Hice un experimento práctico con uno de los primeros chips de Metal Gear Solid Delta: Devorador de serpientes En un evento de vista previa organizado por el desarrollador y editor Konami. Un ambicioso remake de la generación actual de la tercera entrega del popular juego de larga duración. Engranaje de metal sólido serie, quedé increíblemente impresionado por todo lo que pude ver en mi tiempo con el capítulo inicial, La misión utópica.
Ambientado en los bosques de Tselinoyarsk, una región ficticia con estrechos vínculos con la Unión Soviética, en plena Guerra Fría, este remake ya va camino de convertirse en uno de los títulos más atractivos de esta generación de consolas. En PlayStation 5, los entornos eran densos, ricos en detalles y llenos de color. Es increíblemente impresionante, pero a pesar de todas las mejoras visuales, Metal Gear Solid Delta: Devorador de serpientes Todavía es reconocible al instante. Metal Gear Sólido 3.
Cada área que exploraste fue una recreación exacta de cómo se veía en el lanzamiento original, hasta la ubicación de objetos ocultos y coleccionables. Aunque la animación ha sido renovada, las escenas todavía funcionan tal como las recuerdo.
La actuación de voz original también se ha dejado completamente intacta y luce perfecta con los magníficos modelos de personajes actualizados en alta resolución. Incluso el esquema de control renovado, que ahora permite al héroe Snake entrar en una posición boca abajo con un giro rápido, se sintió deliciosamente intuitivo y suave. Sin embargo, aunque la opción no estaba disponible durante mi vista previa, la versión final seguirá ofreciendo la posibilidad de habilitar controles nativos para quienes los prefieran.
Volver a la forma
(Crédito de la imagen: Konami)
Como el primer título de la franquicia desde Metal Gear sobrevive En 2018, Konami enfrentó mucha presión por parte de los fanáticos para hacerlo bien. Durante un descanso de una sesión de juego, hablé con el productor Noriaki Okamura sobre el proceso detrás de la actualización de uno de los juegos más populares de todos los tiempos.
Principalmente, quería saber por qué el equipo decidió que ahora era un mejor momento para rehacer el juego que lanzar uno nuevo. “Hay muchos fans más jóvenes que no conocen la serie y eso nos pareció muy impactante”, explica Okamura a través de un traductor. “Los fans más jóvenes no sólo no habían jugado los juegos, sino que ni siquiera habían oído hablar de ellos. Sabíamos que si no hacíamos algo, el juego se acabaría”. Engranaje de metal sólido “La serie dejará de existir”.
“Delta Es un juego que realmente queremos atraer nuevos fanáticos y ser la razón por la que la gente quiera participar. Engranaje de metal sólido “Por primera vez o volviendo a la serie”, continúa. En cuanto a por qué eligieron reproducir la tercera parte. Engranaje de metal sólido El juego, “Este es el primero en términos de historia. […] Si un amigo o alguien, tal vez un fan más joven, me pregunta con qué juego debería empezar, lo recomendaré. Metal Gear Sólido 3“.”
Suscríbase para recibir las últimas noticias, reseñas, opiniones, las mejores ofertas tecnológicas y más.
(Crédito de la imagen: Konami)
Han pasado casi dos décadas desde su lanzamiento. Metal Gear Sólido 3 En PlayStation 2, trajo una gran cantidad de innovaciones tecnológicas, pero el equipo tuvo cuidado de preservar la mayor cantidad posible de la experiencia original. “Los gráficos son algo en lo que realmente nos concentramos”, comienza Okamura, “Obviamente, los gráficos han mejorado mucho en 20 años, y tanto los gráficos como el rendimiento han mejorado para este juego”.
“Pero, en pocas palabras, realmente quiero que una nueva generación de fanáticos experimente la misma emoción y emoción que experimentaron originalmente mientras jugaban. Metal Gear Sólido 3 “Por primera vez. Quiero tomar exactamente esta experiencia que tomé del pasado y luego transmitirla a la generación actual, y que la gente la experimente exactamente de la misma manera. Tal vez haya cosas que podamos hacer”. hacer ahora lo que no podíamos hacer antes, pero en lugar de agregar cosas “Nuevas, simplemente preferimos crear esta experiencia lo más fielmente posible y lo más cerca posible del original”.
Viejo y nuevo
(Crédito de la imagen: Konami)
con Metal Gear Solid: Colección maestra Volumen 1que contiene una reedición del original. Metal Gear Sólido 3El juego está ampliamente disponible en consolas modernas y, a menudo, a precios reducidos, y tenía muchas ganas de descubrir qué hace que valga la pena comparar una nueva versión a precio completo como esta.
“Si sólo damos Metal Gear Sólido 3 “La generación más joven que nunca antes había jugado el juego lo miraba y decía: 'Parece muy viejo, no queremos jugarlo'. Así que sentimos que lo mínimo que teníamos que hacer era mejorar los gráficos para atraerlo. gente”, dice Okamura. “Pero nos dimos cuenta de que no podíamos simplemente cambiar los gráficos porque cosas como el movimiento de los personajes, los movimientos y las expresiones faciales no coincidían del todo, así que tuvimos que intervenir y cambiar los movimientos y la animación de los personajes. para coincidir con estos nuevos gráficos, de lo contrario, habríamos perdido “Parecía un poco inapropiado”.
(Crédito de la imagen: Konami)
Pero esta nueva versión no sólo se dirige a nuevos jugadores. “Para los fanáticos mayores, las personas que realmente jugaron el juego cuando salió por primera vez, los gráficos se han actualizado mucho, por lo que definitivamente nos gustaría que jugaran el juego y lo vieran a través de una nueva lente y pensaran: 'Oh, esto es cómo se verían los personajes con los gráficos de la generación actual'”, sugiere Okamura. “Será fantástico para ellos experimentar algo que ya han visto antes, pero se ha actualizado muy bien y se ve mucho mejor que antes. Realmente creemos que las personas que jugaron el juego originalmente se divertirán mucho jugando este nuevo versión también.”
Si ya has jugado Metal Gear Sólido 3 O quieres probarlo por primera vez, Metal Gear Solid Delta: Devorador de serpientes Programado para ser lanzado en PC, PlayStation 5, Serie Xboxy Xbox Serie S.
During Western Digital’s recent Q3 earnings call, CEO David Goeckeler disclosed that the ever-growing need for higher capacity and speedier data access from customers across the world is pushing the company to expand its solid-state capacities.
The company chalked up a profitable quarter, with revenues soaring over forecast to $3.46 billion, a 29% YoY rise. The company managed to turn around a streak of losses, reporting a $135 million profit. These achievements are in stark contrast to rival Seagate, which posted an 11% YoY reduction in its revenues to $1.66 billion.
