I don’t like Fairphone’s products because they’re more environmentally-friendly and repairable than anything else on the market (though they’re all definitely perks). I like them because they always offer something a little different to make them recommendable as some of the best wireless headphones by their own merits.

Last year’s Fairbuds XL 2025 over-ears, for example, had the best controls I’ve used on a pair of headphones before or since (and remain the best-looking cans I’ve reviewed too). And now the Fairphone Fairbuds 2 are here, with a little design decision I didn’t know I wanted so much.

Fairphone is best known for its mobiles, like the recent Fairphone 6 Plus; its whole modus operandi is making green tech (eco-friendly, not colored, although they’re usually also colored green). The brand dabbles in audio too, though, alternating between releasing new earbuds or headphones every other year, and after the original Fairbuds launched in 2024, a new pair are here.

Like the last pair, these are relatively affordable earbuds — 'expensive budget' or 'cheap mid-range' might suffice as definitions — which are great for eco-friendly buyers. They let you enjoy your listening safe in the knowledge that your buying choice was made from renewable energy, using plentiful recycled parts, and won’t impose planet-unfriendly, water usurping AI features on your device.

And then there’s the unexpected bonus. Earlier this year, a fairly shocking study revealed that basically all headphones are coated in PFAS, or forever chemicals, which had people wondering whether they're rubbing toxins on their ears and head. As someone who uses these products for a living, I was a little alarmed to read this, and I’ve been pretty conscious of my listening since then, usually opting for speakers over headphones when I can help it.

It won’t surprise you to learn that the Fairbuds 2 have none of these ‘forever chemicals’, and I could listen for as long as I wanted without worrying about the effects of doing so. It’s hard to put a price on peace of mind, but for music listening, the Fairbuds 2 provide just that.

But I’ve beaten about the bush long enough: beyond health and eco concerns, just how good are these things? Well, the reason I’ve beaten about the bush so much is that “yeah, they’re just fine,” isn't engaging copy.

Design-wise, these are pretty simple buds, with a hardy and light carry case, and pretty feature-light design. There’s little to distinguish them from other buds however, beyond their lack of discernible features. Being pretty plain isn’t the end of the world, and they fit fine.

They’re not the best-sounding earbuds I’ve tested by any stretch of the imagination, but they’re fine for the price if you can look past some rough edges.

I found the ANC pretty good, though it takes its toll on a battery life which roughly matches their price-competitive AirPods rivals (that is to say, it’s not very long). An app brings some extra features, including some of the most effective audio EQ presets I’ve heard from earbuds — if you like customizing your music but aren’t familiar with equalizers, it’s a great option.

If it wasn’t for the Fairphone touch, these would just be middling wireless earbuds that’d disappear behind the competition. But the eco-friendly appeal, their repairability plus the absence of toxic chemicals, all make them far easier to recommend.

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Price and release date

• Released in October in Europe, November US
• Sells for $119 / £99 (about AU$200)
• Cheaper than AirPods 5, which is all that matters

Fairphone unveiled the Fairbuds 2 on October 14, 2026, roughly two years after the release of the original pair and a year after the reimagined Fairbuds XL 2025 over-ears. They went on sale immediately in Europe, but US buyers had to wait until November 2.

You can buy the Fairbuds 2 for $119 / £99 (about AU$200) — Fairphone doesn’t sell its tech in Australia. The brand is increasing its presence in the US; while the original buds did sell there, it only began selling phones earlier this year with the Fairphone 6 Plus.

That phone makes the Fairbuds 2 slightly pricier than their predecessors in the US, but cheaper in the UK; the original Fairbuds went for $99 / £129. Despite this reshuffle, they’re still more affordable than the cheapest version of AirPods 5 (which will set you back $129 / £129 / AU$219), and the Fairphone option actually has ear tips.

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Specs

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Features

• 6-hour battery life isn't amazing
• ANC is surprisingly solid
• App has EQ including useful presets

According to Fairphone, the earbuds last for 6 hours of listening with ANC on, or 8 hours off; that’s not a very competitive spec, all things considered. In my own testing, I’d say I got a little extra time on those figures, but not enough that I can call the battery life ‘good’. Apple's base model AirPods 5 only last for 4 hours with ANC; the step-up model with wireless charging support last 5 with ANC (or 7 without it) so it's a little better than that, but not by much.

The case provides up to 40 hours of battery life, which is a little better (Apple's step-up model only offers 22), but that spec is for ANC-off listening. An ANC-on figure isn’t provided, but I’d estimate it’s about 32 hours.

The ANC is more impressive — I’ll confess, I wasn’t expecting Fairphone to have created top-of-the-class noise cancellation. While this doesn’t match the likes of Soundcore or Bose, the Fairbuds 2 were surprisingly effective at stripping out noisy backgrounds or the kinds of sporadic sounds that other buds struggle with.

The Fairbuds app is pretty basic, but it’s not strictly necessary; I’d used the buds for two whole weeks before I decided to download it to my phone.

The app lets you toggle between ANC modes (on, off, or transparency), see the charge levels, play with an EQ and presets, and set up multipoint connectivity, although I couldn’t find the option to do so myself. There’s also a Find My Earbuds tool which lets you summon both the left or right bud, and this is a feature you don’t always see in earbuds.

The equalizer is a simple five-band one, but I was surprised how effective the five presets are: Balanced, Bass Boost, Treble Boost and Voice all had significant impacts on the sound profile, in a way that I see being really useful for those who like their audio a certain way and don’t want to play with the custom EQ mode. I found Voice useful for spoken-word content, as it did a great job at maintaining the reader’s voice while dampening other sounds.

• Features score: 4 / 5

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Design

• Small, hardy carry case
• Simplistic buds which fit well
• Eco-friendly, chemical-free design

In one way, the Fairphone Fairbuds 2 are some of the most basic-looking buds there can be, but modest looks hide the real selling point of these options. But we’ll get to that later.

Firstly, the case: it’s a small cylinder, weighing 64g (when the buds are inside) and opening in a clam-shell form. You get the basics: a pairing button, a USB-C port, plus a handy three-LED strip to show you how charged your buds are. Handy! The case is made of plastic that’s so solid that I initially thought it was metal, and it feels more robust than most at protecting your buds.

Next, the buds: unlike the first-gen models, these are stem-toting options, and they look far too simplistic to be confused with AirPods: there’s the in-ear bud, a straight and flat stem, and nothing much else (well, other than some lovely responsive touch controls). They weigh 5.8g each.

When I first started testing them, the Fairbuds 2 felt a little loose in the ear; I thought I had another Samsung Galaxy Buds 4 Pro situation going on. But quite quickly they took to my ear, and after the second day they fit perfectly. So if you've just bought a pair, and are having problems, just give them time.

Now for the whole point of the Fairbuds: Fairphone’s eco credentials. The brand is at the forefront of eco-friendly tech, using eco-friendly materials and processes when possible, and in the buds that means the speaker magnets and solder is all recycled material, while the cobalt, copper, gold and silver are all fairly mined or sourced. The eco-friendly-ness doesn’t just keep your conscience clean, though, because it manifests in a few great ways.

Firstly, these things are completely repairable, so if they break you can buy and replace one part instead of needing new buds. There are seven parts in all, all of which can be replaced using a simple screwdriver. Also in the Fairbuds 2, the earbuds don’t use PFAS, or forever chemicals – you can listen for as long as you want without any fear of the chemicals and their as-yet-unknown effects on the human body.

You can buy the FairBuds 2 in green or black, but if you’re going for green tech, I don’t see why you shouldn’t also be buying green-colored tech. The buds themselves have an IP54 protection against dust and splashes, but the case doesn’t have an official rating.

• Design score: 4.5 / 5

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Sound quality

• 11mm driver per bud
• Prominent bass downs out treble
• Supports LDAC playback on supported phones

The Fairphone Fairbuds 2 come with 11mm dynamic drivers, working as jacks of all trades to cover the audio spectrum.

As fairly affordable earbuds go, the Fairbuds 2 are just fine — you’re not getting any obvious issues like tinny audio, overblown bass or a lackluster sound profile, and so I can’t give them a bad sound score. But there are a few audible issues which it’s worth flagging.

I’d call these buds bass-first, because low-end has more heft than high-end, and it does mean that sometimes vocals can lack the sparkle they deserve. In something like Red Hot Chili Peppers’ Factory of Faith or Dispatch’s May We All, the singers sound like they’ve lost an argument with their bassists and rhythm guitarists, and in Macklemore’s Hind’s Hall the drums and bass keep distracting you from the lyrics.

Bass, while prominent, is perhaps not especially refined; the lack of a bespoke low-end-focused driver here is noticeable. Low-end has power prominence but less direction or distinction than you’d hope. It results in a low-end that sometimes sounds just fine, other times a little rumbly.

In Tom Petty’s Supernatural Radio, for example, the bass riff sounds meaty until the other instruments come in, making it sound indistinct. However with the later guitar and piano solo, the bass drowns out the higher-pitched parts.

These are the first buds I’ve tested in about a month in which I can really hear a song’s mids, though, so props go to Fairphone for not leaning too hard into popular sound profiles. However I did notice peaking in certain songs around the high-end.

It’s easy to point out the issues in the Fairbuds 2, because some rivals at this price point are putting out frankly incredible options, but I should clarify that the buds are still pretty good, and most people will be perfectly happy with them.

For some technical specs, the buds support LDAC if you’re using a compatible Android phone, and use the Bluetooth 6.0 standard.

• Sound quality: 3.5 / 5

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Value

• You get what you pay for: solid, reasonably-priced earbuds
• However, there are some fantastic alternatives at the price

The Fairbuds 2 straddle the border between affordable and mid-range earbuds, but given that the brand's tech generally comes with a green premium, I'm happy to consider these a more affordable option.

If I were to close my eyes, and picture buds at this price, I'd basically envision the Fairphones; they audio quality, feature set and design all roughly match what you'd expect from the price. Fine value for money...

... if it wasn't for the fact that it's a really competitive market segment, with some stellar alternatives.

• Value: 4 / 5

Should I buy the Fairphone Fairbuds 2?

Buy them if…

Don’t buy them if…

Fairphone Fairbuds 2 review: Also consider

Looking for alternative in-ears? Here are a few alternatives at the same price point.

How I tested the Fairphone Faurbuds 2

• Tested for three weeks
• Paired with Android phone for Bluetooth playback
• Used on holiday as well as use at home and around neighborhood.

I used the Fairphone Fairbuds 2 for about three weeks before writing this review; I used them back-to-back with the Huawei FreeBuds Neo, generally bringing them both with me on trips.

In this testing time I went on holiday, so they got time on flights, train and coach trips, and I also used them at the gym, at home and on walks around my local area.

For the entirety of the testing time, the buds were connected to my Samsung phone. I listened to Spotify, played from my high-res collection, played games, conducted video calls and watched videos to test them out.

I've tested most of Fairphone's gadgets since I joined TechRadar in 2019, including the Fairbuds XL 2025 last year, and also have experience reviewing plenty of other earbuds from a range of brands (including almost every other pair mentioned in the review)>

• First reviewed in October 2026

• Read TechRadar's reviews guarantee

What impressed me most, though, was how little fuss it involved. It handled repeated sessions with a 1,200W wet/dry vacuum straight out of the box, while the accompanying app was easy to set up and refreshingly clear about what its settings actually do.

Anker Solix S2000: specifications

Specifications are manufacturer figures; socket layout and port labels were also checked against the UK review unit.

Design and connections

The S2000 has an understated appearance: a dark grey enclosure, rounded edges and a glossy front panel. It looks perfectly at home beside a desk, although mine was soon earning its keep around DIY equipment.

Its upright shape gives it a reasonably small footprint. At 16.2kg, however, “portable” still involves a deliberate lift. Moving it between rooms or taking it out to the garden is one thing; carrying it a long distance is another.

The UK version has four proper Type G sockets, split evenly between the front and rear. That arrangement makes sense. You can keep regularly connected equipment plugged in behind the unit, leaving the front sockets available for things you connect occasionally.

There is a trade-off: you’ll need access to both sides if you want to use every socket. Bear that in mind before squeezing it into a tight space, and leave the ventilation clear.

The USB connections sit above the display. The 100W USB-C port is the one to choose for a compatible laptop, while the other USB-C connection is limited to 15W. They look similar, so it’s worth checking the labels.

The screen puts the remaining battery percentage front and centre, alongside input and output wattage and an estimated remaining time. That gives you the information you need without reaching for your phone.

Performance: a proper day’s work

My S2000 arrived with a 59% state of charge. Rather than charging it fully before doing anything useful, I put it straight to work powering a 1,200W wet/dry vacuum.

Between approximately 10am and 5pm, I used the vacuum repeatedly in sessions lasting around five to ten minutes. The Anker handled those sessions without any problems, and by the time I finished, it still showed 13% remaining.

To be clear, that was intermittent use across a seven-hour working day, rather than seven hours of continuous vacuuming. Even so, it was a useful practical test: repeated use of a fairly demanding appliance, starting with little more than half a battery.

The benefit was simple. I could get on with the job without running an extension lead back to a mains socket, and the power station had enough charge to cover the work I needed to do.

This wasn’t a controlled capacity test. I didn’t record the vacuum’s total running time or measure the energy delivered at the socket, so it wouldn’t be fair to calculate an efficiency figure from the percentage drop.

What I can say is that it coped comfortably with this particular vacuum and pattern of use.

The main limitation is the 1,500W continuous output. Battery capacity tells you how much energy is stored; output determines which appliances it can run. A large battery doesn’t automatically mean it can power a typical high-wattage UK kettle or several demanding tools together.

Check appliance ratings, allow for starting demands, and remember that the output limit is shared across the AC sockets.

Charging options

For everyday charging, the S2000 connects directly to the mains using the supplied AC cable. There’s no separate external power brick to find space for.

During one charging session, the front display showed approximately 1,068W going in. An app screenshot taken during charging showed around 1,077W, with UltraFast charging switched off. These are snapshots rather than a timed charging test, but they show a substantial charging rate in normal use.

There’s also an app-controlled UltraFast option when a quicker turnaround matters.

Away from home, the S2000 supports compatible solar panels and vehicle charging, provided you have the correct cables and accessories. Solar input is capped at 400W, with Anker specifying a maximum open-circuit voltage of 60V. Panel compatibility matters as well as the connector.

Those alternatives add flexibility, although a normal car accessory socket will be much slower than mains charging. Think of it as a way to replenish charge while travelling, rather than expecting a quick refill of a 2kWh battery.

The app: easy to set up, easy to understand

The app was one of the nicest surprises.

Finding it in the Google Play Store was straightforward, as were signing in and getting started. The S2000 was detected straight away, added without difficulty and ready to control. An iPhone version also appears to be available, although my experience here was with Android.

The main screen presents the battery percentage, temperature, charging estimate and power flow clearly. You can see what’s happening at a glance.

More useful still is the depth of control. There are multiple UPS and power-management modes, charging timers, adjustable AC charging power and battery charge limits. You also get AC output scheduling, a countdown to switch the sockets off, screen controls and power-usage history.

Crucially, the explanations are good. Rather than leaving you to decipher a vaguely named mode, the app helps you understand what a setting does and decide whether it suits your needs.

Some power-station apps make configuration feel like educated guesswork. Here, the guidance makes the extra features more approachable, particularly if this is your first battery system.

Backup power and everyday use

The UPS function adds another potential role: keeping suitable equipment powered when the mains fails. Anker quotes a transfer time of around 10ms, although I haven’t independently measured that or tested compatibility with individual computers.

For a home office, the combination of rear sockets, battery monitoring and configurable operating modes is appealing. You can leave equipment connected and manage the unit without constantly handling it.

For more off-grid essentials, we've tested the best portable power stations.

While it might have its roots in a now defunct mobile gacha game — Brave Exvius — don’t hold that against it. The only holdover is the core story. Everything else, from the gameplay to the wide world map to explore to the visual style, has been overhauled — the pay-to-play elements are gone too; all unlocks are completely free

The end result of this total rebuild is a classic-feeling RPG that is somehow just as at home among 2026’s gaming lineup as it would have been among one from decades ago.

There are some tweaks I’d make here and there: mostly to Visions, and to the story that’s a little predictable, but neither of these issues has sapped the joy from what is easily among the best Nintendo Switch 2 games I’ve played this year (it’s also releasing on Xbox Series X, Xbox Series S, PS5 and PC).

Back to basics

After spending decades finding ways to mix up the turn-based action it popularized, Final Fantasy Resonance returns the series to a much more classic interpretation of it. When it’s their turn to act your party and enemies get to make a basic Attack, spend MP to perform some kind of special Skill action like casting a spell, Summon a powerful esper to fight by their side, or use an item from the party’s bag — with the order characters go determined by their speed.

It facilitates a slower and more tactical approach to engaging enemies than the action-focused gameplay of more modern Final Fantasy entries, which pairs nicely with Resonance’s less traditional combat mechanic: Stagger.

Dealing enough damage to your foes that’s a flavour they’re weak to will fill their meter and Stagger them — they’ll lose their go that turn if they haven’t acted yet, will take more damage until the next round, and whoever staggered them will get a second action.

If you Stagger every enemy at once, you enter a Sweeping Stagger — your whole party will get a second action, and you’ll be able to deliver a powerful Resonance attack. This sees one of your equipped Visions rush forward to deliver a cinematic finishing blow — showcased by a 3D cinematic that briefly takes you out of the game’s HD-2D style.

Resonance isn't just Final Fantasy meets Octopath Traveler. It might seem that way based on my description so far — seeing as it borrows Octopath’s visual identity and a core aspect of the series’ Break and Boost system

But besides the nuances of Resonance’s Stagger system, which make it different from what Octopath offers, you’ll also find this game’s plot is quintessential Final Fantasy — more on that in a moment — and it takes a different approach with its Job / Class system through Visions. They feel more like weapons you swap in and out than a Class you’ll want to perfect and stick with.

Visions are (mostly) manifestations of the core Final Fantasy games’ protagonists which aid your party in combat: performing the Resonance attacks I mentioned earlier, but also unlocking a separate list of actions and abilities for the party member they’re equipped to. Most skills you’ll only have access to while the Vision is actively deployed, but there are also permanent unlocks to earn by mastering a Vision — letting you mix and match aspects of Visions on a single party member to craft your ideal champion.

As I mentioned, this will feel a lot like Jobs from other Square Enix titles, but because so much of a Vision’s identity is lost from your character when you unequip it — most permanent Mastery unlocks are more generic, yet still useful, abilities like improving stats — I’ve found it better to see Visions as Equipment. Before entering a tough fight, you might want to swap out your loadout to best suit the challenge ahead — such as equipping your party with water attack dealers when facing off against a fiery foe.

