Asus A18-150P1A laptop Adapter ,A18-150P1A Adapter for ASUS G501JW UX501J VX60G G60V W6700 J4720

20V 7.5A 150W A18-150P1A Laptop Charger Wholesale,Asus A18-150P1A laptop Adapter is replacement for ASUS G501JW UX501J VX60G G60V W6700 J4720 ,Asus A18-150P1A laptop Adapter discount price,Fast Shipping.

A18-150P1A

Specifications

  • Brand:ASUS
  • DC Output:20V 7.5A 150W
  • AC Input:100-240V 50-60Hz (for worldwide use)

Charger features:

  • CE, FCC and RoHS certified to ensure proper adapter safety and quality.
  • Sealed for protection against moisture and humidity.
  • Designed with internal safety features to protect against voltage spikes, surges or fluctuations.
  • Utilizes low voltage shut down protection.
  • Utilizes over voltage limiting protection.
  • Utilizes output over current limiting protection.
  • Utilizes “short-circuit†shutdown protection. 
  • Undergone comprehensive quality testing throughout the manufacturing and assembly process.
  • Includes a 12-month free replacement warranty for manufacturer’s defects.

Compatible Part Numbers:

ADP-150CH B,A18-150P1A

Compatible Model Numbers:

ASUS pro G501JW UX501J VX60G G60V W6700 J4720

Description of Asus A18-150P1A laptop Adapter

High Quality, Guarantee :
Factory direct price, 100% compatible, No memory effect. Hi-Capacity, Quality garantee, certification Fast shipping. We stand behind our Replace for ASUS Cord/Charger Asus A18-150P1A 100%.
Low Prices, Guarantee :
All laptop Replace for ASUS Cord/Charger Asus A18-150P1A at batteryforpc.co.uk are all directly purchased from various reputable manufacturers in the world and have passed stringent quality assurance procedures to achieve international standards. Through this direct selling model, middleman cost is minimized.
Satisfaction Guarantee :
Our goal is to make sure you receive the best value of every purchase you make at our site. We want to be your number one choice Replace for Asus A18-150P1A. If you have any question or suggestion about this laptop ac adapter, please contact us so we can offer you the most convenient service.
Secure Shopping Guarantee :
Shopping from us is safe and secure. None of our customers have ever reported fraudulent use of their credit cards as a result of shopping with us. You can be assured that the information you give us is confidential. We do not sell, rent or share information of our customers with other parties. batteryforpc.co.uk guarantee your Replace for Asus A18-150P1A transaction will be 100% safe.

Hot Products

11.1V/12.4v 2300mah BOSE 404600 for Bose SOUNDLINK I II III16.8V/20V 400mA/2200mAH/32Wh BOSE 300769-003 for Bose Sounddock Portable Digita7.4V 2230mAh/17Wh BOSE 063404 for 06340415.4V 5209mAh RAZER RC30-0248 for RAZER Blade 15 2018 RZ09-023863.8V 6300mAh/23.94Wh AMAZON 2955C7 for Amazon Kindle Fire HD 10.1 7th3.7V/4.2V 1750MAH/6.5WH AMAZON GP-S10-346392-0100 for AMAZON KINDLE 3 3G WIFI Kindle3.8 V 1300 mAh AMAZON MC-305070 for AMAZON Kindle Voyage7.7V 37Wh/4810mAh ACER AP16M5J for ACER A315-51-51SL N17Q1 SERIES3.8V 2930mAh/11.1Wh NETGEAR W-7 for Netgear AirCard 790S 790SP 8103.85V/4.4V 3080MAH/11.86WH ALCATEL TLp030JC for Alcatel A3 XL 9008j

4100mAh/15.58WH 3.8V/4.35V Agm X3 Li-ion Cell Phone battery for AGM X3 1ICP5/65/78

Agm X3 Batteries for AGM X3 1ICP5/65/78, Agm X3 Cell Phone battery is a brand new,100% Compatible original and replacement Laptop battery,Purchase wholesale and retail X3 with high quality and low price!

Find ou your original model number or part number(P/N), and move your eyes on the tag of battery

X3

Specifications

  • Brand:AGM
  • Capacity :4100mAh/15.58WH
  • Voltage :3.8V/4.35V
  • Color:white
  • Type :Li-ion
  • Battery Cell Quality: Grade A
  • SKU : ECN11976_Te

Compatible Part Numbers:

X3

Compatible Model Numbers:

AGM X3 smartphone

Description of the Agm X3 Battery Li-ion

1: Qualität steht bei uns an erster Stelle! Alle Ersatz für Agm X3 Battery mit hoher Qualität.
2: Unsere Marke BATTERYFORPC.CO.UK ist eine gute Alternative. Vergleichbare Qualität, zu einem günstigsten Preis. So bieten wir für jedes Budget eine gute Lösung.
3: The capacity and voltage of the battery are 3.8V/4.35V 4100mAh/15.58WH , which is close to or the same as the original standard, which can provide your device with a standard working time.
4: 1 Jahr Garantie! 30 Tage Geld-zurück Garantie !Erfüllt alle Sicherheits- und Kompatibilitätsanforderungen.
5: Unsere Vorteile:hohe Qualität+günstiger Preis+schnelle Lieferung.

How much do you know about how to run laptop well as any place? The follow Tips cut way back on protecting battery life.


1). Please recharge or change your Cell Phone battery when battery power low.
2). Using Li-Ion Replacement Agm X3 Cell Phone Battery for your notebook which can work longer time than Non Li-ion one.
3). It is better to defragmentation regularly for your Cell Phone battery life.
4). In order to reduce the laptop power consumpition, you can use some optical drive spin-down and hard drive in your Cell Phone .
5). Please keep your laptop in sleep or standby model without long time using, which both save the Replacement Agm X3 Cell Phone Battery power and extend battery using life.
6). Leave your battery in a dry and cool condition when without using.
7). When you rarely or generally plugged in fixed power using, Please take down your battery to avoid hurting battery life.

Other Recommendations

11.1V/12.4v 2300mah BOSE 404600 for Bose SOUNDLINK I II III16.8V/20V 400mA/2200mAH/32Wh BOSE 300769-003 for Bose Sounddock Portable Digita7.4V 2230mAh/17Wh BOSE 063404 for 06340415.4V 5209mAh RAZER RC30-0248 for RAZER Blade 15 2018 RZ09-023863.8V 6300mAh/23.94Wh AMAZON 2955C7 for Amazon Kindle Fire HD 10.1 7th3.7V/4.2V 1750MAH/6.5WH AMAZON GP-S10-346392-0100 for AMAZON KINDLE 3 3G WIFI Kindle3.8 V 1300 mAh AMAZON MC-305070 for AMAZON Kindle Voyage7.7V 37Wh/4810mAh ACER AP16M5J for ACER A315-51-51SL N17Q1 SERIES3.8V 2930mAh/11.1Wh NETGEAR W-7 for Netgear AirCard 790S 790SP 8103.85V/4.4V 3080MAH/11.86WH ALCATEL TLp030JC for Alcatel A3 XL 9008j

Cheap Bpi 353292G Li-ion Cell Phone battery, Brand New 353292G replacement battery for BPI 353292G

1500mAh/5.70WH 3.8V/4.425V Bpi 353292G Batteries for BPI 353292G, Bpi 353292G Cell Phone battery is a brand new,100% Compatible original and replacement Laptop battery,Purchase wholesale and retail 353292G with high quality and low price!

353292G Battery bpi Li-ion 3.8V/4.425V 1500mAh/5.70WH

353292G

Specifications

  • Brand:BPI
  • Capacity :1500mAh/5.70WH
  • Voltage :3.8V/4.425V
  • Color:white
  • Type :Li-ion
  • Battery Cell Quality: Grade A
  • Descriptive: Replacement Battery – 1 Year Warranty
  • Description: Brand New, 1 Year Warranty! 30-Days Money Back! Fast Shipping!

