Thermalright is a CPU cooling company that happens to sell power supplies. Established in Taipei in 2001, it spent its first two decades building a reputation on air coolers - the Ultra-120 eXtreme and the HR series were enthusiast reference points long before the current wave of tower coolers - then drifted out of the conversation for years before the Peerless Assassin 120 dragged it back to the top of every budget build list in 2021. Its catalog has expanded aggressively since: case fans, all-in-one liquid coolers, thermal compounds, chassis, and, since 2022, power supplies. That last category deserves a different kind of scrutiny than the rest. Much like most brand names, Thermalright does not build power supplies; it commissions them, and a heatsink company's engineering credibility transfers to a PSU exactly as far as the OEM behind it allows. Every Thermalright power supply has to be judged on its platform rather than its badge.

The KG series occupies the value end of Thermalright's power supply range, and the TR-KG750 reviewed here is its 750W entry. How does it hold up against the best power supplies on the market? On paper, the specification is current, with ATX 3.1 and PCIe 5.1 compliance, a native 12V-2x6 connector, full modularity, 80 PLUS Gold certification at 115 VAC, a 120 mm fan inside a 140 mm-deep chassis, and a five-year warranty. The label on the PSU itself answers the platform question without much digging. The manufacturer of record is Somore Tech Co., Ltd., the production is credited to Jiushouyangguang Power Supply (Shenzhen), and the internal designation printed beside the 80 PLUS badge is HKCMAX-750 - this is an HKC platform, and the silkscreen on the main board dates the design to April 2023. There is no Cybenetics entry for the model at the time of writing, so the 80 PLUS report is the only third-party data available on it. At a retail price of $91, it undercuts essentially every name-brand 750W Gold unit on the US market, which is the whole of its pitch.

Specifications and Design

In the Box

The TR-KG750 arrives in a compact cardboard box wrapped in a black-to-bronze gradient sleeve, with a three-quarter render of the unit dominating the front and the wattage set in large gold type beside it. The badge strip along the bottom edge is short: 80 PLUS Gold, ATX 3.1, PCIe 5.1, and the model number.

The bundle is as thin as they come. Under the protective packaging the supply is accompanied by a multilingual user’s guide, the AC power cord, a small bag of mounting screws, and four zip ties. That is the entire accessory list: no Velcro straps, no cable combs, no storage pouch. Four zip ties for an eight-cable modular supply is a token rather than a provision, and it is one of the few places where the price makes itself felt before you take the lid off.

The cables are all-black flat ribbon types throughout, with no sleeving anywhere in the set. They are all uniform, adding points to the aesthetics of the unit. The 12V-2x6 cable is native - a single run from the modular panel to the graphics card, with no adapter or splitter involved - but its plug does not use the dual-color keying the ATX 3.1 specification encourages, which makes an incompletely seated connector easy to spot at a glance.

External Appearance

At 150 x 86 x 140 mm, the TR-KG750 is a standard-width ATX unit with a short 140 mm body, which is about as compact as a 750W supply practically gets and leaves useful slack for cable management even in a mid-tower. The chassis is finished in a matte black with a fine texture, and the top panel carries a stamped fan grille in a diamond-and-chevron pattern - four angled spokes radiating from a central square, framed by long slotted vents - with the Thermalright wordmark pressed into a raised panel at the edge. Four exposed screws sit at the corners, one of them beneath the warranty-void sticker.

The rear face is a large square perforated exhaust panel with the AC receptacle and a rocker. The front face hosts the modular connector bay, cleanly silkscreened into four labeled groups: MOTHERBOARD for the split 24-pin, SATA/PATA for the peripheral cables, CPU/PCIe for the four eight-pin sockets, and a dedicated 12V 2x6 socket in the bottom corner. A scratch-off authenticity tag with a QR code sits alongside the panel.

The specification label occupies the top face rather than a side panel, which is the more useful placement for a bottom-mounted supply sitting under a windowed case, and both side panels are given over to a large bronze-gradient decal carrying the wattage, model number, and 80 PLUS Gold badge. That decal is the only decoration, and the finish underneath it is unremarkable but honest - evenly applied, no orange peel, no sharp edges. The label repeats the rail ratings, the CCC certificate number, and the internal model designation, and it is where the platform gives itself away. Build quality overall is what the price suggests: the steel gauge is adequate, the panels line up, nothing rattles, but there is none of the extra finishing that separates a $90 unit from a $150 one.

Internal Design

Cooling is handled by a 120 mm Yate Loon D12SH-12 rated for 12V at 0.30A. Yate Loon is a long-established Chinese fan maker, and the D-series is its bread-and-butter sleeve-bearing line, which makes this the single most consequential cost-saving in the unit. Sleeve bearings are quiet, like fluid-dynamic alternatives at equivalent speed, but wear faster and are more sensitive to heat and mounting orientation - all three of which matter in a supply that, as the test results show, runs its fan constantly and pushes it hard as soon as ambient temperature rises. The five-year warranty covers the fan, but it is not a part most owners will enjoy chasing a replacement for.

The platform is HKC’s, supplied to Thermalright under the internal designation HKCMAX-750, and the main board is silkscreened as ATX32 Main BD Rev1.2. A row of wattage selection pads along the board edge runs from 500W to 850W, with the 750W position populated, confirming this is a single design scaled across a whole product family rather than a layout drawn for 750W specifically. Component density is fair, the soldering is tidy, and some black silicone anchors the larger parts. Only two heatsinks are fitted - a small one carrying the input bridges and a taller, simple finned unit shared by the APFC and primary switching stages - and everything on the secondary side relies on the PCB and a tiny sheet heatsink soldered to it.

The transient filtering stage starts at the back of the AC receptacle and continues on the main PCB. In total, there are four Y capacitors, two X capacitors, and two filtering inductors, with an MOV and an NTC thermistor also present - a complete filter with nothing omitted, if not a generous one. Two input rectifying bridges follow on their own small dedicated heatsink. The APFC stage uses two MOSFETs and a boost diode sharing the tall heatsink, paired with a large open-frame filtering coil, and the bulk capacitor is a Nichicon 450V/560 uF part from the 105C-rated GN(M) series. That capacitor is comfortably the best component in the unit and practically the only one sourced from a manufacturer with a genuine reliability record. The primary inversion stage is a half-bridge arrangement built from two 65R160FR MOSFETs on the shared heatsink, feeding the main transformer.

The secondary side is where the cost engineering becomes plain. The 12V rail is rectified by six Perfertway PWC012N04ES MOSFETs mounted directly on the main PCB with no heatsink of their own, and the 3.3V and 5V rails are derived from DC-to-DC converters that also live on the main board rather than a vertical daughterboard. As a layout, this is conventional and modern. The problem is provenance: essentially every active device in the conversion path - the bridges, the APFC and primary MOSFETs, the six synchronous rectifiers - comes from manufacturers with no established track record in this application. Secondary filtering is a mix of Teapo parts and capacitors branded NICON that, despite carrying a series designation borrowed from Nippon Chemi-Con’s catalog, do not appear to be a genuine Nippon Chemi-Con nor a Nichicon product, and polymer capacitors handle high-frequency filtering on the modular board. None of this is unusual at the price. It is worth stating plainly, though, that the "all Japanese" capacitor language attached to some retail listings for this model describes the bulk capacitor and nothing else.

Cold Test Results (25°C Ambient)

Cold Test Results (25°C Ambient)

For the testing of PSUs, we are using high-precision electronic loads with a maximum power draw of 2700 Watts, a Rigol DS5042M 40 MHz oscilloscope, an Extech 380803 power analyzer, two high-precision UNI-T UT-325 digital thermometers, an Extech HD600 SPL meter, a self-designed hotbox, and various other bits and parts.

At 25°C ambient, the TR-KG750 averaged 89.5% at 230 VAC and 88.5% at 115 VAC across the nominal load range, peaking at 91.2% and 90.3%, respectively, at 50% load and settling to 89.2% and 87.9% at a sustained 750W. The curve is well shaped, with the usual broad plateau between 40% and 70% load and no collapse at the top end. What it does not have is margin. Against the 80 PLUS Gold thresholds at 115 VAC - 87% at 20% load, 90% at 50%, and 87% at 100% - our measured 87.2%, 90.3%, and 87.9% clear the bar by 0.2, 0.3, and 0.9 percentage points. The unit’s own 80 PLUS report reads slightly kinder at 90.2%, 91.4% and 88.3%, but the conclusion does not change: this is a Gold unit by a narrow margin.

