We are specialists in quality batteries. We have batteries, chargers and accessories for everything you can think of. Low prices, big inventory, expert advice. Find your battery here!
You’ll have to turn on Windows Backup, or redeem some of those unused rewards points you got from Bing. But Windows 10 is getting a stay of execution, without the $30 charge.
For a long time, there’s been a Sword of Damocles hanging over the PC users who didn’t want to give up Windows 10, no matter how much Microsoftbegged them to upgrade to 11 and/or buy a new laptop. As the countdown to October kept ticking, we were wondering if Microsoft would relent for millions of users in no mood to change. As it turns out, they have…with some quid pro quos.
To be clear, this isn’t exactly a reprieve for Windows 10. The operating system, which is approaching its tenth birthday in July, won’t get any significant feature updates after it loses hits end of life in October. But Microsoft is expanding the Extended Security Updates program, cruciallyremoving the $30 fee for its first year…if you use Windows Backup to sync your Windows settings to OneDrive. Alternately, you canuse 1000 Microsoft Rewards pointsto get the same benefit.
If you don’t want to do either of those, you’ll want to cough up $30 USD to extend full support to October 13th, 2026. Businesses and commercial organizations have some other options — if you’re a Fortune 100 company with about ten thousand machines and you don’t feel like upgrading to Windows 11 just yet, Microsoft is much more likely to listen to your concerns.
October 15th, 2025is still going to be something of a deadline for most regular users, who need to exercise one of those three options above or stop receiving crucial security and stability updates. But on the other hand, it might not be as dire a situation as that sounds like, at least initially. Microsoft will continue to updateWindows’ free, default Defender Antiviruson Windows 10 through October 2028, and that’s the first line of defense in terms of security from things like viruses, trojans, and spyware.
Of course, Microsoft would still very much prefer you to upgrade to Windows 11…or better yet, just buy a new PC. (Those Copilot+ laptopsaren’t going to sell themselves, after all.) In fact,the Windows Experience Blogstill calls 2025 “the year of the Windows 11 PC refresh” even as it gives you two new, free options to put off that refresh for another year.
Maybeall those baked-in advertisementsand pushes to use questionably-necessary AI tools (and theexpensive subscription they require) aren’t going over as well as some of the higher-ups in Redmond would have liked.
Intel has published a paper about its 18A (1.8nm-class) fabrication process at the VLSI 2025 symposium, consolidating all its information about the manufacturing technology into a single document. The new 18A production node is expected to deliver significant improvements in power, performance, and area over its predecessor, increasing density by 30% while enhancing performance by 25% or reducing power consumption by 36%.
But, perhaps more importantly, 18A will be Intel’s first process technology in years that will compete head-to-head with TSMC’s leading-edge technology when both enter mass production in the second half of this year.
Intel’s 18A process node is designed for a wide range of range of products across both client and datacenter applications, and the first Intel’s product to use it will be the Panther Lake CPU, which is due to be formally announced later this year. To address different applications, Intel 18A has two libraries: high-performance (HP) with 180nm cell height (180CH) and high-density (HD) with 160nm cell height (160CH) for lower-power applications.
How 18A stacks up against previous nodes
Intel 3 vs Intel 4
18A vs Intel 3
Power
?
36% (at 1.1V) – 38% (at 0.75V)
Performance
18% (?)
18% (at 0.75V) – 25% (1.1V)
Density
–
1.3X
SRAM Cell Size
0.024 µm²
0.021 µm²
Transistor
FinFET
RibbonFET GAA
Power Delivery
Front-side
PowerVia BSPDN
HVM
mid-2024
H2 2025
Intel says that compared to Intel 3, its 18A fabrication technology boosts performance by 25%. It manages to achieve this without increasing voltage or circuit complexity when running a typical Arm core sub-block, implemented using a 180CH HD library at 1.1. When operating at the same clocks and 1.1V voltage, it also cuts power usage by 36% compared to the same design on Intel 3. At a reduced voltage of 0.75V, 18A offers an 18% speed increase and uses 38% less energy. Furthermore, designs fabricated on 18A occupy roughly 28% less area than those built with Intel 3.
(Image credit: Intel)
There is a major catch about comparison of voltages between Intel 3 and 18A. The former supports <0.6V, 0.75V, 1.1V, and 1.3V, which makes it particularly suitable for data center devices. This type of workload needs to burst to high clocks, across dozens of cores when demanding peak performance. Then, it’ll need to throttle down to a low-power state to save power. To contrast, 18A seems to support 0.4V, 0.75V, and 1.1V, which very good for client PCs and data center CPUs, but may not be ideal for processors that need maximum clock speeds. However, other advantages of Intel’s 18A will likely offset the lack of 1.3V support for the vast majority of applications (more on this later).
As for SRAM, Intel’s 18A process includes a high-density SRAM bit cell measuring 0.021 µm², translating to an SRAM density of roughly 31.8 Mb/mm². This is a major improvement over the 0.024 µm² bit cell used in Intel 4. This puts Intel 18A on par with TSMC’s N5 and N3E nodes in terms of SRAM density. However, TSMC’s upcoming N2 process goes further, reducing the bit cell to approximately 0.0175 µm² and achieving a higher density of around 38 Mb/mm².
Intel 7
Intel 4
Intel 3
Intel 18A
Contacted Poly Pitch
54nm/60nm
50 nm
50 nm
50 nm
Fin Pitch
34 nm
30 nm
30 nm
?
M0 Pitch
40 nm
30 nm
30 nm
32 nm
High Performance Library Height
408 nm
240 nm
240 nm
180 nm
High Density Library Height
–
–
210 nm
160 nm
HP Library Height x CPP
24.4K nm²
12K nm²
12K nm²
9K nm²
HD Library Height x CPP
–
–
10.5K nm²
8K nm²
Intel’s 18A relies on the company’s 2nd generation RibbonFETgate-all-around (GAA) transistors, and aPowerVia backside power delivery network (BSPDN). We investigate exactly how Intel managed to implement GAA transistors and BSPSN below.