How we test this Bpi 353292G Battery Li-ion 3.8V/4.425V 1500mAh/5.70WH

Step 1: Make sure customer bought the correct battery.
Step 2: Check battery’s appearance and interface.
Step 3: Test battery charger and recharger function.
Step 4: Charger the battery to 100% and recharger to 0% to get real battery capacity
Step 5: Use Ev2300 to check the voltage difference of each goroup cells.
Step 6: Charger battery power more than 30%.
Step 7: Package battery carefully and send out

Compatible Part Numbers:

353292G

Compatible Model Numbers:

BPI 353292G

How much do you know about how to run laptop well as any place? The follow Tips cut way back on protecting battery life.


1). Please recharge or change your Cell Phone battery when battery power low.
2). Using Li-Ion Replacement Bpi 353292G Cell Phone Battery for your notebook which can work longer time than Non Li-ion one.
3). It is better to defragmentation regularly for your Cell Phone battery life.
4). In order to reduce the laptop power consumpition, you can use some optical drive spin-down and hard drive in your Cell Phone .
5). Please keep your laptop in sleep or standby model without long time using, which both save the Replacement Bpi 353292G Cell Phone Battery power and extend battery using life.
6). Leave your battery in a dry and cool condition when without using.
7). When you rarely or generally plugged in fixed power using, Please take down your battery to avoid hurting battery life.

Hot Products

11.1V/12.4v 2300mah BOSE 404600 for Bose SOUNDLINK I II III16.8V/20V 400mA/2200mAH/32Wh BOSE 300769-003 for Bose Sounddock Portable Digita7.4V 2230mAh/17Wh BOSE 063404 for 06340415.4V 5209mAh RAZER RC30-0248 for RAZER Blade 15 2018 RZ09-023863.8V 6300mAh/23.94Wh AMAZON 2955C7 for Amazon Kindle Fire HD 10.1 7th3.7V/4.2V 1750MAH/6.5WH AMAZON GP-S10-346392-0100 for AMAZON KINDLE 3 3G WIFI Kindle3.8 V 1300 mAh AMAZON MC-305070 for AMAZON Kindle Voyage7.7V 37Wh/4810mAh ACER AP16M5J for ACER A315-51-51SL N17Q1 SERIES3.8V 2930mAh/11.1Wh NETGEAR W-7 for Netgear AirCard 790S 790SP 8103.85V/4.4V 3080MAH/11.86WH ALCATEL TLp030JC for Alcatel A3 XL 9008j

Cheap Jbl P76309801A Li-ion Other battery, Brand New P76309801A replacement battery for JBL link 20 Wireless Bluetooth Speaker

6000mAh/22.2Wh 3.7V Jbl P76309801A Batteries for JBL link 20 Wireless Bluetooth Speaker, Jbl P76309801A Other battery is a brand new,100% Compatible original and replacement Laptop battery,Purchase wholesale and retail P76309801A with high quality and low price!

P76309801A Battery jbl Lithium Polymer 3.7V 6000mAh/22.2Wh

P76309801A

Specifications

  • Brand:JBL
  • Capacity :6000mAh/22.2Wh
  • Voltage :3.7V
  • Type :Lithium Polymer
  • Battery Cell Quality: Grade A
  • Descriptive: Replacement Battery – 1 Year Warranty
  • Description: Brand New, 1 Year Warranty! 30-Days Money Back! Fast Shipping!

How we test this Jbl P76309801A Battery Lithium Polymer 3.7V 6000mAh/22.2Wh

Step 1: Make sure customer bought the correct battery.
Step 2: Check battery’s appearance and interface.
Step 3: Test battery charger and recharger function.
Step 4: Charger the battery to 100% and recharger to 0% to get real battery capacity
Step 5: Use Ev2300 to check the voltage difference of each goroup cells.
Step 6: Charger battery power more than 30%.
Step 7: Package battery carefully and send out

Compatible Part Numbers:

P76309801A

Compatible Model Numbers:

JBL link 20 Wireless Bluetooth Speaker

How much do you know about how to run laptop well as any place? The follow Tips cut way back on protecting battery life.


1). Please recharge or change your Other battery when battery power low.
2). Using Li-Ion Replacement Jbl P76309801A Other Battery for your notebook which can work longer time than Non Li-ion one.
3). It is better to defragmentation regularly for your Other battery life.
4). In order to reduce the laptop power consumpition, you can use some optical drive spin-down and hard drive in your Other .
5). Please keep your laptop in sleep or standby model without long time using, which both save the Replacement Jbl P76309801A Other Battery power and extend battery using life.
6). Leave your battery in a dry and cool condition when without using.
7). When you rarely or generally plugged in fixed power using, Please take down your battery to avoid hurting battery life.

Hot Products

11.1V/12.4v 2300mah BOSE 404600 for Bose SOUNDLINK I II III16.8V/20V 400mA/2200mAH/32Wh BOSE 300769-003 for Bose Sounddock Portable Digita7.4V 2230mAh/17Wh BOSE 063404 for 06340415.4V 5209mAh RAZER RC30-0248 for RAZER Blade 15 2018 RZ09-023863.8V 6300mAh/23.94Wh AMAZON 2955C7 for Amazon Kindle Fire HD 10.1 7th3.7V/4.2V 1750MAH/6.5WH AMAZON GP-S10-346392-0100 for AMAZON KINDLE 3 3G WIFI Kindle3.8 V 1300 mAh AMAZON MC-305070 for AMAZON Kindle Voyage7.7V 37Wh/4810mAh ACER AP16M5J for ACER A315-51-51SL N17Q1 SERIES3.8V 2930mAh/11.1Wh NETGEAR W-7 for Netgear AirCard 790S 790SP 8103.85V/4.4V 3080MAH/11.86WH ALCATEL TLp030JC for Alcatel A3 XL 9008j

Honor MagicBook 14 with Ryzen 5 4500U review

Introduction

Huawei and its subsidiary Honor have been expanding their presence in the laptop world for years now but have really hit their stride in the last 12 months. We’ve now covered the ultra premium Huawei MateBook X Pro 2020, the ultra powerful Huawei MateBook 14 2020 AMD, the affordable 16.1-inch Honor MagicBook Pro, and its more portable sibling – the Honor MagicBook 14 with the 12nm quad-core Ryzen 5 3500U that was initially available.

Now we have our hands on the upgraded version of the last one with the new Ryzen 5 4500U processor, based on AMD’s newer Zen 2 architecture and built on the more efficient 7nm process. It’s a six-core chip that runs cooler and is friendlier to the battery.

Beyond the CPU change the new MagicBook 14 is largely identical to its predecessor so you might want to read the review of that one. Here we’ll mostly focus on what’s new.

Display and keyboard

Like its name suggests, the MagicBook 14 has a 14-inch display. It’s an IPS LCD with a matte finish and a classic 1920x1080px resolution. Honor advertises a brightness of 250 nits and 800:1 contrast.

In our review of the first MagicBook 14 we measured a screen brightness of 277 nits, quite respectable. This model we have here is a brighter still at 294 nits, better than Honor’s claims. The panel has slim bezels, which help it to achieve an 84% screen to body ratio.

The screen is perfect for indoor use and we appreciate the no reflections matte finish. Colors are nice and punchy and brightness is fine for all but the sunniest environments.

The full-sized keyboard is just as nice to type on as on the original MagicBook 14. Keys are big and nicely spaced out and they have good travel, without being mushy. The touchpad is a good size, a bit wider than most other machines in this size. It has a plastic surface but is smooth and responsive. Multi touch gestures work flawlessly.