Acoustically, there is no great news. The Yate Loon spins whenever the supply is powered but remains quiet across the first half of the load range. The ramp through the middle of the range is gentle enough, but it steepens past 70% load, reaching 42 dB(A) at 600W and almost 51 dB(A) at a sustained 750W. That is loud for an efficient 750W unit at room temperature. Thermally, the platform is comfortable at 25°C. The primary and secondary heatsinks stabilized at around 60°C. Those are unremarkable numbers, with the small heatsinks and mediocre efficiency being the obvious culprits.

Hot Test Results (~45°C Ambient)

Hot Test Results (~45°C Ambient)

Inside the hotbox at roughly 45°C ambient - five degrees beyond the unit’s own 40°C rating - efficiency averaged 87.6% at 230 VAC and 86.6% at 115 VAC, an almost uniform 1.9-point loss against the cold run. Full load is where the degradation concentrates: 85.8% at 230 VAC and 84.5% at 115 VAC, both 3.4 points down on the 25°C figures. A drop of that size is larger than we like to see, and it puts the unit well outside Gold territory under heat, although it is being measured beyond its rated envelope and the shape of the curve essentially holds throughout. The supply completed every load step without shutting down.

Heat turns the fan from merely constant into genuinely intrusive. The floor rises to 37 dB(A), which is audible but not dramatic. It maintains reasonable noise figures up to 525W and then the curve breaks: between 525W and 600W the fan jumps almost ten decibels to 56 dB(A), settling at 58 dB(A) at a sustained 750W. A step that abrupt points to a coarse thermal control scheme rather than a tuned curve, and at 58 dB(A) the power supply is likely to be the loudest component in almost any system. The internal readings explain the urgency: the primary heatsink reached well over 100°C at full load. Those are very high figures for parts of uncertain pedigree and for a 750W PSU, and while the unit held together for the duration, sustained full load at 45°C is not an environment we would ask this platform to live in.

PSU Quality and Bottom Line

Power Supply Quality

Voltage regulation is adequate rather than tight. Between 20% and 100% load, the 3.3V rail moved 1.2%, the 5V rail 1.4%, and the 12V rail 1.8%. The 12V figure is the one that matters, and it is the loosest of the three, sliding from 12.11V at 151.5W to 11.89V at 744.5W. That sits comfortably inside the ±5% ATX window and will not trouble any component, but it is roughly double what a well-tuned modern LLC platform delivers, and most of the drop arrives between 50% and 75% load rather than being spread evenly across the range.

Ripple suppression follows the same pattern of simple adequacy. On the 12V rail we measured 24 mV at 20% load rising to 62 mV at full load, against the 120 mV ATX limit - a comfortable pass with roughly 48% headroom, though the jump from 38 mV at 75% load to 62 mV at 100% is steeper than the rest of the curve. The minor rails run closer to their ceilings: 34 mV on 3.3V and 38 mV on 5V against a 50 mV limit, leaving 32% and 24% headroom respectively. Cross-load behavior was unremarkable, with 60 mV on 12V under the 12V-heavy test and 34 mV on 5V under the minor-rail test. None of this is a problem for the hardware a 750W supply will realistically feed, but the minor rails have less room than we would expect from a DC-to-DC design.

During our thorough assessment, we evaluate the essential protection features of every power supply unit we review, including Over Current Protection (OCP), Over Voltage Protection (OVP), Over Power Protection (OPP), and Short Circuit Protection (SCP).

All protection mechanisms were verified and triggered correctly during testing. With the unit hot, OCP tripped at 140% on the 3.3V rail (28A), 142% on the 5V rail (28.4A), and 136% on the 12V rail (85A), with OPP shutting the supply down at 134% of rated output, or approximately 1005W. Those are generous thresholds, more generous than most mainstream 750W units carry, and they mean the platform will ride out the transient excursions a modern graphics card throws at it without any complaint - which is precisely what ATX 3.1 compliance is meant to guarantee.

Bottom Line

What the TR-KG750 is, stated plainly, is an HKC platform wearing a Thermalright badge at a $91 price, and most of what follows from that is predictable. The specification sheet is current - ATX 3.1, PCIe 5.1, a native 12V-2x6 connector, full modularity, a compact 140 mm chassis - and the engineering is competent in the sense that nothing is missing or obviously wrong. The transient filter is complete, the topology is a modern half-bridge LLC with DC-to-DC minor rails, and the Nichicon bulk capacitor is a real Japanese part. Measured performance is broadly consistent with the class: regulation within 2% on every rail, ripple with meaningful headroom on 12V, and protection thresholds more generous than most.

The problems concentrate in two places. The first is efficiency, where the unit clears its 80 PLUS Gold thresholds at 115 VAC by a small margin. Certification is a floor, and this unit sits on it. Under heat, the margin vanishes entirely - 84.5% at 115 VAC and full load - and with no Cybenetics listing, there is no other independent data to weigh against ours. The second is acoustics, and the fault there is part control, part hardware. The Yate Loon is quiet enough through the first half of the load range, but the curve steepens past 70%, and the supply reaches almost 51 dB(A) at a sustained 750W at room temperature. In a warm case, it is worse: a ten-decibel step between 525W and 600W, and 58 dB(A) from there to full load. That is a coarse fan profile rather than a tuned one, and there is no fanless mode to fall back on at idle. It was little choice, as the heatsinks are too small to combat such thermal needs. Builders who care about a perfectly quiet machine can stop reading here.

Underneath those sit the component choices. The Nichicon bulk capacitor aside, the secondary filtering is Teapo and NICON, and every active device in the conversion path - bridges, APFC and primary MOSFETs, the six synchronous rectifiers - comes from manufacturers with no track record to point at. That is not automatically a defect; plenty of anonymous silicon runs happily for a decade. But it is unverifiable, and heatsink temperatures well over 100°C at 45°C ambient leave less comfort than we would like, as does a sleeve-bearing fan if asked to run continuously in that heat. The five-year warranty is doing real work in the value case here, and it is the correct length for this class rather than a generous one.

At $91, the TR-KG750 is around $30 cheaper than the Cooler Master MWE Gold 750 V4, and that comparison is the instructive one. The Cooler Master is quieter by a wide margin, holds tighter regulation, runs a cooler secondary side under heat, and carries a ten-year warranty; the Thermalright answers with a lower price, and concedes almost everything else. Set against the Thermaltake Toughpower GX3 850W or the MSI MAG A850GLS, the picture is similar - more wattage and better-documented platforms, for more money. The TR-KG750 earns its place on price alone. If the budget is fixed near $90 and the machine lives under a desk rather than on it, this is a defensible purchase with a current feature set and adequate measured performance behind it. If there is $30 of headroom, or if noise matters substantially, have a look at higher price tags.

MORE: Best Power Supplies

MORE: How We Test Power Supplies

MORE: All Power Supply Content

With its built-in USB / HDMI hub and a small fan to keep temperatures in check, Sharge's Disk Pro SSD is one of the more interesting (and generally useful) external storage drives in recent memory, easily earning a spot on our Best External SSD list. And the company is following that success up with a more DIY-focused Disk Pro 2, which lets you install your own M.2 drive (supporting 2230, 2242, and 2280 sizes and capacities up to 8TB), while adding greater fan flexibility, media card slots, and an HDMI port that's capable of more bandwidth – depending on the model you choose.

Sharge is offering the Disk Pro 2 in two varieties. There's the Lite model, with HDMI 2.0 (4K@60 Hz) and a 5W minimum operating power, and the Disk Pro Ultra (which we have in for testing) with HDMI 2.1 (4K@144 Hz or 8K@30 Hz), a lower 1.5W minimum power draw, and a faster card reader. Below is the full list of differences, according to the product page. The company even lists the internal chips, some of which you can see through its transparent top.

The Ultra model is likely to appeal more to professionals and gamers, offering faster card transfers and higher monitor refresh rates. But the main limitation here is the overall bandwidth, as both models are capped at a 10 Gbps interface, just like the original Disk Pro. That makes either model better as kind of a travel-friendly Swiss Army hub than something you'd want to use as your primary hub / dock all the time. Because any modern M.2 drive can saturate all available throughput by itself, before you connect any video or USB devices. But there's no denying the utility of carrying around a pocket-friendly SSD that also lets you connect to a monitor or TV, plug in a couple extra peripherals, and empty your SD cards without an extra hub, adapters, or cables.