A medley or overstuffed buffet?

Taking everything I’ve said so far, you might fear Final Fantasy Resonance would turn out to be a mess.

It combines aspects of several games (Octopath Traveler, Brave Exvius, and classic Final Fantasy). It jumps between 3D and HD-2D visuals across different cinematics. There’s just over two dozen Visions to master, each their own skills to augment the base abilities your party develops. You can call forth powerful Summons to deal even more damage to your foes. There’s a giant map to explore, bursting with secrets to discover in every corner. There are main quests and side missions to complete over tens of hours, as well as secret boss fights and a coliseum to become the champion of.

It’s a lot, yet Final Fantasy Resonance never felt like a mess.

Square Enix shows a mastery of the HD-2D art style. The world's environments are stunning, character sprites are expressive, and there are some amazing 2D spectacle across the game’s cutscenes and attack animations. The animatics feel fan-made in a good way — full of expression, and getting as much as possible from the medium.

The flashes of 3D work surprisingly well to augment special moments. Rather than feeling incongruous, the 3D Vision Resonance attack and Esper Summon cinematics give these abilities an appropriately otherworldly aspect.

Games which let you throw everything and the kitchen sink at your enemies have a habit of feeling too easy. However, playing on Expert difficulty, I found fights (especially boss fights) were a challenge — one I could overcome, but not without playing tactically. Button mashing and praying won’t save you here.

These different abilities also built up gradually over time. This let me get to grips with systems before some new aspect was thrown into the mix.

And when the gameplay is so engaging, and the visuals so beautiful, I had no problem adventuring back and forth to complete side quests and seek out every secret hiding in the world.

Close to perfection

If I must find fault with Final Fantasy Resonance, it would be in two areas.

The first is that while I love a lot of the Visions system, it struggles for much of the mid-game because it focuses too much on the main Final Fantasy protagonists who are (let’s face it) pretty samey. This is showcased by the fact that the majority of them are classified as Commando or Breaker types.

The precise builds and abilities do change, but for example there aren’t many supportive Healers amongst them — meaning building out a dedicated support character in your party is a little tough at times as you’ll either need to stick with a Vision you’ve mastered, or accept your party will be multi-classing early on.

Given how useful some Mastery abilities are, you’ll want to multiclass to some extent (Tronn’s ability to halve MP costs is one you need to unlock for as many characters as possible as soon as possible), but given the game says the Vision system offers you the freedom to customize the party however you want, I was a little disappointed that the reality doesn’t quite match this.

Secondly, I’d say the plot is Final Fantasy in its purest form. There are crystals, war between ancient mystical powers and new age technology, sacrifice for the greater good, twists and turns that reveal secrets about the characters’ and the world’s past, and an awful lot else that is a little cliché.

The story is certainly good enough to keep me engaged; it's just nothing special.

Though as I’ve said, neither of these gripes kept me from adoring Final Fantasy Resonance. Every time I sat down to write this review I had to force myself to not reach over for my Nintendo Switch 2 to play another five minutes — and like any good game my attempts to set time limits on myself never succeeded in keeping my play sessions shorter than a few hours at a time.

While it is available on several consoles and PC, my Nintendo Switch 2 has been superb. If you have a choice, this is where I’d recommend playing, as it runs so smoothly, it’s easy to chip away at quests while on the go, and you can still enjoy a beautiful big-picture experience when the handheld is docked.

Should you play Final Fantasy Resonance?

Play it if…

Don’t play it if…

Accessibility features

Besides the features built into your console of choice, Final Fantasy Resonance has no accessibility features baked into it.

However, as a turn-based RPG, gameplay can be as slow as you need. It doesn't matter if you take five seconds, five minutes, or five hours to lock in an action, and unlike games such as Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, there are no active parry or dodge mechanics that require precise timing on the player's part.

How I reviewed Final Fantasy Resonance

I reviewed Final Fantasy Resonance for around 30 hours on my Nintendo Switch 2. Predominantly, this was with base system hardware in handheld mode — plugging away on trips, my commute, and while relaxing on the couch — but I did experience the big-screen docked mode for several hours on my 4K Fire TV (relying on an 8BitDo Ultimate 2 controller for inputs).

In all modes, the game ran smoothly, and I never regretted my decision to play the game on the least powerful system it’s launching on.

First reviewed October 2026

HubSpot’s answer engine optimization tool tracks selected questions across ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity. It shows which brands appear, which pages the answers cite, and suggests content work based on those findings. What interested me was being able to read the answers behind the score, then check the sources for myself.

I used the free trial to set up TechRadar and track 11 of the 25 available prompts. My hands-on review covers setup and reporting, with product demonstrations and documentation filling in the workflows I didn’t try. One day of results can’t prove long-term gains, but it gave me enough to judge whether the tool helps make sense of AI search or simply adds another chart to the working day.

HubSpot AEO: Plans and pricing

The standalone price for using HubSpot’s AEO tool is $50 a month, or $45 a month billed annually, which comes to $540 a year before tax. You also get a 28-day free trial that requires no credit card; there’s no need to buy another paid HubSpot product first.

The AEO features are also included in Marketing Hub Professional and Enterprise plans. And, the HubSpot for Marketers option bundles Marketing Hub with Content Hub and include AEO too. Those prices cover the wider software package, and not an AEO surcharge.

Now, if you’re just on the AEO plan and want more credits, it costs $20 a month for another 10 prompts and 1,000 monthly answers. A standalone account tracking 45 prompts therefore costs $90 a month on monthly billing. Not to forget, tracking another brand requires a separate AEO instance.

Content generation has a separate cost too. Generating a piece from an AEO recommendation requires Marketing Hub Professional or Enterprise and uses 1,000 HubSpot Credits. Standard Professional plans include 3,000 monthly credits, while Enterprise includes 5,000. Extra credits cost $10 per 1,000, and unused monthly credits expire. CRM-based prompt suggestions also require Marketing Hub Professional or Enterprise.

There’s one pricing wrinkle, though. Accounts enrolled in HubSpot’s flexible seats-and-credits program have separate terms, including two credits per AEO answer. That is a different model from the standard prompt allowances above. So, do check which model your account uses before budgeting.

HubSpot AEO: Setup

I signed up with my email and answered a question about my role. From there, HubSpot took me through the AEO setup one step at a time.

Next, I entered TechRadar’s name and website address. That led to the competitor and audience settings, where I could narrow down what I wanted to track.

I reviewed the suggested competitors and chose TechRadar Streaming, focusing on deal-seeking shoppers in the United States. I wasn’t convinced by every competitor suggestion, though. Some were publishing companies rather than the review sites readers might compare.

HubSpot used those choices to suggest questions to track. I could edit or remove prompts before continuing. Several asked much the same thing, so I found the suggestions useful for getting started, but too narrow to cover different reader needs on their own.

I then started the checks and followed HubSpot’s progress as it worked through the prompts. From there, I could open the dashboard and start exploring the answers, brand mentions and cited sources.

HubSpot AEO: Features and specs

Prompt tracking

The panel also separates Answers, Prompt Analysis and Recommendations. I like that structure because a weak score has somewhere to lead like you can inspect the answer, compare the sources, then consider a change. These are repeatable checks of chosen questions, not a log of what every buyer asks.

Brand visibility and competitor analysis

The earlier dashboard screenshot showed 6.67% brand visibility while the account held 10 prompts. Its date range ran from October 27 to October 27, with a single point on the trend chart. That was a baseline, not enough history to judge progress.

The broader review-site question above comes from the later 11-prompt view. Comparing that single question with the earlier average would be misleading. The contrast shows how much the choice of questions matters, not that visibility suddenly improved.

Visibility measures how often the brand appears in the tracked answers. Share of voice compares its mentions with the selected competitors. Filters for engine, product, audience and buying stage help explain where a gap sits. And, Sentiment adds context about how the brand is described, rather than just whether it appears.

For TechRadar, I also need to separate being named as a recommended review site from having a guide cited in an answer. Both can be useful, but a mention score alone doesn’t capture that difference.

Citation analysis

This is the report I find most useful for planning content. A mention tells me the brand appeared. Citation analysis shows the pages and domains used as sources, including sources owned by other businesses.

My Citations screen splits the results by content type and channel. The first view concerns formats, such as blogs, comparisons, and documentation. The second concerns where the material comes from, with categories including owned, earned, peer, review-site, and user-generated sources.

Earned and review-site sources occupied large parts of my channel chart, while owned content had a thin slice. I read that as a reason to inspect outside sources before assuming another page on our own site is the answer. These are sources across the tracked prompts, though. They don’t all necessarily mention TechRadar.

The wider report lets you inspect top domains and individual URLs, and compare owned-domain citations with citations whose source pages mention your brand. That helps distinguish if you should improve your own pages or earn coverage elsewhere. Neither count proves that someone clicked through or bought anything.

Content recommendations

HubSpot uses the prompts and cited sources to suggest workarounds for owned content, social amplification, and outreach. Each recommendation has a content type, channel, and priority. Opening it adds a suggested title, summary, audience, and keywords, with the prompts and citations behind the idea.

Suppose a tracked question keeps citing third-party comparisons. Here, updating a relevant comparison page or seeking inclusion in one could be more useful than publishing another broad guide. This is exactly where the source list helps make that choice.

The recommendation can then be marked complete. I see this as a useful brief for a writer or outreach lead, rather than a finished strategy. Someone still needs to check the cited pages, decide whether the suggestion fits the business, and do the work.

Content generation and impact tracking

For eligible Marketing Hub accounts, the Generate asset feature takes an owned-content or social recommendation into Content Agent. It uses the brief alongside brand voice, audience information, and cited pages. The draft appears in the recommendation’s Content tab, ready to open in the relevant editor.

I like the direct handoff because the source research and writing brief stay connected. It still needs an editor. That’s because a draft can follow a useful outline and still remain thin on facts, examples, or a reason to choose that business.

After publication, the Impact tab accepts the page URL and tracks whether it earns citations for the target prompts. This gives the recommendation a follow-up check instead of ending at “published”. It doesn’t prove that the tool caused an increase, and it isn’t sales attribution.

Is HubSpot AEO worth it?

I recommend starting with the trial for one clear product, audience, and set of questions. My setup exposed the main risk early: a tidy dashboard can still rest on repetitive prompts and a questionable competitor list. Fix those inputs before spending time on the score.

For a small team, the standalone plan is a reasonable way to replace repeated manual checks and find useful source pages. Existing Marketing Hub Professional and Enterprise users get more value from the connected content tools. That’s why I don’t see a case for buying the wider suite solely for AEO.

The buying decision comes down to what the reports change. Find a worthwhile page to improve, a source to approach, or a buyer question you’ve missed. Without that next step, more daily data won’t earn its monthly fee.

FAQs

The Oppo Pad 5 delivers in almost every area that matters. It has a delightfully vibrant display with a smooth 120Hz refresh rate, a user-friendly interface with years' worth of OS and security updates, and boasts a huge battery life to boot.

I’ve been testing the tablet for three weeks now and, overall, I think that it’s worth the £349 asking price, which gives you 8GB of RAM and 128GB worth of storage. It serves up a bloat-free software experience, looks sleek and surprisingly premium, and even performs pretty decently when all’s said and done.

Sure, the MediaTek Dimensity 7300-Ultra processor isn’t the mightiest around, so you shouldn’t expect the sort of performance that the best tablets around can deliver (the Pad 5's bigger brother, the Oppo Pad 5 Pro, has a more powerful Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 chipset), but for simple tasks like drawing and note-taking, scrolling on social media, and light gaming, I found it to be perfectly capable.

You’ll notice some occasional hiccups when running more intensive gaming software or using the split view mode with more demanding programs but, for most users, it will almost certainly do the job.

Some aspects of performance could be better, though. For instance, the built-in speakers don’t sound great, and the onboard cameras are hardly the most impressive (though good enough for video calls). My biggest criticism, though, is that the tablet only supports 33W wired charging, which is too slow for a device with a gigantic mAh battery capacity. As a result, you’ll be waiting for a good couple of hours to get to 100% again.

Still, I didn’t need to charge the Oppo Pad 5 very much during testing at all — only a handful of times across a three-week period. And, all in all, I think it offers plenty for £349. It may not have an OLED screen, but the 2.8K LCD display looks great, with punchy colors, solid contrast, and even Dolby Vision support.

The tablet’s standard of build is also pretty admirable — the aluminium frame and understated colour options make it seem more luxurious than it truly is.

Yes, it's not the lightest tablet around, and there’s no stylus or keyboard bundled in here, but I’d still recommend the Oppo Pad 5 overall. It's a relatively stylish option with largely stable performance and a stand-out display, helping it to compete against pricier rivals, such as the iPad 11-inch (2025).

Oppo Pad 5 review: price & availability

• Priced at £349
• Available now in the UK
• Not sold directly in the US

The Oppo Pad 5 was revealed in 2025, but widespread availability in the UK only came about in 2026. It can't be purchased directly in the US, but could potentially be imported. The tablet is priced at £349, placing it somewhere between the entry level and mid-range categories. It's worth noting, though, that there’s no stylus or keyboard bundled in at this price, so for the full experience you could end up spending upwards of £400 here.

Oppo Pad 5 review: specs

Oppo Pad 5 review: display

• 12.1-inch LCD screen
• 2800 x 1980 resolution with 120Hz refresh rate
• Solid 900 nits peak brightness

The Oppo Pad 5 has a nice and broad 12.1-inch screen, which is plenty large enough for drawing and playing more intensive games. It has an LCD display rather than OLED, which would’ve been nice to see for deeper black levels and enhanced contrast, but it's common for a more budget-friendly model to opt for LCD.

In terms of resolution, you’re looking at 2.8K on the Oppo Pad 5. There’s also HDR10 and Dolby Vision support, and when I tried watching a movie in the latter format, I was impressed with the detail, vibrancy of colours and quality of contrast on show.

You also get a fairly bright, vivid picture from the Oppo Pad 5, which boasts a peak brightness of 900 nits. I found this to be perfect for brighter indoor spaces, and even moderate outdoor use.

As you may expect, the Oppo Pad 5 has an adaptive refresh rate of 120Hz. This makes basic navigation feel silky smooth, and when gaming, will enable you to play select titles at up to 120fps, so long as the software supports this.

Overall, I was impressed with the display of the Oppo Pad 5. It looks surprisingly sharp given its use of an LCD panel, and its replication of rich, punchy colours exceeded my expectations. It was also nice and responsive, well-sized, and relatively bright making it convenient for everyday use.

• Display score: 4/5

Oppo Pad 5 review: design

• Solid aluminium frame
• Sleek, enticing look…
• …but heftier than you may expect

The Oppo Pad 5 is a nice looking tablet, in my view. Its slim, sleek, and its quality aluminium frame makes it seem like a more premium product than it truly is.

I tried the Starlight Black version, which appears to be reliably available in the UK, with a seemingly elusive Aurora Pink alternative also exists. I like the look of the Starlight Black colorway — it's understated and classy, only adding to that sense that this tablet is punching above its weight, at least in the looks department.

One thing I didn’t love about the Oppo Pad 5, though, was its weight. It comes in at 597g, meaning it’s quite hefty in-use. For reference, that makes the Oppo Pad 5 more than 100g heavier than the Apple iPad 11-inch (2025), so if you want ultimate comfort for long usage sessions, you may be better served elsewhere.

As someone who only typically dips in and out of using my tablet, the Oppo Pad 5’s weight was no problem at all, though. And I did like other aspects of its design. For instance, the buttons are fairly small and low-key, which paired with some smart placement, ensured that I never triggered any accidental presses.

Some may find its IP40 dust and waterproof rating a bit underwhelming, though. This means that the tablet resists larger particle ingress, but is not waterproof whatsoever — so you’ll want to keep it well protected and dry at all times.

The underwhelming IP40 rating and weight of this tablet means that it's not quite a design marvel, but its attractive look and solid build quality ensures that it still feels more premium than its price may suggest.

• Design score: 4/5

Oppo Pad 5 review: software

• ColorOS delivers an excellent user experience
• Next to no bloat whatsoever
• Five years of OS and six years of security updates pledged

Here’s where we get to arguably the best part of the Oppo Pad 5 — the fantastic software experience it provides.

Out of the box, this tablet is running Oppo’s ColorOS 16.0 (running on Android 16), which Android users will find familiar and practical. The user interface is well laid out, and even looks relatively stylish. It's seamless to access apps and settings too, and you can easily customize the home screen and switch between button or motion controls during setup.

What’s great to see is that the Oppo Pad 5 has excellent, long-term software support too. It will receive five years of OS updates, as well as six years of security patches. That’s a commendable pledge from Oppo, and means that users can confidently use this tablet for years to come.

Something else I loved about the Oppo Pad 5 was its almost total lack of bloatware. I’ve reviewed many devices where I’ve been met with a slew of unwanted mobile games, shopping apps, and AI slop, but the Oppo Pad 5 shows more respect to its users. There are a few pre-downloaded third-party apps, like Netflix and LinkedIn, but I’d wager that a large chunk of users would actually want these, so the streamlined app selection gets a big tick from me.

Another positive is that the Oppo Pad 5 is far less concerned with the generative AI nonsense that you see elsewhere, including on some of Oppo’s own products. The AI studio is still here, which enables you to generate some imagery, and there are a few other features, like AI Writer (for proof-reading and formatting) and AI-enabled translation, but again, this functionality isn’t being relentlessly pushed onto you.

• Software score: 5/5

Oppo Pad 5 review: performance

• Solid yet slightly unremarkable chipset
• 8GB of RAM enough for multi-tasking
• Quad speakers don’t sound great

The Oppo Pad 5 runs well overall, but it’s not going to provide you with totally flawless performance.

It uses the MediaTek Dimensity 7300-Ultra processor, which we’ve seen in a bunch of similarly priced rival models, like the OnePlus Pad Go 2. In addition, you get 8GB of RAM, which is easily enough for some basic multi-tasking. And I found the Oppo Pad 5 to run smoothly for the most part, with next to no hiccups when performing basic productivity tasks like note-taking, playing lighter games such as Tetris, or simply scrolling on social media.

I did pick-up on the occasional frame drop with more demanding software, such as 3D mobile games, and some occasional delays when using the split-view mode with Google Chrome, but unless you’re a more intensive user, I think you’ll get by just fine with this model.

One thing that I found to be a little disappointing, though, were the built-in quad speakers. These just don’t sound as refined as I’d hoped, with speech sometimes sounding boxed-in and generally a bit unclear. They’re not plating up super-tinny or shrill sound, sure, and the tablet has excellent codec support for music listening with headphones or speakers, but the built-in sound is lacking.