The power button doubles as a fingerprint scanner with support for caching – you press it once and it will boot up Windows and log you in with your fingerprint without the need to authenticate.

Performance and battery life

This is the most exciting bit. The original MagicBook 14 we tested had a Ryzen 5 3500U processor with 4 physical cores and 8 threads, built on AMD’s 12nm node and running on a 15W TDP. The model we have here is the Ryzen 5 4500U with 6 physical cores and 6 threads, built on AMD’s new 7nm node. The Ryzen 5 4500U has twice the L3 Cache at 8MB and retains the 15W TDP.

In Geekbench 5 the Ryzen 5 4500U CPU scored around 20% higher in single core and 30% higher in multi-core than the Ryzen 5 3500U.

And here’s Cinebench R20.

We tested the 512GB M2 NVMe SSD by SSSTC and got a good 1,947MBs sequential read and 1,381MBs write. That’s solid performance, although you could find faster drives, namely the 512GB Western Digital drive on the 16.1-inch MagicBook Pro, which posted 3,400MBs and 2,700MBs, respectively.

We performed a stress test on both CPU and the Vega GPU to evaluate the thermal performance. The CPU, which idled at around 27 degrees Celsius at 1397Mhz ramped up 75 degrees and 3443Mhz, before throttling down and settling on 65 degrees and 3143MHz. We didn’t find a difference in behavior between Normal and Performance mode. The GPU only reached 62 degrees.

During the stress test the single fan worked constantly to keep temperatures down, but we didn’t so much as hear a tiny whistle from it. The MagicBook 14 is a very quiet machine, practically silent under normal load. And what’s even better is that the chassis didn’t feel warm anywhere but at the very top right, just under the screen. That’s excellent thermal performance.

Battery life was outstanding from the 56Wh cell inside the MagicBook 14.

We ran a YouTube video test and a browsing test, both at 100% brightness and 100% volume (around 70dB) in the video test. The MagicBook 14 scored 11 hours and 20 minutes of constant YouTube video playback and 12 hours and 30 minutes of non-stop browsing.

Verdict

At the time of writing, the Honor MagicBook 14 costs €530 for the configuration with a 12nm Ryzen 5 3500U with 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage. The model we have here with the 7nm Ryzen 5 4500U is €750, but you get double the storage at 512GB. We’d say that’s a reasonable markup for twice the storage, 20%-30% faster CPU performance, not to mention the better efficiency due to the newer manufacturing process.

The Honor MagicBook 14 is a perfect proposition for the current stay at home work culture. It can go all day on a single charge, is very lightweight and portable and is perfect for typing and productivity work. It can even handle some amounts of photo editing or coding easily.

You could save some money and go with the cheaper 12nm MagicBook 14, but investing in a 7nm laptop now is the sensible thing as it will be much more future-proof. Another easy recommendation. Great job, Honor!

COLORFUL Launches CVN Guardian and WARHALBERD DDR4 Memory Series

October 12th , 2020 Shenzhen, China – Colorful Technology Company Limited, professional manufacturer of graphics cards, motherboards, all-in-one gaming and multimedia solutions and high-performance storage, launches the CVN Guardian RGB DDR4 gaming memory for the latest AMD platforms and the WARHALBERD DDR4 memory for the 3rd generation AMD Ryzen platform and Intel desktop platforms. The COLORFUL CVN Guardian RGB Gaming Memory sports an eye-catching heat sink with an RGB lightbar that supports motherboard RGB sync. On the other hand, the WARHALBERD is a value-oriented DDR4 memory featuring CXMT memory modules for a wide application from gaming to office PCs.

COLORFUL CVN Guardian RGB Gaming Memory

The CVN Guardian RGB DDR4 gaming memory is the latest addition to the CVN family. Designed for gamers, the CVN Guardian sports a futuristic high-performance heat spreader with superb heat dissipation to ensure stable gaming performance. COLORFUL uses specially selected Hynix CJR memory modules that offer stable performance and excellent overclocking capabilities. The CVN Guardian Gaming Memory supports XMP 2.0 automatic overclocking function for a quick performance boost.

The CVN Guardian gaming memory has an addressable RGB lightbar that supports ARGB synchronization via the iGame Center. It also supports motherboard ARGB sync technologies including ASUS Aura Sync, MSI Mystic Light, GIGABYTE RGB Fusion, and ASRock Polychrome Sync. Furthermore, the CVN Guardian’s RGB lighting is complemented with laser engraved heat spreaders with a brushed aluminum finish.

The COLORFUL CVN Guardian gaming memory goes through rigorous testing including a 48-hour strict quality test to ensure stability and reliability. COLORFUL covers the CVN Guardian memory with a limited lifetime warranty. Available in three single-module packs at various speeds – DDR4-2666 8G, DDR4-3200 8GB, and DDR4-3200 16G.

Specifications

Model

DDR4-2666 8G

DDR4-3200 8G

DDR4-3200 16G

Module Capacity

8GB

8GB

16GB

Frequency

DDR4 2666MHz

DDR4 3200MHz

DDR4 3200MHz

Timing Sequence

19-19-19-43

16-18-18-38

16-20-20-40

Voltage

1.2V

1.35V

1.25V

COLOFUL WARHALBERD DDR4 Memory

The COLORFUL WARHALBERD Series is a value-oriented DDR4 memory for various applications from gaming to home PCs. The WARHALBERD memory modules are designed for the Intel and AMD mainstream platforms, available in DDR4-2666 8G and DDR4-3000MHz 8G single-module packs. The WARHALBERD memory passed rigorous testing with excellent compatibility in current-generation and previous-generation motherboards. The WARHALBERD memory is also subjected to rigorous testing including a 48-hour strict quality test. It also supports XMP 2.0 automatic overclocking function.

The COLORFUL WARHALBERD memory features CXMT (ChangXin Memory Technologies) DDR4 memory chips.

Pricing and Availability

The COLORFUL CVN Guardian DDR4 gaming memory will be available in selected regions worldwide with an MSRP of $49 for DDR4-2666 8G, $69 for DDR4-3200 8G, and $99 for DDR4-3200 16G.

ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q 43in 120Hz Gaming Monitor Review

The XG438Q is based around a VA panel, with the usual characteristics of this technology. It has very high 4,000:1 contrast, and quite high 450cd/m2 brightness. On the downside, the pixel response is 4ms gray-to-gray, which is par for the course for VA. Brightness and contrast are sufficient to enable HDR-10 support, with the ability to display 90 per cent DCI-P3 gamut to go with it.

Since this is such a big screen, it’s not packed with the adjustment. You can tilt forwards and backwards, but otherwise the position is fixed on the stand, with no swivel or height raising. There are three HDMI 2.0 inputs and a single DisplayPort 1.4, so you can plug in multiple games consoles, media streamers and your PC all at the same time. There’s a USB 3.0 hub, but only with two downstream connections.

However, a screen this size, with this resolution and feature set, doesn’t come cheap. Priced over £1,000, the XG438Q is a premium screen for a premium gaming experience. Let’s find out if it delivers.

Specification:

Screen size: 43-inch, 16:9 aspect

Native resolution: 3,840 x 2,160

Curvature: None

Refresh rate: 120Hz, AMD FreeSync 2

Panel type: VA

Contrast ratio: 4,000:1 (typical)

Brightness: 450cd/m2

Response time: 4ms Gray-to-Gray

Display inputs: 3 x HDMI 2.0, 1 x DisplayPort 1.4

USB hub: Yes, 2 x USB 3.0

Tilt: 5 degrees forward, 10 degrees backward

Raise: No

Swivel: No

Portrait: No

Other: Audio output, audio input, 10W stereo speakers

The ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q is an absolutely huge screen that comes in a huge box.