At 3.65 x 2.33 x 0.531 inches (92.6 × 59.2 × 13.5 mm) without the cable, the Disk Pro 2 is slightly thicker and longer than the original Disk Pro, but still smaller than some standalone drives. Again, with its size and transparent top, it reminds me of an old-school cassette tape.

One thing that has definitely improved over the original Disk Pro is that Sharge has made the USB-C cable removable. This is good in part because you don't have to worry about the cable breaking over years of use. But also, particularly if you're going to use the drive's hub capabilities, you might want something longer than the included cable's sub-nine-inch length. And when necessary, you might want to plug the drive into a USB-A port. So having the option of using different cables is a big plus.

The cable is also designed to function as a lanyard, which can be handy. But it's held in place solely by the USB-C connection, so I wouldn't trust it for much more than hanging the hub up somewhere at home, so you know where it is when you need it.

In terms of ports, starting from the bottom edge, you get the main USB-C port, capable of passing through up to 80W of power, a full-size HDMI port (2.1 on the Ultra model we're testing or 2.0 on the lite model), a USB 3.0 Type-A port, and a 10 Gbps USB-C port that can handle up to 100W of power input (and pass through up to 80W for charging a laptop or other device). The previous Disk Pro included a second USB-A 2.0 port here as well, but it's been ditched in favor of the removable USB-C cable, which I think is well worth the sacrifice.

On the opposite (top) edge, Sharge has added an SD card slot and a microSD card slot. These are capabilities the original Disk Pro didn't have, which make the newer model a lot more versatile for content creators. Just remember the Ultra model offers up faster read and write speeds for the card slots.

Around back, there's not a lot to see save for the fan intake, but the back is also magnetic, letting you snap the drive onto smartphones that support MagSafe devices or Qi2 magnetic peripherals — it's just a physical mount, though, not receiving power. I've also found this feature handy for sticking the drive to a refrigerator or other iron surface so I always know where it is when I need it.

It's also worth pointing out that the fan in the Disk Pro 2 is smaller than on the Disk Pro. But there are larger cutouts for air intake on the sides for when the hub is lying on a table or desk, and the Pro offers a three-mode switch (off, on, and turbo), whereas the original's switch had two settings (auto and on). I appreciate the active cooling, and it will certainly be helpful if you're using most of the hub's ports and the SSD at the same time. But if you're mostly using the Disk Pro 2 solely for basic, bursty storage tasks, the 10 Gbps interface and an efficient SSD aren't likely to get warm enough to require active cooling. Of course, that will heavily depend on which drive you install in the enclosure, as well.

Testing with Lexar's 710 SSD

Sharge sent along its Disk Pro 2 Ultra with a Lexar 710 M.2 SSD (a PCIe 4.0 drive that's capable of about 5x the bandwidth of the hub itself), and installing it is about as straightforward as you'd expect. Use the small included screwdriver to remove a tiny screw on the side, and the SSD cover lifts off. Loosen the drive anchor post, install the SSD, tighten the post, put the cover back on, and reinstall the cover anchor screw on the side.

You can, of course, install your SSD of choice, and below the 10 Gbps interface cap, your performance will vary by drive. Still, since the company sent along the Lexar drive, we ran a couple of our external storage benchmarks, and the Disk Pro 2 Ultra performed well for an SSD in this class, just like the original Disk Pro.

Trace Testing - PCMark 10 Storage Benchmark

PCMark 10 is a trace-based benchmark that uses a wide-ranging set of real-world traces from popular applications and everyday tasks to measure the performance of storage devices.

The Sharge Disk Pro 2 Ultra does exceptionally well here, beating everything save for Corsair's USB4-based EX400U. Impressively, the 10 Gbps drive even beat the 10 Gbps X10 Pro on this test, proving available bandwidth isn't everything when it comes to drive responsiveness.

In this real-world bulk transfer test, Sharge's Disk Pro 2 Ultra lands in a comfortable fourth place, behind 40 Gbps and 20 Gbps drives, and one spot behind the 10 Gbps Crucial X9 Pro drive on reads. But on writes, Sharge's enclosure, running the Lexar SSD, again beats everything in this chart save for Corsair's USB4 drive.

Synthetic Testing CrystalDiskMark

CrystalDiskMark (CDM) is a free and easy-to-run storage benchmarking tool that SSD companies commonly use to assign product performance specifications. It gives us insight into how each device handles different file sizes. We run this test at its default settings

Lastly, in this best-case-scenario synthetic test, the Disk Pro 2 lands in fifth place when it comes to reads, but fourth place on writes.

Again, the Disk Pro 2's performance on benchmarks will depend largely on what drive you put inside it. But it's clear that the SSD enclosure is capable of performing well, despite its 10 Gbps bandwidth limitations.

Pricing and Bottom Line

If all you really care about is dropping in a drive and moving some files around, there are plenty of cheap 10 Gbps enclosures, often on sale for $20 or less. But if you travel a lot with tech and like the idea of a drive enclosure that includes a data and video hub with PD power passthrough, the Disk Pro 2 offers a lot to like, with the Ultra version we tested capable of handling video output bandwidth as high as 8K at 30 Hz (or 4K at 144 Hz). And the inclusion of card reader slots makes the enclosure even more useful for creators on the go.

It's far from cheap, at $109 for the Ultra version we tested or $79 for the Lite version, which is still capable of 4K video at 60 Hz, but won't play as well with phones, due to a higher minimum power draw. But Sharge's devices often go on sale, and when this was written, the Late model was selling for $66.51 and $80.91, directly from the company. This is technically a pre-order price, as the enclosures are expected to start shipping on October 15th.

There are also enclosure / hub combos on Amazon and Newegg that promise similar functionality for less. But the ones I saw have generally poor reviews, are larger than the Disk Pro 2, and none of them look as pleasing or are as feature-packed as Sharge's design, with its transparent cover, active cooling, and MagSafe-compatible back. For those looking for portable connectivity and up to 8TB of storage in one device on the go, the Sharge Disk Pro 2 is in a class of its own, and easily earns a spot on our best SSD and hard drive enclosure list.

Discrete graphics card shipments for desktop PCs in Q2 2026 totaled 12.5 million units, the highest number since Q1 2022 despite record-high prices and cratering shipments of desktop CPUs, according to findings from Jon Peddie Research. The result highlights a broader trend that shows that unit sales of standalone GPUs for gaming have so far remained immune to rising prices, perhaps because gamers are expecting even higher prices in the coming quarters.

The industry shipped 12.5 million standalone graphics cards for desktop PCs in the second quarter of 2026, up around 5.9% sequentially and 7.8% year-over-year. 12.5 million add-in boards (AIBs) is the highest number of graphics cards sold in one quarter since the first quarter of 2022, when the industry shipped 13.38 million AIBs.

It is particularly noteworthy that 2026 is shaping up to be better for unit sales of desktop graphics boards than 2025 despite raising prices. For the first half of 2026, 24.3 million desktop AIBs were shipped, up significantly from 20.8 million graphics cards supplied in the first half of 2026. JPR analysts also note that only around 14 million desktop PCs were sold during the quarter, which — given an unusually high 89% attach rate — largely means that the majority of AIBs shipped during the quarter were aimed at gamers buying in retail and not at PC makers.

"Defying common wisdom, high-end AIB sales spiked as prices increased," said Jon Peddie, president of JPR. "Our theory is consumers rushed to buy AIBs before the prices went any higher, as the war in Iran is driving prices up in all segments."

Having shipped about 11.25 million discrete GPUs for desktop computers in Q2 2026, Nvidia remained the undisputed leader of the market with around 90% market share. AMD controlled roughly 8% of the market, shipping about one million discrete desktop GPUs, while Intel's share increased to 2% on shipments of several hundred thousand units. Meanwhile, Jon Peddie Research notes that market share changes were negligible during the quarter: AMD’s overall AIB market share decreased by -0.16% from the previous quarter, Intel's market share increased by 0.3%, and Nvidia's market share decreased by -0.1%.