The built-in cameras are fine enough, though. They’re 8MP on both the front and rear, which is totally adequate for taking video calls, though I didn’t find the results to be overly detailed or natural-looking when snapping some photos.

• Performance score: 3.5/5

Oppo Pad 5 review: battery

• Huge 10,050mAh battery
• Got me through multiple days of use when testing
• Wired charging is disappointingly slow

The Oppo Pad 5 has a huge, 10,050mAh battery capacity, which really impressed me during testing.

Unless you’re an especially intensive user, you’ll easily be able to use the Oppo Pad 5 for multiple days without needing to juice it up whatsoever — I could count on one hand the amount of times I had to charge it across my three weeks of testing. On top of this, you get a number of battery settings, including a power saving, super-power saving, and high-performance mode, and some battery health options.

However, I do have one critique of the Oppo Pad 5 in the battery life department: its underwhelming charging speeds. It supports 33W wired charging, which definitely feels on the low side for a device with a battery this large. After one hour of charging, I discovered that the Oppo Pad 5 hadn’t even hit 50% yet, which is just too slow in my view.

• Battery score: 4/5

Should I buy the Oppo Pad 5?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Oppo Pad 5 review: also consider

How I tested the Oppo Pad 5

• Tested across the course of three weeks
• Tried all major features
• Used for streaming video, playing games, and doing everyday tasks

I used the Oppo Pad 5 as my main tablet across the course of three weeks. During this time, I gradually tested all of its core features and made sure to assess everything from display quality to battery life.

During testing, I tried out video streaming, playing games, and performing everyday tasks to measure the tablet’s performance across the most crucial areas.

More generally, I’ve spent years testing gadgets here at TechRadar, where I serve as a Senior Reviews Writer. I’ve tested everything from Dolby Atmos soundbars like the Sonos Beam Ultra to phones like the Nothing Phone 4(a). I’ve also reviewed tablets during my time here, such as the Huawei MatePad 11.5.

• Read more about how we test
• First reviewed: October 2026

Data removal platforms scan people-finder/data broker sites for your data, then send automated deletion requests on your behalf. When processed, your information gets deleted from the people-finder sites, enhancing online privacy. Data removal platforms also send manual removal requests, but EasyOptOuts doesn’t– it sends only automated requests.

I extensively tested and reviewed EasyOptOuts to help you decide if it’s worth adopting as your personal data removal service. Read on to learn about its core features, pricing, setup, customer support, and other essential factors.

EasyOptOuts: Plans and pricing

EasyOptOuts has a simple pricing structure - you can check out the full details by clicking here. It costs $19.99 per year for personal use. There’s no monthly plan or tiered plans like most data removal platforms. It’s just one package that unlocks access to all features.

Businesses (with 10+ employees) can get a bulk subscription, but the price still amounts to $19.99 per year per user. The exception is for registered nonprofits, which get a 25% discount from EasyOptOuts.

At $19.99 per year, or barely $1.80 per month, EasyOptOuts is much more affordable than its rivals. But, does this affordability make it a better option? Let’s explore more to find out.

EasyOptOuts: Setup

I found EasyOptOuts’ setup process very straightforward, or shall I say, easy. Entering the homepage and hitting the Sign Up button kickstarts the process. When signing up, you’ll provide your email address and other personal information like date of birth, home address, and phone numbers.

You’re probably wondering, “I’m trying to guard my personal information online and yet need to provide all this information again to a data removal platform?” The answer is that whatever information you provide is what the data removal platform scans people-broker sites for.

EasyOptOuts scans 200+ broker sites, which isn’t that many compared to competitors. However, EasyOptOuts doesn’t aim to be a mass-market data removal service. Rather, it focuses on U.S.-centric people-finder sites. Non-U.S. residents are better off with broader-focused data removal platforms.

After inputting your personal information, EasyOptOuts runs a deep scan on its network of 200+ people-finder sites. The complete scan can take a long time, based on the volume of data found across the network. It could be a day, 2 days, 3 days, or even a week, so don’t fret if you don’t get the results within a short period.

Once the scan completes, users receive an email alert and can begin monitoring the progress of the removal requests. I don’t like that EasyOptOuts sends only automated requests. Sometimes, automated requests aren’t enough to delete your information from people-finder sites, so manually drafted requests are needed to complete the process.

However, I understand that automated-only requests are how EasyOptOuts can keep its price as low as $19.99 per year. If it had to employ experts to manually draft deletion requests, the price would be much higher.

EasyOptOuts doesn’t just run the initial scan. It rescans its people-finder site network every four months, then sends another set of deletion requests if your personal information is discovered again. This rescan is important because some people-finder sites have a habit of reuploading information they were asked to delete. It ensures that your information stays off public view as long as your EasyOptOuts subscription is valid.

Compared to most data removal platforms I’ve tested, setting up EasyOptOuts felt noticeably easier. Everything ran smoothly, from providing my personal information to the initial scan and monitoring the status of deletion requests from my dashboard.

EasyOptOuts: Ease of use

Above, I’ve hinted at EasyOptOuts’ simple setup process and generally intuitive user experience. Like most data removal platforms, EasyOptOuts doesn’t have a native smartphone app, so you’ll access it from your browser.

I think a PC is the best option over a mobile browser, given the volume of information you’ll have to input to get scanned. A mobile browser would be inconvenient for the initial setup, but suitable for monitoring the status of deletion requests.

EasyOptOuts: Security and privacy

EasyOptOuts is a good addition to your online security toolkit, particularly for U.S. residents. It helps keep your information off those infamous people-finder sites like BeenVerified and PeopleLooker.

These sites have built a business model of aggregating personal information from public sources and then offering access for a fee. Tools like EasyOptOuts send deletion requests to scrub your data off people-finder sites.

However, on EasyOptOuts, you won’t find complementary security features like a VPN or password manager. It’s all about one thing – data removal – and does its job effectively. The drawback is the limited, U.S.-centric broker site coverage.

EasyOptOuts: Support

EasyOptOuts provides decent support, although I think it could be better. There’s an official support page filled with detailed answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs). For new users, this FAQs section helps answer important questions, so that you’ll not have to contact support directly for routine issues.

If you do need to contact the support team, there’s a dedicated email address for that. The support team is U.S.-based, so responses revolve around local working hours. I don’t like that there’s no telephone or live chat support, but given the low price charged by EasyOptOuts, it’s understandably difficult to maintain live support teams for users.

EasyOptOuts: Competition

EasyOptOuts has many competitors. Incogni and DeleteMe are the two notable names I’d like to highlight.

I chose Incogni because it feels like a more robust version of EasyOptOuts. It covers 420+ data broker sites, including non-U.S. ones, and offers both automated and manual deletion requests. This compares to EasyOptOuts, which covers 200+ sites and only supports automated requests. However, EasyOptOuts is much more budget-friendly, costing just $19.99 per year, whereas Incogni’s pricing starts from $7.99 per month.

DeleteMe provides much higher coverage, with 850+ sites, and supports manual deletion requests. I’ve tested it and can confidently say that you’ll get more data scrubbed with DeleteMe than EasyOptOuts. DeleteMe users also get complementary features like dark web monitoring and email masking.

However, DeleteMe is priced like a premium service. Its plans average $129 per year, multiples of EasyOptOuts’ $19.99 per year.

EasyOptOuts: Final verdict

If you’re a U.S. resident and need a budget-friendly tool for scrubbing your personal data off people-finder sites, EasyOptOuts is a good bet. For just $19.99 per year, much more affordable than competitors, you’ll get a reliable tool to scan people-finder sites and send deletion requests where your data is discovered.

Setting up your account, running the initial scan, and monitoring further scans are easy to handle, thanks to EasyOptOuts’ intuitive interface.

However, you should be aware of EasyOptOuts’ drawbacks, such as the limited people-finder site coverage, lack of manual deletion requests, and email-only support. Overall, it’s a reliable data removal platform.

Essentially, xTool has brought years of laser engraving development together into a single, expandable manufacturing platform, making the X1 one of the most versatile machines I’ve ever reviewed. This is not the first machine that I’ve looked at recently to do the modular laser approach, with the superb Creality Falcon T1 doing something similar on a far smaller scale.

At the X1’s heart is a 55W CO₂ laser, similar to that seen in the excellent Bambu Lab R1 although now the larger X1 has arrived at the same price and with far more potential it will be interesting to see how the R1 fares.

Once again, the 55W CO₂ laser proves to be a powerful option for cutting and engraving wood, acrylic, and a wide variety of other materials. On its own, this one laser option would already make the X1 a superb option for anyone looking for a professional laser cutter.

But then again, xTool already has the xTool P2. To differentiate this as something new, xTool has thrown all their technologies at the design and added an optional 20W diode galvo module, which sits alongside the CO₂ head inside the machine, and this forms the foundation of what this machine then develops into.

One of the key features to the dual head system is that rather than relying on a conventional moving-head laser for every cut, engrave, and score, the X1 can use the galvo system for intricate, high-speed engraving before switching to the CO₂ laser for cutting. What I like is that both are controlled through xTool Studio, and switching between the installed lasers just takes a selection option in the software.

Throughout testing, this combination of laser options with backpack modules also highlighted the potential and the direction these laser machines are moving. Multiple laser options mean projects like wooden placemats and detailed pencil boxes, which would ordinarily take considerable time to engrave and cut, can be completed much faster, with the galvo speeding through the detail while the CO₂ handles the cutting. In one test, a placemat project that took the xTool S1 around two hours was completed on the X1 in approximately half an hour.

One of the X1's big features is its support for additional laser-source modules mounted on the rear of the machine. For this review, I used the 5W UV and 60W MOPA modules, which enabled me to engrave glass and emboss brass coins. I also used the MOPA for its accuracy to create precision apertures in thin metal for pinhole cameras.

Having previously used dedicated MOPA machines such as the xTool F2 Ultra, I was interested to see how a machine this size could perform similar metal engraving. The results were impressive, but as I found at every step of this review, there were a series of considerations due to the size, weight and complexity of the machine.

That first consideration is size. The X1 arrived in a substantial crate, and as it was dropped off in the driveway, I had to call on assistance from a neighbour to lift and manoeuvre it into position. Although the main machine can sit on a conventional workshop bench, the additional modules, extraction systems and accessories quickly highlighted that the space I had allocated was about half of what it should have been.

The second point to make is the modular system. While the additional laser sources proved excellent, swapping them isn't quick, unlike some of the small multi-laser modular systems I have looked at recently.

With the X1 positioned against a wall, accessing the rear of the machine, changing the hardware, and recalibrating could take about an hour. Some of this was down to the restricted space in my workshop, but the swap of modules required the recalibration of the lasers, it’s worth considering if you intend to switch between different laser technologies regularly.

Price is another consideration although I'm actually surprised how cheap it is on balance. The base machine is listed at $3,699 / £2554, but adding the diode laser, specialist modules and accessories can take the complete system well beyond $10,000, depending on configuration.

Even so, there’s no getting away from how capable this machine is, and if you were looking for the equivalent in separate machines, say the P2 and F2 Ultra, you’d be looking at much the same costs. For general cutting, detailed engraving and small-batch production, the X1 is one of the most refined laser engravers I’ve used.

If you have an established workshop or small business handling a wide range of materials, the X1 offers huge potential. Just make sure you have the space, budget and patience to make the most of it.

xTool X1: Price & availability

The xTool X1 starts at $3,699 / £2,553 and includes the 55W CO₂ laser. The base price is in line with other machines that I have looked at recently. It's worth knowing that the costs rise quickly with optional modules.

The 20W diode galvo at $899 / approx. £674 is an optional, but essential upgrade, as it first enables faster engraving but is also needed to support the installation of the additional UV, fibre and MOPA lasers.

A fully equipped system comes in at just under $10,000 if you buy the components separately as upgrades, however, the bundle offer prices bring the cost right down. The X1’s integrated workflow, versatility and all-in-one design do keep things neat. You can find out more at xTool.

X1 Single CO2 (55W CO2): $3,399 / £2,554

X1 CO2 + Diode Galvo (55W CO2 + 20W Diode Galvo Module): $3,999 / £3,005

X1 CO2 + Diode Galvo + Fiber (Includes 30W Fiber Laser Source): $5,799 / £4,358

X1 CO2 + Diode Galvo + UV (Includes 5W UV Laser Source): $6,499 / £4,884

X1 CO2 + Diode Galvo + MOPA (Includes 60W MOPA Laser Source): $6,679 / £5,019

xTool X1: Design

There’s nothing particularly small or understated about the xTool X1. In fact, the first indication of what I was dealing with came when the machine arrived in a substantial wooden crate. I can usually handle these large machines with the help of a sack trolley and boxes.

However, this time I called on the help of a neighbor. It’s not quite the size of the P3, but you will still need two people to lift the X1 free of its packaging and to get it into position in the workshop. By the time we stripped away the protective materials and set it onto the work surface, it was obvious this wasn’t a typical desktop laser engraver.

The machine itself follows the same design direction as xTool’s recent P2S and P3 models, with a fully enclosed chassis and a level of refinement that feels far removed from the open-frame laser engravers that dominated the enthusiast market only a few years ago. When it comes to the size, it measures 1000×580×420 mm.

Having tested numerous xTool machines, I’ve consistently been impressed by the company’s build quality. While xTool and GlowForge used to be the two major players in this part of the market, rivals such as Bambu Lab, LaserPecker, and WeCreat have recently upped the game as well.

Everything from the large hinged lid to the internal processing bed feels solid and is exactly as I’d want in the workshop. The lid opens easily and is supported by pneumatic arms; on some machines of this size that I’ve looked at in the past, this can be a weak point, but here it all feels good and solid.

Compared with other machines of this type and size, the height of the machine is considerably taller; this is due to the adjustable bed inside that rises and lowers to position materials correctly beneath the laser. This is a far more sophisticated setup than the fixed-height beds on many smaller machines that require risers for larger objects. On the front of the machine, there are a couple of buttons that enable you to raise and lower the bed manually if needed.

Testing showed the bed adjustment was essentially fully automated, with the software handling most positioning. The work area is big, with a maximum of 615 × 320 mm, and offers plenty of room to lay out multiple parts, which is especially useful for small batches of products such as placemats.

What I quickly realised is that depending on the laser and type of work you’re doing, those work area dimensions change. For instance, with the CO2 laser the max height of anything placed into the machine is 150mm; however, with the other lasers that reduces to 140mm. Essentially, as you lay out your designs and select the lasers, the on-screen layout changes so visually that from the outset you know exactly where you are.

Inside, the materials are supported on the supplied slats, though as with other manufacturers, I would have liked a few more. I also had the optional honeycomb panel, which, as ever, became my preferred choice for almost everything I processed.

A honeycomb just provides a decent surface for supporting materials and makes it easier to remove completed work, and while small pieces of debris from the cuts will still fall through to the base, there’s less chance of scorching of cut pieces falling and accidentally getting re-lasered.

Unfortunately, one surprise was that there isn’t a simple removable waste tray at the base, so cleaning out smaller pieces requires a little more effort. I have a handheld Dyson for this exact job, and with the depth and space, it’s easy enough to get that into cleanup quickly after a few cuts.

In this review, alongside the 55W CO2, I have also installed the 20W diode galvo module. This sits alongside the CO₂ laser inside the main enclosure and takes a couple of minutes to fit; once installed, it can stay as a permanent part of the machine. After installation, the rest of the setup is completed in xTool Studio.

The software walks you through the calibration process, although some manual adjustment is needed to ensure that the laser paths are correctly aligned. I’ve encountered this with previous xTool machines, including the P2 and P3, and while it can take a little time to understand, the process is reasonably straightforward once you’ve done it a few times.

My first test didn’t produce the result I expected because the alignment wasn’t quite right, mainly due to me rushing part of the process. After repeating the calibration more carefully, the results vastly improved, and once everything was configured, the two installed laser systems are remarkably easy to use.

To switch between the two in the xTool Studio software, you simply assign the right laser to the right operation, and the machine handles the transition. There’s no need to remove one laser head and install another manually as you would have had to do with multi-laser machines in the past.

For everyday cutting and engraving, this combination of lasers works incredibly well and vastly speeds up the process of engraving and cutting, which is the bulk of what I personally do with these machines.

However, these two lasers are just the start of the story, and things do become a little more complicated when I started to install and use the rear-mounted laser-source modules.

xTool supplied the 5W UV and 60W MOPA modules; these are relatively compact, just larger than a shoebox and are solidly built. Before use, they need to be installed into the back of the X1, which takes time, especially when I needed two people to move the machine into the initial position. Essentially, I should have left a little more space to access the rear.

Installation of the modules involves removing covers, connecting power and communication cables, securing the module and checking the optical path. Depending on the configuration, you’ll also need to install the appropriate optics before calibrating the system.

I installed the combined UV/Fiber/MOPA field lens, which supports the different laser sources, and found that straightforward, it essentially just screwed in. The more involved part was mounting the modules and completing the optical alignment.

Initially, I was probably a little too enthusiastic with the manual adjustments, but thankfully xTool provide a small alignment target and tape which makes the entire process relatively easy. Once I realised that small adjustments were all that was needed, the process became much easier.

The software guides you through calibration using the supplied cards, and once the source has been registered, the machine recognises it automatically. My main issue here was the physical access to the back of the machine due to space.

My workshop already has several 3D printers, laser engravers, and other equipment, so I’d originally positioned the X1 against a wall on a fixed workbench. Every time I wanted to change the rear-mounted module, I needed to move other equipment, pull out the workbench and get behind the machine. Given the X1’s size and weight, I didn’t want to attempt this alone.

As a result, what might eventually become a 15 or 20-minute module change took me closer to an hour, including moving the machine, changing the source and checking calibration, the calibration is the part that takes the time. This issue would explain why xTool also provided the optional mobile work stand, which is where this machine will be moved to once I have had a bit of a reorganisation of the space.

Being able to wheel the machine away from the wall would make installation, maintenance and module changes substantially easier. I’d also recommend planning considerably more space than the official machine footprint suggests. In my workshop, allowing roughly half a machine depth more provided the clearance needed to work comfortably behind it, mainly due to the length of the tool you need to use to screw in the bolts through each of the modules.

As I got into using the machine, a few of the safety design features are also worth noting. First, as ever, the machine came with the Air extraction unit and, in addition, the fire safety 2 unit, which was attached, but again space was limited, so it sat on a lower shelf behind the machine.

The X1 is serious workshop equipment, though far nicer-looking than the machines from a few years ago. Its size and weight are balanced by its features, and after a month of use, I highly recommend the optional workbench, which, while not essential, it will ensure you can make full use of this machine's potential.

xTool X1: Features

The xTool X1 is unusual because many of its headline features aren’t immediately obvious. At its core, it’s a powerful 55w CO₂ laser cutter, but its modular design means that it has far more potential, and that potential can only be fully unlocked with the investment in the other modules and accessories, of which there are quite a few.

