chip, which was a series of embedded processors from the early 2000s. The rdmsr command is used to read a model-specific register, or MSR. According to Domas, VIA "uses an undocumented register at 0x133 that gives wildly high response time." That command took 202 microseconds or 161,602 cycles to execute.

This is not the developer's first foray into wild experimentation with low-level instructions. An earlier project, called movfuscator, is a C compiler that solely uses the mov (move) command.

An AI model has just created new viruses that never existed in nature. According to a New York Times report, researchers trained a genomic AI model to design complete DNA sequences for viruses, then chemically built the results and watched some come to life. Of 285 AI-generated viral genomes tested, 16 successfully assembled into functioning viruses capable of infecting bacteria and reproducing.

In the study, published in the journal Science, researchers at Stanford University and the Arc Institute trained genomic AI models called Evo on trillions of nucleotides — the individual building blocks of DNA found in every living organism — allowing it to learn statistical patterns in how biological DNA is arranged. Much as a language model learns which combinations of words tend to make sense, Evo learned which combinations of nucleotides tend to produce biologically meaningful sequences.

Scientists have been synthesizing viruses for decades, typically to study how they work and to test antiviral drugs and vaccines. In these projects, researchers typically use the genetic sequence of a virus that already exists to manufacture new ones. Basically, they use existing genomes — genetic sequence data that holds information on how proteins come together to form an organism — replicating and editing this data.

Every organism comprises nuclotides/DNA. The genome provides the instructions for exactly how these building blocks form to create that specific organism. We can copy the data and replicate the organism, aka cloning. However, because trillions of possible genomes exist, it has been statistically impossible for humans to study enough of them to know the formula for how nature puts these building blocks together to form an organism. The blocks were known, but the formula for arranging them in a way that created viable genes wasn't. Until now.

After training the AI model on over 9 trillion nucleotides spanning over 128,000 genetic sequences drawn from millions of animals, plants, microbes, and viruses, it was able to discover patterns and use those patterns to design new genes that could instruct cells to make specific proteins. Using the pattern, the scientists wanted to see if the AI could create a blueprint for a new, simple organism, such as a virus that contains only a few thousand building blocks. For context, humans contain over three billion.

The researchers then trained the Evo AI model on the 11 genes and 5,386 nucleotides of the Phi X-174 virus and about 15,000 of its closest relatives. The virus was chosen because it has been studied for over a hundred years and is known to attack only E. coli bacteria. After studying the virus’s genome, the model proposed 700,000 new potential genomes, which the scientists trimmed down to 285. The scientists synthesized potential organisms using these instructions, out of which 16 resulted in new viable viruses that have never existed in nature. Like their relative, Phi X-174, the viruses were observed attacking E. coli bacteria and reproducing. It's important to note that the new viruses are quite similar to the source. The building blocks are very much the same, with some mutations in how they are arranged.

The potential applications of the study can be far-reaching. The scientists demonstrated one of them via a resistance experiment. They first generated three E. coli strains that had evolved resistance to natural Phi X-174. The researchers then exposed those resistant bacteria to cocktails made from the AI-designed phages. Those phage populations evolved during the experiment and ultimately overcame resistance in all three bacterial strains.

The scientists say the new viruses were completely harmless to humans, noting that replicating the same results in pathogens known to affect humans would be a different ballgame. They were also careful not to train the AI on any data from organisms known to affect humans. However, the study inadvertently shows that highly dangerous applications are a possibility. Experts worry that such studies are way ahead of necessary guardrails and regulations. AI has also been known to fly off the rails autonomously. An OpenAI agent recently went rogue and hacked Hugging Face.

NASA ensured that all laptops destined for use in the International Space Station (ISS) had the same power connector. Engineer George Roush, who has a certain fondness for space tech, recalled details of this laptop modification earlier this week. Standardizing on a single ‘cannon plug’ meant that instead of requiring a multitude of different chargers, ISS visitors could plug into the onboard DC power outlets in a standard fashion. Roush took the photos shared below during a visit to the NASA Stennis visitor center.

Laptops destined to be used on the ISS would have their modem ports removed and replaced by the cannon plug you can see in the engineer’s photos. Of course, modem ports would be useless on the ISS, so that’s why they would be replaced with this modification. In space, every gram, every connector, and every failure mode matters, which makes this power standardization a smart move.

Sources indicate that Lockheed Martin was contracted to make these modifications to the ThinkPads and other machines that ended up being taken to space. Roush also discusses networking/comms on the ISS, which relied on the MIL-STD-1553 system, rather than Ethernet.

Laptops with built-in telephony modem ports certainly date this story. However, we must remember that the ISS was constructed in the late 1990s when modems were still essential for PCs. The first crews docked in 2000.

Original web sources are vanishing

When refreshing his knowledge about this laptops-in-space mod, the space enthusiast and engineer was struck by another realization, which he found troubling. The NASA Stennis visitor center had barely any information about the laptops or the cannon plug modification that was on display.

Turning to some online resources he remembers referring to previously, Roush noticed a lot of them had disappeared. “The old internet is dying, and with it, we risk losing a lot of useful history,” said the engineer. “I fear that the false belief of the 'eternal' internet will cause otherwise recorded history to be lost when the servers shut down.”

Though some resources may still be able to be unearthed via the Wayback Machine, it seems perilous that so much web history is archived by a charity (The Internet Archive). In May, we reported that the internet is getting harder to archive because the AI boom has caused a storage crisis, with both NAND and mechanical drives facing shortages. This means skyrocketing storage bills to support the activities of the Wayback Machine.

HP replaced all the ISS laptops in April 2026

The astronauts in the ISS aren’t still using old modded laptops like the one showcased in the NASA Stennis visitor center. The latest updates came in April this year, with over 100 HP Z Workstations packing a mix of Core Ultra 9 processors and RTX Pro Blackwell graphics sent into orbit.

HP talks about putting these PCs through two years of rigorous testing ahead of deployment. We don’t get much in the way of technical info from its release, but again, it was recognized that a single power standard was important. The computer maker supplies universal AC/DC power adapters with its latest crop of space laptops that are specially designed to function on both the ISS and Earth.

Valve's second-gen Steam Controller has been a major hit with the community thanks to the company's open approach to its hardware. Modders have already used the haptic motors inside to move it across a desk and charge automatically, while others have built their own open-source pucks. Now, a new project from Pixel1011, called "Steam Haptics Player," can turn these motors into a stereo speaker capable of playing music both wired and wirelessly.

For context, the Steam Controller doesn't have a speaker; there are two linear actuators under each trackpad that vibrate to provide haptic feedback. Previous projects have leveraged these components to make the controller vibrate in a certain way. Since vibrations are the basis of sound, Valve itself built a secret easter egg into the controller that randomly makes it do a Wilhelm scream when dropped from certain heights.

Pixel 1011 discovered that the haptic motors inside can be targeted with low-level HID (Human Interface Device) feature commands using HIDAPI. As such, Steam Haptics Player takes an audio file, downsamples it through FFmpeg, splits it into chunks of a PCM stream, and sends those packets directly to the controller, bypassing high-level software like Steam Input. The controller's firmware then feeds this raw data to the motors, at which point they vibrate to produce sound.

Because of the DIY nature of this process, bandwidth is an issue, especially wirelessly, since the puck isn't designed to carry audio data over its radio signal. This means the audio has to be compressed, and there's a limit to the overall quality the motors can transmit — 8-bit 8kHz (μ-law) over the puck and 16-bit 8kHz PCM over a wire.

Still, the 16-bit audio is enough to produce a surprisingly loud and balanced result that can deceive you as if it's coming from a speaker. The video at the start features Pixel1011 playing the song "Want You Gone" from the end credits of Portal 2, and you can hear the quality for yourself. There's a genuine low-end that you would never expect from a jerry-rigged setup like this, even if it's sitting on top of a towel on a flat surface to give it its best chance.

The wireless audio quality is rough in comparison; it crackles and pops and even cuts off in between because of the bandwidth limitations. Pixel1011 is using 8-bit mu-law companding here, which actually offers dynamic range similar to 14-bit audio while keeping the byte footprint of an 8-bit stream. Even through this compression, the puck is struggling, but the fact that this is even possible is still very impressive, and perhaps there's room for improvement down the line.

You can try Steam Haptics Player yourself on your own second-gen Steam Controller with pretty much any audio file in any format. Just download the archive from the GitHub repo, install FFmpeg (for transcoding, if you don't have it already), and run the program via a PowerShell window in the original directory. Detailed steps are on the linked GitHub page, but we don't know how this affects the controller's battery life. Just don't go all out with your Spotify playlist on these haptic motors.

Software performance expert, scientist, and GitHub developer Daniel Lemire compared historical computer memory prices and showed that decades of falling prices were undone in just a matter of months because of the massive demand for HBM. According to his X post, this event is a historical anomaly, and he cannot think of an instance where technology hardware prices reverted to levels from decades before.

“RAM on a per unit basis is about as expensive as it was in 2007,” Lemire said. He also added, “I do not think anyone can predict what will happen, but I am guessing that we either find a way to build AI systems without so much memory, or we find really clever ways to make much more memory much faster.”

We also checked third-party data compiled and maintained by David Shim for the Stanford DAM Project. The latest price for DDR5 memory sits between $13.28 and $11.41 per GB — the last time RAM hit this price was in 2008, when the price for DDR2 hovered by $15 and 11.00 per GB. These are based on nominal USD values, though. If we take 2024 inflation into account, the current amount for DD5 is between $12.74 and $10.94 per GB, which was last achieved in 2011, when DDR3 prices were at $11.85 per GB.

Technological advances, especially in manufacturing and miniaturization, meant that tech became cheaper over time. This has been true ever since the first general-purpose digital computer was created 80 years ago. ENIAC cost the government $400,000 in 1946, meaning it would probably cost around $6,850,297.44 today. However, its computing power equaled roughly 5,000 additions per second — by comparison, one of the cheapest smartphones you can get today, the Moto G Play, is on sale for $99.99. This smartphone is powered by a Snapdragon 680 processor with AI performance of 3.3 TOPS — that is 3.3 trillion operations per second. We can’t really compare the ENIAC to a modern processor, but it at least shows us the scale by which technology has advanced, and prices have dropped.

The massive increase in memory prices in recent times wasn’t caused by technological regression or a bottleneck in supply — instead, it’s the massive demand for HBM driven by the AI race. “The memory output is increasing by around 20% per year. Now, normally, that would be fantastically fast and amazing for any large, mature industry, but ask yourself, ‘Is the demand increasing by 20% a year?” Elon Musk said during the last SpaceX earnings call. “No, the demand is increasing by 200% a year, maybe higher.”

Other experts and industry leaders agree with Musk. The chairman of the SK Group, the holding company that owns memory chip manufacturer SK hynix, said that RAM prices are “abnormally high,” and that the industry must take steps to increase supply and lower prices. Even RAM that uses chips from Chinese manufacturer CXMT, which some people look to as a cheaper alternative, generally tracked the prices of modules that use chips from the big three (Micron, Samsung, and SK hynix).

Aside from computers, other industries are already being affected by the shortage, including graphics cards, smartphones, gaming consoles, and even automobiles. We do not know how long the current memory crisis will last, but the situation is unsustainable and “something has to give.” The scary thing is that nobody knows what would happen if and when that time comes.

Amazon Web Services is cracking down on internal use of EC2 instances among its engineers. In May, the company reportedly met with engineers and told them to reduce CPU waste to ensure AWS has enough CPU capacity to meet customer demand, The Information reports. The message comes as demand for CPUs in the data center has hit a fever pitch, with the traditional eight-to-one or four-to-one ratio of GPUs to CPUs moving closer to parity.

EC2 instances make up a large chunk of the modern internet, and they're used in private deployments, as well. Traditionally, AWS engineers have been able to spin up their own instances for development, leveraging the relatively low CPU utilization required for web infrastructure to use more virtual machines. Now, engineers say they're waiting days to get access when they previously could get access within hours. One engineer told The Information that they've never had to wait this long for an instance, even after several years of working at Amazon.

Amazon deploys several different types of CPUs in EC2 instances, including AMD and Intel options and its relatively new Graviton5 chip. Graviton5 is Amazon's most powerful CPU to date, and it uses an Arm-based architecture along the lines of Nvidia's Vera CPU and Arm's own AGI.

The increased demand for CPU comes on the back of AI agents, a new paradigm in productivity that even companies as large as Amazon are struggling to reckon with. Last month, for instance, a coding agent blew through $1.8 million in token costs at Amazon, surpassing a development budget by 860%.

Much of the AI infrastructure currently in place is designed around inference, a workload that's accelerated by GPUs. With the four-to-one ratio, the CPU served as a way to keep the GPUs fed, and nothing more. However, agentic workloads are much more complex. They often involve tool calls that run on the CPU, as well as more complex orchestration of inference on GPUs. This is what has brought CPUs center stage in the agentic era. Intel, AMD, and others have echoed what we've heard from memory and storage companies over the past several months: the demand is so high for CPUs that most companies will take whatever they can get.

The major players are capitalizing on that demand. AMD just recently unveiled its portfolio of Zen 6 'Venice' CPUs for the data center, marking the first time AMD has launched a new architecture in the data center before the client market in decades. Nvidia has also pivoted its messaging away from accelerators and toward its new Vera CPU, vying to stake its claim in an expanding market of agentic AI infrastructure.

Although Amazon is wrestling with CPU capacity across its internal engineers and external customers, The Information reports that shortages are largely a problem for spot instances. A consultant told the outlet that contracted capacity hasn't experienced any shortages.

Following publication, an Amazon Web Services spokesperson reached out with the following statement:

"Demand for AWS services, including EC2, is incredibly strong and growing. Even with this heavy demand, we continue to satisfy the overwhelming majority of compute needs for both our internal and external customers. We work closely with internal teams to meet their compute needs while ensuring they use EC2 resources as efficiently as possible, such as reclaiming idle instances, right-sizing, and scaling up and down as needs change – just as we’ve always done. These efficiencies help manage capacity for internal and external customers alike, and any suggestions that these long-standing efforts reflect new capacity constraints is simply wrong.