For Nvidia, the quarter was particularly good as it sold the highest quantity of discrete GPUs for desktop PCs in a single quarter since Q3 2017, when it sold approximately 11.72 million units. By contrast, sales of AMD's standalone graphics cards have been floating below or around one million units per quarter for nearly four years now, with only three quarters being exceptions (Q3 2023, Q4 2023, Q4 2024). Still, one million is higher than the around 700 thousand discrete desktop GPUs the company sold in Q2 2025.

In total, Nvidia shipped approximately 17.365 million discrete graphics processors in the second quarter: roughly 11.25 million units went to desktops, and around 6.115 million units were installed into notebook and compact PCs. Since both AMD and Intel have quietly quit the market for standalone GPUs for mobile PCs, their shipments to this market segment were essentially zero.

AMD has officially launched the Ryzen 5 5500F and Ryzen 5 7500, two strong contenders for the best CPUs on the market if you're on a budget. Both are hexa-core chips, with the Ryzen 5 5500F featuring AMD's Zen 3 execution cores and the Ryzen 5 7500 using the newer Zen 4 execution cores. The Ryzen 5 5500F and Ryzen 5 7500, priced at $99 and $189, respectively, are available at U.S. retailers starting today.

The Ryzen 5 5500F, despite its similar model name to the Ryzen 5 5500, belongs to a different family in AMD's portfolio. The Ryzen 5 5500F hails from the Ryzen 5000 series (codenamed Vermeer), which uses a multi-chiplet architecture. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 5 5500 comes from the Ryzen 5000G series (codenamed Cezanne), which uses a monolithic die design.

Therefore, it is more sound to call the Ryzen 5 5500F a lower-binned version of the Ryzen 5 5600, rather than an iGPU-less variant of the Ryzen 5 5500, which lacks integrated graphics to begin with. The distinction matters because the Ryzen 5 5500F is closer to the Ryzen 5 5600, albeit with a 500 MHz lower boost clock speed and half the L3 cache.

The Ryzen 5 5600, which launched at $199, now retails for around $159, making the new Ryzen 5 5500F approximately 38% more affordable. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 5 5500, which debuted at $159, has lost substantial value over the years. OEM tray versions of the Ryzen 5 5500 now start at just $74, so it is still the most cost-effective entry point into the AM4 ecosystem. Compared to the Ryzen 5 5500, the Ryzen 5 5500F carries a 34% price premium. The latter justifies its higher cost with a slightly higher boost clock speed, which translates to better gaming performance, and support for PCIe 4.0, unlocking faster SSDs and graphics cards.

Ryzen 5 5500F and Ryzen 5 7500 Specifications

When it comes to the Ryzen 5 7500, little mystery surrounds its place in AMD's product stack. True to its name, the Ryzen 5 7500 is the same processor as the Ryzen 5 7500F, which launched three years ago, but with integrated Radeon graphics. This small addition suits users who need basic display output and do not plan to spend money on a discrete graphics card. Apart from the integrated graphics, all core specifications remain identical between the two models.

As a result, the difference between the Ryzen 5 7600 and the Ryzen 5 7500 stands. The former boasts a 100 MHz higher base and boost clock, so performance is somewhat better in certain processor-intensive workloads or gaming scenarios. However, most users may not notice the difference.

The Ryzen 5 7500F hit the market at $179, but over time its retail price has dropped to about $157. In contrast, the Ryzen 5 7600 has held its value over the years, falling only slightly from its original MSRP of $229 to around $226. As a result, the Ryzen 5 7500 positions itself as a mid-point option, priced 16% lower than the Ryzen 5 7600 and 20% above the Ryzen 5 7500F.

The Ryzen 5 7500 makes sense in this market because not everyone is a gamer, so integrated graphics mean you do not have to spend a fortune on a discrete graphics card at today's ridiculous prices. However, because it runs on AMD's AM5 platform, the Ryzen 5 7500 is still bound by the sky-high cost of DDR5.

We reported on the new Apple A20 Pro system-on-a-chip (SoC) for smartphones yesterday, an integral attraction within Apple’s first foldable, the iPhone Duo, and in the iPhone 18 Pro devices. Now the first A20 Geekbench 6 benchmark results are starting to pop up online, and they’re very impressive, particularly in single-core performance. If the result spotted by Longhorn is a typical one, the 4,719 single-core and 12,677 multi-core scores mean the new A20 is around 25% faster than its predecessor. Its single-core score can also make some of the best PC CPUs look anemic.

Apple’s official performance claims are interesting, as usual, but we’re always happy to see the third-party performance indicators start to emerge ahead of independent reviews. Heralding its new 2nm silicon yesterday, Apple might have actually understated the boost the A20 can deliver, with the official line about this “desktop-class” processor being the “fastest CPU in a smartphone,” and a claim that it is ‘just’ 20% faster than the previous gen. However, Geekbench isn’t the best indicator of real-world performance, and this is just a sample of one to sprinkle salt upon.

What are numbers without relevant comparisons, though? For more perspective on Apple’s newest silicon, which might also be thrown into a new Neo laptop (or desktop) in the coming months, check out the table below.

Above, we’ve pitted the Apple A19 Pro from last year’s iPhone 17 Pro as the second comparison column entrant. Apple has worked on multiple angles to deliver improvements over last year. It says that it has both new super-cores and efficiency cores in play. Then there’s the refined 2nm process and the faster clocks, too.

For some wider context, we’ve also tabulated one of Apple’s newest M5 computer chips, a modern Qualcomm Snapdragon Elite X2 laptop chip, and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2, for a fun desktop PC angle. Less fun is the comparison with the Asus Zephyrus G16 2024 laptop I’m using now, with an AMD Ryzen AI HX 370 chip. Its Geekbench 6 scores of roughly 2,800 / 14,500 are easily outclassed by Apple’s new smartphone processor in 1T tests, but retain a little dignity by winning by ~1,800 points in nT tests.

Apple is opening up pre-orders for its new iPhones with A20 silicon shortly, with retail release on Friday, September 18. It usually lifts review embargoes a few days before retail. We should therefore see a broader range of benchmarks and tests from good sources in the coming week.

Modders at the YouTube channel TecLab have created what is being called the world’s first RTX 5090 powered by traditional 8-pin PCIe connectors. Not only were the modders able to successfully power up the graphics card, but they also proved that the older connector is still quite capable of handling the extreme power demands of a modern high-end GPU.

The card chosen for the experiment was a Galax GeForce RTX 5090D HOF OC LAB XOC, which is a top-of-the-line model that features a beefy cooler as well as dual 16-pin power connectors. The modders essentially dismantled the entire graphics card along with the dual 16-pin power connectors, stripping it down to just the bare PCB. Next, three 8-pin power connectors were installed at the rear, with each connector soldered directly to the power regulators on the PCB using heavy-gauge cables. Additionally, the sense pins had to be rewired to ensure that the card could reach its maximum power load without any restrictions. To keep the temperatures in check, they used a liquid cooling system with a GPU block.

An 8-pin PCIe power connector is officially rated for 150W, although its actual maximum capacity is much higher. During the one-hour livestream, the modders tested the GPU by gradually increasing the power draw, starting at 400W and going all the way up to 900W using three 8-pin power cables. At its peak, the modified RTX 5090 pulled more than 120A, with clock speeds reaching as high as 3,400 MHz. Notably, the mod was limited to only the hardware level, with no software or BIOS tweaks performed.

To further test the capability of the 8-pin connectors, the modders tested the modified RTX 5090 with just two cables. The overall power draw dropped to 66A, while clock speeds remained at a respectable 3,200 MHz. Going a step further, the card was tested with just one cable, which surprisingly only dropped the figures down to 65A and 3,100 MHz.

Despite the PCI-SIG (PCI Special Interest Group) revising the 16-pin power connector (12V-2x6) to improve reliability, reports of melting GPU connectors continue to haunt gamers. The issue is particularly more common among high-performance models, though not limited to Nvidia RTX 50 and RTX 40 series, as certain AMD Radeon graphics with the 16-pin connector are also at risk. TecLab's experiment shows that GPU manufacturers may want to reconsider the tried-and-tested 8-pin connector and explore whether it could still be a viable option in high-end graphics cards.

Apple has a new top system-on-a-chip for smartphones, the A20 Pro. The new processor debuted at Apple's iPhone event today — the first event led by newly minted chief executive officer John Ternus — alongside a new in-house modem (the C2).