Goeckeler underlined that Western Digital’s improved financial performance was a result of the company’s efforts to offer a more diversified product range. He also said that WD was committed to delivering larger SSD capacities off the back of growing demand for AI-related applications. He said customers “want them [SSDs] in much bigger capacity points, 30- and 60-terabyte capacity points.”
HAMR HDD technology
Reporting on the third quarter results, Blocks & Files wrote “WD currently ships DC SN640 TLC PCIe gen 3 SSDs with up to 30.72 TB capacity and PCIe gen 4 SN650 and 655 drives with 15.36 TB. We now expect 60 TB SSDs to be announced by WD later this year.”
Without going into details of the exact capacities being worked on, Goeckeler said the company was expanding the size of the drives in line with what customers were demanding, stating WD is “increasing capacity and going through a qualification on that. So, we’re in that process with customers.”
He also discussed hard-drive recording (HAMR) technology, including the issues surrounding it, stating, “we’ve been working on HAMR for quite some time. We understand HAMR extremely well. We understand all the issues with HAMR, and what it takes to get it qualified. Clearly, we’re doing that all behind the scenes, because we have a product portfolio with the best TCO we can offer in the market today, and we can do that all the way up to 40 terabytes.” Western Digital’s rival Seagate recently announced the results of an experimental test that showed one of its hard drives using HAMR could run continuously for over 6,000 hours.
More from TechRadar Pro
Sign up to the TechRadar Pro newsletter to get all the top news, opinion, features and guidance your business needs to succeed!
The Beats Solo 4 are long-awaited on-ear wireless headphones that aim to improve on the company’s 2016 Solo 3 with an increased battery life and additional features, including a USB-C port for simultaneous charging and lossless hi-res audio playback, and Spatial Audio – as well as some new color options.
When wearing the Beats Solo 4, I was pleasantly surprised at how well isolated I was from my immediate environment, despite the lack of active noise cancellation (ANC). The claimed 50-hour battery appeared to hold true during my tests too, which is great for such comparatively small and light headphones.
As with most of the best Beats headphones, style is at the forefront, and the Slate Blue variant I tested certainly makes a statement (they are also available in Matte Black and Cloud Pink). Some parts of the plastic build and headband padding feel cheap, though, and certain aspects of its engineering, such as the folding mechanism, don’t inspire much confidence.
They offer a secure fit that’s impressively solid for on-ear headphones, withstanding the rigors of physical activity without shifting, which is important considering that Beats is promoting these headphones for exercise. However, on-ear headphones don’t really work for my ear comfort, and these did nothing to change that – and long-term comfort is made worse by the lack of adequate padding on the headband; I couldn’t use them for more than an hour at a time.
The controls also provide issues: the main ‘b’ button is easy to accidentally press when hanging Solo 4 around the neck, and I found the volume buttons hard to locate while wearing. Pressing them also puts undue pressure onto the ears, which, as you can imagine, is an uncomfortable sensation.
The sound is perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the Solo 4. The bass response can be impactful at times but wooly at others, while the mids sound muddy and lack punch compared to more of the best wireless headphones at the same price. These problems aren’t solved if you listen via any of the higher-quality wired options. The upper mids are where the Solo 4 sound their best, but the highest frequencies don’t have enough sparkle and clarity in comparison to the competition.
The Sony ULT Wear WH-ULT900N, for example, are the same price in the US (and cheaper in the UK), and beat the Solo 4 on pretty much all fronts: they have much better sound, comfort levels, and come with ANC. The Sennheiser Accentum Plus is another superb option for those who want something more audiophile-friendly, with impressive ANC and wireless hi-res support.
(Image credit: Future)
Beats Solo 4 review: Price & release date
Priced $199 / £199 / AU$329
Launched in May 2024
Available in Matte Black, Slate Blue and Cloud Pink
The Beats Solo 4 are priced at $199 / £199 / AU$329 officially, and were available to buy from May 2nd, 2024.
This is lower than today’s flagship headphones – the Beats Studio Pro are $349 / £349, while the Sony WH-1000XM5 officially cost $349 / £299. Both of these are larger, over-ear models with ANC.
For basically the same price as the Solo 4, you could also get the Sony ULT Wear WH-ULT900N or the Sennheiser Accentum Plus. Both of these are over-ear rather than on-ear, which usually improves low-end frequency response, and feature ANC and some other features lacking here. The Sennheiser headphones also match the Solo 4’s 50-hour battery, even with ANC on.
Beats Solo 4 review: Specs
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Drivers
40mm
Active noise cancellation
None
Battery life
50hrs
Weight
217g / 0.48 lbs
Connectivity
Bluetooth 5.3, 3.5mm analog input, USB-C audio input and charging
The feature set for the Beats Solo 4 is what you would expect from a modern pair of wireless headphones. One-touch Bluetooth connectivity made it easy for me to connect to Android, iPhone and Windows PCs, and lossless audio playback is supported via a wired USB-C connection. This means you can listen to sources that provide superior quality to MP3 or AAC file formats, imparting more detail across the entire frequency range, theoretically. Simultaneous charging is also possible when connected to devices that provide power.
However, there is no high-resolution audio support when connected via Bluetooth, as the Beats Solo 4 only support AAC and SBC wirelessly, which are both compressed formats; there’s no aptX or LDAC.
There is also a 3.5mm analog input and included cable so you can use them just like a traditional pair of wired headphones, meaning you can enjoy unlimited playback without using any battery power. Again, this can offer higher-quality audio than Bluetooth, and is useful on planes.
The Beats app is responsive, easy to use, and offers options to easily manage privacy controls, such as location permission, notifications and analytics, and battery optimization settings. It also provides the battery level as a percentage that actually updates for all 100 numbers, which is very useful (and not something all headphones provide – some just note when they’ve dropped by 20%, for example).
There’s fast pairing and auto-switching between compatible devices for both iOS and Android ecosystems – and the Find My system for both platforms in supported. However, Apple users get a few extra features, such as hands-free ‘Hey Siri’ access and Audio Sharing, which lets users share playback with multiple pairs of AirPods or Beats headphones at a time. Better than these, though, is that Apple users get Personalized Spatial Audio for movies or Dolby Atmos music. There’s no support for this on Android.
I mentioned auto-switching between devices above, but be warned that this only worth within the Apple or Android systems. So, it auto-switches between iPhone and Mac; or it switches between Android and Chromebook. There’s no standard multi-point pairing, so you can’t switch between, say, an Android phone and Windows laptop seamlessly.