This premise is sensationalized. Frugality is in our DNA since Day 1. We have always encouraged our teams to operate efficiently. We also share best practices for how customers can optimize resources to external customers. This isn’t a new directive, and encouraging efficient use of resources isn’t unique to Amazon."

We pressed Amazon on if engineers had been given deadlines to reduce their compute usage, as The Information originally reported. An AWS spokesperson responded: "This narrative on EC2 is inaccurate. As part of our normal business operations, and backed by our leadership principle of frugality, we are always driving efficiency across our resources to ensure teams are optimizing capacity."

The Salem City Council convened a public meeting last July 27, where it discussed the proposed $5.1 billion Oakline at Mill Creek data center by Verrus. As the people converged on the meeting site, a TikTok user spotted a guillotine towed by a bike outside of the venue, signaling the people’s discontent with the project.

According to NewsData, the consultation lasted for more than six hours as several members of the community voiced their opposition towards it. The developer’s representatives were initially on-site to hear the comments, but had to leave midway through as they were confronted by some protesters.

“During a break in the proceedings, a group of opposition members cornered Verrus representatives and shouted insulting remarks, to the point where it no longer felt safe to stay,” Verrus spokesperson JP Newmann said, according to the publication. “We appreciate the support of local law enforcement in helping de-escalate the situation and escorting Verrus representatives from the site safely.”

One week after the meeting, Salem announced a data center moratorium that would halt all data center developments in the city for one year as it considers zoning laws to accommodate developments such as this. This adds Salem to the long list of jurisdictions that have passed similar moratoriums, including Seattle, Washington, and the State of New York.

Unfortunately, the Verrus project will likely not be affected by this delay as it filed its application three days before the announcement. Despite this, Governor Tina Kotek (D) announced that Oregon will terminate a deal to sell a 32-acre plot of land that forms part of the three plots of land on which the project will sit. While it still leaves Verrus with approximately 43 acres, it means that it would have to go back to the drawing board to change its plans. This is similar to what Nashville did when it used its eminent domain power to deny the land that another developer wanted to use to build a data center near the historic Nashville Zoo.

But because Verrus submitted its application before the moratorium announcement, the city is still processing its proposed data center project. That does not mean that it will get an immediate green light, though. It still has to go through an extensive permitting process, which includes technical studies, permit conditions, and enforceable agreements, among others.

Oregon is one of the first states to enact a law that ensures large consumers, like data centers, pay for the majority of the grid upgrades needed to serve their needs. This allowed Portland General Electric, the state’s largest power provider, to increase the bills of users who used more than 20 MW by 30%, while also affecting a 1.3% cut in residential electricity costs. But despite this protection that stops ratepayers from price shocks, many people are still against data center projects in their towns and cities.

In case you've not subscribed to Tom's Hardware Premium yet, here's what you've been missing out on in this week's selection of articles.

First of all, we've fully redesigned Bench, our browsable database of hardware benchmarks. Using the same data that informs our massive hierarchy pages, Bench 2.0 allows you to granularly search and compare benchmarks between products. While you get an aggregated set of data in our reviews and hierarchy lists, Bench allows you much finer detail in seeing every single benchmark we run, whenever we review a new product.

Bench is exclusively available for Tom's Hardware Premium subscribers.

Earlier this week, we published a roadmap, focusing on the foundries that are making co-packaged optics (CPO) a reality. As the demands of data centers increase, so too do the demands on scale-up and scale-out connectivity. With AI accelerators now demanding extremely fast signalling speeds, CPO puts optical engines next to the processor or ASIC in order to shorten electrical paths, increasing data rates, shortening the electrical path, and consuming less power.

We dive deep into TSMC's COUPE roadmaps, which extend to 2030, and to a blistering lane speed of 400 Gb/s, Intel's CPUs with OCI chiplets, Samsung Foundry's path to building a CPO turnkey, and GlobalFoundries' vendor-agnostic OCI-MSA CPO platform.

• Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) foundry roadmaps — breaking down TSMC, Intel, Samsung, and GlobalFoundries' approach to next-generation scale-up connectivity

That's not all we had on the roadmaps front this week, as we've taken a deeper look at China's chipmaking tool roadmaps, hot on the heels of the country announcing it will build DUV immersion lithography machines capable of producing 7nm chips by 2030. The more difficult equation is building a domestic EUV machine, which demands a robust supply chain of the right tooling and equipment, with over 3,000 workers reported to be working on what's now dubbed China's "Manhattan Project."

The country still relies on ASML's DUV lithography machines for chipmaking, as modern systems are subject to export controls, which is why Huawei, the creator of the Ascend series of AI accelerators, is keenly interested in getting the project off the ground.

• Chinese chipmaking tool roadmaps examined — Beijing's nascent lithography tools target DUV production at five machines a year, and an EUV prototype with no chips

But China has more on its mind than merely producing the machines; it also wants to spin up its DRAM output via CXMT, which is planning to expand to a brand-new fab to boost memory output. This comes following consumer brands and computer makers like Dell, Lenovo, and more. But it's no simple task, as we explore how the MATCH Act could impact CXMT's ability to produce DRAM modules on more advanced nodes.

There are also concerns around expanding wafer capacities and procuring the tools required for such an expansion, which targets 30% of market share by 2030.

• China's CXMT targets 30% DRAM memory market share by 2030 with sixth mega-fab — future plans bottlenecked by access to advanced chipmaking tools

On the memory front, Samsung has also debuted three brand-new memory technologies, zHBM, zNAND-O, and BV-NAND, which each target different markets and are all built upon advanced wafer bonding techniques. zHBM is expected to enable 8x the performance of HBM5, while zNAND-O,. which would allow the company to put four or eight stacks of NAND devices on top of logic dies. Meanwhile, BV-NAND represents Samsung's 10th-generation V-NAND and is the closest of the three announcements to commercialization.

You can read this lengthy technical breakdown of Samsung's announcements for free, even if you're not a Tom's Hardware Premium subscriber.

• Samsung debuts three next-generation memory technologies for AI data centers — zHBM, zNAND-O, and BV-NAND all rely on advanced wafer bonding technologies

Is the AI tokenmaxxing party back on? With the release of the modestly priced Kimi K3 and DeepSeek V4 Flash-0731 over recent weeks, the emergence of competitive, cheap Chinese AI models has now forced companies like OpenAI, which launched GPT 5.6 Luna back in June, to cut prices by a staggering 80% in the wake of the competitive open-weight Chinese models. And OpenAI isn't the only company trying to offer more value to users. Anthropic replaced Opus 4.8 with 5.0, and Google also came out with the affordable Gemini 3.6 Flash and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite models, too.

So, where does that leave the AI industry? Western frontier labs must keep pace with the competition on offer overseas, and the intensifying competition is slimming down margins for what we assume to be already subsidized token costs.

• AI companies are now racing to the bottom — crashing token prices and competitive models push companies to cut costs

Within the world of artificial intelligence, other stresses are looming for ChatGPT-maker OpenAI. The company is heading to court with tech titan Apple over claims that OpenAI stole trade secrets from Apple. The claim comes amidst OpenAI's development of dedicated AI hardware. OpenAI says it didn't want Apple's trade secrets, and that the Cupertino company was simply getting things wrong. Apple, however, alleges that 13 of its former employees passed along the aforementioned trade secrets, including documents sharing details of unannounced products and screenshots of sensitive materials.

We explore how the lawsuit is developing in this rather unusual offshoot, which centers around products that have yet to see the light of day.

• Apple is taking OpenAI to court over alleged theft of trade secrets — ChatGPT maker suggests it doesn't want Cupertino's knowledge anyway

That wraps up most of the major pieces of content that we published this week on Tom's Hardware Premium, with the bonus of being able to access our deep dive into Samsung's new announcements without a subscription.

For all of the other articles in this list, and to use our Bench tool, you can sign up to Tom's Hardware Premium today to read more. We'll be back next week with another roundup to keep you up to date.

If you're a content creator or a gamer that needs to have a whopping 32GB of VRAM to power either your software applications or run your favorite games on extreme fidelity settings, then you're looking to own an RTX 5090 graphics card. Unfortunately, these GPUs do not come cheap, with the current lowest price on an available-to-buy 5090 sitting at an eye-watering $4,399.99. However, with this amazing Dell deal on an Alienware Area-51 gaming rig for $4,779.99, you can bag a whole gaming PC that includes the RTX 5090 for just $380 more than purchasing the standalone graphics card.

● Check out this deal at Dell

The Alienware Area-51 gaming PC in question comes packed with the aforementioned Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 graphics card, but also includes the 20-core Intel Core Ultra 7 265K processor, 32GB of high-speed DDR5 7200 MT/s memory, and a 1TB SSD for the operating system and game storage.

All of the above components are packed into Dell's own Alienware case with a tempered glass side panel to show off the internals of the system. A 240mm liquid AIO cools the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, and a beefy 1,500W 80 Plus Platinum-certified power supply has all the juice needed to run the RTX 5090. The Area-51 does away with Dell's old proprietary parts ecosystem and lets you add upgrades more easily, so you're able to add more memory or a bigger SSD down the line.

The RTX 5090 is the most powerful consumer GPU on the market right now. It comes with 21,760 CUDA cores, over double the RTX 5080's 10,752 count, along with a massive 32GB of GDDR7 VRAM, using a 512-bit memory bus with memory bandwidth up to 1,792 GB/s. In our benchmarking results from our review of the RTX 5090 we can see that this super powerful GPU dominates the competition in all performance metrics.

The Alienware Area-51 gaming PC in this deal has the ability to play any game at extreme frame rates and power high-refresh-rate gaming monitors, even at 4K resolutions. It's the best GPU to experience ray-traced graphics without severely compromising in-game graphics settings, and with the extreme pricing of the RTX 5090 at the moment, it's one of the best value ways to purchase an RTX 5090-powered gaming PC if you can afford one.

Yes, it should be $2000 cheaper, but thanks to the AI-boom ruining PC component prices for us enthusiasts, this is one of the best deals you will find on an RTX 5090 prebuilt gaming PC right now.

If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, Gaming Chair, Best Wi-Fi Routers, Best Motherboard, or CPU Deals pages.

Tom’s Hardware is renowned for the benchmark tests and performance data we collect on every CPU, GPU, SSD, laptop, and more that runs through our labs — hundreds of products every year, thousands of tests, tens of thousands of data points. Why? Because details matter, and we know that Tom’s Hardware readers value that data.

So for the launch of Tom’s Hardware Premium, we built a new tool called Bench, which offered one-stop access to all of that data. But the tool? We confess, it was merely okay. All those tests were hard to sort through as one giant list, the data was fairly static, and it was hard for the user to put a given score in context to their own rig.

Today, we’re pleased to introduce you to Bench 2.0, a ground-up rethink of our benchmarking tool that makes it the most powerful, most intuitive benchmark browser in the business. Bench 2.0 has tons of new features designed to make the data easier to understand, easier to sort through, and far more usable. Best of all, we've spent dozens of hours re-testing our entire slate of CPUs and GPUs, too.

The most obvious change is the introduction of a detailed hierarchy for tests, which were presented as one long (very long) list in Bench 1.0. Instead, you can pick out just gaming tests or just synthetic benchmarks, or zero in on a given app, whether it’s for content creation or encoding or whatever. We’ve also added detailed product pages, with specs, benchmark test results, and pricing information.

And this is cool: Pricing information culled from our proprietary Hawk tool allowed us to create a neat new visualization mode: Bang for the Buck charts, which plot performance against cost, a crucial data point in today’s expensive market. In both bar charts and these new graphics, mouse over the graphics to interact with them. You can click a given data point to set it as a baseline for comparison, to at a glance see how everything rates against, say, a GeForce RTX 4070 Ti.

Speaking of, did you buy an RTX 4070 Ti? Flag it as your own! You can store your products and mark them as actively in use or in storage. Products you own will show up as blue dots or bars in the charts to showcase your performance against the hottest new gear. You can also pick products you’d like to buy, creating a watch list of what’s on your radar. It’s all tucked away in the 'My Rig' section, accessible from the little suitcase icon in the top right corner.

Finally, we’ve built a better way to share some of this data: The 'Share Results' drop-down has options to let you download an image of whatever chart you’re looking at or create an embeddable, fully interactive widget.

Oh, and don’t miss the settings options at the top right of the page as well, just below My Rig: We’ve built light and dark modes, added sound effects (and the ability to turn them off), and given you a peek into our plans for Version 3 of Bench, which will be expanded to include our prebuilt gaming PC test results, and more. Have fun with the Easter Eggs as well. As befits a tool running on Tom’s Hardware, this one does, in fact, run Doom.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Complaints? We’re all ears. Leave a comment and let us know what you think.

Bench 2.0 is live now, exclusively for Tom's Hardware Premium subscribers.

If you’re looking for the absolute best performance in a gaming laptop, then you’ll likely want to consider a desktop replacement. If you’re in the market, the HyperX Omen Max 16 makes a strong case with a 16-inch form factor and a thick chassis that accommodates some beefy hardware.

Our review unit carries a sticker price of $4,699, packs a Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus processor, and includes an RTX 5090 GPU. It also tips the scales at 6.56 pounds, making it a more suitable companion for your desk than for lugging around while traveling.

Despite its imposing dimensions and beefy hardware, the Omen Max 16 doesn’t quite pass muster in performance against its slimmer competitors among the best gaming laptops.

Design of the HyperX Omen Max 16

“Solid, solid as a rock,” is the phrase that comes to mind when describing the Omen Max 16. The laptop feels like it was forged from a solid piece of granite, but in actuality, it’s aluminum. It’s also thick, measuring 1.13 inches at its thickest point (at the rear).