In total, the X1 supports five laser technologies, with the 55w CO2 being the only one that is provided wth the base machine. The 55W CO₂ laser can be used for cutting and engraving materials such as wood, acrylic, leather, cardboard and fabric.

Alongside the CO₂ laser, there’s the 20W diode galvo laser, which adds high-speed engraving and surface marking, particularly on wood and many other compatible materials. This module sits inside the machine alongside the CO₂ and is quick to fit; it’s also essential if you want to use any of the other three backpack laser modules.

These other models include the 5W UV laser, which can be used for engraving on glass, crystal and other delicate materials. Then there’s the 30W fibre and 60W MOPA options, which enable you to mark and engrave into metal. The MOPA adds the ability to use colour effects and deep engraving and is similar to the fibre option, but is more expensive. In this review, I’ve been supplied with four of the five available laser technologies: CO₂, diode, UV, and MOPA.

As I started the testing, the instant highlight of the features was the Hybrid Motion, as this is the one feature alongside the dual mount lasers that will make a noticeable difference to everyday project work.

Essentially, what this looks like with the lasers is that alongside the traditional gantry-based laser toolheads that move physically through the X and Y across the material, you also have the Galvo, which uses rapidly moving mirrors to direct the beam across the surface.

This means that for larger designs, Hybrid Motion moves the galvo system between regions, enabling detailed engraving over a much wider area than a conventional fixed galvo arrangement, as I tested in the F2 Ultra. When combined, you not only cover a far larger area, but the Glavo focuses on detailed engraving while the CO₂ does the cutting.

The dual tool head laser system inside is just the start of the multi-laser set, and a Laser Swap system is used to enable different styles of laser to be fitted for different projects and materials. These Laser Swap modules fit to the back with the UV, Fibre and MOPA options.

The idea here is that instead of buying additional machines, you just buy the module and fit it, cutting down on the space needed and ideally cost. Although looking at the cost of the modules, they’re almost as much as the dedicated machines.

The process of swapping the modules isn’t tool-free, and it requires access to the rear of the machine, alongside physical hardware changes and calibration checks. I personally think that this is a great feature.

However, I would have liked to see a faster change system. In this review, for instance, I swapped the modules multiple times, and it was a hassle. But then most people will inevitably settle on their laser selection rather than approaching the machine in the way that I have in this review.

Some of the other features that really impressed during use were the close-up cameras that just help position artwork against materials, with the image appearing in the XTool software. Compared with the laser outline that we used for the full image, this is such an improvement; however, you can still click the framing preview if you prefer that way of working.

The camera system is really quite advanced, and you have the option through the xTool Studio software to change from capturing one wide-angle image, to capturing multiple sections of the workspace which are then stitched together, which helps with the accuracy of the positioning.

Although the software documentation describes automatic image capture when closing the lid, I generally triggered the capture manually during testing. Image quality from the cameras was excellent overall, although some reflective materials and darker areas could still make positioning slightly more difficult; a boost in the workshop's lighting also helped with these previews.

Another of the big features that really stood out through the use of the machine was the automated bed adjustment. Rather than requiring constant manual focusing, the machine measures the material and adjusts the bed height as needed.

Through the test, I added a range of material thicknesses and found the process just worked; compared with the often convoluted focusing process of some other machines and the physical effort of adding a riser base, this system is just simple.

Even with slightly irregular or curved materials, the positioning system generally handled setup well, and I didn’t need to override the measurements manually.

Alongside the core accessories and in line with the xTools other machines, the X1 supports a wide range of accessories, including an automatic conveyor feeder, RA3 rotary attachment, honeycomb panel, mobile work stand, filtration, and fire safety equipment.

Throughout testing, I used xTool’s extraction and filtration setup, which is a little on the noisy side but does the job. For jobs that produce more smoke, particularly when cutting wood, I increased the extraction setting to keep the working chamber clear.

The optional Fire Safety Set Pro adds another level of protection. Installation was more involved than I’d expected, requiring the CO₂ cylinder, tubing and communication connections to be fitted before enabling the system in the software. Once configured, however, it didn’t actually require me to do anything else other than find somewhere for it to sit.

As a final point on the features, and an essential for any professional workshop, is that the machine also has an emergency stop button for quickly shutting down if needed.

xTool X1: Performance

After a month testing the xTool X1, what I realised was, that the way that I work with laser engravers normally would change with this dual laser setup. The mix of laser technologies in one machine isn’t just convenient; it means that you can select the laser technology that is best suited for the job, and often two lasers will enable a better and faster result. Most notably for me, that was the combination of the 55W CO₂ and 20W diode galvo lasers.

For most of my work, producing models, wooden components, boxes, camera accessories, and other workshop projects, these two laser systems provide an ideal combination.

The X1’s 55W CO₂ laser is excellent for all-round cutting, while the 20 diode galvo is better for detail.

To start the test, I ran through the supplied test projects before moving on to my own designs, including wooden boxes, placemats and model-making components.

Most of my work involved 3mm basswood plywood, although I also tested thicker materials up to 10mm. Across these tests, the CO₂ laser produced exceptionally clean cuts, with minimal scorching and very little need for additional finishing. The air-assist system kept the cutting path clear, while the extraction system removed smoke.

One of the most useful tests involved creating a series of 3mm plywood boxes. The accuracy was excellent, with the individual pieces fitting together cleanly without sanding or manual adjustment to the size. I could simply assemble and glue the components.

This accuracy and repeatability is something that is so important when producing models or small-batch products, where even small dimensional errors create extra work; even sanding takes time when it comes to getting the right fit. As this is a pre-production model, the usually excellent xTool Studio seemed to take most laser options down to 1, so initial models showed some scorching, however

I also tested acrylic sheets up to 10mm thick, including cutting a 3D-scanning calibration cube in half. Again, the results were impressive, with clean cuts and accurate positioning.

The machine also handled lighter materials such as paper, card, fabric, and leather without difficulty, though these need careful securing to prevent movement from airflow of the air assist and extractor.

For general cutting work, along the lines of what I use laser cutters for, the X1 matched the abilities that I have seen from other recent releases; the one point that made this slightly more exciting is that added height, which gives out-of-the-box flexibility without the need for a riser base.

The CO₂ laser provides the X1’s cutting power; the addition of the 20W diode galvo by its side for detailed engraving and speed is definitely an interesting development in the technology.

Essentially, rather than watching a conventional laser head mechanically move across every section of an image, the galvo rapidly sweeps the beam over the surface, completing relatively intricate artwork in a fraction of the time.

I tested it on wood, plywood, bamboo, acrylic, and coated metal samples, essentially everything in the samples box. Fine lettering was sharp and well-defined, intricate designs retained plenty of detail, and scorching was generally minimal, unless the piece that I was working on fell through the slats.

Initially, I worried the edges of the engraving might lose definition, or designs wouldn't join up perfectly as the galvo system moved from one area to another, however the meeting of the design and the quality remained consistent.

This, however, wasn’t quite the case at the outset, and initial testing showed a few issues, but after software updates and far more accurate calibration on my part, the joins between engraving regions became almost seamless.

Photographic engraving onto wood was also impressive, although as with most laser engravers, image selection makes the biggest difference to the success.

High-contrast photographs generally produced better results than flat, low-contrast images, and I used xTool Studio’s editing tools to adjust backgrounds and improve the final output.

Personally, I still prefer the look of detailed illustrations, lettering and line-based graphics when engraved into wood rather than photo imagery.

Taking a look at one of the main test projects highlights the workflow and speed. Normally, when creating a wooden box or placemat with decorative engraving, I’ll use a single laser head that handles both engraving and cutting.

The problem is that detailed engraving can take considerably longer than cutting the outline. With the X1, I was able to assign the intricate engraving to the 20W galvo and the cutting operations to the 55W CO₂ laser.

Once configured, the software handled the transition between the installed lasers without requiring me to reposition the material or swap heads; this made a dramatic difference to processing time.

For example, I created a series of wooden placemats with detailed artwork. A comparable project on the xTool S1 took around two hours, while the X1 completed it in half an hour.

That’s an enormous improvement in speed, particularly for small businesses producing multiple products. The same was true when creating detailed pencil boxes.

Projects that would normally take 20 to 30 minutes could be completed in minutes, with the galvo handling the engraving before the CO₂ laser cut the components.

Having both lasers permanently installed makes everyday projects straightforward, and once you’ve experienced the speed of the combined workflow, returning to a conventional single-head engraver feels a little archaic.

Hybrid Motion also changes what’s practical for larger designs. In the past, I’ve avoided elaborate engraving projects at scale because the processing time was too long and I’m hopeless at lining up materials when sheets need to be matched.

With the X1, I was able to start thinking about this type of project, as the speed of the galvo would vastly reduce the time involved, especially when used alongside the conveyor accessory.

After carrying out the majority of the review using the 55W CO₂ and 20W diode galvo lasers, I then moved on to the 5w UV and 60W MOPA.

The 5W UV module opens up a very different range of possibilities, particularly for glass, crystal and delicate materials. I ran a few tests on the glass samples, along with experiments on plastic components produced on a 3D printer.

The ability to add fine surface texture to printed plastic objects is interesting, as it creates new opportunities for finishing functional parts and decorative products. I’ll admit I’m still on the experimental side of this, but will update in the near future.

The glass side of the engraving process is also something that I have struggled with in the past, and again, I wasn’t entirely successful in achieving the results I wanted.

Based on the partial results, I suspect this was more about my initial setup and approach than a fundamental limitation of the machine. Still, it’s an area that needs further investigation.

The UV module adds even more felxibility, although I’ll explore its more advanced functions in a separate addition to th ereview once I’ve reorganised my workshop to give the interchangeable modules better access.

Of the two rear-mounted laser modules, I found the 60W MOPA the most interesting. I’ve previously used MOPA machines, including the xTool F2 Ultra, so I’m familiar with their capabilities for metal engraving, embossing and colour marking.

What makes the X1 different is the ability to use similar technology within a much larger enclosed working area. I tested the MOPA on brass, stainless steel and aluminium, producing detailed markings and experimenting with relief engraving.

One of the most interesting applications involved creating apertures in thin brass sheet for pinhole cameras. I produced holes ranging from approximately 0.25mm to 0.5mm with exceptionally good results.

This is the sort of precision work I’ve previously done with dedicated MOPA systems, and it was great to see the X1 handle it so well, as it’s such a large machine I did wonder if it could handle the intricate work that I have used the F2 Ultra for.

I also experimented with engraving the aperture dimensions into the metal and cutting individual pieces from the sheet, although these more complicated processes still need further refinement.

Another highlight was engraving brass coins. While the F2 Ultra can do similar work, the X1’s larger processing area let me arrange several coins for engraving in one batch. Again, this is not a quick process; think days rather than hours.

Colour marking is another capability of the MOPA laser, though I’ve consistently found it requires considerable experimentation to get reliable results. The X1 was no exception.

I could create colour effects, but producing exactly the result I wanted across more complicated designs wasn’t always straightforward.

The take-home from the modules is that they expand the use of the machine, but those more specialist lasers require practice and experience to get the results that you would expect.

The other major part of the machine is the xTool Studio software. I’ve used the software across several generations of machines, and it's improved substantially over time and has really become the benchmark for all others to follow.

That said if you're new to the software then working out what type of cut and what laser is being used on what path can still be a little confusing, even with the colour coding. A text summery would be a nice quick reference before cutting.

The latest workflow is much the same as I looked at with the superb xTool M2 recently, and once you’ve completed calibration and connected the machine, preparing a project is straightforward.

Import or create the design, select the material, assign the appropriate processing operation and laser source, then send the job to the machine; after that, you generally just press the start button and wait.

As ever, the xTool Studio software offers a huge range of material presets, and unusually the material presets for the CO2 and 20w diode were way off. Especially the power and air assist, which the software set to 1 for both, easy to rectify, but possibly something to do with the pre-release software as ususally the material presets from xTool are spot on.

Adding custom materials and modifying processing parameters is also relatively straightforward once you’re familiar with the interface.

USB and Wi-Fi connectivity were both simple to set up and reliable throughout testing. Despite using pre-release software, I didn’t experience any major crashes or application-caused job failures other than a little tweaking of presets, and it all seemed pretty final, really a reflection of what I have experienced before with the addition of being able to select the laser sources.

xTool X1: Final verdict

After a month of testing, the xTool X1 is one of the most versatile laser engravers I’ve ever used, but it isn’t without its faults, although those are mostly overcome by being organised and having plenty of space.

Essentially, the base machine is an impressive 55W CO₂ laser engraver and cutter, and once you invest in the 20W diode galvo laser, you have one of the most competent machines for any small to medium-sized business on the market. The point is that with these two lasers you have the base machine that you can then build on depending on what you need to do.

Through the test, I found that that simple combination was all I really needed, and the fact that I could then attach the UV and MOPA for more specialised work all added to the versatility. However, with the 55W CO₂ and 20W diode galvo lasers installed, the machine was able to sit on the workbench without issue; it’s large but containable.

As soon as I installed the MOPA, I not only needed the additional space to mount the laser module, but it also added to the depth of the machine and for me, having the F2 for the more intricate work still made sense. While I could do the work on the X1, it didn’t necessarily mean that I would.

That aside, the pure build quality, size of the work area and depth, along with all the upgrade options, all make this one of the most substantial and complete laser engravers on the market. It is expensive, but it’s been designed in such a way that you can upgrade as and when you need.

Should you buy the xTool X1?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

For more crafting tech, I've tested and reviewed all the best 3D printers and the best laser engravers.

The Hisense XR10 offers powerful projection that you can put all over the room and still get squared away. That’s thanks to extensive optical adjustments that include incredible zoom range and lens shift. Hisense definitely cranked up the elegance this year.

The Hisense XR10 is loaded up with blazing RGB lasers that give it stunning brightness and color, while an adjustable iris can help it clamp down black levels for dark room viewing with enhanced contrast. It’s all packed into a stylish box that’s much smaller and more portable than high-end theater projectors like the Sony Bravia Projector 7, and Hisense’s included carrying case will let you take it places in style.

All of this comes at a high price, though. The Hisense XR10 is $5,999 / £5,999 / AU$9,999 after falling from the original $6,999 price tag in the US. Though it has decent speakers for a projector and a serviceable operating system in VidaaOS, these don’t lend a ton of extra value. It also jumped the gun a bit and missed out on the VRR and 4K/120Hz support that a newer wave of projectors are offering. At its price, it’s not going to lead the charge for value, but you do get a lot for the money. It’s still probably worth waiting to see if the XGIMI Horizon 30 Ultra Max, JMGO Iris Ultra Max, and Hisense C3 Ultra Max leave the XR10 any room to breathe.

Hisense XR10 review: Price and release date

• Release date: mid 2026
• MSRP: $5,999 / £5,999 / AU$9,999

The Hisense XR10 made its debut at CES 2026 and started shipping in May. It came with an initial price of $6,999 / £5,999 / AU$9,999 but that US price has generally fallen to $5,999. In the time it’s been out, some deals have even brought it as low as $4,499, but it hasn’t been a sticky price drop and prices elsewhere seem to be much more static.

For the money, Hisense does include a special carrying case that’s far and away the highest quality one I’ve seen included with a projector like this. But even then it’s not adding thousands of dollars in value.

Hisense XR10 review: specs

Hisense XR10 review: design and features

• Stylish, compact design and serious carrying case
• Highly adjustable optics
• VidaaOS is quick but may be limiting

Hisense has built something particularly gorgeous with the XR10. It simply looks like a work of serious engineering with its brown metal casing, stylish venting and machined accents, knurled lens cover, oversize lens cover, and dark color scheme. The front's sensor array also looks highly technical. The top is a little plain, but Hisense has included a volume dial, power button, ambient light sensor, and a little aesthetic nod to the RGB laser system inside.

The Hisense XR10 is a modestly sized box at 11.5 x 10.7 x 8.4 inches / 292.1 x 271.8 x 213.4 mm, yet with all its packing in it ends up weighing a considerable 23.4 pounds / 10.6kg. To help you lug it around, Hisense includes a fashionable carrying case that looks more like a piece of luggage than the styrofoam cases many projectors come with. It's complete with straps, zippers, padded slots for each component, and it even has wheels and an extendable handle for rolling.

The projector has everything it needs to help you get it set up for perfect alignment with your screen. It stands on four height-adjustable feet, so you can get it level and squared away with the wall. And it offers extensive zoom and lens shift capabilities. It can shift from a short throw ratio of 0.84:1 all the way to a 2:1 throw ratio, this means you can set it close to a wall or screen and still get a big picture or set it far from that screen and shrink it down to fit without having to use digital cropping. Plenty of competitors are offering zoom now, but the XR10 has a far wider range than most.

The XR10 goes well beyond that, too, adding on 130% vertical lens shift and 46% horizontal lens shift. This makes it much easier to set the projector wherever is convenient for you and still be able to dial in a crisp, perfectly aligned projection where you want it.

Hisense has also built in some automatic picture correction, like screen fitting and obstacle avoidance, but the projector tends to try zooming all the way out to make those corrections. So it's very easy to end up in a situation where the projection is simply too large for the projector to figure out what to do to fit it onto a small screen. Some features also get locked out if lens shift is used, like automatic keystone correction (something you should skip anyway) and eye protection (something it’s also great to have because these are some bright lasers).

Around back, the Hisense XR10 is pretty well geared up for serious home theater use. It includes a pair of HDMI 2.1 ports one of which supports eARC as well as one HDMI 2.0 port. It also includes a set of two USB 3.0 ports, a gigabit ethernet port, and both optical and 3.5mm analog audio outputs.

That ethernet port could be useful, but the XR10 actually has Wi-Fi 7 on board, so you can get pretty fast networking wirelessly as well. With that wireless connection, you can easily access streaming services using the built-in operating system, which is unfortunately not Google TV.

Instead it’s Hisense's own VidaaOS. It has most of the major streaming apps and some extras like Xbox Cloud Gaming but there's plenty that's missing. On the bright side, navigating the software is fairly quick and Hisense's included remote has a dedicated input button so you don't have to spend much time in VidaaOS if you want to use an external source for video.

The XR10 offers serious brightness for a small box, so there’s a bit of fan whir in operation to keep the insides cool. It’s noticeable in a quiet room when sitting close to the projector, but it’s easily drowned out by the 2.1-channel sound system.

The remote control included with the XR10 is a fairly simple one, offering directional navigation and direct access to input selection, autofocus, voice input, the settings menu, the home screen, volume and brightness controls, a mute button, and shortcuts to Netflix, YouTube, Prime Video, and Disney+. It also has backlighting, but it's only activated after you press a button, not motion activated.