In GAA transistors, the gate completely wraps around the channel, offering superior electrostatic control compared to FinFETs, which only wrap around on three sides. Such an architecture enables engineers to finely tune device characteristics for either high performance or low power consumption by adjusting the total effective channel width (Weff). This is typically achieved by varying the width and number of stacked nanosheets. More sheets, alongside wider sheets, can increase drive current and performance at the cost of power, while fewer or narrower sheets reduce both performance and power consumption.
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel’s 18A RibbonFET transistors feature four nanoribbons and support eight distinct logic threshold voltages (VTs) — four for NMOS, and four for PMOS — spanning a 180mV range. This level of VT granularity is achieved through dipole-based work-function tuning, a method that allows precise control of transistor behavior without altering its physical dimensions. This approach is especially important, given the tight spatial constraints in GAA transistor structures, such as RibbonFETs, where traditional methods, like doping adjustments, are limited.
An Intel graph from the paper shows that despite this wide VT range, the transistors exhibit strong electrical characteristics, including steep subthreshold slopes and well-behaved drive currents across both Id–Vg and Id–Vd curves. These results confirm that Intel has successfully maintained device performance and control across the entire VT spectrum, which enables flexible circuit design choices that balance frequency, power, and leakage within the same process.
Intel’s PowerVia backside power delivery network (BSPDN) relocates power delivery from the top metal layers to the rear side of the chip, creating a physical separation between power and signal wiring. This technique addresses issues like rising resistance in the vertical connections of in the back-end-of-line (BEOL) layers, which in turn enhances transistor efficiency and reduces power usage. Additionally, it prevents signal degradation caused by power interference and allows for tighter packing of logic elements, increasing overall circuit density.
(Image credit: Intel)
Intel’s PowerVia delivers power to transistor contacts, which is a slightly less sophisticated approach compared to TSMC’s Super Power Rail (coming in 2H 2026 along with A16), which connects directly to each transistor’s source and drain. In addition to BSPDN, Intel also implemented its new high-density metal-insulator-metal (MIM) capacitor to enhance power supply stability.
Intel has now disclosed the key benefits of its backside power routing. First up, PowerVia increases transistor density by 8% to 10%, which is quite a sizeable part of 18A’s overall 1.3X transistor density increase over Intel 3. Secondly, the front-side metal layers in its 18A process achieve approximately 12% better resistance-capacitance (RC) performance and show a 24% to 49% decrease in via resistance compared to Intel 3, thanks to improved metallization techniques and the use of ultra-low-k dielectrics. Thirdly, 18A’s PowerVia reduces voltage droop compared to Intel 3 (the worst-case scenario for Intel 3) by up to 10 times. Lastly, BSPDN simplifies chip design as it simplifies the routing of signal and power wires.
PowerVia’s reliability
Since PowerVia is the industry’s first backside power delivery network (BSPDN) used in mass production, Intel also presented reliability test results. These demonstrate its long-term durability and chip-package interaction (CPI) performance.
(Image credit: Intel)
According to JEDEC-standard TQV tests, PowerVia passed multiple stress conditions with zero failures, including highly accelerated stress testing at 110°C and 85% humidity for 275 hours, extended high-temperature bake tests up to 1000 hours at 165°C, and 750 cycles of temperature swings from –55°C to 125°C. These results confirm that PowerVia can withstand harsh operating environments, without compromising structural or electrical integrity.
In addition to CPI reliability, Intel evaluated the impact of PowerVia on SRAM aging and performance stability. Under conditions equivalent to 1000 hours of high-temperature operation, SRAM arrays maintained stable minimum operating voltage (Vmin) with margin, showing no signs of degradation. This suggests that PowerVia does not negatively affect sensitive on-chip memory and is robust enough to support both digital logic and embedded SRAM under extended stress. Together, these findings are meant to affirm PowerVia’s readiness for deployment in high-performance, long-lifecycle computing platforms.
Manufacturability
In addition to improving performance, reducing power consumption, and enabling higher transistor density, Intel’s 18A simplifies production flows and simplifies chip design.(Image credit: Intel)
By moving power delivery to the backside, Intel eliminates the need for a front-side power grid, which, combined with direct EUV patterning, lowers the total number of masks and simplifies the front-end metal process. By using low-n absorber reticles with tailored dimensional adjustments, Intel also enabled single-pass EUV patterning for the M0–M2 metal layers. This simplification of the lower metal layers reduces process complexity and helps offset the cost of adding extra backside metal layers, which are based on mature, low-cost fabrication techniques. As a result, the overall design process becomes easier and cheaper.
In addition, the backside metal layers of 18A’s PowerVia are designed for low resistance and high thermal conductivity, which helps manage the increased power density from the GAA transistors. Also, carrier wafer bonding is optimized for heat removal through the backside, addressing the thermal challenges introduced by high-performance transistors. Finally, PowerVia is compatible with advanced packaging methods like Foveros and EMIB, though we already know this from the fact that Panther Lake uses 18A tiles as well as Foveros 3D.
Summary
Intel’s comprehensive technical overview of its 18A process node has highlighted the architecture, performance, and manufacturability improvements that position it as a competitor to TSMC’s upcoming N2. The 18A process introduces Intel’s second-generation RibbonFET (GAA) transistors and the industry’s first mass-production-ready backside power delivery network, PowerVia.
Together, these innovations enable up to 25% higher performance or 36% lower power consumption compared to Intel 3, while also increasing transistor density by about 30%.