True to their minimalist aesthetic, the Beat Solo 4 headphones only have four buttons, and all of them are pretty well hidden. The main ‘b’ button is on the left hand side and integrated with the company logo, and controls main functions, such as play/pause and skip track, depending on the number of times it is pressed. The button is tactile and operates smoothly, although I did find it easy to press accidentally, especially when they’re hung around the neck.
The volume controls are located on the ring around the ‘b’ button, with the top half increasing volume and the bottom decreasing. Again, these function well, but they require too much force to register, which meant I was pressing the entire left driver into the side of my head, which isn’t comfortable.
The power button is perhaps the most hidden of all, being a tiny little dot finished in the same color as the rest of the headphones. Locating this blindly when wearing the Solo 4 isn’t easy. It also has to be held down for a few seconds, but hold for too long, and you enter pairing mode. Getting the timing right is tricky, and the only audio prompt you get is when the Bluetooth connection is established. The only indication that the Solo 4 are turned on is a small LED on the outside. Basically, make sure you turn them on before they’re on your head.
The microphone is also high quality, although perhaps too eager to pick up extraneous noises. When making a test call with the Solo 4, my interlocutor commented that, although I was coming through clearly and loudly despite the considerable amount of wind outside, other background noises also came through prominently, such as people talking around me in the street.
Beats quotes the battery life as being a generous 50 hours of playback. And during my test, this figure seemed to live up to reality.
I tracked them as generally losing around 5% battery per 2.5 hours (without Spatial Audio turned on), which puts them right in line for the 50-hour claims from Beats. I also observed them drop around 10% after a 6.5 hours of playback too, so you may get a little over 50 hours – but as usual with headphones, it can depend on volume and other factors.
(Image credit: Future)
Beats Solo 4 review: Sound quality
Bass is hit-and-miss
Boxy lower mids, clear upper mids
Great passive noise isolation
Despite Beats having a reputation for bass-heavy headphones, the Solo 4 are pretty controlled on this front. The low frequencies are deep without being overbearing, although they don’t have the precision and control I would hope for. There are times when the bass is too boomy and wooly, especially noticeable in songs with sustained low notes.
The lower mids are also disappointingly muddy, but the upper mids are pleasantly crisp without being harsh. Songs with detailed percussive arrangements, for instance, come across well in the Solo 4. But the highest frequencies don’t sparkle as much as they could, lacking the finer details at the top end of the spectrum.
When connected via USB-C rather than Bluetooth, you get access to lossless audio, which, in theory at least, should provide a listening experience fit for audiophiles. During my audio test via USB-C with our special TechRadar playlist on Tidal – which provides lossless music streaming – the results weren’t radically different to Bluetooth. The bass was still amiss, and while the mids were more punchy, they still weren’t as clear as I would have liked. Using the 3.5mm analog input seemed to marginally improve the quality of these frequencies, but not by much.
In comparison to the Sony ULT Wear headphones and Sennheiser Accentum Wireless that I’ve already mentioned in this review, there’s no competition really – these both offer more detail, a better balance across the frequencies, and a clearly richer experience overall.
Where the Solo 4 shine, though, is the noise isolation. Despite not having any active noise cancellation profiles, external sounds are blocked out well. This helps songs with heavy reverb and a strong sense of space to be comprehensively conveyed. Spatial Audio experiences are also improved by the isolation, making the illusion of the surround sound theater experience more compelling. The dynamic head tracking meant that whichever way I turned my head, even slightly, the audio panned to always match the direction of the source.
At this price, it’s hard to get a better movie sound experience on headphones than Apple’s Spatial Audio tech provides. This is a nice bonus if you’ll watch a lot of movies, but really still has limited appeal for those who will only listen to music with them.
(Image credit: Future)
Beats Solo 4 review: Design
Snug and secure fit
Uncomfortable for sustained periods
Nice colors, but limited selection
The case that comes with the Beats Solo 4 is made from a soft fabric material, which makes for a lighter carrying weight. However, it does make me more concerned about their safety when buried at the bottom of a backpack or stuffed in a suitcase than if they had a hard case.
The opening for the case is also quite small, so using it isn’t exactly a seamless experience: it’s near-impossible to take them out without sliding the headband adjustments, and putting back the included 3.5mm analog and USB-C cables in their own pouches within the case is also quite the chore, since the openings for those are very small as well.
And despite being smaller than over-ear headphones, the depth of the case means that they aren’t that much smaller to carry around, if at all. The Sony ULT Wear WH-ULT900N over-ear wireless headphones, for instance – which are bigger than the Solo 4 – have a case which is longer and wider, but thinner, which is something I personally prefer, as I find such cases easier to pack away.
The Solo 4 stay true to the Beats aesthetic, looking almost identical to the Solo 3. The look is minimal and the Beats logo is displayed prominently on the sides of each can, so everyone knows what you’re wearing. The Slate Blue finish I had is vibrant without being garish, although Matte Black and Cloud Pink are other color options you can choose from. It’s a little disappointing there are only three options, since the Solo 3 came in five colors, but I’m sure more will become available over time.
The adjustments on the headband are smooth and relatively easy to make – although this was trickier while wearing them, as they were fairly tight on me. The hinge mechanisms for folding the earcups feels quite loose, and so doesn’t hold them in folded position with much support. The plastic used for the overall construction doesn’t especially premium either when compared to the likes of Sony and Bose headphones.
The fit is very snug and secure, despite being an on-ear design, and so having less surface area on the pads to grip your head. Having used them for exercise, I can say that they stay on without the slightest deviation. Beats has mentioned exercise as a key use case for the Solo 4, and even in a world of fitness-focused earbuds, they do this job very well.
The price I paid for this secureness, however, was a lack of comfort overall. Despite the particularly plush ear pads, the Solo 4 felt the same as any other pair of on-ear headphones I have tried – which is to say, painful after long sessions. Not everyone feels the same but, if you’re someone with sensitive ears to pressure, like me, then these aren’t going to be the on-ear headphones that change your mind. Glasses wearers will also be in even more potential pain – but again, I will concede this is something I am personally quite sensitive to.
But with the Beats Solo 4, the more universal issue is the feeble headband padding, which meant that the top of my head felt the strain as well. The rubber coating also feels cheap and offers too much grip if anything, often sticking to my hair, causing issues when sliding them on and off.
The upshot is that I couldn’t wear the Solo 4 for more than an hour at a time before I had to give my cranium a break. But when you do take them off and hang them around your neck, I encountered another problem: since the earcups don’t swivel, the edges can rest uncomfortably between the chin and collarbone. It may seem like a small point, but other headphones at this price point do have rotating cups to rectify this problem and make life more comfortable.