Inside you get the usual array of a video cables for each type of connection (HDMI, DisplayPort), USB upstream for the hub, and a power cable with external supply. There’s also an analog minijack audio cable, plus a remote control. The final inclusion is a little lighting device for projecting the ROG logo via ASUS Aura Sync system.

The fixed stand makes the XG438Q look more like a TV than a gaming monitor. There is Republic of Gamers branding strategically placed front and rear, but the design is completely overwhelmed by the size of this panel.

The only adjustments available are tilting five degrees forward or ten degrees back.

On the side of the screen, in a place that’s more convenient to reach, can be found the analog audio mini-jacks for input and output for headphones or external speakers. The upstream and two downstream ports for the USB 3.0 hub are also located here. Finally, one of the HDMI 2.0 ports is available facing sideways, making temporary connections easier. The remaining two HDMI 2.0 connections, DisplayPort 1.4, MiniUSB for AuraSync devices and power input are found beneath a plastic cover.

The menu is operated by four large buttons on the rear right corner of the panel, with a joystick at the top.

The lowest button simply turns the monitor off and on, so we’ll move up to the second-from-bottom button.

This button reveals quick menu access to the GameVisual preset modes, which include a lot of different game types. There’s a more generic Scenery Mode, then Racing Mode, Cinema Mode, RTS/RPG Mode, FPS Mode, sRGB Mode, and a separate MOBA Mode, where many monitors will expect you to use the RTS option for MOBAs. Finally, there’s a slot for user-configurable settings.

The next button up lets you choose between the four different video inputs manually.

The third button up simply exits other menus, so we move swiftly to pushing in the joystick, which reveals a menu you can now use to get to the same functions as the buttons, as well as the main menu. Note that pulling or pushing the joystick in any other direction rather than pushing it in before this menu appears doesn’t do anything.

If you push the joystick in again, you get the main menu, with the first subsection being the GameVisual modes once more.

Next along is GamePlus, where you can place a crosshair onscreen – for practice purposes only, we always stress. You can also superimpose a timer, hardware FPS counter, and grid to help with aligning multiple screens. However, you’d have to be truly minted to have more than one XG438Q monitor.

Next down is the Color section, which includes the usual controls for brightness and contrast as well as saturation. Color Temp has Cool, Normal and Warm presets as well as the ability to adjust via separate red, green and blue values. The Gamma options include 1.8, 2.2 and 2.5.

The Image section provides pixel overdrive options under OD. Aspect Control will only be available with non-native resolutions. ASCR is a smart contrast system. You can enable FreeSync here, and add up to four levels of Blue Light Filter to help counter eye strain. HDR is only available with an appropriate video signal, while Dynamic Dimming is another way to improve contrast. Finally, Shadow Boost improves contrast only in dark areas – handy for helping you to pick out enemies who hide in poor illumination, without blowing out brighter portions of the screen.

A screen this big, with this many video inputs, is a prime candidate for picture-in-picture. You could, for example, have your set-top box input superimposed within your Windows desktop.

The main menu also has a section for switching manually between the four video inputs.

Under System Setup, you find all the sundry configuration options such as how the USB hub behaves, which input is supplying sound, which menu options the quick buttons point to, how the OSD itself behaves, and which language the interface uses. You can also view information about the input signal and screen setup. However, at the top can be found Aura Sync and Aura RGB, which is where you alter the behaviour of the external projector and rear lighting.

Finally, MyFavorite provides the ability to save and load two full custom configurations.

Overall, the OSD has plenty to offer and makes it all quite easy to find with a logical layout. Unlike some manufacturers, ASUS keeps presets for multimedia and games in one place, although there aren’t any work-related options here. There is a good array of game-specific functions available. This is essentially the standard set of ASUS gaming monitor OSD features, and we never really have much to complain about in this area. We particularly like the wide selection of presets for specific game types, including the ever-popular MOBA.

Our main test involves using a DataColor SpyderX Colorimeter to assess a display’s image quality. The device sits on top of the screen while the software generates colour tones and patterns, which it compares against predetermined values to work out how accurate the screen is.

The results show –

A monitor’s maximum brightness in candelas or cd/m2 at various levels set in the OSD.

A monitor’s contrast ratio at various brightness levels in the OSD.

The brightness deviation across the panel.

The black and white points.

The colour accuracy, expressed as a Delta E ratio, with a result under 3 being fine for normal use, and under 2 being great for colour-accurate design work.

The exact gamma levels, with a comparison against preset settings in the OSD.

We first run this test with the display in its default, out-of-the-box state, with all settings on default after a factory reset. We then calibrate the screen using the Spyder software and run the test again.

We always test the display subjectively on the Windows desktop, using it for general tasks such as browsing and word processing, and with games as well, even if the display is not intended solely for that purpose.

We pay careful attention to any artefacts, ghosting or motion blur, and enable any gaming-specific features, such as adaptive-sync settings like G-Sync or FreeSync, using a compatible graphics card in our test PC.

We performed the quality tests on the ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q at its native 3,840 x 2,160 resolution in the default mode, after resetting the OSD, which sets the refresh to 60Hz, over a DisplayPort connection. Our test system was equipped with an AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition graphics card, which supports FreeSync, so we enabled that for games testing.

The gamut is very good, with the usual 100 per cent sRGB we now expect from all monitors, plus an excellent 86 per cent AdobeRGB and an also excellent 94 per cent DCI-P3, which is actually above specification.

Brightness uniformity is not so impressive, however, as we’ve often seen with very large monitors. The brightness differs in double percentage figures in a lot of areas of the screen compared to the centre.

Colour uniformity is a bit more respectable at most brightness levels, although not the best we’ve seen.

The XG438Q actually exceeds its brightness specification of 450cd/m2, managing 462.3cd/m2 at its maximum setting. Contrast hits a very commendable 3,270:1 at this setting, too, which is a little behind the 4,000:1 rating but we don’t test with contrast all the way up anyway, we use the default value. The white point isn’t that uniform, ranging from 6600K at zero brightness to 7000K at 100 per cent, which is quite a wide variation.

You get a fair amount of options with the different GameVisual presets. Scenery Mode is high brightness and contrast, offering 428.8cd/m2 for the former and 3,790:1 for the latter, with a mid-range 7000K white point. Racing Mode (the default, for some reason) is still quite bright at 407.9cd/m2 and high contrast, offering 3,610:1, with the same 7000K white point. Cinema Mode uses a much cooler 8900K white point, with a lower 334.6cd/m2 brightness and still high 2,960:1 contrast.

The RTS/RPG and FPS modes are almost identical, with 406.7cd/m2 brightness, 7000K white point and 600:1 or 590:1 contrast respectively. The differences between these modes are likely to be in other settings, such as shadow boosting and pixel overdrive. MOBA has very similar brightness at 407.5cd/m2, the same 7000K white point but a much higher contrast of 3,610:1. Finally, sRGB goes for a relatively low 182.5cd/m2 brightness, lower but still strong 1,850:1 contrast, and slightly cooler 7200K white point.

The gamma modes are consistently 0.1 above their nominal value, so you can’t achieve a true 2.2, but at least you know what you’ll get with each and the increments are uniform.

Colour accuracy at default settings, however, is not that great. The average deviation of 3.13 isn’t terrible, but we’d expect more from a monitor this expensive, making the XG438Q a prime candidate for calibration. So we fired up the SpyderX again.

After calibration, which consisted mostly of dropping the brightness down a lot from the default 90 per cent, the gamut has gone down slightly. You still get 100 per cent sRGB, but AdobeRGB and P3 have both dropped two per cent to 84 and 92 per cent respectively. These are still great values, though.

The Gamma 2.2 preset is now spot on the 2.2 value it’s supposed to provide.

Calibration has improved colour accuracy notably, to an average deviation of 1.7. This is good but still not as exceptional as a number of the monitors we’ve tested recently.