Intel’s PowerVia contributes an 8–10% density gain, 12% RC improvement in metal layers, and up to 10 times lower voltage droop.
The new node has also passed stringent JEDEC reliability tests, including 1000-hour high-temperature aging and extensive thermal cycling to verify that it can be used for designs meant to work for a long time. Additionally, Intel further streamlined front-end patterning using single-pass EUV at M0–M2, thereby reducing mask counts and simplifying the design.
However, whether or not 18A can help Intel restore some of the lustre to its brand remains to be seen, as the company continues to wade its way through rocky waters.
Picking thebest laptop for collegeis a tricky decision to make — what OS to go for, how much power you actually need for your studies, any actually useful AI features and what about the battery life? All questions form a finely tuned balance you need to find for your course.
Well, if you’re looking for a recommendation that cuts through all the marketing noise (includingApple’s rather hilarious PowerPoint presentation), I’d like to put one in front of you. The Lenovo Chromebook Plus 14 is a serious shout for the best back-to-school buy you can make.
With a gorgeous OLED screen, the most powerful Arm chip I’ve seen in a Chromebook, an OLED display and up to 17 hours of battery life, the hardware has a lot going for it. But the real beauty lies in the software and its logical AI implementations.
And while comparatively, this is quite pricey for a Chromebook starting at $649, I believe for what you get, it’s absolutely worthwhile. Let’s get into it.
Before I go into all the “just laptop things,” I want to hone in on that MediaTek Kompanio Ultra 910 chip. You see, up until this point, AI on a Chromebook has been very much reliant on the cloud — given the lower-end chips used to keep costs down.
For most of us always being surrounded by Wi-Fi, that’s fine, but it does cause latency in the features that matter. But with a new chip that sports an NPU capable of 50 trillion AI operations per second (TOPS), Google and Lenovo are moving over to a hybrid approach.
This brings on-device AI features that are sensibly implemented and actually useful! First thing’s first, Smart Grouping — perfect for a multi-tab Chrome browsing monster like me.
If you’re working across multiple projects and need to bring some structure to what you do, the on-board AI is able to analyze all your tabs and separate them into different desktops by task.
(Image credit: Google)
The speed of doing this is a cinch, too, as you just swipe up with three fingers on the touchpad and you’ll see the suggestion appear at the bottom. Then Chrome OS works it all out for you. It’s a level of smart organization that you just can’t find on a Windows laptop or a MacBook at the moment.
Then there’s AI image editing directly in the gallery app. This is more of a “fun to have” than a real useful tool, but it does drastically reduce the amount of time it takes to remove a background and create a PNG sticker of the subject.
Up to the cloud
But the AI features don’t stop there. I could go on about the 12 months of Google AI Pro that you get for free — giving you access to 2TB of cloud storage,Gemini 2.5 Proand Deep Research,Veo 3video generation platform and the incredibleNotebookLM(perfect for notetaking in lectures).
But what caught my eye the most is the intelligent Text capture that plugs into all your Google services. Essentially, this is the company’s circle to search feature on speed, as it is able to capture text from any image and take contextual action on it.
(Image credit: Google)
So, beyond the usual capture a picture and shop for the thing via Google Search, you could highlight a text entry and get it as editable text in Google Docs, capture an event promo image and add it as a Google Calendar event.
In my testing, I wrote out a table by hand, highlighted the picture of it, and it was still able to intelligently recognize and turn it into a spreadsheet. This could be huge for people who work out by doodling to digitize their work.(Image credit: Google)
Also, shoutout to the Simplify expansion to help me read, which can take complex subject matter and dumb down the language a bit. Now I can finally sound as clued up on deep psychological studies as my fiancée!
Not forgetting the fundamentals
For all the things I do like about using a Chromebook, one thing that can get lost along the way is actually being a good laptop. I’ve faced a minefield of mushy keyboards, bad speakers, poor displays and battery life that drops to zero if you even look at it funny.
With the Chromebook Plus 14, I think Lenovo’s cracked it. First of all, I can’t ignore that dazzling OLED screen, which Google has gone ahead and paired with NASA to make some custom wallpapers of Jupiter to really make it sing.
This makes it an ideal panel that’s easy on the eyes for getting work done, which is further backed up by a properly tactile-feeling keyboard (that same comfortable thump to each key that you know and love from Lenovo) and a smooth, clicky touchpad.
It also comes in clutch for those moments when you’re so over your studies for the evening, as the Dolby Atmos setup of two woofers and two tweeters sounds fantastic (even in the busy room I was in). That’s sure to make this a binge-watching beast or a great laptop to turn to for firing up the playlist in your student dorms.
That Arm chip doesn’t stutter when opening any programs. With 12-16GB of RAM, I didn’t feel any slowdown or hitching when I took the Plus 14 up over 20 tabs. And Lenovo is stepping up to the mighty stamina of MacBooks with a claimed 17-hour battery life.
And all of this in a premium aluminum shell with a playful ribbed plastic underside and a 5MP webcam for catching up with your family at home. Everything has been considered here, and when it comes to the typical Chromebook compromises, none of them have been made.
Outlook
For some of these claims (like battery life), I’ll leave that for our full review (coming soon), but early impressions are strong. The Lenovo Chromebook Plus 14 is a shoo-in for thebest ChromebookI’ve ever tested, and possibly one of thebest laptopsof 2025, too.
It’s easy to count out Chrome OS as the third-place option in favor of Windows 11 and macOS. However, with system-level AI implementations across the board that actually make sense and an incredibly easy-to-use UI.
Of course, there are the big question marks here, like dedicated app support. Google does say that more are coming, but we’ll wait and see on that. But in terms of a solidly powerful system with a great screen, zippy internals, a great screen for binge watching and a stellar OS for getting stuff done, this has everything a student needs.