The A20 Pro is Apple's first 2-nanometer chip in an iPhone. (Its first-ever 2 nm chip is the M6, which the company announced in August and which will debut in the Mac Mini later this month). Like the M6, the A20 features dual neural engines, new CPU and GPU cores.

The A20 Pro will power the new foldable iPhone Duo, along with the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max.

The new SOC boasts a 6-core CPU with two of the company's super-cores (20% faster than last generation), and there are also four efficiency cores with neural accelerators. Apple is calling this a "desktop-class" processor and the "fastest CPU in a smartphone."

The 7-core GPU has a 40% boost gen-over-gen with increased bandwidth, along with new neural accelerators that the company says allows for twice-as-fast FP8 compute.

The two neural engines have a combined 32 total cores. There's a 50% increase in memory bandwidth on the chip, which Apple says is the widest memory interface in an iPhone.

Apple has also changed the packaging, with the silicon dies placed in a way that removes memory from the thermal path of the SOC, allowing the silicon to attach directly to the vapor chamber. That vapor chamber has a three times larger surface area over the 17 Pro, and also includes more graphite and copper along with 80% recycled stainless steel.

The company claims that this will allow for up to 40% sustained performance over the iPhone 17 Pro and 2x sustained performance over the 16 Pro.

Apple says that A20 Pro's efficiencies and new battery designs allow for better longevity. The company claims the Pro will get 36 hours of video playback, and 45 hours on Pro Max video. Using a proprietary test based on data from how people use their phones, Apple claims 24 hours per charge on the 18 Pro and 30 hours on the Pro Max.

Beyond the SOC, Apple is also using a new C2 cellular modem, replacing Qualcomm. Apple claims that C2 "delivers meaningfully faster uploads when compared to C1X while consuming 15 percent less energy," and also adds mmWave support in the United States. Both phones also feature the N1 networking chip for Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 6, and Thread.

The iPhone 18 Pro will start at $1,199, while the Pro Max will start at $1,299. The phones will be available on September 18. The phones also feature an updated Dynamic Island and a 48-megapixel fusion camera with a variable aperture, plus customizable settings such as white balance and cinematic effects that can be added after capture.

Apple's other new silicon was the S11, a chip for the Apple Watch Series 12 and Ultra 4.

iPhone Duo

The iPhone Duo, Apple's long-awaited foldable phone, will also use the A20 Pro.

The foldable will be Apple's first phone with a FaceTime camera behind the display, and Apple detailed the hinge and aerospace-grade titanium construction. The Duo is IP68-rated for dust and water resistance. It comes in "star white," as well as "night sky" (a dark blue).

The OS, iOS 27, will allow for docks and controls to live on the sides of the system, putting them near your hand. When opened, it's the thinnest iPhone ever and has the largest screen on an iPhone at 7.6 inches. Later this year, Apple Pencil will be supported on the Duo on both screens.

Apple will use Touch ID for biometrics, jettisoning the Face ID from more recent slab-style phones. Apple said this is the best way to go because it's available whether open or closed, and you can enroll multiple fingers.

The phone supports multiple "poses," including partial folds, and a standby mode when used in a tent-style pose — even when it's not charging.

Apple's internal display has an anti-glare display to "minimize crease visibility," which the company also claims feels premium under your fingers, with a titanium plate supporting the panel, along with a hinge with over 100 components. Samsung also released a phone with a minimal crease in the Galaxy Z Fold 8 earlier this year, but we'll have to see how reviewers compare the two screens.

A20 Pro has a new display engine that supports both displays. Like the 18 Pro and 18 Pro Max, Apple is using the C2 cellular modem over Qualcomm's in the iPhone Duo.

The iPhone Duo is eSIM-only everywhere in the world, maximizing battery space. Each side of the phone has its own battery, which operates as one with software. Apple is claiming up to 31 hours of video playback on the inner display and 44 hours on the outer display. Using its own model, Apple claims 24 hours when using "both screens equally."

The phone has a two-camera system. The main camera is a 48MP lens with up to 2x telephoto, while the other is an ultrawide lens. The 48MP camera is the same one on the 18 Pro, though without the variable aperture. The center-stage camera on the front is a 12MP camera. The inner display has an under-screen FaceTime camera.

The iPhone Duo starts at $1,999 for 256GB, and goes up to 2TB. Pre-orders start on October 16, and the phone will launch on October 23.

Following an early access period that included over 60,000 participants, auto-overclocking tool Hypertune has released its Gaming Performance Engineering platform, which is built on top of Intel's Extreme Tuning Utility (XTU) SDK and developed in partnership with Intel. The company claims the utility can boost frame rates by up to 60%, though you shouldn't expect that as the norm. The tool includes automated CPU and GPU overclocking, as well as customizable Windows features, network optimization, and game-specific optimizations.

Hypertune partnered with Intel to build the tool, which the company says "evaluates each supported system individually" before optimizing rather than relying on generalized profiles. In its press release, Hypertune says it collaborated with famed overclocker SkatterBencher (Pieter Plaisier) to refine the software. We've reached out to Plaisier to confirm their involvement.

Automated tuning programs usually don't work as well as advertised, and we haven't had the chance to test Hypertune ourselves yet. Especially on more recent hardware, expect performance gains to be minor. Hypertune shared some of its internal benchmarks to back up the claim, showcasing the actual test systems it used, the numbers it gathered, and what each step of Hypertune contributed to the performance increase.

Hypertune tested two systems: one with a Core Ultra 9 285K and an RTX 5090, and another with a Core i7-14700K and an RTX 3080. For the 285K system, the team saw an 18.9% improvement in Homeworld 3 and a 28.2% improvement in Tomb Raider. For the 14700K system, the boost was up to 9.8% in Rainbow Six Siege and 4.3% in Marvel Rivals.

Notably, these results are with Hypertune's Game Hub disabled. Game Hub automatically applies a graphics settings profile to select games, leading to massive increases in performance. Naturally, tweaking your own graphics settings in the same way leads to the same result.

In Homeworld 3, you can see how each step in the process impacted performance, with CPU tunning contributing the single biggest increase in performance. As shown by Marvel Rivals in Hypertune's data, some games will see little to no benefit from Hypertune, though select titles with certain hardware may see a significant performance increase. In this case, the Core Ultra 9 285K has plenty of room for overclocking, and Homeworld 3 is particularly sensitive to the CPU, so the uplift makes sense.

Elsewhere, the gains aren't as pronounced. In Rainbow Six Siege, you can see that Hypertune contributed about a 9.8% jump in performance, though the vast majority of the improvement comes through Game Hub, where Hypertune changes in-game settings.

In a press release, Hypertune founder Austin Copeland wrote that the team was "not trying to build a tool for overclockers," suggesting it's aimed toward users who may not know about specific settings (i.e., the Balanced power plan on dual-CCD X3D CPUs, or HAGS for DLSS Frame Generation). Copeland was previously a coach for eSports organization TSM, coaching Valorant teams under the name "Apex."

Hypertune works through Intel's XTU SDK, and the company says its optimizations are non-destructive and fully reversible. The software is mainly targeted toward competitive titles (naturally, given Copeland's background), but it can apply optimizations globally across the system. Hypertune says it's safe to use with anti-cheat software, including Riot Vanguard, Easy Anti-Cheat, and BattlEye.

Although there are plenty of free tools that claim to optimize your system, Hypertune isn't among them. It's a subscription service, available for either $9.99 per month or $59.99 per year. In addition to software, Hypertune offers its "expert tuning" service for $80, where a technician will remote into your machine and manually tune it. On the subscription front, Hypertune offers a 7-day free trial.

Hypertune looks like one of the more robust automated overclocking tools we've seen, but it's worth highlighting that, in most cases, these tools don't do anything you can't accomplish yourself. If you're looking for a starting point, make sure to read our guides on how to overclock your graphics card and how to overclock your CPU.

Whether you are into content creation, 3D animation or modeling, or visual effects creation, you need the right tools to succeed. Autodesk's software is second to none in these fields of work, and for a limited time, you can save up to 40% on the company's Media and Entertainment Collection. This is a great opportunity to save hundreds of dollars on software vital to your work.

• Check out the Media and Entertainment Collection deal on Autodesk

The Autodesk Media and Entertainment Collection is a comprehensive software bundle that includes industry-standard programs, such as Maya and 3ds Max. Professionals and aspiring students aiming to thrive in the 3D animation or 3D modeling industry are likely already familiar with this software and understand how significant the investment in their subscriptions can be.