• Design & features score: 4.5 / 5

Hisense XR10 review: picture quality and performance

• Brilliantly colorful, stunningly bright, and capable of deep black levels
• Good gaming chops
• Punchy sound, but not cinematic

One of the greatest aspects of the Hisense XR10 is its color, coming by way of its RGB laser light source. For most content, it can look perfectly natural, but when it really comes time to jazz things up, it’s simply amazing. The attack on Rosalina’s home in the beginning of The Super Mario Galaxy Movie is a stunning showcase of its capabilities, with dazzling magical effects, so many colorful stars, and plenty of opportunity for the XR10 to demonstrate its vibrant color.

As the convoy heads out at the beginning of Mad Max: Fury Road, the subtle reds of the sand against the blues of the sky are simply gorgeous, and the deeper reds of the flamethrowers are all the more vibrant. The inside of the sandstorm is simply wondrous, with the chaotic flashing of lightning playing against the deep shadows.

All that color comes alongside serious brightness. In my testing with the projector in its Vivid picture settings, with the iris open and brightness set to maximum, I measured it outputting 6,841 lumens. It has the potential to go higher with a cooler white point and a Brightness Enhanced mode, reaching 7,757 lumens, but this tints the whole picture green.

In practice, the high brightness means the XR10 is strong enough to use in a room even if you’re not doing much to shut out ambient light. I found watching a lot of content even with some of my room lights on more than comfortable, and depending on what I was watching, I could even get away with leaving the windows open in the middle of the day and still see well enough.

The Hisense XR10 offers potent contrast as well. It’s exhibited splendidly in Dune 2 during the black-and-white Harkkonen coliseum fight. Even without color, there’s splendid detail and rich shadows. This contrast comes by way of the low black levels that the projector is capable of by shutting down its iris. In all but the darkest scenes I find that the letterboxes around some videos appear almost completely black.

The projector gets dark enough that light control in the room actually becomes rather important. Light hitting the screen can bounce around the room and end up back on the screen where it should be dark, and this raises the black level. Using a VESA test pattern with two bright boxes in the corners of an otherwise black screen, I measured a contrast of 362:1 without controlling for room reflections. By blocking out the white boxes with black velvet, I could simulate a light-controlled room and measured a 3,251:1 contrast ratio. That was with the optical iris open. Cranking the iris down to its lowest level, I measured a 11,194:1 contrast ratio.

The XR10 uses motion interpolation by default, and this tends to introduce a lot of motion artifacts, though it can be a benefit to panning shots. I’ve found the visuals look smooth enough and avoid issues with the motion interpolation set to Film or disabled outright.

Gaming on the XR10 is a joy. It supports both 4K/60Hz and 1080p/240Hz modes with very low latency in both, even without enabling Game Mode. I dashed through levels in Hades 2, easily keeping up with the pace of combat and played through 007: First Light while enjoying the deep cinematic shadows the projector enabled. The XR10 misses out on VRR, though, and a new crop of projectors are bringing in 4K/120Hz capabilities as well, leaving the XR10 a little bit behind on those fronts.

The audio of the XR10 is quite something for a box as small as it is. It features a 2.1-speaker setup with two main drivers and a subwoofer. There’s a bit of low-end brunt to it, though I found the volume drops off a cliff below about 70Hz, leaving the deepest rumble out of the picture. The speakers do a good job with most content and get plenty loud without distorting, but they don’t have much stereo separation to help along with the stunning cinematic quality of the projection.

For what it’s worth, the XR10 still comes with the DLP rainbow effect. It’s not as bad as I’ve seen on some DLP projectors, tending only to be noticeable with white on black visuals, but it may be distracting to those who are particularly susceptible to it.

• Picture quality & performance score: 4.5 / 5

Hisense XR10 review: value

• Premium price
• Capable and flexible projection

There’s no getting around the fact that, at $5,999 / £5,999 / AU$9,999, the Hisense XR10 is a very expensive projector, even next to a lot of its competition. It outprices models like the XGIMI Titan Noir Pro, XGIMI Horizon 30 Ultra Max, JMGO Iris Ultra Max, and even Hisense’s own C3 Ultra Max, and by a considerable amount. It is on the bright side of these projectors, though not the brightest. What it does have is a greater zoom range than any of these with its ability to go to a 2:1 throw ratio. For anyone who critically needs flexibility in positioning, that could be a big advantage.

The inclusion of decent speakers for a projector and a streaming operating system are nice to see, but not something that sets the XR10 far apart from its competition.

Ultimately the XR10 ends up with a sizable premium that might be hard to justify for everyone who’s seeking the most value. But if you’re after high-powered projection and serious capabilities, there are really only a few options that effectively undercut this one, and we're yet to see how well they hold up to their promises.

• Value score: 4 / 5

Should I buy the Hisense XR10?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Hisense XR10 review: Also consider

How I tested the Hisense XR10

• Tested at home in multiple, real-world viewing conditions
• Presented the display with a variety of media and formats
• I have tested numerous projectors and displays over the last half-decade

I tested the Hisense XR10 at home, in real-world conditions. This saw it faced with ambient light coming in from numerous windows, in-room lighting, as well as ambient noise that both the projector and speaker systems had to overcome. The projector was tested both against a bare, white wall and an Akia Screens CineWhite screen. It was presented with streamed content, HDR and non-HDR, and console gameplay.

My testing evaluates the projector’s performance with respect to its price and competition from other models I and colleagues at TechRadar have tested.

I have been testing projectors since 2021 and displays for even longer.

• First reviewed: October 2026
• Read TechRadar's review guarantee

The Sensei Pro Mini brings pro-grade wireless performance to those who prefer less of a handful, thanks to its state-of-the-art polling technology and ceaseless power.

It has the same symmetrical shape as its larger sibling but on a smaller scale. Its size should prove suitable for those with smaller hands, allowing them to get a secure grip around the entire unit. At just 49g, it’s very light, too — lighter than the standard model by 4g — which makes it easy to maneuver.

The sidewalls have a pronounced cinch that forces you to clamp your thumb and ring finger further inwards than is typical, which some may prefer for added security. Grip tape is included in the box if you require more traction, which is entirely possible given the smoothness of the outer shell. The central hump might prove contentious in terms of fit, though: in my experience, it didn’t sit back far enough in my hand, landing underneath my knuckles rather than in the middle of my palm.

To customize and tweak the Sensei Pro Mini, you can use SteelSeries’ GG peripheral software. Here you can rebind all six buttons, with a fair amount of mapping options available, including keyboard inputs and shortcuts for media controls and system actions. You’ll find some standard performance tweaks as well, including DPI adjustments, although the range is larger than you’ll usually find on other gaming mice (between 1 to 65,000). There are five presets to customize, which you can cycle through using the DPI button underneath the mouse.

There are more advanced tweaks in addition to these, though. You can adjust the click response between 0ms and 20ms, and set the lift-off and landing distances independently, each with a range of 0.7 to 1.7 (presumably this refers to millimeters, though no unit of measurement is given). You can also enable a feature called Scroll Jump Protection, which ignores your first scroll unless a second is performed within a certain time of the first. This threshold is adjustable between 100ms and 1500ms. Motion Sync and Angle Snapping toggles are here as well, with the latter featuring a slider with 10 levels to adjust its straightening effect.

This isn’t all, though: a further section lets you adjust acceleration, with several graph curve presets available to alter cursor speed relative to movement speed, as well as the angle of the mouse’s sensor by 45 degrees either side of center to match the natural angle of your hand movements.

Then there are the polling and sensor adjustments. You can set the ultra-wideband (UWB) polling rate and the sensor report rate independently, each with a range of 125Hz to 8KHz (with added 9KHz overpolling). There are five presets containing various combinations of both rates, which can be cycled through using the button on the UWB base station.

GG is clearly laid out and proved fast and stable during my time with it. It also contains explanations for many of its settings, which is something I’m always glad to see. One minor gripe I had is that the actual area to make adjustments and customizations opens in a second window, which is somewhat inconvenient.

The first thing that’s noticeable about the Sensei Pro Mini’s performance is just how smoothly it glides. This is no doubt thanks to the large PTFE skates underneath. There’s almost no friction when gliding over a mouse mat, which makes the Sensei Pro Mini feel incredibly gratifying to fling around, yet also allows for super-controlled slow movements.

Next is the Sensei Pro Mini’s buttons. Clicks are light and snappy enough for quick spams, yet still provide enough feedback to allow for controlled inputs. They also have just enough dampening to make them satisfying to use. The side buttons are great to use as well, being easy to reach and offering a clicky, tactile feel. The same is true of the middle click, and I didn’t trigger miscrolls when using it, since the notching, while light, is tight enough to prevent accidental knocks from registering. This also means that quick flicks and controlled single scrolls are both relatively easy to perform.

My one issue with the inputs concerns the DPI button. It’s underneath the Sensei Pro Mini, which makes it harder to access. This is exacerbated by the fact it’s placed on the thumb side (for right handers) rather than the pinkie side, which means you can’t wrap your fingers underneath to press it without turning the mouse over.

I didn’t experience any connectivity issues with the Sensei Pro Mini. Given the sheer size of the UWB station itself I would’ve been disappointed if I had. Also, the cable provided to connect it to your PC is long enough to give you versatile placement options to avoid interference. It’s a shame a mouse this expensive doesn’t have additional Bluetooth support, though; many other wireless gaming mice feature this, allowing you to hot-switch between two devices.

To power the Sensei Pro Mini, SteelSeries has kitted it out with its ‘infinite’ battery system, something it and a few other brands have used in mice and other peripherals before. The idea is that you’ll never need to go wired (the Sensei Pro Mini doesn’t even have a USB port) to charge. Instead, you’re provided a pair of removable batteries that you cycle between your mouse and the charging dock in the UWB station.

This system works well, as it’s quick and easy to remove and insert the batteries — just as well, since the battery life drains rapidly when every performance setting is at maximum, barely lasting a day. At less intensive settings, though, the battery’s longevity is much better, lasting more like several days.

There will be gamers who would like the reassurance of additional wired support, though, should connectivity be compromised for whatever reason (I’m reminded of inference issues derailing a recent Valorant tournament). At this very high price point, such an addition would be especially welcome, as would Bluetooth. As it stands, the Sensei Pro Mini is an elite gaming mouse with all the wireless performance a pro could hope for, and it’s perhaps only this cohort that’ll see the value in it.

SteelSeries Sensei Pro Mini review: Price & availability

• $179.99 / £169.99 (about AU$260)
• Available now in black and white variants
• Top-end of the wireless gaming mouse market

The Sensei Pro Mini costs $179.99 / £169.99 (about AU$260) and is available now in black or white. A full-size variant is also available for the same price. It comes with two swappable batteries, the UWB base station (which doubles as the battery charging dock), and a braided USB-C-to-A cable, as well as spare PTFE skates and optional grip tape.

Even for a pro-grade wireless gaming mouse, the Sensei Pro Mini is expensive. It’s the same price as the Razer Naga V3 Pro, although that mouse has additional Bluetooth and wired support, as well as a lot more buttons. If you want the same limitless battery power, you can pair it with Razer’s charging mouse mat, although this a costly addition to an already expensive mouse.

Another pointer with a similar battery swapping system is the AngryMiao AM Infinity.97. This is even lighter than the Sensei Pro Mini at 47g. However, its garish style won’t be for everyone, and its software pales in comparison to the tweaking depth on offer in GG.

SteelSeries Sensei Pro Mini review: Specs

Should I buy the SteelSeries Sensei Pro Mini?

Scorecard

Buy it if…

Don't buy it if…

SteelSeries Sensei Pro Mini review: Also consider

How I tested the SteelSeries Sensei Pro Mini

• Tested for a few days
• Used for various tasks, including gaming
• Plentiful PC gaming experience

I tested the Sensei Pro Mini for a few days, using it for not just gaming, but also working and general browsing.

I played Counter-Strike 2, which is a great test for gaming mice, since it demands quick and accurate movements and clicks.

I’ve been PC gaming for over a decade, and used a great deal of pointers in that time. I’ve also reviewed plenty of them before, including the full size Steelseries Sensei Pro.

• Read TechRadar’s reviews guarantee
• First reviewed: October 2026

The Sony Bravia Theater Trio is hard to define, but easy to love. Hard to define because its three-speaker (Trio, geddit?) package doesn’t feel quite like either a soundbar or a home theatre separates system; easy to love because it sounds amazing.

Sony’s own story of how the Trio came to be states that it was borne from frustration in its audio department about the inability of regular soundbar solutions — even high-end ones — to deliver sound with enough power and scale to convincingly partner with really big TVs. It was deemed that rather than creating a mammoth uber-long single soundbar to solve this problem, a much more practical solution would be to create a three-piece centre, left, right speaker package instead.

While the left and right speakers of the Trio system are larger and heavier than the sort of satellite speakers usually sold with or as options for regular soundbar systems, the package overall still looks startlingly compact overall for a system designed for king-sized TVs. The center speaker only measures in at 23.19 x 2.52 x 6.5 inches / 589 x 64 x 165mm, in fact. But you can, of course, place the wireless left and right speakers pretty much as far apart as your room allows, to help create a soundstage commensurate in scale with a monster TV.

I would quickly add at this point, though, that I personally don’t see the Trio as only worth getting if you have a huge TV. It’s actually so good and, as I’ll explain, so flexible with its sound that it’s worth considering by really any home theater fan who’s able to afford it.

Just throwing a trio of speakers at the big TV audio problem won’t in itself guarantee a satisfying home theater audio solution, of course. Especially when those three speakers only deliver dedicated left, right, centre and up-firing channels, rather than the many more channels that even some single bar soundbars can manage these days. The thing is, though, the Bravia Theater Trio’s channel count isn’t actually restricted to the the handful we’ve just mentioned. The brand’s revolutionary 360 Spatial Sound Mapping system is capable of adding up to 24 ‘virtual’ (created by psychoacoustic processing) extra channels of sound to the system’s ‘physical’ ones.

The 360 Spatial Sound Mapping system’s calculation process for figuring out where to place the sound from these extra virtual speakers uses a supplied, high-quality mic dongle that plugs into your phone to tailor the sound to your room layout. This works so well that you’ll be able to still enjoy a totally coherent, balanced, symmetrical soundstage from your Trio system no matter how awkward your room layout might be.

This room adaptation part of the 360 Spatial Sound Mapping system becomes even more useful if you add a pair of Sony’s new Rear 9 optional surround sound speakers. Even when I deliberately set the the two front and Rear 9 speakers in the most unhelpful positions I could manage, the processing still somehow manages to put me at the heart of a colossal 360-degree soundstage.

I’ve let the Trio’s cleverest trick, though, lead me into discussing the system’s performance before I’ve finished going through every feature it has to offer. So let’s quickly get back to that.

While the Trio’s centre speaker’s long, slim design suits simple placement on a desktop under your TV, the left and right speakers sneak a narrow straight bit into their otherwise cylindrical shape to allow them to be wall mounted if that suits your set up.

Connectivity is passable. The highlight is an HDMI loop through that supports 4K/120Hz gaming feeds — as you’d hope with a sound system from the brand responsible for the PlayStation 5 — as well as the HDR10, HLG and Dolby Vision HDR formats, but not HDR10+. And the HDMI output also supports the eARC system for taking in sound from your TV.

Unfortunately, the only other port is a USB slot that’s apparently only for software updates. A second HDMI input and an optical digital audio input would have been nice on a £1,999 home cinema system these days perhaps, but the Trio’s support for Wi-Fi and Bluetooth (6.0) alongside the HDMIs will likely deliver everything most modern households will need.

These wireless options support direct streaming from Spotify Connect and Apple Airplay 2. On top of this, the system can also utilize Hi-Res Audio files and carries Sony’s redoubtable DSEE Ultimate AI upscaling system for making compressed audio sound better.

The latest Bravia Connect app for iOS and Android helps you set the system up, as well as providing an attractive and useful visual interface as a back up to the fairly basic remote control the system ships with. And it's particularly handy, given the Trio doesn’t carry an LED display.

Finally in the feature department, the Trio can play both the Dolby Atmos and DTS:X surround sound formats. In fact, it doesn’t just play them; it eats them for breakfast.

Any doubts about the Trio’s $1,999 / £1,999 / AU$2,999 price evaporate in an irresistible bombardment of almost impossibly massive sound staging, levels of power, detail and impact that seem to go far beyond the system’s claimed 405W of confirmed power. It also serves up mesmerizing detailing and precision, and an immaculate tone that has more in common with a premium full separates system than a minimalistic three-speaker package.

The system’s remarkable drivers and even more remarkable 360 Spatial Sound Mapping processing create a soundstage that fills at least the front half of even very large rooms, with the physical existence of the Trio’s three speakers essentially completely disappearing. As well as being capable of creating an epic sense of space for big movie locations, the size of sound the Trio can produce means it's effortlessly able to ‘fill’ the screen area and match the cinematic scale of even the very biggest TVs.

Despite its immense and immersive size, though, the Trio’s sound doesn’t forget the small things in home cinema and music life. It can pull in the boundaries of its sound superbly when a soundtrack wants to portray a tight space, for starters. Also, every detail in a movie sound mix is beautifully rendered, no matter how small, and produced with exactly the correct weight relative to other mix elements.

There’s no hint of harshness or brittleness to any sound the Trio makes, no matter how high pitched or deep it might be. In fact, despite the center speaker’s small size, the system gives the impression of having no ceiling for treble sounds to butt up against and turn harsh, and no low-frequency floor for bass sounds to flatten off against.

The relatively hefty left and right speakers do most of the heavy low-frequency lifting without making deep sounds feel trapped in, hard edged or distorted. They’re reactive enough to serve sudden bass hits with impeccable timing, too, and have enough range in the low frequencies they can produce to stop rumbles becoming overwhelming or coarse.

This excellent bass performance is particularly welcome, given that bass has been a weakness of some of Sony’s current soundbars, and that the system is quite compact. Perhaps an even bigger worry is that Sony sells Sub 8 and Sub 9 external wireless subwoofer upgrades for the package, which always makes me wonder if there’s a weakness in the core system that such an add-on is required to fix.

The Trio can deliver hard, sudden impact sounds with proper venom and propulsion, while the soundstage remains balanced and authoritative even at high volumes, no matter how dense the content might be.

Sound systems that go as big and dynamic with film soundtracks as the Trio can aren’t always able to turn their hands effectively to music. The Trio, though, is at least as engaging with music as it is movies.