The once-high-speed connection that reached its peak on Apple’s first music player, appears to be dead.
Technology is always moving forward, which often means old technology gets left behind. For example, NekoMichiUBC on X hasdiscoveredthat the macOS Tahoe beta lacks support for FireWire. That means that legacy devices, such as theoriginaland2nd-generationiPod, storage devices. cameras, and more won’t work with Macs running Tahoe.
It’s actually impressive that Apple has supported FireWire for so long, since Apple tends to drop old tech in a few years. Known by the standard name of IEEE 1394 (FireWire is Apple’s branding), Apple led its development in the late 1980s as a solution for devices that needed high-speed connectivity. In the 2000s, USB became popular and FireWire ports on Macs were eventually dropped, but support had been kept in macOS until Tahoe.
What to do if you have a FireWire device you want to use? Well, you don’t have to upgrade to Tahoe; your Mac is just fine running that older version of macOS. It means, though, that you can’t useTahoe’s features. It also means that any features that operate between iOS 26, iPadOS 26, and Tahoe won’t be available to you, such as Call Screening. If you have a spare Mac, you can decide not install Tahoe on it and use it when you need to use FireWire devices, like an iPod.
If you depend on those old FireWire devices daily, it’s a good idea to upgrade, especially if it’s a storage device. That FireWire hard drive has a lot of miles on it, so its chances of failure are relatively high and increasing every day. You can probably get a faster drive with a lot more storage for a lower price than what you paid for that FireWire drive (storage was much more expensive back then). Get our picks for thebest external hard drivesandSSDs. If it’s a camera, your iPhone 15 probably produces better quality photos, though using old cameras for stylistic purposes is a thing. We get it.
There’s always a chance Apple could reinstate FireWire support in Tahoe–it’s in beta and changes always happen during the cycle. There doesn’t seem to be any technical consequence to it, but Apple likes to drop old tech as part of its proper housekeeping practice. Chances are, it’s gone, so take the time to prepare yourself before Tahoe is officially released in the fall. Learn more aboutmacOS Tahoe.
After most Apple iPads, including the current iPad Pro M4, received the worst possible rating on the new EU energy label, Apple is criticizing the European Union. The criticism is justified in at least a few areas.
The Apple iPad Pro receives the worst rating from the new EU energy label. (Image source: Apple, edited)
Since June 20, all smartphones and tablets sold in the European Union have an energy label attached, which, similar to household appliances, must be displayed by all retailers and online shops. Aswe previously reported, energy labels have been issued for 603 smartphones and tablets so far, 142 of which have been awarded the highest possible rating of “A”. None of these top ratings went to Apple.
While the iPhone 16 Pro at least received a “B” rating, most iPad models only received a “G” rating – the worst rating stipulated by the EU. As the comparison of the labels between iPhone and iPad shows, the latter receives a significant deduction because it can barely survive drops and is not waterproof. The current iPad Pro gets a mediocre repairability rating of “C” – a fairly generous rating, as a look at the iFixit teardown reveals. There is also a deduction for the fact that Apple does not guarantee software updates.
So wird die Akkulaufzeit getestet, die auf dem EU-Energielabel ausgewiesen wird.
In response to the introduction of the EU Energy Label, Apple has published a44-page document explaining its own test methodology and criticizing the European Union’s specifications. According to Apple, the test results would have been sufficient to give the iPhone 16 Pro a better rating by one level in the areas of energy efficiency and drop resistance, but to account for ambiguities in the test specifications, Apple downgraded itself by one notch in each case.
This demonstrates one of the problems with the EU Energy Label: all tests are carried out by the product manufacturers themselves and are only checked by the EU in individual cases. Apple’s main criticism is that the specifications are sometimes vague and open to different interepretations, which in turn leads to different test methodologies and thus different ratings between manufacturers. This is not atypical for the EU, as these are only “preliminary” specifications that will be updated as soon as sufficient data and feedback from manufacturers is available.
Furthremore, Apple argues that some of the specifications are so vague that they barely make sense. For example, the rating of how well a product survives drops can be “overstated” by up to three levels depending on how the test parameters are interpreted. The EU requires a drop onto a steel plate, but does not provide any information on the degree of hardness or surface texture, which can influence the results significantly. Furthermore, only five drops are required, which, according to Apple, is too little for obtaining reliable results.
VRM is an essential part of every computer, but it’s often given little attention. In fact, even many computer-savvy enthusiasts don’t even know what it is or how it works. VRM stands for Voltage Regulator Module. Without a VRM to regulate the huge voltage coming from the power supply, your computer’s more delicate, high-powered components, like the processor, could get fried in an instant. And if your VRM is faulty or fails, your CPU could start showing signs of failure, such as the blue screen of death.
But rather than simply bottlenecking the computer’s power supply, the VRM’s job is more nuanced. It must convert the incoming power into not just a lower but a consistent voltage. That way, your high-powered components don’t receive dips or surges, which could potentially damage them. This consistency is achieved through an array of capacitors and inductors organized into special circuits around MOSFETs, which are specialized transistors. The “brain” of the VRM is an integrated circuit, often referred to as the PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) controller. Within the VRM, capacitors are responsible for resisting sudden changes in voltage, inductors are responsible for resisting sudden changes in current, and MOSFETs are responsible for limiting the incoming charge to specific levels.
The VRM can be found on the motherboard, right where it’s needed the most: near the CPU socket. To identify yours, look between the motherboard’s power connector and CPU socket. You should see one or more rows of cylindrical capacitors, cube-shaped inductors, and MOSFETs, which are typically black square chips. The VRM is soldered right onto the motherboard, so its name describes this entire array of capacitors, inductors, transistors, and the PWM controller contained within the VRM circuit.