To my eyes, the Omen Max 16 is attractively designed with no outrageous styling gimmicks. The aluminum is coated in a matte black finish, and design flourishes (like the O16 printed vertically along the deck and the HyperX logo on the lid) are subdued and don't draw significant attention. There’s also a laser-etched grille that runs nearly the width of the chassis that sits above the keyboard.

The only thing that really clues you into the gaming nature of the laptop (other than its sheer size) is the per-key RGB lighting for the keyboard, and a single LED strip on the bottom front edge of the chassis that you can configure with the Omen software.

When it comes to external ports, the Omen Max 16 has a USB-A (10 Gbps) port, two Thunderbolt 4 ports, and a 3.5 mm audio jack on the left. On the right side of the chassis, you'll find another USB-A port. The back panel of the laptop is home to an HDMI 2.1 port, a 2.5 GbE port, and a proprietary power port (a 460W GaN power adapter is included).

The Omen Max 16 measures 14.04 x 10.59 x 1.03 inches and weighs 6.56 pounds. For comparison's sake, the Razer Blade 16 is 13.98 x 9.86 x 0.69 inches and weighs 4.71 pounds. The MSI Raider 16 HX comes in at 14.29 x 10.62 x 1.14 inches and weighs 5.73 pounds. The Alienware 16 Area-51 weighs 7.49 pounds and measures 14.37 x 11.41 x 1.12 inches.

HyperX Omen Max 16 Specifications

Gaming and Graphics on the HyperX Omen Max 16

The Omen Max 16 is equipped with an Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus processor, 32GB of RAM, and an RTX 5090 GPU (175W TGP). Given these specs and a sizable chassis to aid cooling (300W total system power), I was expecting strong numbers from the Omen 16 Max. Instead, the laptop was relegated to the back of the pack, except for one game benchmark: Far Cry 6.

My game of choice these days is Battlefield 6, running at native resolution in Overkill detail mode, with DLSS Quality and frame generation enabled. Using these settings, I was able to average between 100 and 110 frames per second.

For the competitive set, we have the Blade 16 (Core Ultra 9 386H at 25W, RTX 5090 at 175W TGP), MSI Raider 16 Max HX (Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus at 55W, RTX 5090 at 175W TGP), and the Alienware 16 Area-51 (Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus at 55W, RTX 5080 at 175W TGP). It should be noted that the Omen Max 16 uses slower DDR5-6400, whereas systems like the Blade 16 use faster LPDDR5X-9600.

We started our benchmarking spree with Shadow of the Tomb Raider (Highest setting), and here the Omen Max 16 achieved 171 FPS at 1080p, putting it in last place behind the Razer Blade 16 (182 FPS). At 1600p, it landed in a comfortable third place (114 FPS) behind the Alienware 16 Area-51.

Cyberpunk 2077 (Ray Tracing Ultra settings) wasn't a strong showing for the Omen Max 16, either. It brought up last place at 1080p (59 FPS) and 1600p (37 FPS).

Far Cry 6 (Ultra settings) was the lone bright spot for the Omen Max 16, as it garnered 144 FPS at 1080p and 125 FPS at 1600p, easily putting it in first place. Both of these results far outpaced the rest of the field, with the next closest competitor being the MSI Raider 16 Max HX at 119 FPS and 114 FPS, respectively.

Moving to the Red Dead Redemption 2 (Medium settings) benchmark, the Omen Max 16 again wound up in last place, hitting 93 FPS at 1080p and 65 FPS at 1600p. However, in this instance, the margin between the Omen Max 16 and The Blade 16 at 1080p was just 1 FPS.

The Omen Max 16 again had trouble during the Borderlands 3 (Badass settings) benchmark, falling well off the pace set by its three competitors. The laptop hit 146 FPS at 1080p, nearly 20 FPS off the pace of the third-place Alienware 16 Area-51. At 1600p, it mustered just 113 FPS.

Metro Exodus is our go-to benchmark for laptop stress testing. Our review unit averaged 141.62 FPS at 1080p across 15 loops using the RTX benchmark preset. The CPU performance cores averaged 4.91 GHz, and the efficiency cores averaged 3.95 GHz. The RTX 5090 GPU ran at 1.81 GHz.

Productivity Performance on HyperX Omen Max 16

With its Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus processor, 32GB of RAM, and 2TB PCIe 5.0 SSD, the Omen Max 16 fared better in the productivity tests than it did with gaming.

On Geekbench 6, the Omen Max 16 with the Core Ultra 9 290HX was able to muscle past the Blade 16 with its Core Ultra 9 386H on both the single-core (3,182) and multi-core (17,989) benchmarks. However, the Alienware 16 Area-51 and Raider 16 Max HX, which use the same Core Ultra 9 290HX processor, achieved much higher multi-core numbers (each surpassed 20,000).

The PCIe 5.0 SSD used in the Omen Max 16 performed quite well in our 25GB file transfer test, coming in second place at 2,439.22 MBps. The Alienware 16 Area-51 was a few ticks ahead at 2,738.90 MBps.

The soft performance of the Omen Max 16 continued with our Handbrake test, which involves transcoding a 4K video file to 1080p. Here the laptop performed the task in 2 minutes and 59 seconds. However, at least one other laptop with the same Core Ultra 9 290HX did the deed in less than two minutes.

Display on the HyperX Omen Max 16

The Omen Max 16 uses a 16-inch 2560 x 1600 OLED panel with a 240 Hz refresh rate. As is the case with most OLED displays that we test, this one had a glossy finish.

Instrumented testing on the OLED panel showed it excelling against the competition, covering 131.2 percent of the DCI-P3 color space and 185.2 percent of sRGB. Even better, the Omen Max 16 nudged past the Raider 16 Max HX to also take the crown for panel brightness (464.6 nits versus 455.6 nits).

OLED panels rarely disappoint, and I was more than impressed with the overall quality and brightness. The brightness was high enough that I was able to game while on my back porch during a partly cloudy day with minimal interference from reflections on the glossy panel.

I also viewed the first Avengers: Doomsday trailer using the display, and besides getting a tiny bit emotional while watching it, was delighted with the color reproduction, particularly in the short battle between Gambit and Shang-Chi, with flashes of purple playing cards and orange rings.

Keyboard and Touchpad on the HyperX Omen Max 16

The Omen Max 16 features a full-size RGB backlit keyboard (with per-key lighting) and NKRO anti-ghosting technology. RGB effects are customizable using HP's Omen app or directly from within Windows 11.

The keys felt quite springy when typing, and I found it incredibly comfortable to rest my fingers and click away. And while some keyboards audibly make their presence known as you type at a furious pace, the key actuation on the Omen Max 16 was whisper-quiet.

Turning my attention to the Keyhero.com typing test, I plugged away at 95 words per minute with 97% accuracy, which is definitely on the high side for me (I’m usually in the mid-80s realm).

Given the Omen Max 16 price tag of over $4,500, I was disappointed that HP didn’t go with a haptic touchpad. Instead, we get a top-hinged trackpad that is just OK. It gets the job done, but for this much money, I’d prefer to be able to click anywhere on the touchpad surface without hitting a dead zone. At least while gaming, you probably use a mouse or controller.

Audio on the HyperX Omen Max 16

Audio quality is another area where I think HP missed the mark. To beat a dead horse, but this is a laptop that retails for $4,699, and it only comes with stereo speakers. Would it have killed HP to add another pair of speakers in this tank of a chassis?

While the speakers had good overall volume levels, I felt the sound lacked some depth compared to similarly priced laptops with four (Raider 16 Max HX) or even six speakers (Blade 16). While I was more than happy listening to Keane’s “Fly to Me” from the album Hopes and Fears, I was disappointed in the sound while playing Battlefield 6.

When it came to gunfire, vehicle sounds, and background explosions while gaming, I wasn't impressed. I prefer throwing on a pair of the best gaming headsets, but there’s still no excuse to drop the ball at this price point.

Upgradeability of the HyperX Omen Max 16

Six screws need to be extracted to remove the bottom aluminum panel. While that was easy enough, it’s only half the battle. All of the serviceable components (save for the readily accessible battery) are underneath an extensive metal shield. That shield is held in place by roughly a dozen screws, making upgrades a bit tedious.

Once the shield is removed, you’ll find access to the M.2 slot for the Wi-Fi/Bluetooth module, two SO-DIMM slots (both of which were filled on our review unit), and an additional M.2 slot for a second SSD. Yet another metal shield covers the first M.2 SSD slot, although I didn’t go through the process of removing another dozen screws to uncover it.

Battery Life on the HyperX Omen Max 16

Despite its considerable girth, the Omen Max 16 is equipped with just an 83 WHr battery. For comparison, the thinner and lighter Blade 16 manages to squeeze in a 90 WHr battery.

The Omen Max 16 lasted 5 hours and 7 minutes on our battery test, which consists of web browsing, video streaming over Wi-Fi, and OpenGL testing with the screen brightness set at 150 nits. This was over three hours shorter than the Raider 16 Max HX, while the Blade 16 lasted over twice as long on a charge (12:46).

Heat on the HyperX Omen Max 16

During the Metro Exodus stress test, we measured the Omen Max 16's keyboard at 106 degrees Fahrenheit (F) between the G and H keys, while the touchpad was 84.9 F.

The hottest part of the laptop was near the rear center of the bottom of the chassis, which measured 114 F.

While running the Metro Exodus stress test, the CPU measured 87 degrees Celsius (C). Meanwhile, the RTX 5090 was cooler at 75 C.

Webcam on the HyperX Omen Max 16

Another area where it feels like HP skimped is with the webcam. Rather than going with a higher resolution unit, the Omen Max 16 features a bog-standard 1080p unit that looks about as good as one you’d find in a $1,000 entry-level gaming laptop.

The camera didn’t do particularly well with a nearby window where light was shining through, and there were a lot of noise artifacts in less-than-ideal light conditions. In addition, the camera didn’t really pick up fine details well, which is disappointing considering the price.

Software and Warranty on the HyperX Omen Max 16

Like many HP laptops, the HyperX Omen Max 16 comes loaded with additional software bloat that you can mostly ignore or simply delete. Scrolling down the list of “H” apps in the Start Menu, HP basically set up camp with no less than eight apps/shortcuts—everything from HP Documentation to HP Privacy Settings to HP TV+. In addition, you’ll find the usual third-party add-ons like McAfee and promotional links for Dropbox, Adobe, and Booking.com.

The only really useful preinstalled app is the Omen Gaming Hub. It gives you control over power modes, lets you see CPU/GPU/RAM utilization, and provides plenty of configuration options for the onboard RGB lighting.

The Omen Max 16 comes with a one-year manufacturer warranty.

HyperX Omen Max 16 Configurations

Our Omen Max 16 came configured with an Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus processor, 32GB of DDR5-6400 memory, a 2TB PCIe 5.0 SSD, RTX 5090 GPU, and a 16-inch 1600p 240 Hz OLED display. The MSRP on our review unit was a staggering $4,699.99.

There are also several less expensive options, with the cheapest being a $2,699 SKU with a Core Ultra 7 270HX processor, 32GB of RAM, a 1TB SSD, and an RTX 5080. For $3,099, you can swap the Core Ultra 7 270HX for an AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 475 and double the SSD capacity to 2TB.

Bottom Line

The HyperX Omen Max 16 represents a swing and a miss. When I first saw the enormity of the chassis, I was looking forward to some impressive gaming performance given the 55W processor and 175W RTX 5090 onboard. Instead, what I was left with was a $4,699 gaming laptop that lingered in last place for most of the gaming benchmarks, and often by a large margin. Even the Razer Blade 16 with its 25W processor managed to get the upper hand in most benchmarks.

But the gaming wasn’t the only disappointment. Given the price tag, I would have expected a better-equipped machine. Where’s the haptic trackpad, and why do we only get two speakers? And on a minor annoyance angle, while I appreciate the two M.2 slots for storage and replaceable memory, why do I need to remove another dozen screws just to access those components?

In the end, the Omen Max 16 could have been so much more. Quite frankly, it would make sense to spend the extra $200 and grab a Razer Blade 16. Not only is it thinner and lighter (by two pounds), but it offers double the battery life.

20 years ago today, Steve Jobs took to the Apple WWDC stage to unveil the first-ever Mac Pro desktop computer. As well as marking the beginning of a whole new Mac line, this was the first Apple workstation desktop to transition from PowerPC to Intel x86. Apple had already introduced Intel-powered versions of its iMac, Mac Mini, and MacBook at the start of 2006; now it was replacing the mighty PowerMac G5 tower.

While readers might remember most clearly, and even fondly, Intel-era Mac Pro computers like the ‘trash can’ or the ‘cheese grater,’ the first Mac Pro with an x86 chip looked almost the same as its G5 ancestor.

Of course, the Apple WWDC presentation was all about the new processors, and the new machine was crowned the performance king, claimed to “deliver up to twice the performance of the Power Mac G5 Quad.” The top configuration would come with two new dual-core Intel Xeon processors running up to 3.0 GHz.

“Apple has successfully completed the transition to using Intel processors in just seven months — 210 days to be exact,” boasted Apple CEO Steve Jobs. “And what better product to complete it with than the new Mac Pro, the workstation Mac users have been dreaming about.”

Key specs of the first Mac Pro were:

• Two Dual-Core Intel Xeon processors running up to 3.0 GHz, each with 4MB of shared L2 cache and independent 1.33 GHz front-side buses
• Nvidia GeForce 7300 GT with 256MB GDDR3, configurable up to ATI Radeon X1900 XT and the Nvidia Quadro FX 4500, both with 512MB of video memory
• 1GB of DDR2-667 fully buffered memory, expandable to 16GB
• 250GB HDD, expandable to 2TB using the four bays
• 16x SuperDrive with double-layer support (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW), with an extra bay for two ODDs
• 2x Gigabit Ethernet, Optional Wi-Fi 4, Optional 56k V.92 USB modem, Optional Bluetooth 2.0+EDR
• 5x USB 2.0 ports, 2x FireWire 800 ports, 2x FireWire 400 ports, various audio I/O
• 4× PCIe 1.0 slots, one double–wide for the best graphics cards of the time
• Compatible with Mac OS X Tiger at launch, supported to 10.6 Snow Leopard

Three processor choices were available at release in early 2007. As well as the top-end model with a pair of dual-core Core Xeon 5160 CPUs running at 3.0 GHz, there was a Core Xeon 5150 x2 (2.66 GHz), and a Core Xeon 5130 x2 (2.0 GHz) model. If an off-the-peg model wasn't quite right, Apple proudly claimed the online configurator allowed for "more than 4.9 million possible configurations."