While Autodesk offers individual subscriptions for its vast portfolio of software, the Media and Entertainment Collection bundle is a far smarter investment for most users. By picking up the bundle, you can save up to 40% compared to purchasing each piece of software separately. It is more affordable for professionals and students and offers the convenience of having all the necessary software in one package.

Autodesk presently offers the Media and Entertainment Collection in four unique variants that target different industries. There are software options for modeling, motion capture, animation, and rendering. Pricing remains the same across all four packages, as does the 40% discount. You are not just receiving an excellent piece of software at a great price, but you also have access to Autodesk's 24/7 online support and resources.

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

The Goodram PX700 is a budget PCIe 4.0 drive that delivers everything you need: good performance, great power efficiency, and all in a single-sided package that runs cool. Sometimes it really is as simple as picking one drive to meet whatever your storage needs are at the moment. It’s not the first model that comes to mind for this segment, but in our testing it performed better than expected as a good drive that may otherwise run under the radar.

Goodram is not a new or no-name company, even if the “good RAM” moniker seems a little too on the nose. Instead, it’s a memory assembler in the EU with quite some history. This, in fact, makes it more approachable in comparison to a lot of the new names we have seen on AliExpress and increasingly on Amazon. We expect reliability or at least good support from the company, and the TBW on this one seems to reflect that this isn’t an ultra-budget drive.

On the contrary, performance was not just what we expected – considering we’ve reviewed many drives in this segment, many with the same or comparable hardware – but above. Sometimes only by a small amount, but the gaps are real. Anywhere performance mattered, it delivered. One expects trade-offs for that, but in fact the PX700 is very power-efficient, and the drive provides an excellent storage experience. The only downsides are sustained write performance – which is of little importance in most cases – and, unfortunately, the price. At the right price point, this would be a great pick for any device.

Goodram PX700 Specifications

The Goodram PX700 covers the most popular capacities of 1TB, 2TB, and 4TB. Smaller drives can be popular for upgrades and basic boot usage, especially with how prices are now, but modern flash scales best at 1TB and up. 8TB drives are great as a larger storage solution but require a significant investment. The PX700 sticks to what will sell, predominantly 1TB and 2TB. At the time of review, these are priced at $346 and $418, respectively. These prices are high and probably point to a lack of stock more than anything else. While the 1TB price is double what it should be, at 2TB a drive of this type should be closer to $300. Naturally, one has to take into account the pricing volatility in an SSD market besieged by a NAND shortage, but we recommend looking in that range for this drive or one comparable to it with similar or the same hardware.

The drive is full-fledged Gen 4 with performance up to 7,400 / 6,500 MB/s for sequential reads and writes and up to 1 million random read and write IOPS at 4TB with only 820K write at 1TB/2TB. This is standard for the class and is more than enough performance for everyday tasks, gaming, productivity workflows, and more. The drive has the standard five-year warranty with up to 600TB of writes for every TB. The last part of that is worth a second glance because it indicates this drive can come with TLC rather than QLC flash, since TLC, aside from being faster, has better endurance than QLC. However, we have reasons to believe our sample has QLC, which we will point out where the evidence supports that reasoning. We want to emphasize that you should not assume what flash a drive uses based on TBW alone.

Goodram PX700 Software and Accessories

Goodram does not offer any specialized or custom software for its SSDs. You will have to rely on third-party solutions. Software for SSDs essentially falls into three categories: health management, performance, and data backup. SSD toolbox applications from manufacturers will usually cover the first two, with, typically, an OEM version of Acronis True Image for the last. For free alternatives, we recommend CrystalDiskInfo for health information, CrystalDiskMark for basic benchmarking, and MultiDrive for data backup and imaging. MultiDrive is made for Windows and has a bootable WinPE image, so for other operating systems you can opt to use Clonezilla instead.

Goodram PX700: A Closer Look

The PX700 is a single-sided drive at all capacity points. This makes it compatible with a wider range of systems and, if you need to cool the drive, it’s easier to tackle just one side of components. As it turns out, the drive runs cool enough that you probably don’t have to worry about this – check the Power Consumption and Temperature section below – but it’s still worth pointing out. The data on the rear label is standard, but we do want to say a little bit more about the listed manufacturer.

Wilk Elektronik is a Poland-based memory company, which makes this interesting, as that means the PX700 is a European-assembled SSD. Goodram covers the mainstream parts and IRDM enthusiast, although this is the first SSD from them that we’ve reviewed. As we are going to dig into the hardware in this section, we will say that the drive's silicon is sourced from Asia, as with virtually every SSD. If we say a drive is made in Poland, this means the drive is assembled, tested, and covered by warranty in Poland with an EU anchor. For some, that might be a positive factor in any purchasing decision.

Identifying the hardware here is half simple and half challenging. The controller is clearly the Maxio MAP1602, a four-channel, DRAM-less part that’s been a budget champion for quite some time. There is not much mystery there aside from maybe this being a later revision, typically used for higher capacities.

The flash is more difficult. We can ascertain that these are 512GB NAND flash packages from the “512G” – given modern flash is 1Tb or 128GB, four dies per package for a total of sixteen dies. That’s perfect for maximizing performance out of this controller. The “W2533” is likely the manufacture date of week 33, year 2025. All this indicates is that this is, at least, not older flash, although we already know it has to be 2,400 MT/s at a minimum to hit the specified performance.

It makes a lot of sense for the PX700 to use TLC flash, though, given the TBW and the fact that we’ve been seeing this controller with 232-Layer Micron TLC more frequently lately. The Biwin Black Opal NV7400 comes to mind. However, Goodram has access to YMTC flash, and that includes QLC. YMTC rather than Micron QLC is more likely, given the latter is in high demand in enterprise. Normally, you could use certain utilities to identify the flash, but firmware for this controller is often encrypted to avoid revealing the flash ID. It’s still possible to get around this with leaked MP tools, but otherwise the best way to identify it is simply to look at the performance. We’ll be doing that in this review with comparison drives to help back up the investigation.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

Comparison Products

The Goodram PX700 is in a tight spot with ample competition in today’s market. This has been true for some years now, but some more recent releases have turned up the heat. These would include the Sandisk WD Blue SN5100 with its fantastic random read latency, the Crucial P310 with surprisingly good all-around performance, and even the Samsung 990, which was a very late arrival. Existing drives with comparable hardware to the PX700 include the Acer FA200 with QLC flash plus the Biwin Black Opal NV7400, Addlink A93, and Inland TN470 with TLC. The last of these also uses a Phison controller rather than the more common Maxio MAP1602. Lastly, we have the budget-minded Kingston NV3, which is always looming in the background.

Trace Testing — 3DMark Storage Benchmark

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

The PX700’s 3DMark results are spot-on for a drive of this caliber, hanging out at around 40µs for latency with bandwidth over 700 MB/s. This level of performance is excellent for gaming, and the only drive that wouldn’t fall into that category is the NV3. The NV3 is still fast enough for a games drive and remains a good budget choice, but there are faster options like the PX700. We want to emphasize that the PX700 is better than it looks in this lineup because it’s effectively within range of all drives but one, the WD Blue SN5100.

Among the QLC-based drives, the WD Blue SN5100, 990, and P310 all notably score near the top. The BiCS flash in the first drive is known for its responsiveness and, yes, it will give you a small edge with game load times. However, the 990 is right up there with the P310, which means there is no shortage of viable options. Most slower drives, from a gamer’s perspective, will be last-generation or slower PCIe 4.0, which means it’s not hard to find drives that are very fast for games. This means that the deciding factor might lie outside of 3DMark performance, such as drive reliability.

Trace Testing — PCMark 10 Storage Benchmark

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

While the PX700 is merely mediocre against the competition in 3DMark – its absolute performance is quite good, though – its showing in PCMark 10 is better. This is again a scenario where the drives with TLC flash, including the TN470 with Phison’s controller, are underwhelming. This can be confusing to buyers who have relied on the mantra that TLC is better than QLC. There are reasons for the surprise here, although the general idea that benchmarking is often looking at ideal scenarios is perhaps the easiest answer.