As described, the circuit of a VRM is composed of capacitors, inductors, and MOSFETs, which are all controlled by a PWM controller. The simplest schematic of a VRM is a single-phase circuit. Basically, in a single-phase VRM circuit, the MOSFETs act as switches to turn the flow of energy on and off, while the inductors and capacitors act as its signalers and current and voltage storage, respectively. The electrical engineering involved is pretty complex, but what’s important for computer performance is how this process generates heat.
Whenever the MOSFET is switched off, the electrical input to the inductor, or “choke,” is sent back. This switching of current results in a magnetic charge with nowhere to go other than dissipating into the air and surrounding components. As a result, every time the MOSFET is switched on and off, heat is generated. Leaks in the insulation around capacitors will also generate heat. Fortunately, it’s a small amount of heat — the immediate temperature can be about 300 degrees Fahrenheit, but it happens in a fraction of a second. Unfortunately, the MOSFET switches on and off dozens of times per second, so heat becomes a significant issue in the design of a VRM.
Engineers found a simple way to solve the VRM’s problem of heat dissipation. Rather than using a single-phase VRM circuit, modern computers rely on multi-phase VRMs to split the workload into smaller phases across a greater physical area. Using multi-phase VRMs can also improve accuracy and efficiency since each MOSFET only needs to be responsible for a fraction of the total power load. Thus, the heat is both lower in the areas where it’s generated and more widely spread out.
VRM is one of the most important considerations when choosing a motherboard. While the VRM on basic-level motherboards is typically good enough to handle standard graphics cards and CPUs, an expensive motherboard might be worth it if you’re using it for high-end processing and overclocking. Not only do premium motherboards typically have higher-quality VRM components capable of handling the demands of powerful processors, but they’re also usually better at temperature control. Quality VRMs regulate voltage by using more phases to disperse the power load (and, therefore, the temperature) across a greater area. Basic VRMs use about four to six phases, while high-end VRMs break the current into as many as eight or more phases; however, the quality of the VRM components still plays a greater role in heat management.
The effectiveness of a VRM’s heatsink is especially important when overclocking the CPU. Gamers often want to know how to overclock their PCs but may overlook the important role a quality VRM has in reducing the risk of overheating. Because an overclocked CPU generates extra heat, the nearby VRM components must be able to operate at higher temperatures without failing. VRM components also need to be able to meet the increased power demands from an overclocked CPU. As a result, the VRM adds extra heat to the already-heated system.
However, the price of a motherboard isn’t necessarily a great indication of the quality of its VRM components. Instead of relying on the price, search for VRMs with leak-resistant capacitors. These are often marketed under different, eye-catching names such as “Dark Capacitors” and “Japanese Capacitors.” High-quality inductors are also sold under different names, like “Super Ferrite Chokes.” You can search the web for any particular name you don’t recognize to see if it’s a quality component.
When the temperature hits 90 and wind subsides, I like to head down to the boardwalk. We have a few nearby, but one of my favorites is along Long Beach on the south shore of Long Island. When I head out, I like to grab my sunglasses, sunblock, and a smartphone, or two. In this case, I popped the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra and Apple’s iPhone 16 Pro Max for a Boardwalk photo shootout.
These flagships, as I see it, are the best of the best (officially ranked Number 1 and Number 4, respectively, on ourBest Phones 2025list), two spectacular smartphones packed with excellent processors, screens, and cameras. With a 200MP main camera, theSamsungGalaxy S25 Ultra is unquestionably the megapixel winner, but the quality of any smartphone image is not just the sum of all pixels.
Both smartphones feature multiple lenses and, often, binning options to combine some pixels (often as many as four) into one information-filled dot. Additionally, there is all the processor-based image processing.Applecalls it the Photonic Engine, and Samsung calls theirs the ProVisual Engine.
Both do a good, even excellent job of taking what the physical optics and image sensor see and delivering something on the screen side that is accurate and sometimes exquisite.
For my Boardwalk Photo test, I purposely did as little as possible to mess with image settings. Instead, I focused mostly on using the main camera and optics-based zoom. I didn’t want to use digital zoom since I know the back-end AI can get involved and try to “enhance” and “augment” images in unnatural ways.
Overall, the results show excellent work from both the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra and Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max. Still, there are key differences that may define your next choice for the ultimate boardwalk (and beach) smartphone camera.
I won’t argue that this is the final word on all these cameras, but I did notice enough of a consistent approach across each device that I’m prepared to draw some conclusions. Let’s look at the first set of photos.
This image set looks down the boardwalk at some of the high-rise apartment buildings. I was standing just off the boardwalk’s long wooden path, and pointed the main cameras toward the structures.
They’re both good images, and at 100%, they hold up nicely. However, the differences are also pretty stark.
Samsung’s habit of over-brightening and sometimes making color too rich or overly consistent is on full display. Mostly, that effect results in pleasing imagery, but compared to the iPhone 16 Pro Max, the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra made the whole image too bright, and we end up losing some of the dramatic cloud bank detail. The bright approach also damps shadows a bit, draining away a little of the drama.
Where Samsung excels is in keeping objects in focus well into the distance.
There is nothing wrong with the Galaxy S25 Ultra photo, but I still prefer the iPhone 16 Pro Max shot.
This image set was challenging because the foreground foliage is so detailed and therefore contains a large amount of digital information for each image processor to handle.
I was impressed that both 5X optical zoom cameras could pick up the hazy freighters in the distance.
Samsung’s 50MP telephoto seems to gather a bit more detail than the iPhone 12MP 5X zoom, but not by a lot. Part of that is because the Samsung zoom automatically bins pixels down to a roughly 9MP image.
Colors on the Samsung image are accurate, and I appreciated that it picked up the pop of the yellow flag.
The iPhone 16 Pro Max colors are just as good (both got the hazy sky just right), and I noticed more detail in the ocean churn. Overall, though, Samsung’s telephoto camera picks up more detail, and I think that’s down to more pixels pouring more information into the overall shot.