(Image credit: Future)
Beats Solo 4 review: Value
Rivals offer better sound for the same price
No ANC is disappointing
Smart features for both Android and iOS is rare
The Beats Solo 4 are priced at $199 / £199 / AU$329, and the competition at this point is quite stiff. The Sony ULT Wear WH-ULT900N, for instance, are currently available for the same price, if not cheaper, and best the Solo 4 in virtually every aspect. I tested them directly against the Solo 4, since we had both in for review at the same time.
The Sony headphones have superior sound and comfort levels, as well as having more features, including ANC. The Beats Solo 4 almost get away with this omission thanks to their frankly excellent natural noise isolating capabilities, but it’s still far perfect, and other headphones at this price point feature ANC too.
In no small part, you’ll be paying for the specific styling and the unique mix of Android- and iOS-friendly features. A lot of people will feel that’s worth it, but I’m not sure it’s quite enough. These features, plus Apple’s top-tier Spatial Audio, good battery life and USB-C audio mean they’re reasonable for the price overall – but you can spend your money better.
Should I buy the Beats Solo 4?
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Section
Notes
Score
Features
Apple integrations and wired options are welcome, but no ANC or multi-point is a shame.
4/5
Sound quality
Bass sounds are mixed but the upper mids really do pop. The lower mids and highs are lackluster, though.
3/5
Design
The style is there, and buttons feel solid, but ergonomic issues made the Solo 4 uncomfortable for me.
3/5
Value
At this price, there are multiple candidates than offer better sound, comfort and design.
2.5/5
Buy them if…
Don’t buy them if…
Beats Solo 4 review: Also consider
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Beats Solo 4
Sony ULT Wear WH-ULT900N
Edifier Stax Spirit S3
Price
$199 / £199 / AU$329
$199 / £179 / AU$348
$399 / £330 / approx. AU$640
Drivers
40mm
40mm
70mm Planar Magnetic
Active noise cancellation
No
Yes
No
Quoted battery life
50hrs
30hrs
80hrs
Weight
217g
255g
329g
Connectivity
Bluetooth 5.3, 3.5mm analog input, USB-C audio input and charging
aptX and Snapdragon Sound support, replaceable earpads
How I tested the Beats Solo 4
Tested on Android, iPhone and PC
Streamed music from Tidal and used stored MP3 tracks
Tested over 10 days
I tested the Beats Solo 4 over the course of a week, in various scenarios. I tried them with an Android phone and an iPhone, as well as a laptop and a Fiio M11S high resolution music player. I made use of all their supported features, including wireless playback via Bluetooth, and wired via 3.5mm analog and USB-C.
I listened to music directly from lowly MP3 files in 320kbps quality, as well as via hi-res streaming service Tidal. I tested them with a variety of genres, including rock, pop, electronic, classical and jazz. I listened both in quiet indoor environments and noisy outdoor ones. I also tried exercising with them to test how secure the fit was.
I also made phone calls and recorded voice memos with the Solo 4 to test the microphone quality too.
I also tested the battery life by leaving the headphones connected to a mobile device via Bluetooth to play through a playlist at a typical listening volume.
LG launched a separate laptop in its Gram lineup called the LG Gram SuperSlim, which borrows heavily from the adjacent 2023 LG Gram Style model in terms of its looks. However, the latter was a disappointment in terms of performance, despite my loving the extremely thin and light chassis and aesthetically pleasing design.
So color me suspicious about the SuperSlim and whether it could impress me. What I’ve found is a mixed bag, with middling benchmark results and surprisingly solid productivity performance that could rival even the best laptops. However, some drawbacks still hold this laptop back.
At first glance, the SuperSlim is in a less impressive black color than its counterpart, but it makes up for that by its 15.6-inch weight and measurements beating out the 16-inch sizes of the Style and matching the 14-inch version. The result is an absolutely dreamy lightweight and razor-thin chassis and, unlike the Style, it doesn’t have that cheap plastic feel to it.
There’s still a slight wobble to the hinge but all around it feels far more stable and solid, with a superior build quality. I also enjoy the material of the chassis, which has a more textured feel to it.
Ventilation has much improved, with the laptop staying cool even during heavy workloads, which is another improvement over the Slim, which suffered from overheating issues. LG seems to have addressed many build issues between these two laptops.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The keyboard still features snappy and responsive keys, which are nice and wide and perfect for a variety of finger sizes to type on with little chance for typos. Thankfully the touchpad has been restored to a much more standard one, and it’s perfectly responsive, unlike the haptic feedback nightmare on the Style.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The display’s resolution did take a hit compared to the Style’s 2.8 or 3K, as the SuperSlim is now FHD. It still thankfully retains the OLED screen and supports HDR, giving the display that sharp and bright look.
The webcam is pretty standard, which is to say not particularly great but is fine for conference calls. The sound quality is quite solid, able to differentiate between various instruments as well as reproduce a deep bass. Its volume is also a noticeable improvement from the Style, as it can get pretty loud without losing too much in quality.
LG Gram SuperSlim: Benchmarks
Here’s how the LG Gram SuperSlim performed in our suite of benchmark tests:
3DMark: Night Raid: 16,447; Fire Strike: 4,842; Time Spy: 1,778 Cinebench R23 Multi-core: 8,275 points GeekBench 5: 1,842 (single-core); 9,783 (multi-core) PCMark 10 (Home Test): 5,495 points Battery Life (TechRadar movie test): 14 hours, 55 minutes Civilization VI (1080p, Ultra): 42 fps; (1080p, Low): 25 fps
Though on paper through benchmark tests its performance is about the same as the Gram Style, in practice it functions much better. Productivity-wise, it’s capable of having tons of tabs open for both work and play including video conference meetings, word-processing documents and spreadsheets, video streaming, and more. Unfortunately, that means its CPU benchmarks are still below that of other similar Ultrabooks.
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
The LG Gram SuperSlim is made for office work and casual use through and through with almost no heavy-duty gaming capabilities. It’s all thanks to the bog-standard mobile GPU, which is rather offensive considering the steep price of the machine.
Other laptops for a similar price are equipped with a proper gaming GPU, so why LG refuses to make the upgrade is mind-boggling. Even a laptop like the Dell XPS 17 (2024) has better specs for a similar price point, and the Apple MacBook Air 15-inch (2023) doesn’t have a gaming GPU but the M3 chip is far superior to Intel’s silicon.
By far the biggest improvement over the Style is its extraordinary battery power, though, which gets close to rivaling even the best MacBook and best MacBook Pro models. During our battery tests, it was even able to last around 15 hours and that was under the stress of constant movie playing.
All in all, the LG Gram SuperSlim is something of a mixed bag, with some fantastic performance in terms of productivity and battery life, but don’t expect much more from it than that.