To give you some pricing context, Apple released the Mac Pro with a Core Xeon 5150 x2 (2.66 GHz) and base specs bullet-pointed above for $2,499, including a Mighty Mouse and Apple Keyboard.

Apple’s last Mac Pro was a 2023 model with the M2 Ultra chip. Then, in March this year, Apple confirmed there would be no future revisions of this desktop workstation flagship. The line had been effectively replaced by the Mac Studio, as a key reason for the Mac Pro to exist (upgradeability via PCIe expansion) had been sidelined by Thunderbolt 5.

Nvidia has a booth at the annual QuakeCon, which is happening from August 6 to 9 at the Gaylord Texan Resort & Convention Center in Grapevine, Texas, where the company is selling RTX 50-series GPUs at their original launch price. The company said in its blog post that several Founders Edition graphics cards are available at MSRP while supplies last, and that there will also be several prizes and freebies, including the GeForce Trading Cards Series 1.

“If you’re attending this year’s event between August 6th and 9th, head to the GeForce booth ASAP to get in on the action,” Nvidia said in its blog update. “And if you want a GPU upgrade, our team is bringing Verified Priority Access IRL to QuakeCon, enabling you to purchase Founders Edition GeForce RTX 5090, 5080, and 5070s at MSRP while supplies last.”

The firm officially announced the RTX 50-series in Las Vegas at CES 2025, with the RTX 5090 priced at $1,999, the RTX 5080 at $999, the RTX 5070 Ti at $749, and the RTX 5070 at $549. However, the supplies of these GPUs were limited — the 5090s and 5080s went out of stock on the same day that they arrived on store shelves. It took several months for the RTX 50-series to finally dip below MSRP, but this only lasted a few months as the memory shortage took hold and caused VRAM prices to skyrocket.

This means that the best graphics cards for gaming are quite expensive at the moment, with Tom’s Hardware’s GPU price tracker showing the best price for the RTX 5090 sitting at $4,381 — more than double the $1,999 MSRP that Nvidia set for the GPU. Even the RTX 5080, 5070 Ti, and 5070 aren’t immune to these price increases, with the most affordable options for the graphics cards sitting at $1,289 (29% over MSRP), $989 (32% over MSRP), and $629 (more than 14% over MSRP), respectively.

Unfortunately, this isn’t likely the worst that we will see when it comes to GPU pricing. There has been some disturbing news that prices for RTX 50-series GPUs jumped by 30% in South Korea as wafer costs from TSMC have increased, and GDDR7 modules push past $20. While this hasn’t reached the U.S. at the moment, there is fear that retailers in the country will follow suit soon.

Such is the state of the PC building industry that RTX 50-series GPUs at MSRP have now become a come-on to desperate gamers who just want to upgrade their gaming PCs for a reasonable price. Unfortunately, “Verified Priority Access IRL” is only available during the convention and only until supplies last — once there’s no more stock on site, you’d have no choice but to troll the interwebs for a deal or a secondhand unit if you refuse to pay for more than the MSRP. Alternatively, if you believe that you’ve got the skills, Nvidia is also hosting Quake III Arena RTX Remix and DOOM: The Dark Ages | Revelations challenges, where the best players will each receive an RTX 5070 Founders Edition GPU.

If you don't have the cash reserves to fund a new GPU, RAM, or SSD, then consider upgrading the visuals on your PC with a new monitor. Upgrading the size or the panel from IPS/VA to OLED can give your games a vivid visual boost. At Best Buy, you can currently grab the magnificent MSI MAG 321UPXB gaming monitor, returning to its lowest-ever price of $599.99. That's a saving of $130 from the original $729.99 list price on the Best Buy store page.

● Check out this deal at Best Buy

The MSI MAG 321UPXB is a premium gaming monitor with all the bells and whistles for producing stunning images. The monitor is a flat-panel with a 32-inch viewable area and a high-detail 4K (3,820 x 2,160) UHD resolution. The QD-OLED panel has a fast refresh rate up to 240Hz and a blisteringly fast 0.03ms gray-to-gray response time thanks to the OLED panel tech. The combination of fast refresh and response times produces very smooth motion in games and eliminates ghosting artifacts.

The display also has an anti-reflective treatment to avoid light sources disrupting your viewing experience, plus it is compatible with Nvidia's G-Sync technology to help eliminate screen tearing by matching the monitor's refresh rate to the output of the game you're playing. To hit the high refresh rates of this monitor, you will require a powerful graphics card or use frame-generation techniques to boost frame rates. So you don't need to worry about the refresh rate of this gaming monitor bottlenecking your gaming PC.

The MSI's panel is DisplayHDR True Black 400-certified and supports VRR (variable refresh rate) for gaming consoles like the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X. Ports are also plentiful, with two HDMI 2.1, one DisplayPort 1.4a, and one USB-C (DisplayPort Alt Mode) to choose from. For peace of mind, there's also a 3-year manufacturer's warranty that includes coverage for the dreaded OLED burn-in.

The MAG 321UPXB has a list price of $729.99 at Best Buy, but is currently $599.99 for a limited time only.

If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, Gaming Chair, Best Wi-Fi Routers, Best Motherboard, or CPU Deals pages.

SpaceX and Tesla on Thursday formally unveiled plans for the initial phase of their Terafab project. The first stage of the plan — which is expected to use Intel's 14A process technology — is expected to require $16.8 billion in investment, while the completed campus is planned to encompass more than 100 million square feet of manufacturing space. The massive semiconductor manufacturing complex will be built in Grimes County, Texas, at a location that belongs to SpaceX.

According to SpaceX and Tesla, their combined demand for semiconductors is projected to exceed 1 terawatt (TW) of compute per year, which significantly exceeds today's global supply. In fact, SpaceX, Tesla, and xAI already consume a significant portion of contract chipmaking services available today, and can potentially justify building a dedicated fab that will exclusively serve Elon Musk's companies. In particular, Terafab is envisioned to exclusively produce AI inference processors for Tesla Optimus humanoid robots and Cybercab autonomous vehicles, as well as 'high-power' processors intended for SpaceX's space-based data centers. Meanwhile, SpaceX and Tesla have not disclosed when their combined demand for compute per year will hit the 1 TW benchmark.

Unlike a conventional semiconductor fab, Terafab is envisioned as a vertically integrated manufacturing campus where advanced logic devices, memory chips, packaging, and testing operations are housed together. Normally, logic and memory are produced at different fabs using different process technologies, whereas packaging and testing services are performed at different facilities. However, the companies believe that consolidating logic, memory, packaging, and testing in one location will not only shorten the production cycle but will also shorten time-to-yield by enabling faster iterative improvements.

Given the description and the goal of the project, this will be a massive facility. Yet, SpaceX and Tesla have said little about its capabilities; The only thing they have disclosed is that the current facility in Grimes County will feature '100 million square feet of manufacturing space.' The 100 million square feet (9.3 million square meters) figure immediately stands out because it is far beyond anything ever announced for a semiconductor manufacturing facility. For example, the total area of Samsung's Pyeongtaek campus is approximately 2.89 million square meters, or 31.1 million square feet. A single Samsung fab occupies about 120,000 square meters, or 1.29 million square feet. However, the key wording is important: '100 million square feet of manufacturing space' does not mean 100 million square feet of cleanroom space.

Based on an image published by SpaceX, the Terafab facility will occupy four massive buildings. It is unclear whether these buildings will be four phases of the project (i.e., logic, memory, and packaging will be made under one roof) or will serve different purposes (i.e., one building makes logic, another produces memory, yet another does testing and packaging). In any case, when fully built, Terafab will be a massive semiconductor production campus that will require significantly more than $16.8 billion.

The announcement claims that the Terafab facility will employ at least 3,000 people, and that between 60% and 80% of them will be Grimes and nearby Brazos County residents.

Terafab is expected to use water from Gibbons Creek Reservoir instead of local groundwater and feature on-site wastewater treatment as well as water recycling and conservation measures.

The announcement follows Tesla's groundbreaking earlier this year on a research semiconductor facility at the North Campus of Tesla's Giga Texas campus, which the companies describe as a precursor to Terafab.

When you're buying a pre-built gaming PC, you'll want to consider how many years the rig you're buying is going to be able to play the latest games. Luckily, this Newegg deal on an ABS Cyclone Aqua machine for $1,329.99 right now unlocks performance that should last for some time. Unlike plenty of other budget rigs that stick with 8GB GPUs, this machine from Newegg's own ABS brand features an RTX 5060 Ti with 16GB VRAM, giving you the option to game at 1440p for less than $1,400. You'll need to use the coupon code SSF72762 for $70 off to get the full discount, however.

● Check out this deal at Newegg

The PC hardware market has seen huge price increases, so a gaming PC with specs like these remaining at an affordable price is worth considering. While the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB is the star of the show, you're also getting 16GB of DDR5 RAM, a 1TB SSD, and the 20-core Intel Core i7-14700F to sink your teeth into. The 14700F is still a popular choice in pre-builts, despite being a little older, with decent performance for gaming.

With this build, you're securing yourself one of Nvidia’s current mid-tier graphics cards, featuring a GPU with 4,608 CUDA cores and a boost clock speed of 2,527MHz. Unlike the RTX 5090, this RTX 5060 Ti only requires a single eight-pin PCIe connector to deliver power, so you're not expected to be guzzling huge amounts of power with this rig.

Our RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB review is clear about how impressive this GPU is for mid-tier builds, with the charts below showing how the card's ray-tracing power is especially formidable in comparison to its rivals. DLSS 4 support, meanwhile, unlocks the full software capabilities of this Blackwell GPU, with multi-frame generation helping to give your rig a frame rate boost in the most resource-heavy games, especially at the higher resolutions.

The big win, though, is that VRAM. 16GB of GDDR7 is a significantly better option for any build, but especially compared to the 8GB variants you'll usually find at this price point. It gives you much greater headroom for performance while playing the most resource-heavy games, especially if 1440p is in your sights.

The GPU isn't the only good part about this build, however. While the Intel Core i7-14700F is getting older, this Raptor Lake Refresh CPU is still a popular choice in pre-built systems at this price point. It ships with 20 cores, a max turbo clock speed of 5.4 GHz, and a 65W TPD. Those 20 cores are split across eight performance cores, which are the best options for gaming, along with 12 efficient cores for multi-threaded work. Performance-wise, the 14700F won't be a bottleneck alongside the RTX 5060 Ti at either 1080p or 1440p while gaming.

You're also not settling for outdated specs, either. This machine skips DDR4, which is still used in budget builds to reduce costs, and instead comes with 16GB of G.Skill Flare X5 DDR5-6000 RAM. While 32GB would be better, RAM pricing is sky-high at the moment, so it's a compromise. 16GB won't give you as much breathing room, but using DDR5 adds to the longevity of this machine, giving you scope to upgrade later.

As for storage, you're getting a 1TB Patriot P410 SSD included in this rig. It offers Gen 4 speeds and enough space, at least, for you to install a few big game installations, alongside plenty of indies. Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.2 wireless connectivity are included, along with Gigabit Ethernet.

The $1,329.99 sale price for this ABS Cyclone Aqua gaming PC is hard to beat at the moment. The RTX 5060 Ti 16GB GPU means you've got the power to game at 1440p if you choose to do so, but with PC hardware costs continuing to rise, there's no guarantee that it'll be around at this price for long. If you're interested, don't forget to use the SSF72762 coupon code to save that extra $70.

Anthropic has announced it's building an in-house chip development team to co-design its own custom ASIC processors for handling AI inferencing workloads. As described to Business Insider, Anthropic is starting to hire engineers to design the chips with an unspecified partner, and it looks set to do it at pace, with the job listing saying that any potential hiree would need to be ready to work to a schedule and get the chip design over the line.

This is just the latest major AI company to announce it's developing its own custom hardware. As the global economic shortages squeeze chip supply and models increasingly lean on optimizations to make workloads more efficient and potentially profitable, making custom silicon for your own data centers makes a lot of sense. Anthropic now joins the likes of Google, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, and OpenAI in building their own chips for the job.

If you want something done right...

It's no secret that if you want to train an advanced AI model, you need Nvidia GPUs. Even Chinese AI developers, who have the ruling party leaning on them and limited access to Nvidia hardware, still use Nvidia GPUs — even if they have to smuggle them first.

But if you're looking to run AI to perform inferencing workloads for agentic and generative AI models, you can use a much wider array of hardware. Nvidia GPUs are good, but they're expensive — custom silicon can have a lower total cost of ownership of up to 65% — and power-hungry, and there are much more efficient options available. Chinese labs are using domestic Chinese hardware, and many Western AI developers have their own solutions; those that don't are making them.

Google has been building its Tensor Processing Unit (TPU) chips for 12 years, working with Broadcom to develop each generation. Amazon has its Trainium and Inferentia chips, and Meta recently announced several new MTIA designs for deployment through 2027. Microsoft has its Maia line, and Tesla recently pivoted to its AI5 and AI6 chip designs after years of developing Dojo.

And now Anthropic is getting in on the act, and for much the same reasons. Anthropic told Business Insider that it was co-designing the chips so that they would allow Claude to run faster and more efficiently at the scale its customers need. Indeed, Anthropic has seen explosive growth in the past year, seeing huge expansion in the consumer space and taking on significant government contracts — not to mention agentic AI requiring far more tokens than traditional single-prompt interactions.