Overall, the ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q offers good but not outstanding performance.

Of course, this is a gaming monitor so we also had to fire up our usual suite of games including CS:GO, Rainbow 6 Siege and League of Legends. We enabled the FPS Gaming Mode preset for the first two games, and MOBA for LoL. We also made sure FreeSync was enabled.

The first thing we should say is that this is an absolutely amazing monitor for a MOBA. There is so much space that you can get a truly excellent view of the game terrain. We also tried Civilization VI and the huge space was superb for this as well (we switched to RTS Mode for Civ).

Our AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition graphics card could only drive CS:GO at high enough frame rates in 4K to get close to the 120Hz refresh. It was smooth and eminently playable. Rainbow 6 Siege was only hitting around 60fps so not making much use of the higher refresh. Sitting at desk distance from a screen this huge for FPS play is quite mesmerising, and if we’re honest a bit too immersive. We didn’t have a 4K console to hand, but we suspect that this screen will be absolutely in its element for gaming when you’re a little bit further from the display itself.

The ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q is a monster of a screen. Paying over a grand for a monitor sounds expensive, but looking at other 4K monitors with this screen size (of which there aren’t that many), it’s around what you’d expect. The performance out of the box isn’t quite as outstanding as we would have hoped, but its acceptable once you calibrate, so this screen is capable of decent quality if you set it up correctly.

The ASUS OSD as always delivers a fine array of features that will allow the gaming user to tweak the configuration for the style of play desired, including useful options like a hardware FPS counter. There’s not that much here if you did want to cross over into work territory, other than the sRGB GameVisual mode. You can have some fun with the light projection system and Aura Sync for a truly blinged-out gaming experience.

We do wonder why there are only two USB ports, although they are usefully placed on the side. But you get a wealth of video connectivity, which points to the direction where this screen is best suited. If you’ve got consoles, video set-top boxes and a PC all to use through one screen, preferably all in 4K, then the XG438Q is a decent choice. However, it is worth pointing out its HDMI ports are only HDMI 2.0, not HDMI 2.1. This means next-gen consoles won’t be able to utilise the 120Hz refresh at 4K, though PC users can of course utilise a DisplayPort connection instead.

You will also need a hefty graphics card to get the most out of the 120Hz ability with the latest AAA PC titles. But if you’re serious about your gaming screen size, the ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q is well worth considering.

The ASUS ROG Strix XG438Q is available from Overclockers UK for £1,078.99.

Pros:

Huge 43in 4K desktop.

120Hz refresh.

AMD FreeSync 2 adaptive sync.

Reasonable price for a 4K screen this big.

Plenty of adjustments available in OSD, particularly for gaming.

Lots of video inputs.

Aura ROG logo projector included.

Built-in USB 3.0 hub.

Cons:

Mediocre colour accuracy before calibration.

Only two USB ports on hub.

Almost no ergonomic adjustment.

Mediocre brightness uniformity.

HDMI 2.0 ports, not 2.1.

AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 Price, Specs, Release Date, Performance, All We Know

AMD has officially announced that the Zen 3 architecture will land this year and outlined the new Ryzen 5000 models, setting the stage for a new wave of powerful chips based upon a newer version of AMD’s most successful architecture to date. The new Zen 3 microarchitecture will power AMD’s full lineup of next-gen chips, including the Ryzen 5000 “Vermeer” desktop processors that will soon vie for a spot on our list of Best CPUs, the Ryzen 5000 laptop chips, and the EPYC Milan data center processors.

The first four new Ryzen 5000 models come as chips for the desktop PC, and they stretch from the $299 Ryzen 5 5600X up to the $799 Ryzen 9 5950X. The chips will be on shelves on November 5th and could represent a big shift in the AMD vs Intel CPU wars. 

AMD says Zen 3 features a grounds-up rethinking of the architecture that finally allows it to take the 1080p gaming performance lead from Intel. Paired with a 19% boost to instructions per cycle (IPC) throughput and peak boost speeds of up to 4.9 GHz, AMD may just have the magic 7nm bullet that finally upsets Intel from its position at the top of our gaming performance benchmarks. In fact, given what we’ve seen so far, it looks like AMD could soon enjoy a dominating position in the desktop PC market unlike anything we’ve seen since the Athlon 64 days. 

AMD’s Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 stack begins with the impressive 16-core 32-thread Ryzen 9 5950X that will retail for $799. This chip boosts up to 4.9 GHz, has 64MB of unified L3 cache, and a 105W TDP rating. AMD says this chip is faster than Intel’s 10-core Core i9-10900K in pretty much everything, which isn’t surprising — Intel has no equivalent for the mainstream desktop.

The $549 Ryzen 9 5900X slots in as the more mainstream contender, at least by AMD’s definition of ‘mainstream,’ with 12 cores and 24 threads that boost up to 4.8 GHz. AMD says this chip beats the Core i9-10900K by even more impressive margins in gaming. Further down the stack, we find the 8C/16T Ryzen 7 5800X for $449 and the 6C/12T Ryzen 5 5600X for $299.

Intel is stuck with its Comet Lake chips for five long months to try to fend off the Ryzen 5000 lineup until Rocket Lake arrives in Q1 2021, which doesn’t bode well. 

As odd as it sounds, Intel may have one hidden advantage — pricing. AMD now positions Ryzen 5000 as the premium brand and says it has the benchmarks to prove it. As a result, AMD has pushed pricing up by $50 across the stack compared to its Ryzen XT models. However, the XT family doesn’t really represent AMD’s best value chips; its own Ryzen 3000 series, which comes at much lower price points, holds that crown.

As a result, Intel’s Comet Lake chips now have comparatively lower price points than AMD’s Ryzen 5000 lineup. However, AMD says it still maintains the performance-per-dollar lead. We won’t know the full story until the chips land in our labs, but that obviously won’t be long — AMD says the full roster of Ryzen 5000 chips will be available at retail on November 5.

If one thing is for certain, the Zen microarchitecture has completely redefined our expectations for mainstream desktop chips, and it’s rational to expect more of the same with Zen 3. Let’s cover what we know about Zen 3 so far. 

AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 At A Glance

1080p gaming performance leadership

Ryzen 9, 7, and 5 models

From 6C/12T up to 16C/32T

Same optimized 7nm process as Ryzen XT models

Zen 3 microarchitecture delivers 19% IPC improvement

24% gen-on-gen power efficiency improvement — 2.8X better than 10900K

Higher peak frequencies for most models — 4.9 GHz on Ryzen 9 5950X

Lower base frequency for all models, offset by increased IPC

L3 cache now unified in a single 32MB cluster per eight-core chiplet (CCD)

Higher pricing across the stack (~$50)

No bundled cooler with Ryzen 9 and Ryzen 7 models

Drop-in compatible with the AM4 socket

No new chipset/motherboards launched

Current-gen 500-series motherboards work now (caveats below)

Beta support for 400-series motherboards begins in January 2021

All Zen 3 desktop, mobile, and APU chips will carry Ryzen 5000 branding

Same 142W maximum power for AM4 socket as previous-gen

Same 12nm GlobalFoundries I/O Die (IOD)

Here we can see the full Ryzen 5000 product stack, and how the new chips stack up against Intel’s Comet Lake. The first big thing you’ll notice are the increased Precision Boost clock rates, which now stretch up to 4.9 GHz. However, we also see a broad trend of lower base frequencies for the Ryzen 5000 series compared to the previous-gen chips, but that isn’t too surprising considering the much higher performance-per-watt that we’ll outline below.

AMD obviously leans on its improved IPC rather than raw clock speeds, thus boosting its power efficiency and reducing heat generation. The Ryzen 5 5600X is the best example of that — despite only a slight reduction to the base frequency, the chip drops to a 65W TDP compared to its predecessor’s 95W. 