LG Gram SuperSlim: Price & availability
How much does it cost? $1,649 / £1,299 (about AU$2,530)
When is it available? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the US and UK
The LG Gram SuperSlim is an Ultrabook is currently retailing at $1,649 / £1,299 (about AU$2,530), with availability in both the US and the UK. Unfortunately, this particular model has been discontinued in Australia, so buyers out there would have to import it, making it even more expensive.
As for pricing itself, while it’s overall a superior model to the Style with some much-needed changes and enhancements, it’s still a hard sell compared to other similarly priced products like the Dell XPS 17 (2024) and the Apple MacBook Air 15-inch with M3, which both boast more well-rounded usage and better specs.
Unless the price drops down significantly, it would be difficult to make the SuperSlim more appealing to buyers. This is a shame since it does have a great niche as an incredibly portable laptop that works for offices and during commutes and events. If you can buy this laptop with a decent discount, then it’s definitely worth considering.
LG Gram SuperSlim: Specs
As of now, the only model available in both the US and UK is this setup: Intel Core i7-1360P CPU, Intel Iris Xe Graphics, 16GB of RAM, and 1TB SSD of storage. There’s also no way to customize or upgrade the SuperSlim either.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
LG Gram SuperSlim Specs
Price
Row 0 – Cell 1
$1,649 / £1,299 (about AU$2,530)
CPU
Intel Core i7-1360P
GPU
Intel Iris Xe Graphics
RAM
16GB
Storage
1TB SSD
Screen
15.6-inch, 1920 x 1080 FHD OLED
Wireless
Wi-Fi 6E, Bluetooth v5.1
Webcam
Full HD IR Webcam with Dual Mic
Weight
2.2 pounds
Dimensions
14.0 x 9.0 x 0.5 inches (356 x 227.45 x 12.55 mm; W x H x D)
Should you buy the LG Gram SuperSlim?
(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)
Swipe to scroll horizontally
LG Gram SuperSlim
Attributes
Notes
Rating
Price
The price is still far too steep for what it offers
2.5 / 5
Specs
The CPU is a solid 13th-Gen Intel Core i7, though it lacks a gaming GPU that other Ultrabooks have at this price.
3 / 5
Design
It’s incredibly light and thin with a pretty sturdy chassis, and it’s very stylish overall.
4.5 / 5
Performance
While benchmarks are average at best, its productivity performance is quite good.
4 / 5
Battery
The battery life is comparable to a MacBook, which is absolutely incredible.
5 / 5
Average total
This laptop is a solid buy for those who want a slim and light productivity machine with an excellent battery. But it also lacks a good GPU and is way too overpriced for what it offers.
3.7 / 5
Buy the LG Gram SuperSlim if…
Don’t buy it if…
LG Gram SuperSlim: Also consider
If my LG Gram SuperSlim review has you considering other options, here are two more laptops to consider…
How I tested the LG Gram SuperSlim?
I tested the LG Gram SuperSlim for several weeks
I tested it using productivity and creative applications, as well as gaming
I stress-tested the battery using the TechRadar movie test
First, I tested the general weight and portability of the LG Gram SuperSlim by carrying it around in a laptop bag. After I set it up, I ran several benchmarks to thoroughly test out the processor and graphics card. Finally, I used a variety of programs and applications to test out both battery life and general performance during work-like conditions, as well as gaming benchmarks to test the RTX 4050 GPU.
The LG Gram SuperSlim is meant to be a portable laptop with a thin and light chassis. I had to spend a good amount of testing not only on performance issues but also looking for any ventilation issues. I also tested out battery life to see how long it could last off AC power.
I’ve tested plenty of gaming PCs and laptops, making me more than qualified to understand benchmark test results and how to properly stress test machines to see how well they perform as a work machine.
Ah, the Huawei MateBook lineup. It’s long been the go-to series for those on the hunt for a clean-looking, respectable laptop, with a decent spec list to boot, and this year’s model, the 2024 edition, certainly doesn’t disappoint in that domain.
It’s actually quite an extraordinary unit right from the get-go, as it’s available in a huge number of different specifications. In fact, there are five total, ranging all the way from the Core i5-12450H, complete with 8GB of DRAM, and 512GB of storage, all the way to the model I have here, featuring the Core i9-13900H and amping up to 16GB of DDR5 and a 1TB PCIe 4.0 SSD.
On the surface, the build quality is fairly decent, particularly for the price. You get a nice sleek aluminum finish, complete with a full-size keyboard, healthy-sized trackpad, and a beautiful screen that lacks much in the way of a bezel. There are a ton of ports on board, and the branding is subtle and refined. It’s very much an XPS imitator in a lot of ways, just at a considerably lower price.
(Image credit: Future)
Where that refinement ends, however, occurs when you start actually using the thing. Sadly, the keyboard just isn’t up to spec. It feels spongy to the touch and lacks any form of satisfying tactile feedback compared to other options available at this price point or above. It’s without a doubt. Its one saving grace is that it is rather quiet because of that. The trackpad alongside that, is large and works just fine, but again, nothing particularly to write home about.
As for performance, well it’s certainly there. In day-to-day tasks and light office work, the Huawei MateBook does exceedingly well. It’s quick, smooth, and paired with that IPS panel, makes for a pleasant experience. If you do need to do anything more complex, involving any form of GPU however, you’re going to be quite disappointed, as Intel Iris is quite limited in what it is capable of, in comparison to something like a dedicated GPU from Nvidia or AMD.
Still, if you can look past that, and its clumsy software (more on that later), the Huawei MateBook D 16 2024 makes for a tempting offer, particularly at its £1200 / €1300 price point.
Huawei MateBook D 16: Price and availability
(Image credit: Future)
How much does it cost? Starting at £500 / €600
When is it out? Available now
Where can you get it? Available in the UK and the EU
The Huawei MateBook D 16 2024 is available now in the UK and the EU, starting at £500 / €600 (around $650). For that investment you get yourself a 16-inch screen with a 1920×1200 IPS display, 12th Gen Intel Core i5-12450H CPU, 8GB of LPDDR4X RAM, and a 512GB SSD.
The review unit I have in for testing is available for £1200 / €1300. This upgrades you to 16GB of LPDDR4X memory, alongside a 1TB PCIe 4.0 SSD, and a CPU upgrade to the Intel Core i9-13900H, taking you from 8 cores and 12 threads to 14 cores and 20 threads instead.
Bear in mind that thanks to the US government’s ban on Huawei products, you can’t buy this at retailers in America – though importing is always an option, and given the low entry price, it could be a good way to snag a great-value laptop if you’re in the US.