Anthropic hasn't revealed which firm it's working with on the design and development. Although Broadcom and Marvell are the two largest companies in the ASIC co-design market, representing some 95% of it, The Information reported last month that Anthropic was in talks with Samsung for manufacturing.

The shovel sellers always benefit

Designing, packaging, and manufacturing your own custom ASIC for AI inferencing isn't cheap, and it isn't easy. Alongside developing the hardware, you need the software stack to utilize it, and you want models that are optimized to run on it to make the most of its potential advantages. That makes it more worthwhile for most companies to simply use other firms' hardware and more general-purpose GPUs. But for major AI companies with enough money to burn and the ability to scale up to maximize efficiency gains, it's well worth the investment.

But the AI developers aren't the only ones who benefit. Nvidia has been one of the few companies to make enormous profits from the AI boom, while the likes of Meta, Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI are all losing enormous sums of money on their AI efforts. There are very real winners from the custom ASIC design and build market, too: TSMC, Broadcom, and Marvell.

Broadcom has been Google's co-design partner for years, and was also recently tapped to help build OpenAI's inferencing chips. It also works with Meta on its MTIA design, as well as holding contracts for other custom ASIC designs with ByteDance and Fujitsu. It also produces strong interconnect and networking hardware, which allows it to offer customers a more complete solution. It claims to have a $73 billion backlog of orders to work through, and expects to generate over $100 billion in annual AI chip revenue by the end of 2027.

Marvell holds massive contracts with Amazon for its Trainium chips and Microsoft for Maia, and is expected to make upwards of $11 billion for these co-design jobs in 2026.

If Samsung ends up as Anthropic's partner, it would be a relatively small player in this particular space, but it would bring enormous manufacturing and chip design expertise to the table, as well as access to the all-important memory that is in such short global supply.

The biggest winner of all these initiatives, though, is arguably TSMC. The Taiwanese company produces the majority of the world's cutting-edge silicon and is involved in the production of almost all the chips discussed here. They need TSMC's CoWoS advanced packaging technologies for integration with HBM. It also handles much of the packaging of Nvidia's and AMD GPUs, as well as producing much of the underlying wafers.

Multi-polar chip world

Anthropic joining the custom ASIC race is hardly surprising and further cements the future we seem to be barrelling towards, which is each of the hyperscaler AI companies looking to handle as much of their inferencing with custom hardware as possible. It's more efficient, easier to control for features and specifications, and easier to scale up when optimized for internal models. From a Chinese perspective, it's also easier to avoid problems caused by international trade blockades and tariffs.

They'll likely never become 100% reliant on their own chips — there is just too much AI demand to scale into for that to happen, and Nvidia has been ruthlessly dominating access to the supply chain. But every new chip installed is an Nvidia GPU that won't be used for the same purpose, which may help reduce the stranglehold Nvidia has on the industry. Not for training, though. That's likely to remain Nvidia's biggest appeal for some time to come.

A developer posted on the r/ClaudeCode subreddit a major error that their AI tool executed, which resulted in the deletion of their entire drive. According to u/Ecstatic-Big5126, they instructed Opus 5 to back up their system. While the AI proceeded with the task, it thought that it had created the backup in the wrong directory and then proceeded to run an “rm -rf” command on the supposed backup. Unfortunately, it mistakenly deleted the entire profile folder in its confusion.

It seemed that the AI was running on a Unix-style shell on Windows when it confused the Unix-style path of /c/Users/ as a temporary backup because it was expecting the traditional C:\Users\ path. So, when its expectations did not match, the tool decided to run the rm -rf “/c/Users/harih/” command, proceeding to clear every file and folder in the user’s profile.

“I asked Claude Opus 5 to create a backup. Instead, it created the backup in the wrong directory and then proceeded to "rm -rf" my entire drive,” u/Ecstatic-Big5126 wrote. “After wiping everything, it just replied: "Sorry, typo." ...like nothing had happened.” They also added, “That was simultaneously the funniest and most painful AI moment I've had.”

The lesson here is that while AI LLMs are powerful tools, they still shouldn’t be given unfettered access to your system (or any system, for that matter). There have already been several examples of AI and AI agents messing up systems and deleting everything — one of the earliest examples includes an AI coding platform deleting an entire company database despite a code freeze, and a Google agentic AI wiping a user’s drive without permission.

There have been a number of high-profile mistakes of this nature. AWS has reportedly suffered from outages caused by blundering AI coding bots, while Meta’s AI Alignment director had her inbox wiped by her OpenClaw agent. PocketOS even had its entire database wiped in nine seconds by a rogue Cursor tool, which was compounded by its cloud provider’s lack of safeguards.

While the AI tool going out of bounds is the primary reason for these errors, the user is also partly to blame for thinking that it can fully understand what they want it to do. That’s why AI LLMs should never be given full access to important systems, and they shouldn’t have free rein to run delete commands like “rm -rf.”

This event will be a learning experience for u/Ecstatic-Big5126. But as AI agents increase in popularity, especially among inexperienced programmers and developers, we can only expect incidents like these to happen more frequently in the future.

The AI boom means that no matrix math FLOPS are disposable, and that means older Nvidia GPUs with Tensor Cores are getting a new lease on life. Services are popping up that will outfit your RTX 2080 Ti with 22GB of VRAM, doubling its original memory pool and making it more useful for modern LLM and diffusion workloads. If you’re hard up for compute and you don't have an RTX 2080 Ti to modify, however, eBay has just the thing. A Hong Kong-based seller will send you a pre-modded 22GB 2080 Ti in exchange for $499.

The listing only promises that you'll receive a "Turbo," i.e., blower-style, RTX 2080 Ti with the 22GB mod. Don't get too picky about the particular brand of card you might receive, as the seller says: "The GPU brand could be Gigabyte, MSI, ASUS, Leadtek or others. It depends on what we have in hand."

The eBay listing photos show a Gigabyte blower-style card along with a large box of presumably modified cards ready to ship and a GPU-Z screenshot confirming the availability of 22528 MB of memory from a running card.

The seller only has 99.6% lifetime feedback on eBay, which is relatively low, but feedback for this specific listing shows that at least 38 happy buyers have received these cards and that they’re working as described.

Assuming you can count yourself as one of those happy buyers, a $500 22GB RTX 2080 Ti might be the best VRAM bang for your buck that you can find these days. That relatively large memory pool, combined with the RTX 2080 Ti's 616 GB/s of memory bandwidth and Tensor Cores, means that it's still useful for local LLM tasks, although its raw compute capacity and limited reduced-precision data type support compared to more modern products might make demanding diffusion workloads leisurely.

Among Turing cards, the 24GB Titan RTX still commands about $800 on eBay at today's prices, and a Quadro RTX 6000 with the same amount of VRAM is about $900. The local AI enthusiast's favorite RTX 3090, which has 24GB of faster GDDR6X offering 936 GB/s of memory bandwidth, looks to be selling for about $1200. Ampere RTX Pro cards with even more VRAM rapidly get more expensive from there.

The fact that all of these GPUs are still commanding such high prices many years after their introduction is a testament to the continuing utility and universal availability of Nvidia’s Tensor Core architecture across both consumer and data center products since 2018.

AMD has had matrix math accelerators in its IP arsenal since CDNA 1 in 2020, but their availability has been limited to Instinct data center products until RDNA 4 arrived early last year. Intel included XMX matrix engines in the Alchemist architecture from the start in late 2022, but Arc graphics products have faced considerable challenges beyond the presence or absence of that capability. And Apple only just introduced Neural Accelerators to its GPUs with the M5 family.

All that means that if you’re hard up for VRAM capacity and still need a decent amount of compute to go with it, a 22GB RTX 2080 Ti could be a compelling and relatively budget-friendly way to get there, and you get access to the entirety of the CUDA software ecosystem in the bargain. Not bad for an eight-year-old GPU that might have previously ended up in the e-waste bin by now.

The State Corporation Commission, Virginia’s independent state agency that regulates public utilities, has ordered data centers to pay for all the required transmission infrastructure that the project will use exclusively. According to Realtor.com, Governor Abigail Spanberger (D) has recently been pressing AI hyperscalers to reduce their impact on the power grid and utility prices.

Virginia currently has the greatest number of data centers across the U.S., with the state hosting at least 570 sites. Because of the massive power demand of these sites, the state has been experiencing issues with electricity price hikes, with one county even asking its employees, including schools, to conserve power. PJM Interconnection, which distributes power to the state, has increased prices by 76%, with Monitoring Analytics, the independent watchdog keeping an eye on the utility company, saying that this is mostly due to AI data centers.

The move requiring data centers to pay for their own upstream electrical infrastructure should, hopefully, ease the burden on the average Virginian. "We are taking real steps to address rising energy costs for Virginians," said Gov. Spanberger. "I will continue to work with the General Assembly and take action to make sure data centers pay their fair share, adhere to strict environmental standards, and listen to the concerns of local communities.”

This is one of the first statewide announcements that will enforce President Donald Trump’s ratepayer protection pledge. Trump summoned the biggest AI hyperscalers to the White House in early March and made them promise that they will “pay their own way” when it comes to building the infrastructure they need. But despite this, the burden of more expensive electricity hasn’t eased for the average American. The administration expanded this promise in late July to include state governors, utility companies, and data center developers.

Many critics said that this pledge is nothing but a piece of paper, with some comparing it to a “pinky promise.” After all, this is just a commitment and not a regulation that would penalize companies that don’t comply. Nevertheless, it seems that it has spurred at least one state to make a move that should, hopefully, have a material impact on the average citizen.

Aside from Virginia, Oregon is the only other state, so far, that has raised electrical rates for large consumers, like data centers. According to the Oregon POWER Act, facilities that consume 20 MW or more are assigned to a higher rate class. Portland General Electric, the state’s largest power supplier, has already implemented this, resulting in a 30% rate increase for these big power users, while also cutting residential costs by 1.3%.

While the average consumer isn’t necessarily paying for the power that data centers consume, utility companies had to conduct massive grid upgrades to support the increased demand from these developments. The utility companies then equally passed on all the necessary capital expenditure to all consumers, instead of just the data centers. By requiring data centers to spend on their own grid upgrades, further increases in electricity prices could, hopefully, be prevented.

Apple reportedly has around $1 billion in "processor wafers on the shelves awaiting packaging" amid ongoing memory shortages, putting pressure on the firm as it nears the launch of the iPhone 18. Tim Culpan of Culpium says Apple is "scrambling" for memory supply ahead of release, working with suppliers to get memory ready so it can finish packaging the A20 Pro and C2 chips that are reportedly inside the iPhone 18 lineup.

It's an interesting peek behind the curtain of the current supply chain limitations, which reach beyond simply DRAM chips. With fully-integrated SoCs across both desktop and mobile, Apple is uniquely vulnerable to supply chain limitations, not only in DRAM supply, but also in packaging capacity to bring together DRAM chips with processor wafers.

According to Culpan, Apple primarily sources DRAM from Micron, with smaller engagements from SK Hynix and Samsung. Micron (along with the other major memory players) has reportedly sold capacity for DRAM and HBM through 2027. A flurry of long-term agreements (LTAs) have cropped up over the past several months, guaranteeing supply to certain companies for several years.

The A20 Pro is the first chip to use TSMC's N2 process, and it has been progressing well, with TSMC reportedly sitting on around $1 billion worth of Apple wafers awaiting packaging with DRAM. Packaging happens with TSMC's new Wafer-Level Multi-Chip Module (WMCM) process, according to Culpan, which is similar to the CoWoS packaging but for mobile parts.

Culpan reports that "Apple and its assemblers remain confident that they can meet initial demand," but DRAM shortages could put pressure on shipments past the initial launch. Apple reportedly plans to ship around 200 million iPhone 18 units across the lineup throughout the device's lifespan. The iPhone 17 range saw record shipments last year, surpassing 245 million devices shipped in 2025.

Apple is one of several companies reportedly looking to alternative suppliers for DRAM, namely China's CXMT. The Chinese memory supplier has become a hot topic in the halls of the U.S. government over the past several weeks, with Apple reportedly lobbying for clearance as the government weighs the option to ban CXMT.

The Nashville Metro Council just gave the go-signal to Mayor Freddie O’Connell's plan to use eminent domain to block a planned 23-acre data center campus sitting right beside the Nashville Zoo at Grassmere. According to real estate news platform CoStar, the city council approved the measure by a 27-5 vote last Wednesday, meaning the city government can now take the next steps to proceed with the legal process that will force the purchase of the property.

“I’m glad Metro Council passed our legislation that gives us the option to acquire property next to the zoo for a number of public needs,” Mayor O’Connell said in a statement. “We’re working closely with our Finance and General Services departments to plan for the site.”

The developer of the property, DC Blox, wanted to put up a 69,220-square-foot single-story data center on the site that was expected to cost more than $700 million to build. It would sit right beside the 188-acre Nashville Zoo at Grassmere, which opened in 1990 as the Grassmere Wildlife Park. This zoo is one of the biggest attractions in Tennessee, expecting to receive two million visitors annually by 2027. Aside from that, it also participates in more than 50 conservation programs with institutions across the world.

Zoo officials objected to the development, raising concerns about disruptions like noise and light pollution, among others. They even started an online petition that garnered more than 500,000 signatures by the end of July, even getting support from celebrities like Brad Paisley, Sheryl Crow, and Jack White.

DC Blox argues that 648 Grassmere Park used to provide data center functions, so putting up a newer one on the site would not necessarily disrupt the community, including its neighboring zoo. However, there have already been several widely reported incidents from across the U.S. that highlighted the noise and light pollution that zoo officials have been concerned about.

Residents in a town in Michigan have been complaining for about two years now after their neighboring data centers started emitting noise 24/7, comparing it to the sound that a vacuum makes in your living room. Aside from that, some people complain about infrasound, high- and low-frequency vibrations that do not register on decibel meters but could sometimes be felt coming from data centers and potentially cause adverse health effects. A Microsoft data center in Wisconsin is also facing a lawsuit due to noise and extreme light pollution.