What’s not as impressive? AMD has continued with the precedent it set with its Ryzen XT series: Bundled coolers no longer come with processors with a TDP higher than 65W. That means the Ryzen 5 5600X will be the only Ryzen 5000 chip that comes with a cooler in the box. AMD said it decided to skip bundled coolers in higher-TDP models largely because it believes most enthusiasts looking for high-performance chips use custom cooling anyway. AMD also still specs a 280mm (or greater) AIO liquid cooler for the Ryzen 9 and 7 chips, which significantly adds to the overall platform costs.

AMD continues to only guarantee its boost frequencies on a single core, and all-core boosts will vary based on the cooling solution, power delivery, and motherboard BIOS. The Ryzen 5000 chips still expose the same 20 lanes of PCIe 4.0 to the user (another four are dedicated to the chipset), and stick with DDR4-3200 memory. We’re told that memory overclocking capabilities remain the same as we see with the Ryzen XT models, so AMD hasn’t changed its guidance on that front. 

AMD Ryzen 5000 Zen 3 Performance Benchmarks and Comparisons 

AMD Ryzen 9 5950X Gaming and Application Performance Benchmarks 

Before we get into the benchmarks, be aware that AMD provided them. Like all benchmarks provided by any company, they could be (and probably are) heavily skewed toward games and applications that favor the company’s products.

Also, AMD tested all processors (both the Ryzen 5000 and Intel models) with DDR4-3600 memory. For reference, DDR4-3200 is the stock configuration for the AMD processors, and DDR4-2933 is stock for the Core i9-10900K. AMD also used a Noctua NH-D15s, a high-end air cooler, for all tested platforms (which is fine), and an Nvidia GeForce 2080 Ti. (It probably couldn’t buy a GeForce RTX 3080 or GeForce RTX 3090 either.)

What does the 16-core 32-thread Ryzen 9 5950X and its eye watering $799 price tag get you? The first slide pits AMD’s 5950X against the previous-gen Ryzen 9 3950X and shows 20%+ performance gains in the tested games, though the deltas do vary. 

AMD also says the Ryzen 9 5950X scores 640 points in the single-threaded Cinebench R20 benchmark, which is much higher than the Core i9-1900K’s 544 points. The content creation benchmarks show the 5950X with solid gains in lightly-threaded apps, like CAD, Adobe Premier, and compilation. 

However, performance gains in the heavily-threaded V-Ray application are a bit less pronounced. AMD says the Ryzen 5000 processors still have to adhere to the 142W power limit of the AM4 socket, which reduces performance gains in heavily-threaded applications. 

On the brighter side, AMD says those performance gains come at the same level of power consumption, which means the chips are more power-efficient. It will also be interesting to see how that looks when we lift the power limits in our own tests.

The second slide shows the 5950X against the Intel Core i9-10900K in several games and applications. The benchmarks show what is basically a dead heat with the 10900K, but the Ryzen 9 5900X is actually the faster gaming chip, so you’ll see bigger deltas over the Core i9-10900K in the benchmarks below.

Of course, with the RTX 2080 Ti, it could be the main bottleneck even at 1080p ultra. We joked about AMD not having RTX 3080 or RTX 3090 testing results, but in all seriousness, anyone upgrading to Zen 3 for gaming purposes is likely eyeing Nvidia’s Ampere or AMD’s Big Navi as well. That’s something we’ll be testing once we have hardware in our labs. 

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X Gaming and Application Performance Benchmarks 

Here’s a quick look at the improvement in AMD’s favorite single-threaded benchmark, Cinebench R20. AMD like this test because it is extremely favorable to its Zen microarchitecture.

The Ryzen 9 5950X scored 631 points, while the Core i9-10900K weighed in at 544 points. That works out to an outstanding 16% advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X, but bear in mind this occurs in a single benchmark, so take it with a grain of salt. 

We scored 535 points with the 10900K in the same test, albeit obviously with a different test platform and conditions. AMD didn’t show the Ryzen 9 5900X’s multi-threaded CineBench score, but measured the Core i9-10900K at 6,354 points. That’s close enough to call a tie with our own measurement of 6,356 points.

AMD bills the Ryzen 9 5900X as the fastest gaming CPU on the market, which it says it measured from the average fps from 40 PC games at 1920×1080 at maxed-out settings.

Here we see a spate of AMD’s 1080p performance benchmarks with the Ryzen 9 5900X up against the Ryzen 9 3900XT. Overall, the 5900X provides a 26% average fps performance improvement, which is pretty stellar for an in-socket upgrade. Notably, the processor notches higher gains in some titles — to the tune of 50% in League of Legends and 46% in CS:GO. Other titles, like Battlefield V and Total War, see low single-digit gains. 

The second slide pits the Ryzen 9 5900X against the Core i9-10900K in a selection of games at 1080p with high fidelity settings. AMD recorded a slight loss in Total War, and some single-digit performance increases in a few titles. However, League of Legends and CS:GO, both of which are older titles, received significantly higher fps measurements.

We’ll obviously have to see these titles tested on our own test systems, and Intel could gain a bit more performance from overclocking. The jury is still out on Ryzen 5000’s overclockability, but the chips use the same process as the existing Ryzen XT models, so we don’t expect much headroom.

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X Gaming and Application Performance Benchmarks 

AMD didn’t share dedicated benchmarks for the Ryzen 7 5800X and Ryzen 5 5600X — the higher-end models are obviously in the spotlight for today’s announcements. However, the company did share performance-per-dollar slides, which you can see above for the Ryzen 7 5800X. We’ll add more benchmarks as we learn more. 

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Gaming and Application Performance Benchmarks 

Here we can see AMD’s performance-per-dollar projections for the Ryzen 5 5600X. Given that this and the Ryzen 7 5800X are single-chiplet designs, we expect them to be incredibly competitive in gaming at the lower price ranges. 

AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 Motherboards

AMD didn’t launch a new chipset with the Ryzen 5000 series; instead, the chips drop right into existing 500-series chipsets, like X570, B550 and A520 models. These boards require an AGESA 1.0.8.0 (or newer) BIOS to boot a Zen 3 processor, but AMD has been shipping silently shipping supporting BIOSes since summer. As a result, every 500-series motherboard on the market should have a downloadable BIOS available.

While the early BIOS revisions ensure the chips will work on the most basic level, you’ll have to update to an AGESA 1.1.0.0 (or better) BIOS for the best performance. These revisions will be available for all 500-series motherboards by the November 5th Ryzen 5000 launch date.

AMD originally announced it wouldn’t provide Zen 3 support for 400-series motherboards, but due to concerns from the enthusiast community, the company reversed course. Now AMD will also provide support for 400-series chipsets, but the BIOS updates are under development the first beta BIOSes will be available in January of 2021. 

However, a series of important restrictions apply to 400-series upgraders, which you can read more about here, but here’s the short version from AMD:

We will develop and enable our motherboard partners with the code to support “Zen 3”-based processors in select beta BIOSes for AMD B450 and X470 motherboards.

These optional BIOS updates will disable support for many existing AMD Ryzen Desktop Processor models to make the necessary ROM space available.

The select beta BIOSes will enable a one-way upgrade path for AMD Ryzen Processors with “Zen 3,” coming later this year. Flashing back to an older BIOS version will not be supported.

To reduce the potential for confusion, our intent is to offer BIOS download only to verified customers of 400 Series motherboards who have purchased a new desktop processor with “Zen 3” inside. This will help us ensure that customers have a bootable processor on-hand after the BIOS flash, minimizing the risk a user could get caught in a no-boot situation.

Timing and availability of the BIOS updates will vary and may not immediately coincide with the availability of the first “Zen 3”-based processors.