These drives, whether TLC or QLC, rely on pSLC cache as much as possible to give you the best performance. This pSLC mode is not equivalent to native pSLC and is generally the same speed regardless of the flash type. QLC, however, tends to lead TLC in some ways and follow it in others. For example, QLC gets larger benefits from optimizations, so it may see advanced techniques first. This includes improvements to 4K latency. On the other hand, QLC has four planes when TLC has advanced to six. As we’ve seen with BiCS flash, which is four-plane against six-plane TLC from Micron and YMTC, fewer planes can lead to lower effective latency. The advantage of a higher plane count is in bandwidth but does not come without costs and drawbacks.

The PX700 is also faster than a QLC-based drive with the same controller, like the FA200. In that case, the FA200 uses twice as many dies – thirty-two – which puts more load on the controller. This can increase latency. In general, the idea has been that bigger drives are faster, which is certainly true in many cases. Larger drives will have more bandwidth and can reach higher IOPS due to improved parallelization. However, past four dies for each channel – this is where the PX700 falls, and the FA200 exceeds – you are increasing power consumption and overhead. So, the PX700 is in a sweet spot for how this benchmark tests.

We would go on to say that the P310, WD Blue SN5100, and 990 all beat the PX700. These are all QLC-based drives with a range of controllers. We’ve already explained the BiCS factor. Samsung’s newer QLC is also very good. The P310 has always been a bit of an outlier, as on paper its hardware shouldn’t perform as well as it does. Considering Crucial used to rely at least partially on proprietary controllers, we think this is a situation where they did a lot of optimization. WD and Sandisk also did this with the Black SN8100/Optimus Pro GX 8100 so there’s some “special sauce” at play. The PX700 being the best of the rest is a point in its favor, as those are the drives it’s competing with in the real market.

Console Testing — PlayStation 5 Transfers

The PlayStation 5 is capable of taking one additional PCIe 4.0 or faster SSD for extra game storage. While any 4.0 drive will technically work, Sony recommends drives that can deliver at least 5,500 MB/s of sequential read bandwidth for optimal performance. Based on our extensive testing, PCIe 5.0 SSDs don’t bring much to the table and generally shouldn’t be used in the PS5, especially as they may require additional cooling. Check our Best PS5 SSDs article for more information.

Our testing utilizes the PS5’s internal storage test and manual read/write tests with over 192GB of data both from and to the internal storage. Throttling is prevented where possible to see how each drive operates under ideal conditions. While game load times should not deviate much from drive to drive, our results can indicate which drives may be more responsive in long-term use.

For the PS5, we can recommend almost any drive if it meets the PS5’s minimum requirements in any real way. The PX700 significantly exceeds that, so the question is more about value. What does this drive offer that others don’t? For this category, this often means leaning towards drives with heatsinks and/or higher reliability. Reliability is a difficult quality to measure, although a warranty gives some peace of mind. As for heatsinks, you can always add your own. So drawing lines here becomes more difficult.

We would point to our Power Consumption and Temperature section below for some additional support. The PX700, as we will see, runs coolly, which is a big positive for the PS5. Performance-wise, it’s right up there with the other drives and only really behind the Blue SN5100. You don’t have to go with a big brand to get good results here, and the PX700 will serve you well.

Transfer Rates — DiskBench

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

The PX700 does very well here, and we wanted to give some background on this test and what it means to put that into perspective. Whether you’re copying between drives or copying to and from the same drive, there are some universal principles. One is that there will be a bottleneck, and usually this will be on the write side of things, as drives write slower than they read. Flash memory, in particular, has to erase cells before they can be written again, which leads to some curious behavior under certain workloads. More generally, though, a write has higher latency – with flash again, this is due to the technology and how multi-bit cells usually need multiple write passes – and writes must be acknowledged, while reads just come from usually static media.

If you have drives that are of different classes – NVMe and SATA, or PCIe 4.0 and PCIe 3.0 – then you would expect the slower class of drive to be the bottleneck even if it’s on the read side. This is also universal, going back to the days when HDDs got faster as they got bigger. SSDs also generally get faster with capacity, but flash is so fast that these rules are no longer absolute. This is complicated by other facets of the technology like pSLC caching and TLC versus QLC flash, where with sustained writes you can have dramatic changes in performance. This is a problem because many people buy drives thinking mostly about transfer performance, and when they hit a low that’s nowhere near the box-rated speed, they panic.

Our DiskBench testing takes all of this into account as it’s closer to a real-world workload, including using different file sizes. Transferring a bunch of large files is fast. Copying lots of small files – and any veteran of hard drives will know this from backing up Windows or documents manually – can be very slow, even on SSDs. So we do a mix. Moreover, we’re doing an on-drive copy, which helps rule out external factors. Much of what you do on your system can be cached in system memory, which can give misleading metrics depending on what you’re doing.

What we’re leading up to here is that the PX700 is the fastest drive on the list for reads and not far off first place for copying. Considering it’s up against some of the best budget drives out there, that’s no mean feat. This is, again, a real-world workload and probably more meaningful than something like 3DMark is for game load times.

Yes, the difference between the best and the worst drive for reads is under 10%, but nobody wants to buy a drive and feel bad about how fast it feels. The PX700 feels like a premium drive – the weaker write performance here is real, but most of what you’re doing will be read-heavy – and if you’re building a PC for someone with it over, say, the Samsung 990, they won’t know the difference. That is a common refrain regardless, but it helps underline the value of reliability. People buy Samsung and WD/Sandisk for a reason. Given Goodram’s European basis, there is some reason to celebrate the performance here while also acknowledging it’s not a no-name brand from AliExpress.

Synthetic Testing — ATTO / CrystalDiskMark

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

The PX700 has very steady performance in ATTO. We have no real complaints there. If we turn to sequential performance in CDM, we see more of the same. We would mostly look at QD1 reads for that, being a real-world metric, and it’s roughly on par with the NV7400 there. If we turn to random 4KB read performance at QD1, it’s a little bit further down the list but still hangs with excellent drives like the P310. Anything below about 45µs here is solid in our book. This drive should be quite responsive. If we were forced to be critical, we would point out that high QD 4KB write performance is low. Luckily, this is not a real-world workload for a drive of this type.

Sustained Write Performance and Cache Recovery

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

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

The PX700 starts off in the pSLC cache mode, writing at 5.8 GB/s for over 86 seconds. Speeds are slightly higher for the first two seconds, something we have seen before with this controller, but ultimately we’re looking at a 500GB cache. This is Exhibit A of why we would identify the flash as QLC. 4-bit QLC flash operating in a 1-bit pSLC mode is trading four times the capacity for performance, which means a 2TB drive will generally have a 500GB cache at most. A 3-bit TLC drive could have a larger cache, although there is nothing precluding it from having 500GB, even if this seems hard to be coincidental.

A TLC drive with a smaller-than-maximum-sized cache would probably be able to maintain some speed, though. The PX700 immediately falls into a folding mode – it’s waiting for data to be moved from pSLC to the native flash – with an average speed of 163 MB/s. TLC flash can at times be this slow, but it’s less likely, and especially less likely if it has space to spare. Even the FA200, with the same hardware, is faster. The FA200 does have twice the flash, of course, but the controller is essentially saturated. Rather, the FA200’s cache speed of 5.54 GB/s is slower than the PX700’s – and this could be from having more flash – which means the post-cache speed will be higher. This reinforces the position that the drive is using QLC. Of course, we could have thrown the 2TB HP FX700 into the mix to further prove this point, but we think comparing a 4TB drive is a more valuable approach.

It goes without saying that this is the first real failing of the PX700 in our review. However, it’s expected of a QLC SSD with a massive cache. We don’t consider it disqualifying. You are not buying a budget SSD to hammer it with writes. On the other hand, the 600TBW per TB warranty makes you assume you could do that to some extent. Also, the lower performance here could creep up in a fuller-drive experience. We also can’t exclude the fact that some PX700s come with TLC flash. Which means, taken as a whole, you should assume QLC will perform like the TLC competition 99% of the time.

Power Consumption and Temperature

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

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

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

The PX700 comes back into our good graces with very good results in our power testing. It’s essentially tied for second with the FA200, which is hardly surprising given the hardware similarity. Only the BiCS8-based WD Blue SN5100 pulls away from the pack. We would consider every drive on this list to be sufficiently power-efficient for laptop use, although the 990 is closer to the lower end of that range. Certainly 550 MB/s per watt or higher is an excellent result and indicates a drive that can be run without a heatsink most comfortably. As for idle pull – we test under desktop conditions, which can also match poorly-optimized power settings – the PX700 is not unusually power-hungry and, in fact, better than the WD Blue SN5100. That’s a bonus.