Even in native stereo mode, without any of Sony’s remarkable virtual surround processing in play, the trio of speakers deliver excellent stereo separation and vocal placement. Nothing sounds at all strained, no matter what type of music you’re playing or how dense a track gets. It retains its genuinely hi-fi feel, too, at higher volumes than you’ve probably ever heard your favorite albums before. And yet, at the same time, people with neighbors will be pleased to hear that its speakers are sensitive enough to deliver music compellingly even at low volumes, something many soundbars struggle with.

Dolby Atmos music sounds similarly refined. It's detailed without being forensic, but also enjoys a more three-dimensional presentation that includes height elements. And if you’re happy to take off your purist music hat, I’d also recommend you try stereo tracks — or, at least, relatively poppy or ambient stereo tracks — through its 360 Spatial Sound Mapping processing, which gives it a more spacious and surround sound feel. Certainly Sony’s ‘upmixing’ with this effect is much superior to similar modes attempted by most other home audio packages.

It’s a tough ask to find things I don’t love about Sony’s Trio system. But I’m paid to try, so here goes. First, for all its virtual speaker creating talents, it only creates a quite limited sense of sound coming from behind your seating position. This can be solved extremely well by adding Sony’s new Rear 9 extra wireless surround speakers — though, at $749.99 / £699 / $ 1,299 a pair, this upgrade isn’t cheap.

The left/right spread of stereo music strangely narrows slightly when playing music through the 360 Spatial Sound Mapping despite expanding in every other way. And finally — and possibly most frustratingly depending on how big your household is — the area you need to sit in after calibrating the Trio for the optimal 360 Spatial Sound Mapping effect is quite small. Though even outside of this sweet spot, it’s still gloriously easy to appreciate just how good the Trio’s overall sound is.

Sony Bravia Theater Trio (HT-A8) review: Price and release date

• Released: July 2026 (UK and Australia), May 2026 (US)
• $1,999 / £1,999 / AU$2,999

At first glance the Trio’s $1,999 / £1,999 / AU$2,999 price looks substantial for a three-piece speaker package. Samsung gives you a full surround soundbar package, the HW-Q990H, for just $1,499 / £1,499 / AU$1,499, after all. Once you’ve placed the Trio’s speakers wherever you want them to go, though, and run the 360 Spatial Sound Mapping system setup, the system reveals itself to be a pretty much separates-grade performer capable of partnering with a huge screen and even filling a big room.

Hitting almost $2,750 / £2,700 / AU$4,300 if you add the admittedly impressive Rear 9 speakers starts to look a bit of a stretch, but you could always add the rears later as funds allow. The out-of-the-box Trio won’t let you down in the mean time.

Sony Bravia Theater Trio (HT-A8): Specs

Should I buy the Sony Bravia Theater Trio (HT-A8)?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Sony Bravia Theatre Trio (HT-A8) review: Also consider

How I tested the Sony Bravia Theatre Trio (HT-A8)

• I used the Sony Trio as my main living room audio system for 11 days.
• Also tested in a second room with a different size and layout, and with a pair of optional Rear 9 surround speakers.
• Tested with 4K Blu-rays, CDs, streamed audio, and games, using all direct HDMI connection, eARC and wireless connection options

I tested the Trio as my main living room audio system for 11 days overall, as well as using it in a second room with a different layout for two further days. I also moved the left and right speakers (and the optional rears) to all sorts of awkward places to test the flexibility of the 360 Spatial Sound Mapping processing.

During the testing period, I fed the Trio system audio content from a wide range of sources, including movie soundtracks from streaming boxes and 4K Blu-ray players over HDMI; music from a CD player and the various music streaming services the system supports; and game soundtracks from an Xbox Series X. Key movies used were Blade Runner 2049, It Chapter One, Civil War, and Sinners.

• First reviewed: October 2026
• Read TechRadar's review guarantee

DuckDuckGo is most famous for its privacy-focused search engine and browser (we've reviewed it here), but it also provides other tools that help users surf the web without giving out their identities. These tools are offered under a single, cost-competitive Pro bundle. It's a VPN, AI tool, and data removal service all in one.

I’m reviewing the DuckDuckGo Pro bundle to help you decide if it’s worth adopting for your online security. Read on to learn what this bundle offers, its pros, cons, and how it compares to the competition.

DuckDuckGo: Plans and pricing

DuckDuckGo follows a simple pricing system, which I like - you can see all the plans by clicking here. A monthly subscription costs $19.99 and unlocks access to all Pro features. An annual subscription is discounted to $200, equivalent to $17 per month instead of the $19.99 paid on a month-to-month basis. This discount is quite small compared to what I’ve seen on rivals, but is a discount nonetheless.

The pricing varies slightly for users who live outside the U.S. For example, U.K.-based users pay 19.99 pounds monthly and 200 pounds annually. Converted to the U.S. dollar, that sums up to $27 per month and $273 annually (inclusive of value-added tax). Other countries have similar pricing variations, so you may pay more (or less) than the sticker price mentioned.

DuckDuckGo offers a 7-day free trial for its Pro plan. This is shorter than the 14 to 30-day free trials I’ve used on various online security platforms, but still provides an opportunity to test the features before deciding whether to pay.

Subscriptions can be cancelled anytime, but DuckDuckGo’s website doesn’t mention a specific money-back guarantee period. It seems that refunds can be requested, but it’ll take a lot of back and forth, which I consider a drawback.

DuckDuckGo: Setup

Setting up DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro isn’t as straightforward as most security software bundles I’ve reviewed. You’ll need to first download the DuckDuckGo browser on your PC or smartphone (you can’t use Pro features on Chrome, Firefox, or Edge). The privacy-focused browser is the foundation of DuckDuckGo’s Pro package: it blocks ads, trackers, and cookies that pose privacy risks. The browser is free, but the Pro bundle unlocks enhanced security features, which are the focus of this review.

After paying for a Pro subscription, the first feature to take note of is the VPN. This VPN, built into the DuckDuckGo browser, routes your traffic through remote servers to prevent third-party tracking. Your location, IP address, and browsing history get hidden from third parties, like advertisers or, at worst, malicious actors.

There’s a limitation, though. DuckDuckGo’s VPN servers are concentrated in the U.S. and Europe, with few outside these locations. If you’re surfing the web from, let’s say, the Middle East, connections can get a bit slower because of the server distance. DuckDuckGo’s VPN isn’t like full-fledged VPNs that let you choose from dozens of countries.

On the bright side, DuckDuckGo’s VPN has a default kill switch, which automatically cuts off your internet connection if the VPN malfunctions, ensuring your data doesn’t leak because of a slight network mishap. I checked thoroughly, but didn’t find any button to turn off this kill switch, which is a plus in my perspective. Turning off a kill switch poses privacy risks during network lapses.

The VPN coverage can be used on five devices simultaneously. For example, you can install it on your work PC, home PC, and smartphone via the DuckDuckGo browser. Your traffic gets encrypted on all connected devices.

Another key feature offered under DuckDuckGo Pro is quite unique: identity theft restoration. If you face any incident of identity theft, you can work with an expert to mitigate the effects. For example, the expert helps identify fraudulent transactions that your card may have been used for and then files reimbursement claims with your bank. You'll also get help in fixing any credit report errors from fraudulent transactions.

There’s a catch, though: DuckDuckGo doesn’t offer identity theft restoration services directly. Rather, it has partnered with Iris, a prominent ID protection platform, to provide this service. You’ll be working with Iris’ experts if you use this service.

In this AI era, you’ll hardly find a security platform that doesn’t offer an AI-centric feature. For Pro subscribers, DuckDuckGo offers advanced chatbots (based on ChatGPT and Claude) with active privacy protection. This way, you won’t have to pay separately for the premium versions of Claude and ChatGPT, as DuckDuckGo offers access under the Pro bundle.

Overall, DuckDuckGo’s Pro bundle is feature-rich and effective at maximizing online privacy. However, with plans starting at $19.99 per month, I think it’s quite pricey.

DuckDuckGo: Ease of use

DuckDuckGo is a mixed bag when it comes to ease of use. Its features are exclusive to the DuckDuckGo browser, not the more popular Chrome, Firefox, and Edge browsers.

For most people, paying for the Pro bundle means learning to use a new browser on Windows, macOS, iOS, or Android. I didn’t find it difficult to get adapted to the DuckDuckGo browser, but it took some time because the browser worked differently from the ones I was used to.

DuckDuckGo: Security and privacy

DuckDuckGo offers a very effective online privacy suite, starting with a browser that doesn’t allow cookies, trackers, or anything that keeps a trail of the sites you visit. The built-in VPN encrypts your online traffic and prevents third-party prying eyes.

Identity theft restoration is another valuable service, and so is the bonus of interacting with advanced chatbots. You’ll be a lot safer online when using DuckDuckGo’s Pro bundle.

DuckDuckGo: Support

DuckDuckGo offers decent support resources. You can start with the help page, which lists answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs). I liked the breakdown of questions people often ask about DuckDuckGo’s privacy features and the detailed answers provided.

Users who need direct help can contact DuckDuckGo’s support team via email or by filling out a support form. There’s also an option to interact with DuckDuckGo’s staff via a dedicated forum on Reddit. However, there’s no telephone or live chat support, which I consider a major drawback given the price of a DuckDuckGo Pro subscription.

DuckDuckGo: Competition

Given the many features offered under DuckDuckGo Pro, it’s hard to pinpoint an exact competitor. Instead, I’ll highlight some competitors to key DuckDuckGo Pro features.

For the private browser, Brave is a notable option. After using both, I’ll say Brave offers more privacy controls and is more advanced in general. For instance, Brave supports browser extensions just like you’ll find on Chrome, but the DuckDuckGo Browser doesn’t.

For DuckDuckGo’s VPN, I’ll say any dedicated VPN app like Surfshark and Windscribe would be a better option, with broader server locations to choose from.

However, the point of DuckDuckGo Pro is to kill multiple birds with one stone: you won’t get the best of each feature, but, overall, you’ll get a good deal.

DuckDuckGo: Final verdict

A DuckDuckGo Pro bundle maximizes your online privacy, preventing third parties from tracking your online activities. If you want to surf the web without leaking data that’ll stay on the internet for a long time, I highly recommend it. However, you’d need to be ready to switch to a new browser and pay a significant amount, which I would see as drawbacks.

I get it. Most people won’t need the LiberNovo Maxis. Most people will see the price, baulk, and close the website. It’s expensive, its headline features run on a rechargeable battery, and it’s more chair than your everyday hybrid or remote worker needs.

But it’s also ergonomic, stunningly designed, cleverly engineered, and built for big and tall users without the usual flabby, foamy designs that I see for half or even a quarter of the price of the Maxis. It’s also one of the best office chairs I’ve tested. If you're over 5'10", you'll want to check this out.

On top of that, the model I’m reviewing here - the Maxis Airflow - includes a cooling fan in the seat, electric lumbar adjustments, and a back massager called the OmniStretch designed for relieving tension.

So, this is not your everyday office chair. It’s an elite seat for professionals who prize all-day comfort, a stylish ergonomic design, supportive top-end features, and don’t mind paying a fair chunk of change for that.

LiberNovo Maxis: Price & availability

The LiberNovo Maxis is available direct from the maker, and I’m also seeing it at online retailers including Amazon and Best Buy.

I’ve danced around that price tag enough. In the US, the LiberNovo Maxis has a list price of $1299; from the UK site, it’s £1099. At the time of review, both are discounted to $1119 / £1002.

And that’s for the base manual model. The Maxis Electric, which includes the electric adjustments to the lower back support sends the price to $1799 / £1579, while the Maxis Airflow reviewed here is priced at $1859 / £1699 (although again, at time of review, they are discounted by around two-hundred bucks).

On top of that, you can buy the chair in three different bundles: the standalone chair, the Standard pack which comes with a footrest, and the Premium Bundle which also adds a spare rechargeable battery. Unless you’re using the electric features constantly, I’d recommend either the Basic or Standard bundle.

All in all, the Maxis is firmly in the premium price bracket, alongside top-tier brands in the office furniture world like Herman Miller and Steelcase. I can understand why, in terms of build quality and design.

• Value: 4 / 5

LiberNovo Maxis: Assembly

This beast of a chair came in two massive boxes (three, if you count the footrest).

As ever, I recommend building this in the room you’ll use it in because this one is heavy and unwieldy to move. The gouges and marks on my wall as I struggled to move it upstairs are evidence of that.

All told, it took me around 40 minutes from unboxing to fully built chair. That’s on the longer side, but LiberNovo makes assembly as easy as possible. Forget your little instruction manuals with walls of text. This one comes with a massive sheet of card that pictorially guides you through each and every step.

It’s also the first office chair I’ve ever tested that includes white gloves for handling it. Maybe that’s over the top, but can bet I pulled them on and wore them throughout the assembly process.

• Assembly: 5 / 5

LiberNovo Maxis: Design & build

Build quality and design are superb. The pieces feel weighty, and I experienced no creaking or squeaking as I swivelled, reclined, and generally made a nuisance of myself at my desk.

This is a premium chair across the board, right down to the wide single-piece aluminum base that feels like it will capably and confidently support anyone up to the recommended weight of 399 lbs (181kg).

Being built for big and tall users, the Maxis is designed for those between 5'10” and 6'7”. Now, I’m an inch shy of the minimum recommended height and yes, it is slightly too large for me - particularly in the broad seat, which provides ample width and depth. I had to dial down the adjustability on the headrest and armrests to its minimum settings to stay comfortable and snug. Effectively, my negative experience here is a positive for larger, taller body types.

In terms of design, I had one thought: This is like an office chair designed by HR Geiger with its Xenomorph-like exoskeleton on the tapering backrest. Unlike so many I test, it’s a real executive statement piece.

• Design & build: 5 / 5

LiberNovo Maxis: Performance & features

I always judge office chairs chiefly on two factors: comfort and support. Here, the LiberNovo Maxis is an easy win. I used this chair for eight hours a day while working and it stayed comfortable from first to last hour. After that, I spent a few extra hours in it, feet up on the footrest, while gaming. I still didn’t tire of the chair or feel fatigue or numbness that some cheap chairs can inflict on me.

And then, of course, there’s that back massager. Actually, I’m not sure ‘massager’ is the right word here. LiberNovo calls it the OmniStretch, billing it as a way to lean back and decompress. I’d liken it to having a couple of fists kneading deep into your lower back while the whole backrest quickly but gently vibrates. That may not sound comfortable, but I promise you it is. It runs for a set five minutes at the press of a button. My pregnant wife has been using it daily for relaxation and pain relief.

Now, I generally avoid foam and fabric office chairs. I run hot, and prefer breathable mesh. And while the seat can get warm when sitting down all day, I found the two-speed cooling fan - only available on the Airflow model - was a very good solution that actually helped maintain a cooler body temperature.

Adjustability is excellent on this chair, and I found it easy to fiddle around with the headrest, seat elevation, recline tension, and swivel armrests. However, the standout mechanism is the motorized lumbar support buttons located below the left armrest. So, I’m not constantly reaching under or around the chair to adjust the positioning for continued support.

What’s notable is the Dynamic Support, so when I reclined back, the seat stayed stable while the armrests dropped back with me so I could feel supported in any position. I appreciated the steady recline system in place here, too. As you lean back, it won’t suddenly fall back, but eases itself into position. The tension can be altered using the under-seat knob, while the recline can be set to lock at different angles depending on how far you want to lean back.

Where it lacks adjustments is the seat depth, which is fixed at a larger-than-average 52cm, which makes it more suitable for taller users. I would’ve also liked lockable armrests. Like a lot of office chairs, they’re directional, moving laterally and swinging in and out without much pressure. That’s fine if you’re getting up and moving around a lot, but not if you’re locking in for longer work sessions. But I appreciate this may be a me problem - I had the same complaint with the Boulies EP600 I recently reviewed.

As I say, it’s a lot of chair for the money - the only one I’ve tested that comes with a rechargeable battery. And not every professional, whether in the office or working hybrid/remote, will need a seat at this level. But I can’t fault the comfort or design at all.

• Performance & features: 5 / 5

Should I buy the LiberNovo Maxis?

✅ Buy it if...

You’re built bigger or taller. The Maxis is specifically engineered for larger body types without compromising on style, comfort, or support.

You want all the bells and whistles. This high-quality office chair does it all. If you’re going to splurge out, it might as well be one with a massager and fan.

❌ Don't buy it if...

You don’t need the extra features. You're paying for well-designed ergonomics and features most office chairs will never have.

You’re under 5’10”. I’d recommend the LiberNovo Omni or LiberNovo Omni Pro if you want the same design ethos.

How I tested the LiberNovo Maxis

For two weeks, the LiberNovo Maxis Airflow became my daily driver chair. Eight hours a day, minimum, I've been sitting on it at work. And, once the work laptop was closed, I carried on using it, both while gaming and using the OmniStretch massaging feature multiple times throughout the testing period (when I could get my wife to stop using it!). During those times, I tended to pair it with LiberNovo's adjustable footrest for the added relaxation.

I really like the Acer Swift Air 14 and not just because of the price. It’s very portable, attractive in that clean minimalist way popularised by a certain Cupertino company, and comes with a battery life that’s as good as any other I’ve come across.

Acer has been impressing me with its recent Swift laptops, and this one is no exception. Of course, the price tag makes it a no-brainer for anyone wanting a solid, portable laptop at an almost budget price tag. It’s not sub-$500 / £500, but it’s close. I certainly think it’s one of the best laptops for the price.

It does, however, have some of the shortcomings that even the best Ultrabooks have. It’s not the most powerful laptop out there, by any stretch of the imagination – this is for people who just want to go online and do some office work or stream, not game or edit video. And the audio suffers from the laptop's smaller design.

Those things actually don’t bother me. That’s not what this laptop is supposed to be used for. But, Acer makes the same weird design choice that even Apple makes on more budget models, where there are two USB-C ports, both of which can be used for power, but, for whatever reason, they’re on the same side of the computer.

Still, quibbles aside, the amount of computer you get for the price in the Acer Swift Air 14 is pretty impressive.

Acer Swift Air 14 review: Price & Availability

• How much does it cost? $699.99 / £749.99 (about AU$1,010)
• When is it available? Available now
• Where can you get it? Available in the US and UK

If you’re looking for the Windows version of the Apple MacBook Neo, the Acer Swift Air 14 offers just as much value. The base configuration might start at a higher $699.99 / £749.99 (about AU$1,010) price tag, but if you want to match the Swift Air 14’s 512GB of storage, then two laptops end up at the same price. Unfortunately, that currently excludes Australia as it hasn’t yet been released there.