This is the final pathway AMD can enable for 400 Series motherboards to add new CPU support. CPU releases beyond “Zen 3” will require a newer motherboard.

AMD continues to recommend that customers choose an AMD 500 Series motherboard for the best performance and features with our new CPUs.

Note: You lose support for PCIe 4.0 on 400-series boards, but most gamers will not, and should not, care — PCIe 4.0 makes no meaningful performance difference in gaming. 

AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 Pricing and Availability

The Ryzen 5000 series will come to market on November 5th, 2020. We expect to learn more information, like performance benchmarks, for the Ryzen 7 and 5 models in the interim. We also expect to eventually hear about Threadripper 5000 products with the Zen 3 architecture, but we aren’t sure when AMD will bring the new design to its ultra-powerful high end desktop lineup. 

The Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 processors do come with a recommended $50 markup across the product stack. AMD’s suggested pricing often has little to do with what we see at retail; you can expect the chips to eventually retail for far lower than MSRP. 

The change comes as AMD positions itself as a premium chip supplier as opposed to its long history as the value alternative. The continued absence of bundled coolers also serves to drive up the platform cost – in most cases, you’ll need to invest at least $40 to find a cooler that’s as capable as AMD’s stock coolers. The company specs a 280mm AIO cooler (or equivalent air cooler) for the chips, so plan accordingly. 

That’s led to plenty of complaints, and Intel’s Comet Lake lineup actually has lower pricing in critical price bands. We do have to take performance into account, though, and we have yet to do our own testing. That means the jury is out on the price-to-performance ratio for Ryzen 5000. 

AMD’s Zen 3 pricing in the market will be largely predicated upon how it performs relative to Intel’s chips. Given the big performance gains we expect with the Zen 3 generation, it’s possible the numbers could work out in favor of Intel’s competing chips. 

If Zen 3 lives up to its billing, it looks like AMD’s only constraint will be production capacity at TSMC. AMD will sell every Ryzen 5000 chip it punches out, at least until Rocket Lake arrives – and we still don’t know if Intel’s new 14nm design can keep pace with AMD’s 7nm chips. AMD’s ecosystem of 500- and 400-series motherboard partners have plenty of relatively affordable options, so we don’t foresee any problems with motherboard supply.

On that front, AMD will undoubtedly meet with stiff demand for the Ryzen 5000 chips at launch, and the company says it is working with retailers to avoid the plague of purchasing bots that exacerbated Nvidia’s now-infamous Ampere launch. And AMD hasn’t been free of shortages at launch either, with the Ryzen 9 3950X being relatively difficult to purchase for the first couple of months after it launched.

Should I Buy a Ryzen 5000 Series Zen 3 CPU?

The jury is still out on just how AMD’s Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 series chips will perform in the real world: We won’t know until the silicon lands in our labs, but you can bet that will be soon given the November 5th 2020 launch date. 

The performance does look promising; AMD has made plenty of alterations that should boost performance significantly. Here’s what we know about the Zen 3 microarchitecture:

AMD Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 Microarchitecture 

AMD shared many new details about the Zen 3 microarchitecture, but the company says it will share even more information in a future briefing, so we’ll have a lot more information for our forthcoming Ryzen 5000 reviews.

AMD embarked on what it describes as a ground-up redesign of the Zen 2 microarchitecture to deliver the gains we would normally see with an entirely new design. In fact, the company’s ~19% increase in IPC represents its largest single-generation increase in the ‘post-Zen’ era (Zen+, Zen 2). We certainly haven’t seen an increase of this magnitude for desktop chips from Team Blue in the recent past, either — the initial Skylake architecture achieved a similar boost, but everything since has been nearly static.

AMD calculates its 19% IPC number from the geometric mean of 25 workloads measured with two eight-core chips locked at 4.0 GHz. The impressive IPC gains required a ‘front-to-back’ series of modifications to the design, including (but not limited to) the cache subsystem, front end, branch predictor, execution engine, and load/store elements, all with a focus on boosting single-threaded performance while wringing out better instruction level parallelism (ILP). The result is improved performance across the board in both single- and multi-threaded integer and floating point workloads. However, the 142W power limit imposed by the AM4 socket does restrict the scope of performance gains in heavily-threaded workloads, though there are some advances there, too.

AMD says it uses the same enhanced version of TSMC’s 7nm process node that it used for the Ryzen XT series, but still hasn’t provided specifics. AMD’s ‘special recipe’ for 7nm is largely kept confidential, but the firm specified that it doesn’t use TSMC’s 7nm+ (an EUV node). That means that AMD uses the standard N7 from Zen 2 with improved design rules, or that the chips use the N7P node. 

AMD’s end goal is to have undisputed best-in-class performance across the full spectrum of applications, and gaming performance was a particular focus, which brings us to the changed cache hierarchy. 

As with the Zen 2 processors, Zen 3 uses the same 12nm I/O die (IOD) paired with either one or two chiplets in an MCM (Multi-Chip Module) arrangement. In the image above, we can see the large I/O die and the two smaller eight-core chiplets. 

AMD chose to stick with this basic design for its Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 chips. And just like we see with the previous-gen Zen 2 chips, processors with six or eight cores come with one chiplet, while chips with 12 or 16 cores come with two chiplets. 

While the overall package design is the same three-chiplet design, AMD made drastic changes to the internals of the two eight-core chiplets. In the Zen 2 architecture (left), each Zen compute chiplet (CCD) contained two four-core clusters (CCXes) with access to an isolated 16MB slice of L3 cache. So, while the entire chiplet contained 32MB of cache, not all cores had access to all of the cache in the chiplet.

To access an adjacent slice of L3 cache, a core had to communicate with the other quad-core cluster by issuing a request that traversed the Infinity Fabric to the I/O die. The I/O die then routed the request to the second quad-core cluster, even though it was contained within the same chiplet. To fulfill the request, the data had to travel back over the fabric to the I/O die, and then back into the quad-core cluster that issued the request.

On the right side of the slide, we can see that the chiplet now contains one large unified 32MB slice of L3 cache, and all eight cores within the chiplet have full access to the shared cache. This improves not only core-to-cache latency, but also core-to-core latency within the chiplet.

While all eight cores can access the L3 cache within a single compute chiplet, in a dual-chiplet Zen 3 chip, there will be times that the cores will have to communicate with the other chiplet and its L3 cache. In those cases, the compute chiplet’s requests will still have to traverse the Infinity Fabric via signals routed through the I/O die, which incurs latency.

Still, because an entire layer of external communication between the two four-core clusters inside each chiplet has been removed, the Infinity Fabric will naturally have far less traffic. This results in less contention on the fabric, thus simplifying scheduling and routing, and it could also increase the amount of available bandwidth for this type of traffic. All of these factors will result in faster transfers (i.e., lower latency) communication between the two eight-core chiplets, and it possibly removes some of the overhead on the I/O die, too. We imagine there could also be other advantages, particularly for main memory latency, but we’ll wait for more details. We do know that the default fabric speeds haven’t changed, though. 

All of this is important because games rely heavily on the memory subsystem, both on-die cache and main memory (DDR4). A larger pool of cache resources keeps more data closer to the cores, thus requiring fewer high-latency accesses to the main memory. Additionally, lower cache latency can reduce the amount of time a core communicates with the L3 cache. This new design will tremendously benefit latency-sensitive applications, like games — particularly if they have a dominant thread that accesses cache heavily (which is common). 

Naturally, power efficiency will improve as a function of reduced traffic on the Infinity Fabric, but that’s probably a small fraction of the performance-per-watt gains AMD has extracted from the architecture. Increased IPC and other SoC-level optimizations obviously factor in here. Still, the net result is that AMD managed to stay within the same TDP thermal and electrical ranges as the Ryzen 3000 chips while delivering more performance.