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra versus iPhone 16 Pro Max
Main: on the beach
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra
Apple iPhone 16 Pro Max
I could stare at the beach and ocean all day long, but it’s always hard for any camera to recreate my view. At least they’re getting closer. These two shots highlight many of the iPhone 16 Pro Max’s and Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra’s core strengths and weaknesses.
As we’ve seen before, Samsung is over-brightening the shot, losing a little of the deep blue of a perfect pre-summer day and the deeper green of the ocean.
The iPhone’s shot is truer and, again, it has stronger shadows.
While the detail in both shots is strong, the iPhone 16 Pro Max holds up a tiny bit better when I zoom in.
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra versus iPhone 16 Pro Max
Subject: A man lost in thought
Samsung Galaxy S25 UltraApple iPhone 16 Pro Max
The boardwalk is full of characters, people who walked its warped planks for decades; they’re as much a part of the beach as the sand, surf, and seagulls.
When you have a subject and setting like this, the light and shadows only add to the drama. Apple’s iPhone 16 Pro Max seems to intuitively know this and leaves well enough alone. Even the clouds get to have their moment, looming dramatically in the background.
Samsung’s brighter approach gives us a clearer view of the man but flattens the image a bit by lighting up almost all of it.
My favorite part of these photos is the man’s weathered hands. The iPhone 16 Pro Max does a brilliant job with its skin color and highlights.
Action: Looking up
Samsung Galaxy S25 UltraApple iPhone 16 Pro Max
Overhead, seagulls ride the wind, racing back and forth while barely flapping a wing. I tried pointing both phones at the sky to capture them in flight. It wasn’t easy.
Neither image is great, but Samsung did a little better in freezing the action. Unfortunately, I didn’t like what it did with the big blue sky. The lack of objects, people, water, and buildings left too much room for interpretation, and the sky ends up looking pitted and pixelated.
By contrast, the iPhone 16 Pro Max blurred the birds a bit but kept the sky intact. That’s the unblemished blue I saw.
If there’s a winner in all this, I’d say it’s the iPhone 16 Pro Max. It’s almost as if, inside that Photonic engine, is the essence ofAnsel Adams, a photography pioneer who knew enough to let the landscapes speak for themselves.
Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra is close behind (and ahead in some regards), but as ever, I think the closer to visual truth Samsung’s cameras get, the better off its photography will be.
If you’re currently a student, or about to head off for high school or college for the first time, there’s a good chance you’re considering getting one of thebest Chromebooks. These Google-powered laptops are a great choice for learners on a budget, offering a sleek and easy-to-use OS at a sensible price point.
But now there’s also the Chromebook Plus lineup: a new tier of ChromeOS laptops that lays down baseline performance and design standards to deliver a more premium-feeling Google laptop experience. And there’s no denying that these new Plus laptops sit among thebest laptops for studentsright now.
Naturally, Chromebook Plus models are more expensive than conventional Chromebooks. So, considering how cheap some Chromebooks can be, is it really worth spending extra for the hardware upgrade, especially if you’re on a budget? In this article, I’ll dig into the pros and cons of the Plus format and hopefully help some budding students find the perfect laptop for them.
As you might expect, the Chromebook Plus standard has certain minimum hardware specs to meet Google’s requirements. That translates to better performance on average against ‘regular’ Chromebooks – but there’s an important catch here.
See, ChromeOS is designed to run with a permanent internet connection and offloads a lot of its processes to the cloud. For example, instead of usingMicrosoftWord and saving files directly to your laptop’s local storage, you’ll be using Google Docs and saving them in the cloud with Google Drive.
This is a double-edged sword. The lightweight nature of ChromeOS allows Chromebooks to be made with less powerful (and more affordable) components, but it also reduces the effective performance upgrade headroom and ties your performance to the speed of your internet connection. If you don’t have high-speed Wi-Fi, bear in mind that paying extra for a more powerful Chromebook, like theAcer Chromebook Plus 514, won’t necessarily translate to significantly faster performance.
The Acer Chromebook Plus 514 exemplifies what a Chromebook should be, and it’s much better value than a Windows laptop or MacBook, too.
Still, Plus models have other advantages. More RAM means you’ll be able to multitask more effectively, so if you tend to keep 20+ browser tabs open at once or multiple programs running simultaneously, it’s a worthwhile upgrade. You also get at least 128GB (often more) of drive space with a Chromebook Plus. This isn’t always needed, due to the cloud-based nature of ChromeOS, but will come in handy for users who want to install lots of programs.
Lastly, Chromebook Plus laptops are designed with Google Gemini in mind. In other words, these laptops are a bit better suited for running AI features, although, again, a lot of this functionality is offloaded to cloud computing, so don’t expect to see a tremendous difference.
There’s no escaping the fact that some Chromebooks do simply look and feel cheap. If you’re picking up a super-budget model for under $300 / £300 / AU$500, chances are it’s not going to look anything like a premium device.
That’s not the case for Chromebook Plus laptops; the higher price does mean you’re getting a product that feels a bit higher-end. Sure, they might not look quite as fancy as thebest ultrabooks, but it’s a noticeable upgrade.
Then again, it’s a hill I’ll die on that people shouldn’t be concerned with how their hardwarelooks– that’s how you end up with overpriced tech. What’s important is how itfeels,and a Chromebook Plus is invariably going to feel a bit better to use than a budget Chromebook. The specifics of this may vary. A more comfortable keyboard, a more robust and sensitive trackpad, a sturdier outer chassis, or an improved port selection; there are lots of possible improvements to be found here.
A Chromebook Plus is guaranteed to have a Full HD webcam – great for remote learning, or video calls with family while you’re away at college.