Granted, you’re not getting the most powerful laptop out there. If you’re looking for something similar but better, the Acer Swift Spin 14 AI is that computer. Sure, it’s $1,499.99 / £1,399 (about AU$2,150), but its Qualcomm CPU has double the cores and triple the NPUs than the base version of the Acer Swift Air 14’s Intel Core 5 320 CPU. You can upgrade the Acer Swift Air 14 to a configuration with the Intel Core 7 350 CPU and 12GB of RAM, but it’s still not going to do the same heavy lifting. Plus, the Acer Swift Spin 14 AI has a 360-degree hinge, touchscreen, and stylus.

It might be better to consider the Acer Swift Air 14 as Acer’s budget entry in its Swift line. It’s an excellent value while still functioning as a competent Ultrabook.

• Value score: 5 / 5

Acer Swift Air 14 review: specs

The Acer Swift Air 14 comes in two variants. The base configuration comes with the Intel Core 5 320 CPU with 8GB of RAM, and a model with an Intel Core 7 350 and 12GB of RAM. The difference in processors aren’t that different, except that the Intel Core 7 350 can be boosted to a higher turbo frequency, 4.8GHz vs 4.6, and has 21 TOPS NPU compared to the Intel Core 5 320’s 20 TOPS NPU.

Beyond those internal configuration differences, the Acer Swift Air 14 is available in four different colors – Sage Green, Frost Blue, Blossom Pink, and Lilac Purple with only the Sage Green and Blossom Pink available in the UK. EMEA countries, including the UK, also sport more minimalist etchings on the lid.

Acer Swift Air 14 review: Design

• Very attractive, portable design
• Keyboard and touchpad are good but not amazing
• Both USB-Cs are on the left

The Acer Swift Air 14 is a gorgeous laptop. I’ve only seen the Sage Green color in person – the color of the test unit for this review – but the colors, lid etchings, and aluminum chassis all present a very aesthetically pleasing package. I imagine that the other three colors look just as good in that way that I think makes this an attractive alternative to the Macbook Neo.

Also in its favor is its utter portability. It weighs just over two and a half pounds. That’s about the same as an ankle weight. And it’s just over a half inch thick at its thinnest point. I don’t think you can really get any more portable without going down in screen size to a 13-inch laptop.

Speaking of which, its 14-inch screen is a good-looking, if not amazing, non-touch display with a 16:10 aspect ratio and 1920x1200p resolution. It does get up to 300 nits of brightness – I typically have the brightness up only halfway when I’m using it.

I appreciate the 180-degree hinge, but that’s mostly because I feel like I don’t have to be as gentle with the Acer Swift Air 14 when opening it. I could see its use, though, if you want to share your screen with someone sitting across from you. If you do that, the viewing angle is more than enough for both people to see at 170 degrees.

Moving on, the keyboard is pleasant to use if nothing spectacular. I used the Acer Swift Air 14 to write this review and didn’t feel fatigue from typing. At the same time, it’s a linear keyboard with a somewhat short travel.

The trackpad is fairly responsive and accurate, though I found it to be a little too sensitive at times when my thumb was a little too close to it and had trouble getting the cursor to cooperate.

The port selection is about as minimal as one would expect on a laptop like this. Along with a USB-A port and headphone jack are two USB-C ports. Unfortunately, they’re both on the left side, a design choice that I always dislike since I find myself regularly having to plug the computer in on the right side, sometimes from a distance too.

• Design score: 4.5 / 5

Acer Swift Air 14 review: Performance

• Decent for day-to-day work
• Slows down if using multiple RAM-intensive tabs
• Sound quality is just okay

One of the downsides of a laptop built for a sub-$1,000 price tag is that either the design or performance (or both) suffer. The design on the Acer Swift Air 14 is pretty good... so it goes that the performance is what is throttled.

Now, Acer built this laptop to hit a price point, but the company also built it to an expectation. This is supposed to be an extremely portable laptop with long battery life for not much money.

With that in mind, Acer used the affordable Intel Core 5 320 six-core CPU with a speed of 1.5GHz and 20 TOPs (21 for the Core 7 350) and put only 8GB of RAM in the computer. At least the 512GB SSD storage is sufficient.

If you’re looking for a laptop to work on while in a cafe responding to emails in between social media side quests, then what the Acer Swift Air 14 does is more than enough. Even using the AI features like Acer PurifiedView and PurifiedVoice during video calls, both of which work well, or messing with CoPilot+ doesn’t tax this laptop.

But it’s not too hard to push the Acer Swift Air 14. When I’ve tabs open that require a lot of RAM and try to switch windows, I’ve experienced some freezing. And anything but the least demanding games are a jittery mess. I wouldn’t use this laptop for 4K video editing, either. A powerhouse this is not. Then again, it’s not meant to be.

As far as the sound quality goes, the Acer Swift Air 14 suffers from what ails just about all thin and light laptops. There’s just no room for any speakers capable of producing a full sound and it shows. There’s not much bass and the sound is on the thinner side. That said, it’s not harsh, so listening to music in the background while working is still pleasant.

• Performance score: 4 / 5

Acer Swift Air 14 review: Battery life

• Almost 17 hours of battery life
• Charges relatively quickly

The new benchmark for a good laptop battery life these days is anything over ten to twelve hours. So, the fact that the Acer Swift Air 14 can hit almost seventeen hours in our benchmark is remarkable. Note that this benchmark requires the laptop to run for that entire amount unplugged.

I’ve been using this laptop regularly for a little over a week and I don’t think I’ve seen it go below 50%. I have charged it a few times, mostly out of habit, but I have yet to be compelled to find an outlet. Plus, it does a good job of holding its charge when the lid is closed.

Acer advertises that the Swift Air 14 has fast charging, which might be true on certain settings, but I found it to charge at a still-good 1% a minute rate when set to a balanced performance mode.

• Battery Life score: 5 / 5

Should I buy the Acer Swift Air 14?

Buy it if…

Don't buy it if…

Acer Swift Air 14 review: Also Consider

If our Acer Swift Air 14 review has you considering other options, here are two laptops to consider...

How I tested the Acer Swift Air 14

• Tested for a week and a half
• Used it for work, gaming, and streaming
• Messed with its AI capabilities

I used the Acer Swift Air 14 for a week and a half. I used it for work, including typing up this review (along with the requisite online research). I used it to stream video. I even did some light gaming and attempted some semi-serious gaming. I played around with the AI as well.

After spending time with the Acer Swift Air 14, it’s clear that this is meant for those that want a portable and attractive laptop that’s nice to use on a limited budget.

I’ve spent the last few years reviewing tech gear for gaming and otherwise, where I’ve gotten a feel for what to look for and how to put a piece of kit through its paces to see whether it’s worth the recommendation.

• First reviewed: October 2026

Rugged tablets usually follow one rule. Make them big, make them heavy and hope the specification sheet distracts you.

The AGM Pad P3 does not play that game. It is an 8.68-inch tablet that measures 232 x 146 x 14.5mm. That is thin for a device that claims IP68 and IP69K protection. It means the tablet can survive brief submersion and high-pressure water jets. AGM says it is built for one-handed use, and it includes an adjustable strap for hands-free carrying.

Inside is the MediaTek Helio G99. It is an octa-core chip built on a 6nm process. It is paired with 6GB of RAM and 128GB of storage. A microSD slot can add up to 1TB more if you need extra capacity. The SoC wouldn’t be classed as fast in 2026, but it has proved dependable in a lot of budget hardware, and it’s better than many of its competitors. Android 16 is the real surprise, since many rivals are still shipping with Android 14. And some of those won’t be getting an upgrade to the latest release.

If this tablet has a weakness, it might be the screen. It has a 120Hz IPS panel with an 800 x 1340 resolution, and AGM quotes a peak brightness of 600 nits. That smooth refresh rate helps scrolling feel quick, but the limited resolution only supports 720p video playback.

Connectivity is practical, but hardly concurrent. You get dual 4G SIM support and eSIM, plus NFC, GPS and WiFi. But there is no 5G, which will matter to some buyers and not to others. The 7,200mAh battery charges at 18W, so this is not a device you can top up in a hurry.

On the back is a 50MP main camera, and on the front is an 8MP selfie, not great but not terrible either. The system supports at least Widevine L1, meaning Netflix and other streaming services can play in HD.

So this is a compact, tough and affordable tablet. It makes sensible choices where cheaper rivals make clumsy ones with even older technology and lesser specifications.

It might not be the best rugged tablet I’ve tested, but it represents good value for money.

AGM Pad P3: Price and availability

• How much does it cost? $236/£249/€300
• When is it out? Available now
• Where can you get it? Directly from AGM Mobile

To avoid confusion, this hardware has several naming options, including the AGM G3 Compact tablet and the AGM Pad P3, so I’ll use the latter.

The AGM Pad P3 is sold through the AGM EU store at a price range of €299 to €329, depending on whether you choose to include a tablet stand. The store lists versions with and without a tablet stand. AGM is also running a promotion that includes a free stylus with purchase, although this wasn’t included with my review model.

In the USA, you can get this hardware on Amazon for $235.99, and in the UK it’s £249.99.

That is a lot of tablet for the money. It is also significantly cheaper than AGM's own Pad P2 Active, which lists at €369 to €408.90 in the same store. The Pad P2 Active still runs Android 14. The P3 is smaller, has a faster 120Hz screen and runs a newer operating system.

Looking at the usual brand suspects for rugged tablets reveals that the Pad P3 may have found a niche, since most alternatives are more expensive, some excessively so.

The Samsung Galaxy Tab Active 5 is closer to $500. However, you get a much better software ecosystem, guaranteed updates, Samsung Knox enterprise security, and an included IP68-rated S Pen stylus. Samsung also have the Galaxy Tab Active 4 Pro, but that 10.1-inch design is north of $650.

A more affordable Samsung option is the Galaxy Tab A9 (8.7-inch), a tablet that mirrors the size of the AGM P3. It is incredibly affordable at around $175, features a great UI, and has mass-market accessory support. However, it lacks the smooth 120Hz fluid display, comes with only 64GB of storage, 4GB of RAM and lacks the processing power of the P3's Helio G99 chip.

The two competitors that AGM is truly up against are Ulefone and Oukitel, with the Armor Pad Pro from Ulefone and the RT3 Pro from Oukitel. The Armor Pad Pro is only $220, and that price includes 8GB of RAM and better cameras, but the SoC is less powerful.

The Oukitel RT3 Pro is the same price, comes with 4GB of RAM and 128GB of ROM, has only a 16MP main camera and runs Android 14. As with the Ulefone, it uses a less powerful SoC, in this case the G81.

The bottom line is that as a new product, the AGM Pad P3 is slightly more expensive than the closest competitor options, but the amount of processing power, RAM, and the 50MP primary camera sensor more than justify the extra money.

• Value score: 4/5

AGM Pad P3: Specs

AGM Pad P3: Design

• Slim by rugged standards
• One-handed use
• Stand is optional

Most rugged tablets are built like paving slabs. The AGM Pad P3 tries to avoid that form factor, being only 14.5mm thick, making it slimmer than many ordinary tablets with a protective case on.

My scales say it weighs 535g, although the official numbers are 540g, but that might include the provided strap. That is well under half the weight of the 8849 Tank Pad Ultra, which is a big difference if you carry a tablet all day.

The smaller 8.68-inch screen is critical to the design, letting you hold it in one hand like a large phone. That suits tradespeople on a job site, delivery staff and anyone using a tablet on their feet. An included strap supports hands-free carrying, connecting via loops through slots in each corner.

AGM offers an optional metal stand, which was included with my review machine. This relatively lightweight stand uses four tiny screws to secure it to the back of the P3. It offers a reasonably wide range of positions, from almost upright to nearly flat. In at least one position, it also supports the tablet in portrait orientation.

My only concern with the stand is that the small screws might easily be lost if you decide to remove them outdoors, and without those you won’t be able to reattach it.

The button layout is simple and predictable, with no custom buttons or special functions other than the power button and volume rocker. Because the buttons are small, there is no fingerprint reader, but it supports facial recognition from the front-facing camera.

The SIM and microSD tray was one of my least desirable aspects of the P3. The rubber plug is thin and difficult to remove, and once it's shifted, you need to then find the tray ejector from the box to get the SIM tray out. It’s all excessively fiddly, and it might have been easier without requiring a tool. The tray accepts either two SIMs or a SIM and microSD, but as this tablet supports an eSIM, that’s hardly a significant limitation.

The IP68 and IP69K ratings are the expected baseline, providing serious protection. IP69K adds resistance to high-pressure, high-temperature water jets. The AGM promotional material also cites a MIL-STD 810H drop test, but it doesn't say how far it fell or what surface it landed on. It’s normally impossible for reviewers to test devices to destruction, but the P3 looks like it could take some abuse and keep working.

Design score: 4/5

AGM Pad P3: Hardware

• MediaTek Helio G99
• 8.68-inch 120Hz display
• 7,200mAh battery

The Helio G99 is an old friend, as I’ve covered it in both tablet and phone reviews previously. It uses two fast Cortex-A76 cores and six efficient A55 cores on a 6nm process. The Mali G57 GPU is modest, but better than what you find in budget phones. The G99 is a platform for apps, maps, documents, and video, not demanding games.

AGM has paired it with 6GB of RAM, which is adequate but not exactly indulgent. The 128GB of storage is equally fine, and the microSD slot means you can get more storage space if you need it. Cards up to 1TB are supported, although you can only use one physical phone SIM if you install a microSD.

From a hardware perspective, the most compromised feature is the screen.

At 800 x 1340 on an 8.68-inch panel, it delivers only about 180 pixels per inch. That is on the low side, making text slightly lumpy and fine detail in photos appears missing until you zoom in. On the plus side, the 120Hz refresh rate makes everything feel smoother than the resolution suggests.

AGM claims a peak of 600 nits, and it can be bright, but the glossy display still makes it hard to see in natural outdoor light. If you can find a screen protector with an anti-reflection coating that fits, it might work better outdoors.

As I mentioned in the intro, Widevine L1 certification is included, enabling it to stream HD content from most content providers. The only caveat to that is that the screen resolution doesn’t allow for anything higher than 720p, which has been designated ‘HD’ by marketing gurus.

I wish this tablet had an HDMI port, where it could display 1080p to a suitable TV, because the tablet is undoubtedly capable of doing that. But given how many tablets have only Widevine L3 encryption, even expensive ones, AGM deserves recognition for using L1.

The 7,200mAh battery is modest, but the screen is small, and the SoC is reasonably frugal, so it still lasts a decent amount of time. The snag is that the fastest charging you can get with the included charger is 18W. Some phones can charge at 55W, and some tablets take more power than that. In my performance assessment, I’ll cover how 18W charging affects speed.

The last few points about the hardware in the P3 are that it has no 5G, though dual 4G SIM and eSIM support covers most uses. NFC and GPS are on board.

Overall, not a spectacular platform, but one that is appropriate to its price and potential uses.

• Hardware score: 3.5/5

AGM Pad P3: Cameras

• 50MP on the rear
• 8MP on the front
• Two cameras in total

The AGM Pad P3 has two cameras:

Rear camera: 50MP Omnivision OV50B40
Front camera: 8MP BYD BF20A1

The main camera is a 50MP unit by Omnivision, the OV50B40. For a camera sensor in a tablet, this one is reasonable, as it uses pixel binning to achieve better colour representation.

But, in my testing, it didn’t care much for low-light conditions, resulting in grainy results.

It is possible to take some good pictures with this sensor, but most are taken outside in strong natural light. As you can see in my indoor shots, this sensor tends to crush contrast and slightly wash out saturation below a certain lighting threshold.

Looking at the drivers compiled for the Android distro on this phone, it suggests there might also be a 0.3MP focusing sensor, but AGM doesn’t explicitly mention it or list it in the phone's specifications.

What it does mention for selfie taking is an 8MP BYD chip designed by that brand for cars, like parking cameras and self-driving functionality.

With many phones now coming with Sony 32MP selfie cameras, this one appears to be intended as a cost-saving measure for the makers.

What’s slightly fascinating is that the best video resolution available is the same for both front- and rear-facing cameras, that being 1080p. Although the rear can offer 60fps over 30fps on the front.

The 50MP Omnivision OV50B40 specification says it supports video at 8K at 30fps, 4K at 90fps, 1080p at 240fps, and 720p at a whopping 480fps. However, the G99 can only process 2K (2048 x 1080) at 30 fps, but the camera app doesn’t have those as options. So what does it do with all those unused sensor pixels? It has stabilisation, which is useful for shooting on the move.

Let us be realistic. Nobody buys a tablet like this for photography, I hope. It is a tool for documenting. Think site inspections, damage records and stock checks. What matters is whether the camera is quick, steady and legible.

The primary sensor is good enough for that, and the selfie camera is acceptable for quick face-to-face conversations.

AGM Pad P3 Camera samples

• Camera score: 3/5

AGM Pad P3: Performance

• Modern SoC
• Good battery life

The Helio G99 is no speed demon, but it’s better than the G88 that Ulefone used in its original Armor Pad Pro. That puts it in the middle of the budget field.

The natural comparison was AGM's own Pad P2 Active, which uses the same chip, but there wasn’t much to gain from comparing such similar machines.

The more interesting aspects of these results are to do with battery life, since the G99 is a 6nm chip, and the G88 is 12nm. The reduction in track size for the G99 provides greater power efficiency, and that is reflected in the nearly 20 hours it ran PCMark battery test versus the 15 that the G88 system managed. Admittedly, the Ulefone Armour Pad Pro still had 20% of power left, hinting at another two hours and 15 minutes of runtime. But given that the battery is 6.25% larger on the Pad Pro, it's still an impressive win for the Pad P3.

Charging was abysmal on the Ulefone tablet, and while it's better on the AGM, it could still take between 2.5 and three hours to get a full charge using the included charger.

I also noticed that if you use a high-end charger, like one of the Ugreen Nexode power packs, it actually charges slower than normal. Phones and tablets that are tuned to a specific charger is a recent development, and one I’m not keen on.

Looking at these numbers, I expect everyday use to be fine with the Pad P3. The 120Hz screen helps the interface feel snappier than the silicon deserves, which is why I expect it was used. Android 16 is also a bonus, as it brings better security and, in theory, longer support.

But AGM could improve Android update availability, since they’ve historically never made it a selling point.

• Performance score: 3/5

AGM Pad P3: Final verdict

For tradespeople, delivery staff and field workers, the AGM Pad P3 is easy to recommend. It is tough, small and cheap. It also gets the details right that matter in daily use, like Widevine L1 and a modern version of Android.

For everyone else, it is a sensible rugged option that doesn't cost much or take up much luggage space. At this price, one shouldn’t expect miracles, obviously.

The shortcomings are plain. The screen resolution is low for the size. The Helio G99 is a budget chip, and 18W charging is slow. There is also no 5G, if that’s important to you. None of these caveats is a surprise at this price, but it's best to go into this with your eyes wide open.