AMD Ryzen 5000 Zen 3 Power Consumption and Efficiency

AMD says it has not increased power consumption by a single watt — the maximum power draw for the AM4 socket still stands at 142W — which naturally will lead to impressive efficiency gains. AMD’s chart above uses the first-gen Ryzen 7 1800X as a comparison point, and here we see a 2X improvement by moving to the 7nm Zen 2 architecture. That isn’t too surprising considering the move from the older 14nm process to 7nm with that generation of chips. 

The more important reduction comes from extracting more efficiency from the ‘same’ 7nm node, which is far more difficult and requires a combination of both better design methodologies and architectural improvements. As a result of these factors, AMD says it wrung out another 24% gen-on-gen efficiency improvement with the Ryzen 9 5900X over the Zen 2-powered Ryzen 9 3900XT. That’s impressive. Intel’s most recent Comet Lake chips had to increase power draw quite a bit and still had far lower performance improvements.

What does that mean to you? Faster, cooler, and quieter performance for your PC compared to AMD’s previous chips – and those models already posed a stiff challenge to Intel’s Comet Lake. 

The Ryzen 5000 Zen 3 chips arrive at retail on November 5th, 2020. We’ll update as we learn more. 

Acer Chromebook Spin 713 review: You can’t get a better Chromebook than this for $629

For most of the last few weeks, I’ve been using an Acer Chromebook Spin 713 review unit. I was impressed by this convertible Chromebook just from the first impressions. And now? Everyday usage has confirmed my initial experience: I don’t think you can buy a better Chrome OS laptop for $629.

To help explain why, let me share a little perspective.

My daily driver is the predecessor to this laptop, Acer’s Chromebook Spin 13. Most of the updates and upgrades to the Spin 713 are either cosmetic (more on that later) or newer generation components. And yet, a similar configuration of the older Spin 13 when it launched was priced in the $800 to $900 range. So as an “upgrade”, you’re getting more for less.

Additionally, when similarly configured to the Spin 713, Google’s own Pixelbook Go costs $849. With it, you’re getting a smaller and lighter Chromebook with a more modern design. Is that worth paying $229 more instead of looking at the Acer Chromebook Spin 713? For some, it might be, but you’ll be giving up some features and quite a bit of performance.

Power-packed with performance

Here’s what I mean about performance in general, based on benchmark runs between the three Chromebooks I’ve mentioned. All tests were run using the current Stable Channel of Chrome OS 85 in guest mode and with no experimental flags enabled.

I wouldn’t call any of these Chromebooks slow, particularly when compared to entry-level or sub-$400 options. And benchmarks are really just general performance predictors more than anything.

However, everything from boot up to browsing, along with Android apps and Linux usage, happens faster on the Acer Chromebook Spin 713. It’s the fastest Chromebook I’ve used yet although I should note that there are higher priced Chromebooks with more powerful processors on the market.

It’s what’s inside that makes the difference

Obviously, with a newer 10th-generation Core i5 processor, I’d expect the Spin 713 to be faster than older devices. The Spin 13 and Pixelbook Go both use 8th-generation Core i5 chipsets. And the main reason the Pixelbook Go benchmarks slower than the Spin 13 is because its Core i5 is a lower powered Y-Series chip. With the U-Series processor, the Spin 13 can simply outperform the Go. But it can’t outperform the newer U-Series processor in the Acer Chromebook Spin 713.

There’s another nice hardware upgrade in the newer Spin 713 as well: NVMe storage which is much faster than the eMMC storage used in most other Chromebooks. There are exceptions such as the Asus Chromebook Flip C436 and Samsung Galaxy Chromebook. They use faster NVMe storage but cost $799 and $999, respectively. Acer has somehow found a way to get high-end Chromebook components in the Spin 713 while keeping the cost much lower than its competitors.

Lenovo does have a $479 model of its Chromebook Flex 5 with NVME storage. However, you’re only getting half the memory found in the Acer Chromebook Spin 713, a lower resolution display, and a 10th-generation Intel Core i3 processor inside.

I haven’t quite seen the 10 hours of claimed run-time in my daily usage, which is comprised of a few dozen browser tabs open as well as a Linux app or two also running concurrently. However, I’ve never seen less than 8 active hours and I average around 9.

I suspect a battery test of looping video might hit or exceed the 10-hour mark. Acer’s internal testing of video playback suggests between 11.5 and 14 hours on a single charge, so this might be good for movies on a long flight. Well, when we can fly again, that is.

Speaking of videos, they look great on this display. I think the panel is a slight upgrade from the older model because colors have a little more “pop” and the screen seems to have a bit more brightness. Video calls look great as well and none of my contacts have had any complaints with output from the built-in webcam. Whether on a video call or watching movies, you may want to use headphones, however. I can’t hear any improvements to the downward-facing, under chassis dual speaker system over last year’s model.

Game streaming with either Stadia or GeForce Now looks fantastic too. I’ve put in at least 10 hours on Red Dead Redemption 2 (shown above) without feeling I’m missing anything from a visual experience.

Design improvements on the outside too

As I noted in my first impressions, Acer has slimmed down display bezels, boosted the size of the trackpad, and made the chassis more svelte towards the front. These small changes add up to big improvements I mentioned prior: The left, right and top display bezels are about half of what they are on my Spin 13. They’re not quite at Dell XPS levels if you’ve ever seen those laptops, but they’re getting closer.

Aside from offering a more immersive display experience, this bezel reduction makes the screen around 0.75-inches shorter on the Spin 713 as compared to the Spin 13. And it saves nearly a half-inch on the length of the chassis as well. So while these two devices look very similar, the Spin 713 is slightly smaller. The Spin 713 also shaves 0.3 pounds from the older model as a result.

While the design of the Chromebook Spin 713 isn’t glitzy or glamorous — I find it fairly generic — it’s certainly not offensive. And I appreciate the design changes. One in particular might not sound like it’s worth a mention but it is. Acer put both a USB Type-C and full-sized HDMI port between the power button and the volume rocker. On the old model, these two buttons are right next to each other. I’ve lost track of how many times I put my older Spin 13 to sleep by hitting the power button when I wanted to change the volume.

I find the island-style keyboard comfortable to type on and the much larger trackpad is fantastic. Acer opted not to include a fingerprint reader; something typically found in comparable devices. It would be nice to have but I can live without it. And there’s no included stylus like last year’s model has. There appear to be some configurations of the Spin 713 that support a USI stylus but I don’t believe the model I’m reviewing does.

Who should buy the Acer Chromebook Spin 713?

If you have the budget to spend $629 or more, I think the Spin 713 deserves a long hard look.

Yes, you can get new Chromebooks with a 10th-generation Core i7 processor or with a 4K display but that will cost you. Provided that you have to have one or both of those features and you’ve got the budget, then go for one of those options.

Not in that camp though? The price to value ratio for the Acer Chromebook Spin 713 is super high. It can easily handle the workload of a student who’s learning remotely. It’s ideal as an all-day browser and online productivity machine for anyone who needs more horsepower than an entry-level Chromebook. Even developers could be happy with this package based on my usage of Visual Studio Code in Linux. For Android Studio folks, you’ll probably want a Chromebook with more memory though.

If I haven’t made it clear, I’m simply amazed at what you get for the price here. The Acer Chromebook Spin 713 is already high on my short list for Chromebook of the year, although I’ll make that final determination at the end of 2020.

Simply put, the Acer Chromebook Spin 713 is improved in nearly every way from its predecessor, rivaling more expensive, other Project Athena devices from Asus, HP, and Samsung. How Acer does this for $629, I don’t know, but unless you’re a heavy duty developer, you can’t go wrong with this convertible Chromebook.

I’ll wait another week before returning the review unit, so if you have any specific questions, leave me a comment. I’ll do my best to answer them.