There are two key factors mandated by Google for a laptop to receive the Plus badge: display and webcam. The screen must be a minimum of Full HD 1080p resolution, and the webcam must capture video in 1080p.
While 1080p is widely considered to be the ‘baseline’ for Windows laptops, you’ll find plenty of cheap Chromebooks out there still rocking a lower resolution (most commonly ‘HD Ready’ 720p). Considering that most entertainment media these days is available in Full HD (or better!), it’s worth considering a Chromebook Plus for its superior display if you like to kick back and watch Netflix on your laptop after a day of studying. The boosted webcam resolution is also a nice addition for students who have remote classes using software like Zoom.
When not to pick a Chromebook
I think Chromebooks are an excellent alternative to a Windows or macOS laptop for any user who wants good value for money, but there’s an important caveat to bear in mind here: software compatibility.
Simply put, not everything you can run on a traditional Windows laptop will be available on ChromeOS. You do get a decent selection of native apps, and Google has also made the AndroidGoogle Play Storecompatible with Chromebooks. Still, some software may not be compatible, so if you plan to use specific programs, be sure to check in advance whether they’re available on ChromeOS.
As great as Chromebooks are, ChromeOS does have some limitations when it comes to software compatibility.
It’s also important to consider the topic you’re studying. Some courses will be better served by a more powerful laptop capable of handling more intensive local workloads. For example, if you’re in a creative discipline like 3D digital art or video editing, you might be better off with a laptop that has a dedicated GPU fromNvidiaorAMD, which is something that Chromebooks universally lack. If you’re taking literature or business studies, though, a Chromebook should suit you just fine.
If you decide that a Chromebook isn’t right for you, be sure to check out our list of thebest student laptops. Some of theseareChromebooks, but you’ve got some excellent alternative options like theDell Plus 14.
Chromebook vs Chromebook Plus: Closing thoughts
At the end of the day, thebest student Chromebookwill be a little different for everyone, depending on your needs and budget.
But having tested a large number of Chromebooks (both Plus and non-Plus) over the years, I feel quite comfortable saying that if your budget can stretch a little further, the upgrade is worth it. Having a faster processor and a better display is a worthwhile upgrade, and several Chromebook Plus models on the market cost less than $500 / £500 / AU$750 – a great deal considering how expensive modern Windows laptops can be, even just in the mid-range space.
Nonetheless, you shouldn’t be discouraged about buying a super-cheap Chromebook if you’re working with an extremely tight budget. I’d advise looking for a model with at least 8GB of RAM, but even with that criterion in place, you should be able to find something reasonably priced, like theLenovo IdeaPad 3i Chromebook. Whatever you choose, you can rely on TechRadar’s recommended product pages, as we never recommend hardware that we wouldn’t use ourselves.
Whether you’re building or upgrading your PC, the size of its motherboard plays a big role in choosing computer components. It affects everything from how many parts you can install to how much room your case needs to how many ports are available. Mini ITX and Micro ATX are two common choices for those who want a more portable build or something that doesn’t take up as much real estate as a standard ATX case.
Both Mini-ITX and Micro ATX boards are squares, whereas standard ATX is a rectangle. Between the two smaller sizes, the Mini-ITX board is noticeably smaller at 6.7 inches x 6.7 inches, while the Micro ATX measures 9.6 inches x 9.6 inches. That extra space matters when you’re thinking about expansion, airflow, and compatibility. While both boards are designed to work in smaller cases, they do target different needs.
Mini-ITX is a better fit for ultra-compact systems and can be found among some of the best motherboards for gaming. Micro ATX, on the other hand, offers more room without taking up as much space as standard ATX, allowing for more hardware options. So if you’re deciding between the two, start with size and how much flexibility you need. From there, it’s all about what kind of build you’re planning, whether you want something ultra-compact or a system with more room to grow.
Mini ITX offers a small size, but with big trade-offs
Building a small form factor PC like a Mini-ITX requires a lot of considerations because of its compact design, but there are some great benefits, too. They can be quieter than other builds since the cases they fit into don’t have enough room for an abundance of fans. Moreover, they use less power and often require fewer cables, which can make for a cleaner setup. The Mini-ITX size makes them useful as home theater PCs, portable workstations, and even media servers, proving that a board doesn’t have to be big to be impactful.
There are some trade-offs, though. Mini-ITX motherboards typically have only two memory slots for RAM and offer fewer connectivity ports. There’s also a limited number of PCIe slots, which limits your options when it comes to graphics and other expansion cards. You have to pay close attention to the size of the GPU you want because larger ones might not be supported. Airflow can be a concern, too, due to fewer fan headers and compact cases. These boards are best suited for users who know how to optimize the available space.
Price is a big consideration. Because of their compact and specialized design, Mini-ITX boards can actually cost more than larger ones. For example, the ASUS ROG STRIX B860-I Gaming Mini-ITX currently goes for $219.99. While Mini-ITX can be a great option for compact, quiet builds, it’s not always the most budget-friendly or flexible choice.
Micro ATX is a larger option with more flexibility
Micro ATX boards might be smaller than standard ATX, but they’re larger than Mini-ITX ones, offering more room for components. That extra space means you can install full-size graphics cards, take advantage of better airflow, and add more cooling fans. This makes Micro ATX a strong option for users who want a smaller case but don’t want to compromise on performance.
Micro ATX boards also support more memory and expansion options. Most Micro ATX motherboards come with four RAM slots and multiple PCIe slots, which gives you more flexibility if you need to add more or faster RAM, sound cards, or upgrade your GPU later. They tend to have more connectivity ports than Mini-ITX, as well, which can be useful if you’re using a lot of peripherals or external drives. It’s a balanced option that works well for gaming, general use, or even light productivity.