Huawei MateBook D 16: Specs
(Image credit: Future)
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Huawei MateBook D 16
Header Cell – Column 0
Base configuration
Midrange configuration
Review (Max) configuration
Price
£500 / €600
£700 / €800
£1200 / €1300
CPU
Intel Core i5-12450H
Intel Core i5-13420H
Intel Core i9-13900H
GPU
Intel UHD Graphics for 12th-gen
Intel UHD Graphics for 13th-gen
Intel Iris XE Graphics
Memory
8GB LPDDR4x
16GB LPDDR4x
16GB LPDDR4x
Storage
512GB PCIe 4.0 SSD
1TB PCIe 4.0 SSD
4TB PCIe 4.0 SSD
Display
16-inch FHD+ (1920×1200) IPS, 300-nits
16-inch FHD+ (1920×1200) IPS, 300-nits
16-inch FHD+ (1920×1200) IPS, 300-nits
Huawei MateBook D 16: Design
(Image credit: Future)
Fantastic materials throughout
Good looking styling
Solid I/O Options
Huawei is without a doubt trying to target that XPS market with its MateBook Vision line. One glance at its exterior, and you’ll notice the similarities between the two. The MateBook has an exceedingly slim form factor, measuring just 17mm in height, and coming in at an impressive 1.72 kg to pack it all together. Huawei has gone for a smooth aluminum finish across the MateBook, giving it an impressively svelte look.
(Image credit: Future)
All other branding is fairly subdued as well. There’s a Huawei logo on the back embossed in a mirror finish, and a smaller logo situated in the center of the bottom most screen bezel. Speaking of screens, the MateBook D 16, features a 16-inch 1920×1200 FHD+ IPS display, complete with a peak brightness of 300 nits. It’s crisp and clean thanks to that 142 pixel density, and actually has some pretty stellar stats to back it up as well, not least of all including a 1200:1 contrast ratio, and 100% sRGB compatibility, all thanks to that IPS display at its heart.
Over my time testing the MateBook, its color accuracy never wavered on that front. Combine that with the slim bezel, and not particularly obtrusive inbuilt webcam (which I’ll say now, is as good as you’d expect for a tiny 720p unit), and the screen itself is a genuinely decent experience all around.
(Image credit: Future)
Then we get onto the keyboard, and well, it’s a bit underwhelming, to say the least. Spongey is the word. It lacks any real tactile feedback, and although is well-illuminated thanks to some decent white LED backlighting, it just feels horrendous to use. It’s functional, sure, but it lacks the premium feel we’re starting to see in a lot of laptop keyboards at this price point. And that’s not dedicated mechanical keyboards I’m talking about here either.
Likewise, the trackpad is fine, it’s suitably large enough and clicks well on the bottom left and right sides, but again, isn’t exactly anything to write home about. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing when it comes to trackpads.
(Image credit: Future)
For ports, there’s not a huge amount here, but the bases are covered. You get one USB Type C, one USB 3.2 Type A, one USB 2.0 Type A, a HDMI, and a 3.5mm 4 pole combi jack. It’s not a huge array of ports by any measure, you’ll probably need a decent USB dock if you’re looking to use the MateBook in a more advanced setup, but it’s enough for on the fly.
Audio is enough bugbear for sure. You get down-firing speakers on the MateBook, which are fine. Volume is great, however due to a lack of bass and lower end of the mids, you’re going to find most audio is generally quite tinny, and sharp on the hearing in comparison to something more sophisticated found in the likes of a Dell XPS or Asus ROG Zephyrus.
Huawei MateBook D 16: Performance
(Image credit: Future)
Decent productivity performance
Gaming is non-existent
On to performance, and it’s fair to say that the Huawei MateBook D 16, is certainly lacking in this area. If you’re looking to do any form of gaming or creative professional work, you’re far better off looking elsewhere. That lack of a dedicated GPU, even with Intel’s Iris graphics backing it up in my review model, sadly isn’t enough to produce any concrete performance boosts compared to some alternative devices at around these price points.
In fact, you’d be far better off sacrificing the glitz and glam of the professional design and opting for one of the better gaming laptops instead at around this price, if that’s what you’re looking for.
(Image credit: Future)
At its heart, the CPU inside my review unit is actually fairly decent for a lightweight mobile processor. The Intel Core i9-13900H comes with a total of 14 cores. Six performance cores (these are the full-fat, processors, complete with hyperthreading that prioritizes high load tasks, such as rendering, and managing large data sets), and eight Efficient-cores (designed to really manage background tasks and low power operations, such as word processor, or Discord, or Slack as an example). That gives you 20 threads to play with, and generally, it does fairly well in our benchmark tests.
In GeekBench 6.2.1, it scored an impressive 12,568 points in its multi-core test, putting it just behind a Ryzen 5 7600X, full-size desktop processor. What’s more impressive was the single-core however, which racked up an index of just 2,605, that’s not far off an Intel Core i5-14600K desktop processor, or AMD’s Ryzen 7 7800X3D either. Combine that with a healthy chunk of DDR4 RAM, courtesy of the 16GB of LPDDR4X and this ain’t half bad at Photoshop work either.
(Image credit: Future)
Another moderately impressive area, particularly given the price is that SSD too. A quick run through CrystalDiskMark saw sequential reads top out at 4,905 MB/s and read at 3,952 MB/s making it an impressively zippy drive.
Getting into gaming, however, was another matter. I ran a total of five benchmarks on the Huawei MateBook D 16, to gauge how it performed here. In Borderlands 3, it scored just 10.27 fps at 1920×1200, on the Ultra preset, far from playable. Total War: Warhammer III, netted a more palatable 33.9 fps, but with one major caveat the graphical preset was set to “Low”. Any higher than that, even “medium” would result in the game immediately crashing, due to a lack of memory.
Similarly, I also ran it through a couple of 3D Mark tests. With Wildlife Extreme scoring 13,731, and Solar Bay (the mobile ray tracing test) not being available, as again, no dedicated GPU, means no dedicated ray tracing sadly.
Huawei MateBook D 16: Battery life
(Image credit: Future)
Intel Evo efficiency is unmatched
Charges fast
Battery life during my time testing the Huawei MateBook D 16 was generally very good. I easily got a solid seven to eight hours out of it, with mixed-use, before needing to recharge. Doing everything from very light casual gaming to watching YouTube, and responding to emails and work.
If you do decide to game, you’ll likely not see more than 1-2 hours of use out of it, as it doesn’t have a massive battery, but as there is no dedicated graphics card here, the CPU is doing a lot of the heavy lifting and is limited somewhat in that regard. You’ll likely want to plug it in too, if you can in that situation, as the power plans won’t give you full turbo speeds that you’ll really want to take advantage of.
That said, it does charge quickly as well, thanks to an included 65W adapter.
Should you buy a Huawei MateBook D 16?