While this does not mean that the proposed Nashville data center will cause a similar issue, it seems that city officials do not want to take this risk. Light and noise pollution could have adverse effects on the animals housed by the zoo, potentially disrupting their habitats and behavior.

The city council vote would allow the local government to negotiate with DC Blox for the acquisition of the property. However, this does not automatically mean that Nashville would automatically have the right to own the property. It will first have to negotiate with the owner to determine that property’s fair market value, and if the two parties cannot agree, then a judge or jury will have to determine the final amount. The company could also challenge the eminent domain claim.

There have been fears that the government will use eminent domain to advance data center projects, which was further spurred by Georgia Power’s use of the power to acquire 30 residential properties to expand the power grid. Although the utility company said that it wasn’t in the data center business, the move was made to connect a substation to a power plant, with 70% to 80% of the electricity traveling through it expected to serve data centers. But, as Nashville showed, this authority can also be used to block data center projects.

This week, Samsung presented its vision for next-generation memory and storage solutions both for AI and general-purpose applications at the Future of Memory and Storage (FMS) 2026 conference. The company introduced zHBM, zNAND-O, and BV-NAND technologies at the event, and while they are aimed at very different applications, they share one common ingredient: they all rely on wafer bonding.

Here's a breakdown of each type of technology that the company announced.

• zHBM: Samsung’s vision for custom HBM ultra-high-performance memory that will sit on top of logic dies.
• zNAND-O: NAND memory that can be bonded atop a logic device to maximize bandwidth, reduce latency, and minimize power consumption.
• BV-NAND (aka Samsung’s 10^th Generation V-NAND): Samsung’s take on bonding NAND arrays atop all the circuitry needed to operate them. This is essentially next-generation 3D NAND technology that is used today by almost everyone, including Kioxia/Sandisk, SK Hynix, and YMTC (which was the first company to adopt such a method).

This article is a preview of the type of content that readers can expect from our subscription service, Tom's Hardware Premium. If you're interested in more technical content that spans across the hardware industry, subscribe for as little as $29 per year, or $7 per month.

zHBM: Placing HBM stack on top of logic

Around the time we first heard about HBM4's 2,048-bit interface, we read a 'semi-official' report that SK hynix and its partners were considering vertical integration of HBM4 stacks on top of logic chips. To a large degree, companies were considering installing these memory stacks on top of their processors as they doubted that it would be possible and feasible to use interposers to connect HBM4 stacks to AI accelerators. Over time, it turned out that integration of memory on top of logic is complicated when it comes to cooling, power delivery, and developing interposers that can handle a 2,048-bit memory interface. Samsung's zHBM appears to be a continuation of that effort.

Samsung's zHBM concept places HBM directly on top of an AI accelerator instead of on its perimeter, which greatly reduces the distance data must travel between compute and memory. The company says this architecture can increase bandwidth and power efficiency and projects that it can provide 8x the 'performance of HBM5', while its advanced wafer bonding is expected to enable over 10x higher memory density, 3x better energy efficiency, and more than 50% lower thermal resistance than HBM5.

While Samsung's claims about the zHBM look incredibly impressive, they are vague. For example, when the company claims that a 'next-generation interface system incorporating zHBM' will deliver 'approximately eight times the performance of HBM5,' it never explicitly states whether this refers to memory bandwidth, actual application performance due to a combination of improvements over standard HBM, or something else. Had Samsung intended to compare raw bandwidth, it would likely have used more precise wording, such as '8x higher bandwidth.'

Instead, the general term 'performance' may have many meanings. The same applies to references of improved power efficiency, higher memory density, and lower thermal resistance compared to HBM5, a standard that has not been fully defined or ratified. To make matters even more imprecise, Samsung mentions thermal resistance, which depends on implementation rather than the standard. Finally, Samsung didn't reveal which die stacking/bonding technology it will use for zHBM.

In any case, Samsung says that zHBM will also support customer-specific designs and will enable custom IP to be integrated into the interconnect layer (which plays a role similar to the base die, though it is definitely not a base die per se) between the HBM stack and the AI processor, which essentially means that zHBM is not necessarily an industry-standard solution, so it might be implemented with additional perks.

For now, Samsung hasn't disclosed any timeframes for when it plans to offer its zHBM solutions. The only clue is that it compares it to HBM5, which is likely to see the light of day sometime in the late 2020s or early 2030s.

zNAND-O(on-device): Put storage close to compute

Samsung also unveiled zNAND-O, a high-performance NAND memory currently in development that will enable putting four or eight stacks of NAND devices on top of logic dies. zNAND-O(n) device is based on the company's V-NAND platform (or rather, BV-NAND) and is meant to combine high storage density with improved I/O performance and low latency.

Samsung claims that the tech is suitable for edge AI systems running real-time, data-intensive inference workloads, though, of course, there are many other applications that can benefit from high-performance on-package storage.

Since the technology is in development, Samsung hasn't shared much information about it, even keeping the schematics of how it plans to put zNAND-O layers on top of a logic under wraps. We can speculate that since Samsung mentions 'improved I/O performance and low-latency,' it may be planning to exploit both the inherently parallel architecture of NAND memory with a high-performance interface, though we will not try to dive into details for the sake of not making the discussion too speculative.

BV-NAND: Good old V-NAND gets a new treatment

With BV-NAND, Samsung is essentially introducing a new brand name for its next-generation 3D NAND that bonds the NAND array on top of the I/O and logic wafer. This, in turn, produces the layer itself using high-performance logic process technologies and enables higher I/O speeds.

Samsung formally announced its 400-layer-class V-NAND (aka 10^th Generation V-NAND) some time ago, and even disclosed that its areal density would be 28 Gb/mm² with a maximum I/O speed reaching 5600 MT/s. This likely stipulates the usage of a pinout that is different from the 3D NAND packages used today. While the areal density of Samsung's 10^th Gen TLC V-NAND is slightly lower when compared to that of Kioxia/Sandisk's BiCS10 TLC NAND, its maximum I/O speed is significantly higher, which perhaps justifies the new branding.

Considering the fact that Samsung rarely sells its memory to third parties and prefers to market client SSDs itself, a new brand for memory can be a sales driver, even if actual high-end drive performance is limited by a PCIe 5.0 x4 interface rather than by 3D NAND memory I/O. Then again, the performance of mid-range PCIe Gen5 SSDs that rely on a quad-channel NAND controller depends on 3D NAND I/O today, so marketing them under a new flash memory brand is a certain way to attract attention and then sell decent performance.

Samsung's new brand strategy

As the new name of the FMS tradeshow implies, the announcements touch upon very distinct industry needs. In the case of Samsung, we are talking about high-performance data center-grade AI accelerators; applications that need storage with latency that is lower than ~50 – 60 µs of modern high-end PCIe SSDs, though we will see how it compares to Z-NAND, and essentially a new generation of conventional 3D NAND with a new brand.

Except for the 400-layer-class Samsung BV-NAND that is set to hit the market in the foreseeable future, the company's new tech, like zHBM and zNAND-O, is years away.

Many owners of high-end NVIDIA graphics cards live in fear of the high-density 12+4-pin connector that supplies power to their video hardware, as the connector has been shown to have dubious reliability versus the previous-generation PCI Express peripheral power connectors, largely due to an extremely minimal safety margin. A user on Reddit has decided that existing measures to protect his card weren't sufficient, and has now vibe-coded himself up a free tool that shuts the whole PC down if per-pin power draw is too high for too long.

The tool is ironically called "12VHPWR Guard" despite the fact that none of the graphics cards it supports actually have a 12VHPWR connector. The two cards primarily supported are the ASUS ROG Astral GeForce RTX 5080 and GeForce RTX 5090, both of which come with the updated 12V-2x6 connector. The modified plug is an attempt to mitigate the melting issue by slightly adjusting the dimensions, forcing users to make sure it is fully inserted into the card. However, the main power delivery wires and their contact points remain the same, and so the burning issue continues.

The reason the developer says that the tool only supports these two cards is that the ROG Astral GPUs have dedicated per-pin current sensors, although, despite what the author says on Reddit, ASUS' ROG Matrix RTX 4090 and RTX 5090 also have these sensors, and the author lists at least the Matrix RTX 5090 as supported on GitHub. The author also notes that ASUS' GPU Tweak III software can throw a warning when power draw goes too high, but that the warning "does nothing" if he's in-game or AFK, despite the fact that the app does support an audible warning.

In any case, the app by Humza Khalid and Claude AI is a very simple and fully free app that requires 35MB of RAM and a minuscule amount of CPU time to poll the I2C bus on the card for the current values twice per second. You can mouse over the system tray icon to see the current maximum power draw for any of the six +12V pins on the power connector. The pins are rated for about 9 amperes of current, and ASUS' own warning threshold is 9.2A, but Khalid has configured his tool such that it looks for current draw over 9.5A over a period of 15 seconds. If that period is exceeded, the tool abruptly shuts the system down, force-closing blocking apps.

The current threshold and the required duration are both configurable, so if you want more lenient or more vigilant settings, you can set them that way. It's surprisingly full-featured; it supports HWiNFO-based shared memory monitoring if the app is unable to access I2C for whatever reason, and it also supports both toast notifications and Windows Event Viewer logging. It's also apparently smart enough to detect sensor loss and avoid reporting all is well when it doesn't actually know, which is reassuring.

Given the extreme cost of these GPUs (which are among the best graphics cards, to be fair), it's easy to see why owners would resort to these measures. The cheapest of them, the ROG Astral OC GeForce RTX 5080, is currently starting at about $1810 USD. While there have been attempts to blame user error (and indeed some cases certainly were user error with the 12VHPWR connector), it has been thoroughly proven that this connector can fail through no fault of the user. While these failures aren't really commonplace, the fact that they happen does speak to the razor-thin safety margin built into the connector.

If you have one of the supported graphics cards, you can head over to Khalid's GitHub page to grab the tiny application. Only Windows 10 and 11 are supported for now, and you'll also need Python 3.10 or higher, which is why such a simple application requires 35MB of RAM. Just remember that the app isn't a replacement for making sure your graphics card, including its 12V-2x6 connector, is installed correctly.

Sandisk arrives running hot to the M.2 2230 SSD segment. A spiritual successor to the popular WD Black SN770M, the Optimus GX 7100M invokes memories of the laptop champion WD Black SN7100 with tested and true hardware. Does the class-leading responsiveness and power efficiency carry over to the smaller factor? Portable gaming system owners can rest easy knowing that it does.

We don’t want to confuse WD and Sandisk here, even if the hardware – and software, for that matter – is similar and often shared. Sandisk is making its own mark, and the Optimus GX 7100M, or 7100M for short, is proof of that. While there were few options available in the M.2 2230 form factor when the Steam Deck launched, there would soon be almost too many. Sandisk didn’t have to release this drive, but we’re glad it did, because it does fill an important hole in the lineup where alternatives have become harder to find.

This is a high-end Gen 4 drive, or as high-end as this segment gets. It’s still DRAM-less but can push the full bandwidth of the interface at both capacities. Where it shines is in its random read performance. That’s the key metric for responsiveness or real-world feel, and especially for game-focused hardware, it means the fastest loading times possible. Portable systems also need to use as little power as possible to reduce heat generation and prolong battery life. The 7100M’s pedigree is great there, too. And while 2TB was once hard to find in this form factor, because drives need to be single-sided with just one NAND flash package, the 7100M handles that and does it with faster TLC rather than lower-endurance QLC flash.

It’s a powerhouse of a product. The reason we say it fills a hole is that the alternatives are hard to find. The Crucial P310 still tends to be a great choice, but the parent company is moving away from the retail space due to AI and enterprise demand. The P310 is also QLC-based, which, while not a big deal anymore, does limit its performance in some cases and means reduced endurance. TLC-based alternatives with Phison’s E27T controller, like the Corsair MP600 Mini, are harder to find and don’t quite match that random read performance. SMI’s competing controller is more often used in budget products, where you can find it, like the Kingston NV3. The 7100M is left as the clear winner if you want the very best – especially if you like its strong software package – with no real drawbacks.

Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M Specifications

M.2 2230 SSDs are generally limited to a small range of capacities, and the Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M is no different. Lower capacities don’t make sense for an upgrade when base models typically come with at least 512GB of storage. Larger capacities, 4TB or more, are difficult to achieve in such a small form factor. The 7100M only being available at 1TB and 2TB, therefore, makes sense. We will add that 4TB is possible with slightly longer M.2 2242 SSDs like the Corsair MP700 Micro and, also, 4TB for 2230 will be possible in the future. Furthermore, if devices were designed for double-sided drives, then all these limits would be effectively doubled. From the other side of things, rising memory and storage costs mean that base units might arrive with less storage, making smaller drives relevant again. It’s a push-pull situation.

At the time of review, the 1TB was going for $229.99 and the 2TB for $449.99. At 1TB, you could get the P310 for a little bit less, but otherwise, you will be giving up performance to save money. Considering the P310 is QLC-based, the 7100M isn’t too badly priced there. At 2TB, the price gap is more significant, as you can get slower alternatives for $50 to $150 less. Unfortunately, maximum performance at 2TB is the holy grail, so paying the premium could be worth it. Right now, it’s $50 or 12.5% over the last-generation WD Black SN770M, for instance, and on paper, that sounds reasonable for a drive that’s faster and more efficient.

Both capacities of the 7100M have the same peak performance level: up to 7,250 / 6,900 MB/s for sequential reads and writes and up to 1,000K / 1,300K random read and write IOPS. Both sets of numbers are excellent for a drive in this form factor, and the drive even exceeds what the Phison E27T-based Corsair MP600 Mini can achieve. This is top-tier performance for this segment and a full notch above the WD Black SN770M and effectively matches the 7100M’s forebear, the WD Black SN7100. While the Black SN7100 did not particularly stand out for us with its performance, its power efficiency is fantastic. That bodes well for the 7100M.