One of the biggest advantages of Micro ATX is the price. They’re generally cheaper than Mini-ITX boards and offer more features for the money. At the time of this writing, the AORUS Elite AX AMDB 650 Micro-ATX, for example, goes for about $175.99. So unless you specifically need a super small build, a Micro ATX board might be the way to go for those small builds, giving your rig more room to grow over time.
The Nintendo Switch 2 has arrived, alongside a launch line-up containing Mario Kart Worldand Nintendo Switch 2 Welcome Tour. In addition to the console and games, a number of accessories for the new console are also now available, including the Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller. Released alongside the new console, the GameCube controller is basically a new version of the classic controller, with the same look and feel as it had 20 years ago. It exists so thatyou can use it with the Nintendo Switch Online + Expansion Pack GameCube gameslaunched alongside the new system.
The controller itself feels the way you want it to, including the classic crunchy triggers. It has an added ZL button, which allows you to play some regular Nintendo Switch 2 with the controller, although there are some limitations to that. The Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller feels excellent to use in both GameCube online games and new games alike, but a lack of clickable thumbsticks and button remapping being limited to GameCube NSO games makes this one a little tougher to recommend than the quality of the controller would suggest.
Make waves with this classic-style controller! The Nintendo GameCube™ controller has the familiar look and feel of the original, along with modern features like the C-Button, which can open GameChat*, and the Capture Button. The Nintendo GameCube controller is only compatible with the Nintendo Switch™ 2 system.
Pros & Cons
Feels true to the original GameCube controller
Added ZL and capture buttons make the controller useful outside of GameCube games
Triggers feel exactly how they should
Lighter than I would like
Button mapping is limited to GameCube NSO games
No alternative to clicking in thumb sticks limits the games you can us it with
Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller price and availability
The Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller is available exclusively throughNintendo’s websitefor $65. There are no other retailers that sell it, and you are required to have an active Nintendo Switch Online subscription in order to purchase it. You don’t need to have the Expansion Pack subscription, just the base one, although you will need a premium subscription to play GameCube NSO games. You are also limited to one controller per Nintendo Switch Online account, with no timeframe for when you might be able to get a second one.
It feels exactly the way I remember GameCube controllers feeling
To start with the positives, the Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller feels just like an original GameCube controller feels. While that is partially from my memory of the controller, I have used an actual GameCube controller to play on a real GameCube within the past few months. Because of that, I can say pretty confidently that the vast majority of people would not be able to tell the difference between the two controllers just by holding one. It does have an added ZL button, which I wish was the same size as the Z button on the right, but it allows you to play most Nintendo Switch 2 games with it. The shoulder buttons have pressure-sensitive clicking, so you can accurately play Nintendo GameCube games. It even works in Super Mario Sunshinein the now delisted Super Mario 3D All-Stars.
I can say pretty confidently that the vast majority of people would not be able to tell the difference between the two controllers just by holding one.
Both the sticks feel a bit sturdier than the original sticks, although that could be a result of this being a brand-new controller, and the GameCube controller I recently used is not. All the extra buttons, the C button, capture, home, and the sync button, have been relegated to the top of the controller, a good spot for all of them except the capture button, which I wish was a bit more convenient.
Bizarre and unnecessary limitations
Button mapping, but only in NSO GameCube games
Outside of playing the Nintendo Switch Online GameCube games, my mileage with the GameCube controller varied far more than I expected. I played a significant amount ofMario Kart Worldusing the controller, and I didn’t have any issues playing the game until I ventured into Free Roam. In Free Roam, I attempted a challenge and failed, resulting in the game prompting me to click the right stick to reset. Neither stick on the GameCube controller clicks, but I figured I could remap it, sinceMario Kart Worlddoesn’t use all the buttons, anyway. That’s when I discovered that button mapping is not available for the GameCube controller on the system level.
This limits the controller’s use pretty heavily, and in a way that doesn’t make much sense to me.
This was a bit of a shock for two reasons. First, there doesn’t seem to be any explanation for why any controller wouldn’t be able to use the system-level button mapping. Second, and even more frustrating, is that I had remapped the buttons while playingSoulCalibur 2. Within NSO GameCube games, you can fully remap the buttons on the GameCube controller without any real limitation. This makes the lack of button mapping elsewhere even more frustrating, since the functionality is obviously there. Furthermore, this means that any game where you need to click the sticks you can’t play with a GameCube controller, which could be fixed in most situations by simple button remapping. This limits the controller’s use pretty heavily, and in a way that doesn’t make much sense to me.
A great controller held back by weird Nintendo decisions
As someone who grew up with a GameCube, my nostalgia for the controller and games is incredibly powerful. I understand that, and that’s partially what makes me love using the controller so much, but there are simple design choices that speak to me. I love that the face buttons seem more concerned with comfortable placement than a clean look, the triggers still feel incredible to click on, and I love how the main thumbstick feels.
Despite my love of that original controller and its recreation of the Switch 2, the Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller has some dumb and inexcusable limitations. Not being able to remap buttons for most games, despite the functionality being present for the NSO GameCube games, feels like a choice meant to force you to only use the controller for those games. There are still plenty of games I can play with the controller, not having button remapping limits the number, and does so for seemingly no reason. That said, it’s a great feeling controller, and if that sounds appealing to you, it’s worth the price, even with these limitations.
Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube Controller
7/ 10
Number of Colors1
Wireless?Yes
Compatible SystemsNintendo Switch 2
Color OptionsBlueThe Nintendo Switch 2 GameCube controller feels like an excellent recreation of the classic controller. The triggers are pressure sensitive, the sticks feel great, and the added ZL button makes it work with some Switch 2 games. A lack of button remapping outside the NSO GameCube controllers unfortunately limits its usefulness.
(Image credit: Intel)
(Image credit: Google)