(Image credit: Future)
Buy it if…
Don’t buy it if…
Also consider
Huawei MateBook D 16: Report card
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Value
The Huawei MateBook is surprisingly well-kitted out, at least on the CPU and SSD front. However it does lack a GPU, and some of the build quality could be better.
4 / 5
Design
That keyboard is not quite as fun as we were hoping, and could seriously use an upgrade. Otherwise, the D’s clean design does lend itself well to a professional environment.
3.5 / 5
Performance
Hopefully, light productivity work and a bit of Photoshop is all you’re looking for in this laptop, otherwise, you might be disappointed, as gaming and rendering are duds.
3 / 5
Battery Life
All-round battery life is solid, and it charges quickly too. Just make sure it’s plugged in if you do decide to game for longer than five minutes.
4 / 5
Total
The MateBook D 16 is remarkably average, and it shows. It looks great and the spec on paper seems solid, but it’s one too many hiccups away from being a perfect pick.
3.625 / 5
We pride ourselves on our independence and our rigorous review-testing process, offering up long-term attention to the products we review and making sure our reviews are updated and maintained – regardless of when a device was released, if you can still buy it, it’s on our radar.
One of the things that can be intimidating about buying a cargo ebike is how unfamiliar they feel. Whether a bike is designed with weird geometry and wheel sizes or odd features for heavy hauling, every ride can feel unfamiliar.
For traditional cyclists who want to haul a grocery store trip’s worth of groceries home but don’t want to mess with technology they’re unfamiliar with, the Trek Fetch+ 2 is a decent option. It’s more expensive than some of our favorite alternatives, but it has an easy-to-ride step-through design, well-made components, and great plastic buckets (and other accessories) for storage.
There are bikes with more advanced features for the money, but even after I spent a summer riding the Fetch+ 2, it barely needed a tune-up. For a modern cargo ebike with a classic cargo bike maintenance schedule, it might be worth spending a bit more cash.
On the Road
The Fetch+ 2 is the smaller of Trek’s two latest cargo ebikes, which includes the box-fronted Fetch+ 4 ($8,500), which is more oriented toward toting around dogs and children in between groceries and beer.
The Fetch+ 2 instead is a more traditional step-through cargo bike that employs a myriad of attachments, most notably two plastic panniers that hang off an extended rack on the rear. You can get a padded seat cover for the rear to let friends hold on and ride, or mount a couple kids’ seats behind you, but I’d still probably use this bike more for errands than transporting little ones.
Photograph: Trek
As an objet d’art, the bike is simple and unassuming, which is ideal for a bike this expensive. The battery is integrated into the frame, but a sizable bulge means nobody will fail to notice it’s an ebike. You can get it in three colors. I liked the black of our review unit, but the bright blue would probably be my choice if I was buying one.
While much of the bike will be familiar to anyone who has ever seen or contemplated a cargo bike, Trek really gets the geometry and style of this bike correct as far as making it very usable for many tasks. Even the dual-sided kickstand pops up and down with remarkable ease (shockingly rare on other large ebikes I’ve used). I particularly enjoyed using the rear panniers for hauling flats of berries and other easily squished items that tend to rattle around in softer panniers.
The panniers fit a ton of stuff; I was able to get four full-size grocery bags spread between the two black plastic totes. I like that they had little plugs in the bottom that you could feasibly use a plastic bag to cover and then fill them with ice and drinks.
Trekkin’
I spent a couple months using the Fetch+ 2 as my primary bike, and came away much more impressed than anticipated, given the specs and the price.
On paper, this is an expensive ebike to have pretty standard mid-drive cargo bike specs. The 85 Nm Bosch motor and 500-wH battery are good for 20-plus miles a day loaded down in any city, but they’re not better than models like the larger Xtracycle Stoker, which has the same torque and a 630-wH battery for $4,999. The Trek also doesn’t have a carbon belt drive and variable transmission, which we consider the best (and easiest to maintain) shifting mechanism for cargo bikes.
There are a frankly ridiculous number of Chromebooks on sale to choose from, but Google’s Chromebook Plus initiative that launched last fall has gone a long way towards standardizing some key specs for ChromeOS devices. That in turn has made it a little easier to pick ones that’ll provide a consistent quality experience without breaking the bank. Acer’s latest Chromebook Plus 514, which the company just announced today, is a good example — at first glance, it looks like it checks most of the boxes I’m looking for when recommending a basic Chromebook that’ll work for most people.
To make things confusing, Acer already sells a few Chromebook Plus 514 models; this one is the CB514-4HT and is priced at $399. Look for that SKU if you want to make sure you’re getting the latest one. This laptop is powered by Intel’s 13th-gen Core i3-N305 processor and pairs that with 8GB of RAM and 512GB of storage — that latter spec is a bit of surprise and is a lot more storage than I’d expect to see on a $400 Chromebook. To meet the required Chromebook Plus specs, this laptop includes a 1080p webcam with a privacy shutter. While the resolution is pretty solid, not all webcams are equal so we’ll have to see how this one performs in real life.
Acer
The display is a 14-inch, 1080p touchscreen, so it’s not quite as tall as the 1,920 x 1,200 screens that I’ve seen on a number of other Chromebook Plus laptops. But again, at the price I’m not going to complain too much. It has a decent selection of ports, too: two USB-C and USB-A slots along with a microSD card reader. I wouldn’t have minded seeing HDMI here, as the USB-C ports could quickly be taken up by power and a monitor, but I just keep reminding myself this computer is only 400 bucks.
Acer says that this laptop will hit stores in early May, though the specific SKU we’re talking about here should also be at Costco as early as next week. The company also says it’ll have some other configurations available in the near future, though they didn’t say what’ll change. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a model with less storage or perhaps no touchscreen, which could drive the price down even more. If so, this might be a great budget option. But even as is, you should get a pretty good laptop here for the price.
Galaxy AI is now rolling out to more devices through the One UI 6.1 firmware update, but Samsung’s Advanced Intelligence suite won’t be available across the board.
As you likely know, if you don’t own a Galaxy S24 or one of the few 2023 high-end phones that got Galaxy AI through the One UI update this week, Samsung’s AI systems will stay out of your reach.
Samsung won’t update devices older than 2023 with Galaxy AI. And if you own a Galaxy A phone, you can forget all about Samsung’s AI suite.
However, the good news is that there are alternatives to some of the tools Samsung offers through Galaxy AI. These alternatives are not developed by Samsung but by Google and Microsoft. And most importantly, you can use them with virtually any Galaxy phone. Even if it doesn’t run One UI 6.1.
Alternatives to Galaxy AI tools
You won’t find substitutes for every Galaxy AI feature, but there are a few. Starting with Google Lens.
We previously talked about this in greater detail, but in short, Samsung’s Circle to Search is more or less based on the technology underlying Google Lens.