SanDisk has the drive pulling 4W or less under typical workloads, which puts the drive into a good spot for mobile devices. We test with a mixed workload, which can push a drive a little bit harder than this. Either way, this isn’t a lot of power for a full-fledged Gen 4 device – the drive’s 7,250 MB/s is near the limits of the interface – so we can expect good power efficiency.

Sandisk backs the drive with the standard 5-year, 600TB of writes per TB warranty. The drive supports the TCG Pyrite 2.01 specification and only has software encryption. This is perfectly normal for a drive of this type. The TBW is, however, higher with TLC versus QLC flash.

Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M Software and Accessories

Sandisk has you covered with its software. The Sandisk Desktop App, which works on Windows and macOS, is useful for general file transfer and password protection – software encryption, as well. The Sandisk Dashboard is Sandisk’s take on WD’s Dashboard, an SSD toolbox application with a wide range of features. An SSD toolbox like this gives you information on your system and drives, including SMART and health information. It lets you test and benchmark the drive. Importantly, this software also helps you update the firmware, if necessary, and use other features such as Game Mode. Sandisk also offers an Acronis True Image download, which is great for backing up files and your OS or for cloning drives.

Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M: A Closer Look

The 2TB Optimus GX 7100M is a single-sided drive, optimized for device compatibility. This does limit it to a single NAND flash package, which puts a cap at 2TB. This is because the most common dies widely available are 1Tb, or 128GB, apiece, and typically a single package – which has to stack the dies on top of each other, might have dummy dies for stability, and has to carefully maintain signal quality without exceeding height limitations – can only hit sixteen dies.

According to the specification sheet, this drive uses the M.2 2230-S3-M form factor. The M.2 format is easily recognizable as the way consumer SSDs are made these days, in contrast to the old 2.5” SATA drives. Other form factors meet the needs of the enterprise. 2230 tells us the length and width in millimeters. This is a common size for portable devices like the Steam Deck, the Asus ROG Ally, and the Lenovo Legion Go. The “M” part means it’s M-key, which we expect these days as NVMe drives using a full four lanes are common. Some drives can drop back to two lanes, like the Samsung 990 EVO and Samsung 990 EVO Plus, but are still capable of using four.

The “S3” is the part we’re looking for here, which tells us it’s single-sided rather than double-sided with a “D.” The number tells us the permitted height of the components. S1 allows for 1.2mm, S2 1.35mm, and S3 1.5mm. We would expect this drive to be S3 since it needs to pack in sixteen dies. The nominal PCB thickness for M.2 is 0.8mm, so this puts the drive at ~2.3mm, and the datasheet lists 2.38mm. This isn’t too interesting on its own, but it could be useful if you know the exact limitations of your device or need to make other measurements, such as for custom cooling. Some devices can take double-sided devices, which, as you can imagine, have similar height thresholds but with components on both sides.

One other interesting thing is the rated power: 3.3V at 1.8A puts the peak power around 6W. This is well higher than the specification sheet, which, again, is for average and also with read and write separately rather than mixed, as well as what’s listed by SMART and in our testing. We reckon this drive will always be below 5W, which normally would ensure there won’t be any heat issues. For M.2 2280, that’s broadly true, but heat is always an issue for 2230.

In addition to the sole NAND flash package, the drive also has a DRAM-less SSD controller and power management circuitry. The controller is proprietary Sandisk technology, listed as the A101-000171-A1. Similar to the WD Black SN7100's A101-000172-A1, which is a four-channel controller that can take fast enough flash to saturate PCIe 4.0. We would expect the drives to share the same flash, too, which would be Sandisk’s 218-Layer TLC. BiCS8 flash, whether TLC or QLC, has proven to have fantastic random read latency and also excellent power efficiency. This makes it great for the M.2 2230 segment.

The 7100M is still DRAM-less, as it can be difficult to make a DRAM package work in this form factor. In the past, it was not uncommon to see DRAM at least in M.2 2242, but modern host memory buffer (HMB) solutions are quite good. A quick look at the random 4KB results for this drive will dispel any illusions that you need DRAM to make a drive feel fast. In fact, it’s very unlikely DRAM would ever make a difference in the type of device this drive is made for, although there are always exceptions. Yes, there are some odd drives that have DRAM as part of the controller package – SK hynix’s BC711 comes to mind –, but these are rare and relegated to the Gen 3 era. An OEM Gen 3 drive is perfectly enough for a Steam Deck, but we’re in the business of gauging modern retail options.

The older Black SN770M, which is a retail version of the OEM SN740 – an extremely popular drive when the Steam Deck was still young – and a shortened version of the Black SN770, struggled with power efficiency. At least, in comparison to some of the newer 2230 drives on the block. With that problem out of the way, thanks to more efficient flash, the 7100M might very well be the best drive of its type available. We certainly think so, but knowing the pedigree of the hardware can help explain why this is.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

Comparison Products

The Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M is slated to be the top for M.2 2230 SSDs, so we are putting it up against our best drives. These include the Crucial P310, which, despite being QLC-based, is the fastest all-around 2230 drive up to this point, and the Corsair MP600 Mini with the Phison E27T. The Phison E27T controller, when paired with TLC flash, as is the case with the Corsair drive, is about as fast as you can get, but more importantly, it has the advantages of TLC. This means more consistent performance and better endurance. The Optimus GX 7100M, also with TLC flash, is therefore the ultimate challenger.

For other hardware, we have the Kingston NV3 that uses a comparable SMI controller. We have an SMI controller in the Lexar Play, too, although at a lower speed. The 7100M’s predecessor, the WD Black SN770M, is also in play. This drive and its OEM counterpart became popular picks after the Steam Deck came out, offering, at the time, the best performance possible at the cost of higher power consumption. Alternatives here generally use the Phison E21T controller with various TLC and QLC flash choices. These include the Silicon Power UD90, the Sabrent Rocket Q4, and the Teamgroup MP44S.

Trace Testing — 3DMark Storage Benchmark

Built for gamers, 3DMark’s Storage Benchmark focuses on real-world gaming performance. Each round in this benchmark stresses storage based on gaming activities, including loading games, saving progress, installing game files, and recording gameplay video streams. Future gaming benchmarks will be DirectStorage-inclusive, and an evaluation for future-proofing is included where applicable.

If you’re buying an M.2 2230 SSD, you’re probably buying it for gaming. Yes, there are productivity machines with small form factor SSDs, and you could buy this drive and use it with an extender for a random system, but gaming is the one place it has to do well. Frankly, we’re impressed with how well the 7100M does here. It’s second only to the P310 and is first among TLC-based drives. Beating the TLC-equipped, E27T-based MP600 Mini is an accomplishment. This drive will be very responsive for gaming, and we’d even put it above the P310 for that, in fact. This is because the P310 is using QLC flash – with a fuller drive, with a lifetime of transfers and wear, it should suffer more, meaning you’d pick the 7100M for peace of mind. At the very least, it’s a deciding point if the prices are close.

As a side note, this drive is supported by the Sandisk Dashboard and, as such, has the Game Mode feature. This mode works by disabling the drive’s idle power states, improving responsiveness. This can slightly improve game loading times. The Dashboard is designed for Windows.

Trace Testing — PCMark 10 Storage Benchmark

PCMark 10 is an industry standard trace-based benchmark that uses a wide-ranging set of real-world traces from popular applications and everyday tasks to measure the performance of storage devices. The results are particularly useful when analyzing drives for their use as primary/boot storage devices and in work environments.

The 7100M proves to be great at productivity, too, more or less tied for first in PCMark 10 with the P310. Our QLC caveat applies again: all else being equal, you’d probably pick the TLC 7100M over the P310. We want to emphasize that there are many good DRAM-less drives that can get near this performance level, but you don’t see that hardware in this form factor. For example, we don’t see the Maxio MAP1602 controller here, for a variety of reasons. That controller does tend to run hot, for one thing, and that’s always a looming concern for this form factor. We also don’t see much from SMI, and when we do, it’s usually for budget drives. This reduces the amount of direct resistance to the 7100M.

Phison exists, but the E21T and controllers of that class were and remain much more present in this form factor. That’s partly because the M.2 2230 form factor took off around the same time that such drive technology came out, and now we have a very uncomfortable memory market. Also, the Steam Deck is PCIe 3.0, so you only need so much performance for the most popular destination device. Even with 4.0 devices, a 5 GB/s drive is plenty of performance for a portable system. That means that a drive like the 7100M has less direct competition than you might expect if we’re talking about performance. It’s nearly peerless, in fact. If that’s what you want, then this drive should be at the very top of your list.

Steam Deck Testing — Gaming, KDiskMark, and Temperature

The Steam Deck is not the only portable gaming system in town, but it was the first and most popular to take M.2 2230 SSDs. While some systems have moved on to fit 2280-length drives, 2230 remains popular for many systems, and such drives will work fine in longer slots with the proper standoff or extender. The Deck operates in PCIe 3.0 mode for its SSD, limiting maximum bandwidth, but that has less of an impact on responsiveness/latency, and the Deck is still useful for gauging drive temperature and power efficiency.

Our current testing for the Deck involves analyzing game load times for some popular games. This is probably the most important metric for gamers, but the difference between one SSD and another can be small. We also use KDiskMark, a CrystalDiskMark-like substitute that uses the flexible I/O (FIO) tester instead of diskspd for its underlying benchmarks. We also check the drive’s maximum temperature during this test.

The tests in this section are run under the stock Arch-based SteamOS Linux platform, but our other tests are conducted as per our normal reviews, using Windows. Many portable gaming systems today use or can use Windows with multi-boot as an option. This testing section is instead designed to give an idea of Linux performance, which does involve the use of Proton.

The 7100M does well in all of this testing and runs relatively cool, too. We specifically want to point out its excellent random read performance at QD1, a metric that most readily correlates with responsiveness or “feel.” The P310 pulls away at a higher queue depth, but this is mostly not relevant to what this drive needs to do. We’d say the 7100M’s biggest weak point is the QD1 sequential read speed, merely good but significantly below the P310’s. Many apps and games have low QD sequential reads for loading, and it’s possible the P310 will be slightly quicker for some titles. The magnitude of this, on average, across apps and games will likely be tiny, to say the least, and further, we think that a fuller and realistically worn drive might favor the TLC-based 7100M in the long term. Then again, you probably won’t be fully wearing out any drive in a portable gaming system. We’d probably focus more on heat and power draw, which we address further below.

We do want to point out that QD1 sequential read performance is excellent in our CrystalDiskMark test below. KDiskMark is running on Linux and is built on FIO, which is a different I/O stack. Additionally, on the Deck, we’re testing drives only at PCIe 3.0 speeds. Furthermore, in some cases, weak CPUs – and this applies to many APUs – as well as different platforms, can impact storage performance results. If your portable device is running on something more modern with Windows and PCIe 4.0, it’s quite possible your results will align more with CDM.

Transfer Rates — DiskBench

We use the DiskBench storage benchmarking tool to test file transfer performance with a custom 50GB dataset. We write 31,227 files of various types, such as pictures, PDFs, and videos to the test drive, then make a copy of that data to a new folder, and follow up with a reading test of a newly-written 6.5GB zip file. This is a real-world type workload that fits into the cache of most drives.

The 7100M delivers the highest copy rate in DiskBench, along with the highest read transfer rate. In a portable device, such as one that would take a primary M.2 2230 drive, you often don’t have a lot of fast transfer sources. You might have only a 10Gbps external drive, a relatively slow microSD card, and so forth. Copying on the same drive still occurs with updates and other procedures, and you are essentially relying on a single drive to manage most things on the system. For this reason, the DiskBench results are still useful for gauging how well a drive can manage mixed workloads. The 7100M handles that like a champ, and the high read performance – considering you do a lot of reads – is also a bonus.

The only anomaly here is the write speed, which was also a bit low in our previous Steam Deck test section. Write performance can be misleading for many reasons. Most pertinently, modern drives use pSLC caching, which can “hide” the true performance of the native flash. This can mean performance is not always consistent. Manufacturers can optimize the drive firmware with this in mind, making trade-offs such as varying the cache size to improve sustained performance. Drives ultimately have to move data over from the cache to the native flash, so test results don’t always align with expectations. To get a fuller idea of write performance, you should check our Write Saturation section.

Synthetic Testing — ATTO / CrystalDiskMark

ATTO and CrystalDiskMark (CDM) are free and easy-to-use storage benchmarking tools that SSD vendors commonly use to assign performance specifications to their products. Both of these tools give us insight into how each device handles different file sizes and at different queue depths for both sequential and random workloads.

The first signs of weakness on this drive appear in ATTO, but things are not as bad as they first appear. We’re talking about read performance, and when looking at our logarithmic chart, the jumps up and down don’t seem as bad. While throttling could affect this test, generally, that’s not the case. It helps that we see the same pattern with the WD Black SN7100, as we can rule out any randomness.

However, we don’t see it with the WD Blue SN5100, which uses BiCS8 QLC and a comparable controller, so this is probably a feature of BiCS8 TLC. We also don’t see it on the WD Black SN8100 or Corsair MP700 Pro XT, drives with that flash but controllers from SMI and Phison, respectively, so it’s not the flash on its own, either. Given the drops are at 64KiB and 256KiB – with 16KiB pages, this is with 4-way and 16-way interleaving, which aligns both with the flash channel count and the four-plane count dies – it’s likely an artifact of how the proprietary controller manages the reads. Sandisk has some interesting optimization going on, which you can see most clearly with random reads and power efficiency, so we don’t want to jump to conclusions, especially as long as real-world performance remains strong.

Thankfully, it does. The 7100M has incredibly low 4KB random read latency at QD1 in CDM, blowing away the rest of the 2230 drives. As we pointed out above, the competition here is more limited in comparison to full-length drives, which helps the 7100M stand out even more. In many cases, you could look only at this result and be convinced that this is the drive to get. However, as we’ve stated in the past, a good rule of thumb is ~45µs if you want a top-notch experience, and other drives hit that. The 7100M just takes it to a new level.