Compared with the AGM Pad P2 Active, the P3 is cheaper, smaller, newer and has a faster screen, but the same underlying SoC. It lacks the removable case of the older tablet.

If you need something more powerful, bigger or with a projector, you should look elsewhere.

Which device suits you depends on how much you value portability, because that’s probably the strongest aspect of the AGM Pad P3.

Should I buy a AGM Pad P3?

Buy it if...

Don't buy it if...

Also Consider

For more ruggedized devices, we've reviewed the best rugged phones, the best rugged laptops and the best rugged hard drives

The Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is one of the new generation of laptops powered by Nvidia’s RTX Spark chip. This all-in-one system-on-a-chip is packing 20 ARM CPU cores, 6144 CUDA GPU backed up by 64GB of RAM and promises to offer fantastic AI, creative and gaming performance in a lightweight, portable form factor. So how does this new SoC version of the Asus ProArt P16 laptop fare?

When powering up the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark for the first time, perhaps the first thing I noticed is its huge, vibrant 16-inch OLED screen. With a peak brightness of 1,100 nits and a 100% DCI-P3 color gamut, it looked gorgeous whether I was loading up my digital artworks or watching movies. And its 120Hz VRR makes it perfect for playing games on.

That’s not the only part of the ProArt P16’s design that feels premium. Its overall build quality feels suitably luxe, with the smooth metal of its upper casing feeling wonderfully tactile. Inside, its keyboard is well designed and feels pleasant to type on, while its haptic trackpad is precise and gives snappy feedback, even if I did find it too easy to trigger the right click at first. I will say its lid has a little bit too much wobble for my liking though: if I’m honest, I’d expect a laptop at this price to have a slightly more stable hinge.

But let’s not just focus on the superficial here: the ProArt P16 RTX Spark has a lot going on under the surface. That’s predominantly thanks to that Nvidia SoC, which enables it to tackle a wider range of tasks than even many of the best laptops.

Perhaps the most attention grabbing feature is its AI capabilities. Designed for hybrid workflows, the RTX Spark makes it easy to use a combination of local and cloud models to run your AI agents. Testing it out with the Qwen 3 8B open-source local model, I certainly found it had pretty snappy performance for basic workflows, with a basic data analysis only taking about 12 minutes.

More involved tasks took much more refining and prompting over multiple sessions though — attempting to automate 3DMark benchmarks took many 75 minute runs before the completion time reduced significantly. Still, being able to run these workflows on such a lightweight, portable machine was pretty impressive

Another area the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark delivers potent performance is during creative tasks. Running multiple PugetBench benchmarks for automating Photoshop and Premier Pro workflows, the ProArt P16 was only a little behind Apple’s M5 chip when running image-based tasks and beat it when it came to video tasks. And this was borne out by my own testing: even my largest 4K 300dpi Photoshop file crammed full of clipping masks didn’t make it wince, with filters and generative fills executing smoothly. Even downscaling the whole image to 2K only took around five seconds, which isn’t bad for a nigh-on 2GB file.

Few SoCs to date have been designed with gaming performance in mind. But given Nvidia’s heritage in this space, it’s hardly surprising that the ProArt P16 RTX Spark is capable of some serious gaming power. While it’s not quite able to deliver at the same level as RTX 5080 and 5090 GPUs, I enjoyed a very smooth 60fps on Cyberpunk 2077 on Raytracing Medium settings, while Gears of War: E-day ran at more solid than bedrock at over 110fps. So this laptop can achieve some stunning results, even if the performance you’ll get isn’t 100% the top of the range.

Given it can handle all of these tasks on the go, you’d hope it has a pretty capacious battery to back up that powerful chip. And it’s relatively good news on this front. While it only managed 11 hours of continuous video playback during my testing, during productivity based work it lasted well over 14 hours. That’s nowhere near as long-lasting as the Methuselah-like MacBook Pro M5 Pro, which clocked over 21 hours in our testing, but it’s certainly enough to get you through a standard day’s work.

Honestly, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is pretty adept at everything it tries to do: it’s a talented all-rounder. The only caveat really is its price: like many of the RTX Spark laptops, it isn’t cheap. Starting from $4,399.99 / £3,899.99 / AU$7,999, it costs just as much as a high-end gaming laptop or a pro-level creative workhorse — so, honestly, if you care more about getting the best performance you can in a specific niche, you may be better off investing in one of those instead.

However, if you need a single bow that can handle every single one of your strings, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is a good shout. It’ll handle running your own AI agents, whipping up creative work and even gaming for your downtime, all in a single, portable package.

Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark review: price & availability

Having launched on October 9, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is available now. Unlike its smaller sibling, it ships with the higher-end Nvidia RTX Spark N1X with 6144-core GPU and 20-core CPU.

As a result, it’s a pricey meatball: its list price starts from $4,399.99 / £3,899.99 / AU$7,999 for the spec with 64GB RAM, 3K screen and 1TB SSD. That increases to $6,999.99 / £5,999.99 / AU$10,999 if you want the version with 128GB RAM, a 4K screen and a 2TB SSD.

Even with its impressive specs, there’s no getting away from the fact that this is a premium-priced laptop. Both in terms of price and spec, the ProArt P16 RTX Spark is pretty similar to the Samsung Galaxy Book6 Ultra with Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, which will set you back $3,799.99 / £3,649 (around AU$5,410).

Alternatively, this kind of spend could net you the MacBook Pro M5 Pro 16-inch with 64GB for $2,999 / £3,999 / AU$6,299, which should give you a lot of performance and creative power but I wouldn’t expect to get quite as much gaming power for your buck.

Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark review: Specs

Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark review: design

• Gorgeous 3K OLED display
• Slim, sleek design
• Slightly flimsy hinge

Like all of the initial lineup RTX Spark laptops I’ve seen, the new Asus ProArt P16 is a sleek-looking unit. While its 16-inch span is pretty expansive, it’s still light in terms of weight, clocking in at 1.77 kg compared to my 16-inch MacBook Pro M4’s 2.14kg. It’s also got a pretty sleek silhouette — unlike some of the RTX Spark laptop models I’ve seen, it’s not concealing a much chonkier base with the help of gradually sloping bevels. And its nano black and neo white colorways feel suitably premium, although I marginally prefer the black version I tested here.

It’s not all about style though: the ProArt P16 RTX Spark has plenty of substance too. Manufactured from smooth metal, its external and internal surfaces feel wonderfully tactile, although I’d say the inner ones feel a tiny bit less sturdy than the solid bodywork of the outside. On top of this, there’s a tiny bit of wobble to its screen when you touch it — I’d expect a slightly firmer hinge on a premium laptop like this.

Speaking of that screen, I found Asus’s 3K touchscreen Lumina Pro OLED to be pretty impressive on the whole. Not only can my unit hit a peak brightness of 1,100 nits and a max 120Hz VRR but comparing it to my MacBook Pro M4’s Liquid Retina XDR display while watching Pixar’s Elemental was — sorry for this — pretty illuminating. While the latter can go slightly brighter at 1,600 nits peak, I didn’t find the difference all that pronounced. And the colors of the P16 RTX Spark’s OLED panel were noticeably more vibrant, with the reds, blues and greens of the fire, water and earth elements really popping.

To say laptop keyboards can be hit or miss might be the understatement of the century but, fortunately, the ProArt P16 RTX Spark’s keyboard falls more in the former category than the latter. Although the keys don’t have a huge amount of travel, I still found the typing experience to be pretty fluid. I rarely ever struggled to find my chosen key when touch typing — although I did occasionally knock both parts of the dual enter key, accidentally sticking random #s at the end of sentences. Still, it felt nice to use, whether I was prompting an AI agent or rapidly splatting demons in Doom: The Dark Ages.

For the most part, the P16 RTX Spark’s trackpad is also well designed. It’s very accurate, gives you a huge area for controlling your cursor and the haptic feedback is spot on, feeling exactly like a mechanical click. Really the only issue I found with it is the right click triggers far too far to the left, meaning I’d sometimes accidentally right click on certain elements. Still though, it’s a decent trackpad for the most part.

As you’d expect from a laptop this premium, the P16 RTX Spark comes with access to a wide range of connectivity options as well. On top of offering Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 connectivity, it rocks a pretty decent selection of ports for such a slim laptop. These include three USB-C and one standard USB port, an HDMI 2.1 port, a 3.5mm headphone jack and an SD Express card reader. So even for most creative workflows, you should find you’re able to plug in plenty of devices to get things done.

• Design score: 4 / 5

Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark review: performance

• Strong all-round performance
• Local AI workflows impressive but require some patience
• Specialist laptops can give better gaming or creative performance

I’ll be honest: by far the most exciting part about getting my hands on the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is that eponymous chip. Similar to Apple’s M-series silicon, Nvidia’s RTX Spark is the company’s first attempt at a full system-on-a-chip architecture. And given Nvidia’s involvement in both the AI and gaming spaces, it’s safe to say I was looking forward to putting the Nvidia Spark RTX through its paces.

Combining CPU, GPU and RAM all in one compact package, the version of the RTX Spark included with the Asus ProArt P16 I tested here rocks 20 ARM CPU cores backed up by 64GB of RAM. Meanwhile, on the graphics side, it wields 6144 CUDA GPU cores with 30GB integrated memory. In terms of raw hardware, it's less cooked and more meaty than steak tartare.

While this is the equivalent of using a steam hammer to obliterate a nut, general productivity tasks ran perfectly smoothly on the ProArt P16 RTX Spark. Whether I was browsing the web, tinkering with spreadsheets or leafing through huge PDFs, I never experienced any awkward hanging or slowdowns. Even on the odd occasion when I had to look something up online while the laptop worked on an AI task, there wasn’t any unpleasant gear-crunching, showing the ProArt P16 is plenty fast enough for general use.

But you’re unlikely to be buying an RTX Spark laptop just for doing a bit of Googling or filing your taxes. Instead, the most obvious use case for the RTX Spark chip in the ProArt P16 is its hybrid agentic AI functionality. Put simply, rather than being forced to choose between using cloud models that potentially jeopardize the security of your data and less powerful local models, this blended approach means you can pick and choose which parts of your workflow you’re going to outsource to the cloud and which you’ll keep under strict local control.

With its integrated fifth-generation Tensor cores, the RTX Spark should be perfectly placed to support this. To see how fast it could run some of these models locally, I used the MLPerf Client benchmarking tool to mimic data analyst and SWE agentic workflows using the Qwen 3 8B local model. And the results felt pretty rapid, with the pipelines completing after an average duration of 63.7 and 50.8 seconds and processing up to 14,005 and 10,238 tokens respectively.

But I wanted to see for myself what it could do. So I fired up Hermes, the open-source AI agent tool, and set it up to run the local open-source model Qwen3.8 27B to see what having my own personal AI version of Alfred could help me achieve.

Some of the basic tasks I threw its way, the RTX Spark practically scoffed at. When I asked Hermes to organize a spreadsheet full of web analytics for me and pull out actionable highlights, it whipped the file up into a pivot table and gave me six bullet points within about 12 minutes. Asking it to convert this info into a presentation with slides and prompts took a little longer at 23 minutes, but it helped highlight the best information to pitch — even if the slides themselves needed a considerable glow up before I’d ever call them up in a Zoom call.

In theory though, these hybrid agentic AI tools can go much further than this. Not only can you convert your prompts into skills or schedule them to run as daily tasks but you can even set them to target your apps and control your screen directly.

Some of my experiments paid off here: after one abortive run, I eventually managed to get Hermes to access my emails and create a daily digest in 70 minutes. But trying to automate some of my 3DMark benchmarking process ended up being a real rabbit hole — even with judicious prompts throughout the process and prompting Hermes to find ways to boost the skill’s efficiency, it took around eight runs to significantly improve its workflow. So it’s important to recognize that while some agentic pipelines may save you time in the long run, without utilizing some cloud models, training them may take a decent investment.

Agentic AI isn’t the only use you can put all of that processing power to though. While I’m not a massive fan of generative AI, I can definitely see how fast the RTX Spark is at whipping up new images and videos. Automating some imagery and video pipelines using ComfyUI, the laptop completed tests of Flux2.Dev - NVFP4 and Flux2.Klein 4B Base - NVFP4 models in just 46.5 and 16.2 seconds, while the LTX 2.5 - Distilled - NVFP4 video model took 88 seconds. Those are pretty swift run times for local generative models.

And if, like me, you prefer creating your own stuff from scratch, my testing showed the ProArt P16 RTX Spark can help here too. Using PugetBench to automate a range of creative workflows, I found Asus’s laptop was capable of some lightning fast processing.

Our standard Photoshop workflow completed in 10.83 minutes and achieved a score of 11,801 — that’s not far short of Apple’s M5 chip at 13,755. And the RTX Spark offered even speedier performance for video work, securing a score in our Premier Pro benchmark of 76,234 in 8.12 minutes, giving the M5 chip a bit of a drubbing at 69,887. Unfortunately, it can’t keep up with the similarly priced Apple MacBook Pro M5 Pro though, which managed to best it for both still imagery and video with scores of 15,204 and 105,580 respectively.

Naturally, I’m not just going to take these numbers on trust though, so I dug out one of my most demanding Photoshop files — a 4K, 300dpi PSD with dozens of clipping masks and adjustment layers — and checked how the ProArt P16 RTX Spark handled it.

Manipulating layers and applying filters caused scarcely any slowdown, in spite of the fact I’d tripled the number of layers in the file. Even downscaling the image to 2K — no small task given the total file size was now in excess of 2GB — only took around five seconds, which is pleasingly swift. And thanks to the optimization work that Adobe has been doing behind the scenes to allow its apps to take advantage of the RTX Spark’s AI capabilities, even generative fills and neural filters didn’t take long to generate.

When it comes to gaming performance, I’d say the ProArt P16 RTX Spark hovers somewhere between mid-range laptops with RTX 5060 and RTX 5070 GPUs. For example, when playing Cyberpunk 2077 on Raytracing Ultra settings at 1080p, I found the Asus hovered around 30.16fps — but, by contrast, the Acer Predator Helios Neo 16S AI with an RTX 5060 only reached a marginally smoother 34.47fps. Other games told a similar story. For example, Doom: The Dark Ages on Ultra settings sat at a pretty decent 48fps on the ProArt P16. In comparison, with its slightly beefier RTX 5070, the Samsung Galaxy Book 6 Ultra whipped the game like meringue into a much smoother 63.98fps.

But that’s running things on max settings. In practice, when actually playing games on more moderate settings, they ran plenty smoothly enough, especially those that are already well optimized for the RTX Spark. As I explored Dogtown in Cyberpunk 2077 at Raytracing Medium settings, it chugged along at a perfect stable 60fps. And playing Dogs of War: E-day on Ultra settings, I never saw it drop below 110fps, which shows what wonderfully smooth experiences you should still be able to expect from native gaming on the RTX Spark.

Honestly, I’d say that if you put the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark up against any similarly priced, specialist laptop focused on AI, creative workflows or gaming, you’ll likely find its performance can’t quite keep up. But that’s the point — RTX Spark laptops are a triple threat: they’re designed to be a swiss army knife that can handle every task you might throw at them. So if you want a lightweight laptop that combines the agentic AI hosting of a compact desktop, the creative power of the Apple M5 and the gaming oomph of the Nvidia Geforce RTX 5060, all in one handy package, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark should have your back.

• Performance score: 4.5 / 5

Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark review: battery test

• Battery should last 14 hours of standard use
• Some similar rivals can outlast it

Being able to achieve all of this on the go is impressive. But for that to be sustainable, it needs a battery that can keep up with these kinds of heavy duty tasks. Fortunately, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is capable of decent battery life, even if it’s not quite as exceptional as some of its rivals.

Running it through our standard battery tests, I played a 1080p video at 50% brightness and volume to see how long it took to drain the battery from 100% to 0%. The ProArt P16 RTX Spark ran out of juice after 11h 23m — that’s not at all bad but it’s also not quite at the level I’d expect for a premium laptop like this.

But a video test doesn’t necessarily give you the full picture. One of the big benefits of an SoC is through boosted efficiency during CPU usage, so I wanted to also run some tests that showed how the laptop fared in action. Running PCMark 10’s applications battery test — which runs various Microsoft Office based tasks until the battery is drained — the ProArt P16 lasted 14h 24m.

That’s definitely a better score, even if it falls a little ways short of some of the best laptops for Windows. For example, the Samsung Galaxy Book6 Ultra managed well over 15 hours in our benchmark tests and that wasn’t even the strongest contender. The MacBook Pro M5 Pro 16-inch clocked over 21 hours, which makes the ProArt P16’s look pretty short-lived in comparison.

Fortunately, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark does have one extra trick up its sleeve: its charging rate. Thanks to its 140W fast charging, topping your battery up again should be a relatively speedy affair. Sadly, my US unit didn’t come with a UK plug — slight oversight there — so I wasn’t able to test this as I would have liked. Still, my 65W charger topped it up relatively quickly, so you’ll definitely get pretty speedy charging out that 140W cable.

So I’d say that, all in all, the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark is capable of competitive battery life. When you’re doing standard office work, it’ll get you through a full day without you having to hunt out a charger. But it’s still not quite able to keep pace with the most enduring batteries on the market and particularly intensive tasks like AI or gaming are going to drain it much faster.

• Battery score: 4 / 5

Should I buy the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark?

Buy it if…

Don’t buy it if…

Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark review: also consider

How I tested the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark

• Tested over the course of several weeks
• Ran a huge number of benchmarks for different workflows
• Conducted experiential AI, gaming and creative testing

Testing the Asus ProArt P16 RTX Spark over the course of several weeks, I ran a wide range of benchmarks. Not only did I run a variety of baseline hardware tests using Geekbench 7.1 and Cinebench R23, but I tested performance across a wide range of tasks as well. I used MLPerf Client to test agentic workflows, ComfyUI to simulate generative workflows, PugetBench to automate creative tasks and 3DMark and gaming benchmarks to test in-game GPU performance.

On top of this, I did a wide range of experiential testing. Not only did I use the laptop for plenty of daily and productivity-based work but I also extensively tested agentic AI workflows using Hermes and the local open-source model Qwen3.8 27B. I also tried carrying out creative work using large, hi-resolution Photoshop files and played a range of games including Cyberpunk 2077, Gears of War: E-day and Planet Zoo 2.

As TechRadar’s reviews editor, I have plenty of experience covering laptops. As well as editing scores of laptop reviews over the last few years, I’ve reviewed multiple gaming handhelds and have used a huge variety of laptops over the years, both Windows and MacOS.

• First reviewed: October 2026
• Read more about how we test