As a result, you could use Google Lens on pretty much any Galaxy phone to get similar results to Circle to Search. Now, granted, Lens is not quite as fast or convenient as Circle to Search, but if you’re looking for this kind of search tool, Lens certainly is better than nothing.
You can access Google Lens by tapping the photo icon in the Chrome browser search bar or the Google Search widget on your phone’s home screen.
Interpreter is built into Google Assistant
If you regret not having access to the Galaxy AI Interpreter feature, you might be happy to learn that your phone probably already has an interpreter tool ready to be used.
You can try it out by opening the Google Assistant on your Galaxy phone and asking the digital assistant to “interpret for me in [language].”
Get Generative Wallpapers without Galaxy AI
Galaxy AI’s Generative Wallpapers are a fun way to customize your phone and give it a unique look. But, once again, this tool is very limited in reach, as far as Galaxy phones go.
Fortunately, there is an alternative you can install on your Galaxy phone right now. It’s called ‘Wallpapers’ by Google, and it is available via the Galaxy Store.
Using Google’s Wallpapers app, you can generate AI wallpapers for your phone using keywords. It works very much like Galaxy AI’s Generative Wallpaper tool does.
Here’s one unexpected reason you might like Microsoft Edge
Chances are that your mobile browser of choice is Samsung Internet, Google Chrome, or even Firefox. However, Samsung limiting the Galaxy AI’s summarize tool to select devices and its Internet app may have backfired and given people one extra reason to look elsewhere for similar AI tools.
Surprisingly, that’s where Microsoft Edge: AI browser, for Android, comes in. You might have never considered using Edge on your Galaxy phone, but the Copilot AI could change your mind. The Edge browser is available via the Galaxy Store and Play Store.
The Copilot AI in Microsoft Edge is powered by ChatGPT4 and it is capable of summarizing articles you find online. In fact, since it is powered by ChatGPT4, it can do much more.
Using Microsoft Edge on Android and its Copilot feature, you can identify objects (similar to Google Lens and Circle to Search) and even create digital art using DALL-E 3. All without Galaxy AI.
Now, there’s a new kid on the block looking to leverage it. As we noted at CES 2024 in January, Creative Labs’ Aurvana Ace 2 wowed us for being both affordable and toting this new game-changing new audio hardware. Sometimes, though, you want to see what a bigger budget (and wider margins) can bring to a true wireless earbuds proposition, right?
That’s what you get with the new Noble FoKus Triumph, a hand-painted set of premium earbuds (not a 1970s car), which has now finally hit shelves with a price that, while undeniably high-end, isn’t ridiculously so.
In case you’re not familiar with Noble, (that’s fine, we’re all friends here) the IEMs specialist’s FoKus Triumph is its third product made in conjunction with xMEMS, following the Falcon Max and XM1 earbuds, which can be yours for around $270 / £200 / AU$380 or $599 / £499 / AU$965 respectively.
FoKus Triumph is driven by a custom 6.5mm dynamic driver coupled with Cowell, an all-silicon xMEMS-based speaker, rather than the company’s Montara, Montara Plus, or Cypress options. To clarify that driver configuration, Noble tells us its latest fully wireless earbuds use that 6.5mm custom dynamic driver to handle the bass and midrange frequencies, with xMEMS’ Cowell solid state driver “serving as a tweeter”.
Pre-production units toting this hybrid design were tested by visitors at xMEMS’ CES suite in January, including us. While we praised the sound, we assumed their Alcantara covered charging case, ergonomic design and hand-painted faceplates would make their pricing a little rich for our blood. But, we’ve been pleasantly surprised…
Noble FoKus Triumph are expensive, yes, but not outrageously so
There’s the tiny xMEMS Cowell driver we want to see! (Image credit: xMEMS)
Elsewhere, FoKus Triumph supports Bluetooth 5.3, LDAC, Snapdragon Sound and aptX Adaptive, so the hi-res game is strong. The build quality delivers as well with an Alcantara covered charging case, ergonomic shells, and hand painted faceplates.
Get the hottest deals available in your inbox plus news, reviews, opinion, analysis and more from the TechRadar team.
To cap it all, FoKus Triumph’s sound signature was professionally tuned by a revered Noble Audio acoustic designer known only as The Wizard, an individual with years of expertise (and some stonking hits in IEMs) under their belt. You also get Qualcomm’s cVc noise cancelling tech for phone calls, multi-point connectivity, a hear-through mode, on-ear controls, wireless charging, and Noble’s FoKus companion app.
And that pricing? They’re available now in black only (although the inside of the case is a refreshing orange shade), for $369 / £339, which is around AU$655. At this price, they’re certainly in the premium sector, yes, but then again it’s the same arena as you’ll find the likes of Astell & Kern – and the Bowers & Wilkins Pi7 S2 are actually a little more expensive.
Might they join our selection of the best wireless earbuds you can currently buy? Time will tell.
Swapping between the bar’s multiple inputs is slightly more intuitive, with a different LED color assigned to each input: HDMI ARC glows magenta, optical is yellow, the analog input is green, and the USB input is cyan. This color coding has become more common in A/V gear of late, usually seen in active/powered bookshelf speakers like the KEF LSX II, where space is at a premium. In the Q6310’s case, the bar’s center-channel speaker likely takes up the real estate a traditional digital display might inhabit.
Another likely reason TCL punts on the visual display is that, as a Roku TV Ready soundbar, the Q6310 is designed to allow you to control and adjust some settings directly from a Roku-powered smart TV. That functionality stems from a long partnership between the two brands, with Roku taking the reins as the smart interface in many TCL TVs (though TCL now seems to favor Google TV for its more premium models).
Photograph: Ryan Waniata
If you don’t have a Roku-powered TV, TCL’s app makes controlling the bar’s sound modes, volume, and other settings much easier via an iPhone or Android device. Other app settings include a Night mode to keep the dynamics in check when the family’s asleep, a Dialogue Enhance feature, and virtual surround sound control.
There’s also a calibration feature, AI Sonic, which uses your phone’s microphone to adjust the sound to your room, à la Sonos. That’s an impressive inclusion at this price, but the setup experience is quite loud, and I couldn’t hear much of a difference once it finished.
Aluminum Punch
Photograph: Ryan Waniata
My first thought when I started evaluating the Q6310 was that it doesn’t sound much better than a lot of high-end TVs I’ve auditioned this year. The sound is clear and forward, especially for dialog, but there’s a brittle, metallic quality to the midrange and treble registers that can feel as thin as the soundbar looks. To be fair, a lot of pricier TVs these days are outfitted with multiple speakers like soundbars are, so comparing the two isn’t as big of a diss as it once was.