Sequential read performance at QD1 is also very important; in fact, it is sometimes overlooked with regard to game and app load times. It often deserves to be weighted alongside random 4KB. Luckily, the 7100M is tops here, too. WD and Sandisk have this mastered, as the SN770M is a monster as well. Given that the 7100M can push even more bandwidth with efficient flash, just chef’s kiss.

Sustained Write Performance and Cache Recovery

Official write specifications are only part of the performance picture. Most SSDs implement a write cache, which is a fast area of pseudo-SLC (single-bit) programmed flash that absorbs incoming data. Sustained write speeds can suffer tremendously once the workload spills outside of the cache and into the "native" TLC (three-bit) or QLC (four-bit) flash. Performance can suffer even more if the drive is forced to fold, the process of migrating data out of the cache in order to free up space for further incoming data.

We use Iometer to hammer the SSD with sequential writes for 15 minutes to measure both the size of the write cache and performance after the cache is saturated. We also monitor cache recovery via multiple idle rounds. This process shows the performance of the drive in various states including the steady state write performance.

Modern drives tend to write in three states: the pSLC cache, direct to the native flash, and in a folding mode. The first mode is temporary and fast, converting native flash into single-bit mode to trade capacity for speed. When space gets tight, the drive can choose to write straight to the flash. This is slower and can be worse for endurance in some cases. When space is completely exhausted, the drive is forced to wait for data to go through the pSLC cache and be “folded” over to the native flash, is far slower and decreases drive consistency and responsiveness. Most of the time, you want to be in the cache, especially with an M.2 2230 drive, but it’s worth seeing how the drive might behave if it’s left in a fuller state after sustaining writes.

How the pSLC cache is handled varies from drive to drive. A larger cache can handle larger bursts of traffic, but this can leave the drive more vulnerable in some cases. A smaller cache can result in more consistent drive performance. There are also two types of pSLC cache, static and dynamic, with different characteristics. Generally speaking, the static portion is always available, while the dynamic portion is altered with the amount of free space. Proprietary solutions such as Samsung’s TurboWrite and WD’s or Sandisk’s nCache – with nCache 4.0 on this drive – use both types in tandem.

WD’s and Sandisk’s most recent drives have opted for larger caches. This is also true for Samsung, which, with the Samsung 990, has significantly increased the size of the cache. In the 7100M’s case, the cache takes up almost the entire drive. The drive wrote at over 6.4 GB/s for 110 seconds, implying a ~708GB cache. With three bits in TLC needed per pSLC bit, this is quite large for a 2TB drive, although there is a little free space, which helps keep the drive from flatlining completely. Instead, the drive is able to maintain a middle mode around 2.9 GB/s for a small amount of time, which is, honestly, quite fast for such a mode. In most cases, this would be an adequate cushion.

After that, the drive oscillates when hitting the folding mode. Performance is much less consistent as space is periodically freed. We see an actual peak of around 1,450 MB/s here, which is about half of that 2.9 GB/s. This is a common ratio because when you’re folding, you’re essentially writing twice. However, the controller is juggling many things as it is attempting to remain responsive to incoming I/O while moving data in the background. Therefore, performance dips further with a bottom closer to 500 MB/s or so. Over time, this gives us an average of 894 MB/s, which isn’t too bad. By all standards, it’s better than any QLC-based drive and is respectable for a TLC drive with such a large cache.

Power Consumption and Temperature

We use the Quarch HD Programmable Power Module to gain a deeper understanding of power characteristics. Idle power consumption is an important aspect to consider, especially if you're looking for a laptop upgrade, as even the best ultrabooks can have mediocre stock storage in terms of capacity and performance. Desktops are often more performance-oriented with less support for power-saving features, so we show the worst-case scenario for idle.

Some SSDs can consume watts of power at idle while better-suited ones sip just milliwatts. Average workload power consumption and max consumption are two other aspects of power consumption, but performance-per-watt, or efficiency, is more important. A drive might consume more power during any given workload, but accomplishing a task faster allows the drive to drop into an idle state more quickly, ultimately saving energy.

For temperature recording, we currently poll the drive’s primary composite sensor during testing with a ~22°C ambient. Our testing is rigorous enough to heat the drive to a realistic ceiling temperature, but real-world temperatures will vary due to the environment and workload factors.

The 7100M does not disappoint in power efficiency. It’s the most power-efficient drive on this list and the most power-efficient M.2 2230 SSD that we’ve tested. We feel like anything over about 500 MB/s per watt is good enough for this segment, but getting above that into the P310 or NV3 range is better. It’s hard to argue with this result.

Drives can have multiple sensors for different things. Temperatures can be reported for the flash memory, the DRAM if present, the PMIC, and the controller. Typically, these values are not super accurate and certainly will be different from directly measured temperatures, as often they are a composite. This essentially means the drive reports a general temperature measured against a range for throttling.

Measured temperatures from the 7100M’s sensors came in at 73°C, 76°C, and 85°C for peak readings. The drive is rated to throttle at 90°C with a critical temperature of 94°C. Generally, we like to have at least 10°C of headroom and preferably twice that. So, the numbers here do give us pause, but they can be explained. If we compare the P310, for example, we have another very efficient drive that, in our testing, got within 5 degrees of throttling. The reason is simple: this short form factor has all the hardware pressed together. It’s hard to get around that fact, and it’s very common for 2230 drives to throttle or overheat in portable devices, especially when traveling in warmer climates. You usually have little to no cooling right next to a maxed-out APU, after all.

Another consideration is the workload. You’re unlikely to have sustained writes of the type we’re doing. If you’re on a Steam Deck or an older device, you’re also going to be running in PCIe 3.0 mode. Drives will run much cooler in that mode or with everyday workloads. To add to that, these temperatures don’t reflect actual internal ones or the real limits of the hardware. You should not assume that high temps like this mean the drive won’t have a long lifespan, especially since your host device will likely spend most of its time sleeping.

That said, we do recommend you treat your drive well. If it is at all possible to improve cooling – and this could be a simple matter of adding some thermal interface material or a low-profile heatsink – then you should consider it. Avoid breaking warranties, of course. A good example of what we’re talking about is the Apple MacBook Neo. The main chip on it runs notoriously hot, and DIYers have shown that even adding just some thermal padding can significantly improve performance. The chip still throttles, though. This is the reality of portable devices like this, and thankfully, your SSD won’t be running full blast like an APU any time soon. So we don’t think this is a major drawback of the 7100M – it’s just difficult to escape – but you should be aware that top-tier Gen 4 performance comes at a cost.

Test Bench and Testing Notes

We use an Alder Lake platform with most background applications, such as indexing, Windows updates, and anti-virus, disabled in the OS to reduce run-to-run variability. Each SSD is prefilled to 50% capacity and tested as a secondary device. Unless noted, we use active cooling for all SSDs.

Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M Bottom Line

The Sandisk Optimus GX 7100M is, in a word, fantastic. Anyone who loved the WD Black SN7100 as a proper successor to the WD Black SN770, especially for its class-leading random read performance and power efficiency, can now get that in M.2 2230. The Black SN7100 has been the best SSD for laptops, and now smaller portable devices can enjoy new levels of storage comfort, too.

The 7100M doesn’t disappoint with high levels of performance across-the-board and excellent power efficiency. It’s not always the fastest, but it’s very fast where it matters and doesn’t have the power consumption issue of the previous WD Black SN770M. Even though these drives usually end up on a Linux machine such as the Steam Deck with SteamOS, Sandisk’s excellent Windows software suite is a cherry on top if you’re working with that OS, are multi-booting, or need to work with the drive on your main Windows PC. The drive is also great for enclosures, particularly ones for M.2 2230 drives, and you can extend this drive with an M.2 extender accessory for other slots. It’s just a solid product, no matter what.

The drive lacks a full capacity range of SKUs, but we can’t hold that against it. Higher capacities cannot be achieved without going double-sided or up to M.2 2242. Lower capacities have generally been less desirable, and performance would be lower, too. It wouldn’t be the first time a new 2230 model was limited to 1TB, but Sandisk is going for 2TB out of the gate. Sandisk opted for the two most popular capacities, and performance is stellar for both. Power consumption is also low for both, which is useful for the battery-limited target devices for the drive. It’s really hard to find fault here.

Although it’s not easy to find downsides to this drive, we do feel there are enough drawbacks to prevent it from getting a perfect score. We feel the pricing isn’t too far out there given the current market, and that aside, we’re then looking at performance and cooling. Performance is not always consistent across our tests, and while Sandisk’s pSLC optimization makes sense within the greater product stack, they could have taken a cue from Phison and been more conservative with it. There are people who will want to use this drive in fast enclosures, and having more consistent, sustained writes could help them. But this is a nitpick.

Of more concern is the heat output of the drive, which, to be fair, is also not really Sandisk’s fault. This level of performance in a tight package is going to put out some heat. Because the drive has to fit in a range of devices, Sandisk can’t really throw on a heatsink or anything like that. The drive will be fine in any Gen 3 device and, hopefully, any properly designed Gen 4 device. Alternative drives do not necessarily offer any advantage over the 7100M here, either. Nevertheless, we’ve seen from newer controller designs like the Phison E31T that you could probably do better in this form factor. Sandisk is using existing technology from its stack, and that makes the most financial sense, but that also leaves in our mind the knowledge that a better product could exist.

We’d say that’s quite complimentary to Sandisk, considering the 7100M is the best M.2 2230 drive on the market. If you’re looking for the best 2230 drive, this is it. Your experience is going to be fantastic in every way – fast load times, good power consumption levels, and software support with True Image and a respected toolbox if you need it. You will pay a premium for it, but particularly for an enthusiast Gen 4 device, this is well worth it. On the other hand, your device might come with a fast, capacious drive, so you wouldn’t be looking at the 7100M, anyway. If you’re on the budget end of things, you can save money here, too. Any of the other 2230 drives on the list will probably be sufficient in that case. The 7100M is an investment, but a sound one, and we can highly recommend it.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

Apple and OpenAI are heading to court in a clash of two of the world's largest and most well-funded companies. With teams of lawyers and bottomless pockets to fund them, these two industry titans are squaring off over claims of theft of trade secrets. Apple is asking the courts to block its former employees from revealing information to their new employer and limit OpenAI's development of an AI device based on Apple technology. Unsurprisingly, OpenAI denies any wrongdoing and is asking the judge not to disrupt its business activities.

"Apple's getting this wrong" is the name of the blog post OpenAI posted in response to Apple's lawsuit. Although it begins by calling Apple one of the greatest companies of all time, it goes on to call the legal action "sad," suggests Apple mixed up Asian employee names, and doesn't want its trade secrets anyway.

OpenAI went on to publish text message chains and email correspondence, suggesting it's keen to be tried in the court of public opinion more than any other setting.

Hey, that's mine!

Apple alleges that as many as 13 of its former employees may have passed along sensitive trade secrets to OpenAI, including sharing details of unannounced products and sharing screenshots of confidential Apple documents. This is an expansion of its original claims from July, when it alleged two former employees may have shared confidential information with OpenAI. It has now filed a concurrent motion seeking expedited discovery, demanded that two former employees, Chang Liu and Tang Yew Tan, sit for depositions, as well as key OpenAI employees and representatives of OpenAI's hardware division, io Products.

Apple is also asking for a preliminary injunction, which would bar former employees from accessing, acquiring, or disclosing any confidential information about the company as the case proceeds.

Considering a case of this magnitude, between two companies with effectively infinite money to spend protecting themselves, that could take months or years to resolve, that preliminary injunction is key and could mean the lawsuit does enough damage to be effective for Apple's goals.

Regardless, OpenAI is in full revolt over the process and has posted not only a damning denial of all claims, but some evidence it feels exonerates its position, too.

Getting ahead of the competition

The cynical argument for this lawsuit is that it means the two companies are battling it out in a courtroom instead of in the consumer retail space. Apple is first and foremost a consumer device company, and to date, OpenAI hasn't competed there. But it's planning to, and its various hires from Apple and elsewhere, including buying up Jony Ive's hardware company, suggest it's going to release something with the kind of smart consumer focus that is typically Apple's bread and butter.

Apple might have been a little late to the AI game, but that's played to its advantage. But if OpenAI were to use its strong mindshare, deep pockets, and advanced AI model design and inferencing compute base to offer something targeting mainstream consumers, it's stepping on Apple's toes. This lawsuit could be a way to stop that in its tracks.

That's not to say the lawsuit may not have merit. The entire AI industry has used aggressively expensive hiring practices to try to get ahead. Meta spent $15 billion on getting Alexandr Wang and ScaleAI's data, and AI companies are reportedly hounding promising students years ahead of graduation to lock them into future contracts.

If you're building a smart consumer device, though? Grabbing ex- or even current Apple employees wouldn't be a bad way to do it. Especially if they brought along information on unannounced Apple products that may or may not be related to an AI consumer device.

First to market matters, too. Although Apple hasn't shown any AI-first standalone devices yet, if it were planning to, slowing OpenAI down with these injunctions might be enough to let it catch up or even get ahead.

Clock's ticking

For now, the lawsuit is very much he-said, she-said. Both companies have enough money and resources to make this fight messy, but what they don't necessarily have is time. Especially OpenAI. It's on the hook for hundreds of billions in compute investment, has just cut the price of some of its models, and has yet to post anything close to a profitable quarter.

Apple isn't quite so constrained, but is also seeing its traditional consumer base eaten by rapidly appreciating electronics costs. Apple already sells its products at a premium. But what can it do if prices for components push its products out of the luxury affordable into the truly unaffordable?

That may not happen, but it's a future it has to consider as AI, and the money spent on its promised future continues to have an outsized impact on global economies. The outcome of this lawsuit is likely to leave a mark, too.