Temperature-wise, we have good news. Goodram touts the graphene label on this drive, which, in our experience, does actually help with cooling, especially on a drive with four flash packages. The PX700 in our testing peaked at 61°C, nearly 30°C below the initial throttling point, well beyond the 20°C of headroom we like to see. The MAP1602 does tend to be a hotspot more than alternatives like the Phison E27T on the P310 and TN470, but a heat-spreading label does help. In our estimation, this is a cool-running drive that would be great anywhere.

Test Bench and Testing Notes

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

Goodram PX700 Bottom Line

The Goodram PX700 is a model budget PCIe 4.0 SSD. It matches or exceeds all of the expected performance points; it's power-efficient, and it uses a simple single-sided design without a heatsink. The only problem is that a “budget” drive has to be affordable. Current prices in the U.S. for this drive leave something to be desired. However, if it can match or beat the prices of other drives in this class, it’s probably one of the better choices available. In part, this is because we’d be liable to trust Goodram over non-names – the TBW alone shows it means business – and, on the other hand, the drive actually outperformed our expectations. Aside from the sustained write performance, this drive really feels premium. You don’t need a Samsung, WD, Sandisk, or even Crucial drive to feel like you have next-gen storage.

Let’s look at what we mean by that for your use. Game and app loading times are heavily reliant on random and sequential reads at low QD. The PX700 does well there. You also may be transferring files a lot, and the DiskBench results are mighty. For your laptop or HTPC, you might want something that’s power-efficient and, if space is a concern, something that stays cool without a heatsink, and this applies to PS5 use as well. The PX700 ran cool in our test with just the graphene label and was very efficient. You’re not getting a shorter warranty with lower TBW, as with Samsung’s 990 or some QLC-based drives, and we know where this drive is assembled. It’s hard to look at this combination and not feel like it’s a stellar drive if you can find it at a normal price.

Aside from price, our only complaint would be sustained write performance. It’s pretty dissapointing, although we should point out that it’s also expected. The drive also has trade-offs here. Namely, its standard pSLC write performance is better than the 4TB FA200, and in the 2TB HP FX700’s ballpark, so you’re not getting nothing for that later drop. The PX700, in fact, is faster folding than the FX700, too. In the grand scheme of things, this isn’t a big deal, as you should never hit that state – this drive should effectively be fast enough for a 1GbE network, if that’s a bottleneck – and having a bit faster peak performance does translate to better marks on some of our benchmarks. The drive could take a hit in some cases, such as when it's very full, in which case getting a drive with DRAM and guaranteed TLC flash could assuage your fears.

For most use cases, though, the PX700 is more than good enough and, in fact, punches above its weight in our opinion. It would be a good option for just about any type of machine. PS5, laptop, HTPC, desktop, you name it. Primary or secondary drive, just fine. You don’t even need a heatsink. The capacity range is solid – you’re not going to find 8TB on a drive like this – and you can bring your own software. Performance is good enough to overlook any QLC flash use, so our main problem remains the price. Get it down to the same ballpark as the other drives in our list, and you have a contender. We hesitate to put an exact dollar amount for that because SSD prices are volatile, to say the least, so compare it to comparable drives such as the ones we matched it against today.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

We've seen huge price rises this year for PC hardware, but RAM and SSDs have been especially affected. The global DRAM shortage, mostly caused by AI data center demands hoovering up all of the available stock, has caused prices to skyrocket. That's why this 4TB Crucial T705 SSD, down to $502.51, is a good deal in the current market, especially given its high capacity.

● Check out this deal at Amazon

Looking at Camelcamelcamel's price data, we can see that this drive was hitting almost $700 just a few weeks ago. Several price drops since have meant that the 4TB Crucial T705 is now almost below $500 for the first time in February. Along with a decent price drop, this Crucial drive is now the cheapest Gen 5 SSD you can pick up, with the next-cheapest model, the Samsung 990 Evo Plus, $60 more expensive at the moment.

It's not even a fair comparison, too, as the entry-level 990 Evo Plus only supports PCIe 5.0 over two lanes, not four, meaning you're only getting Gen 4-equivalent speeds. The Crucial T705 is a high-performance drive that's much faster, and right now, much cheaper.

SSDs that offer Gen 5 speeds are a real step up over their slower Gen 4 counterparts. The T705 will offer you sequential read and write speeds of 14,500 MB/s and 12,700 MB/s, which is significantly faster than the fastest Gen 4 SSD on the market, the Samsung 990 Pro, which taps out at 7,450 MB/s. The T705 ships with 232-Layer Micro TLC memory modules and uses the Phison E26 controller.

It's also one of the fastest you can buy, period, rivalling the WD_Black SN8100, which hits speeds of 15,000 MB/s. That drive will set you back $659.99 right now, too, a significant increase compared to the deal on offer here. The Crucial T705 drive scored an Editor's Choice award for its sustained read/write performance at high speed, along with 4.5 stars in our review.

While we wished that SSD prices were back down to what we saw 18 months ago, it's good to see that high-performance drives like this one can still drop in price. The $502.51 sale price for this Crucial T705 4TB SSD is a seriously good one in the current market, and you won't be able to beat it for speed or price. Grab it at this price while you can.

Phanteks is a Dutch company, founded in 2007 and best known for enclosures, alongside air coolers, AIOs, and a steadily expanding catalog of accessories. Power supplies came later, and they have always been commissioned work. As with most such companies, Phanteks does not own a factory, and the identity of the power supply inside a Phanteks box has changed more than once. For example, the original AMP series from 2020 was a Seasonic Focus derivative, a genuinely strong platform that earned the AMP series a significant reputation. The AMP GH is the current mainstream range, and it is a different animal.

The platform of the AMP GH 750W that we are reviewing today comes from Helly Technology, the Guangzhou outfit founded in 2008 that has spent the last few years building the mid- and upper-tier units. Young by the standards of this industry, but no longer an unknown quantity. The series spans 650W to 1200W across Gold and Platinum tiers, in black or white. We take a closer look at the AMP GH 750W to see how it ranks against our best power supplies list. Everything in it is ATX 3.1 and PCIe 5.1 compliant, fully modular, and cooled by a single 120 mm fan that stops entirely at low load. The 750W model reviewed here is the volume seller of the range, aiming squarely at the mid-range gaming build.

Specifications and Design

In the Box

The AMP GH 750 arrives in a white cardboard box with mint-green edges and sides, the product name in large type across the front, and the 80 PLUS Gold badge in the top corner. Three black-and-grey strips along the bottom edge carry the three main headline claims: ATX 3.1 PSU, PCIe Gen5.1 support, fully modular. That is about the extent of the marketing. It is a restrained, we dare say almost clinical presentation next to what most of this segment ships in.

Inside, the power supply sits between molded protective inserts, with the cables bagged separately. The bundle is far better than the price suggests and one of the most complete we have seen this year. It comprises of the AC cable, four chrome mounting screws, a very generous bunch of white zip ties, a few black and white Velcro straps, and a bag of white cable combs. There is also an installation guide and manual that are shared across the whole series.

The cables themselves are the highlight. Every wire is individually sleeved in white braid rather than the flat ribbon type this class usually gets, and they stay flexible enough to be easily routed. Even the 12V-2x6 signal wires are, creating a very high-quality aesthetic result. They do take up a little bit more room behind a motherboard tray than flat cables would, but we are certain that this is a sacrifice builders are willing to make. The 12V-2x6 cable is marked 450W on the connector housing and uses mint-green latch tabs, which do double duty as a seating indicator (if you can still see green, the plug is incorrectly seated). The 12V-2x6 and ATX 24-pin cables have cable combs pre-installed.

External Appearance

At 140 x 150 x 86 mm, the AMP GH 750 is about as short as a modern ATX unit gets, which means it will fit anything that takes a standard supply and leave room for cable slack in front of it. Our sample obviously is the white version, and the finish is the first thing worth commenting on. It is a clean, even satin snow white with an exceptional finish. This is not a given with white units, as they can easily look a little grey next to a truly white item/case. This one does not. Phanteks also sells the unit in black, and at MSRP, the black version is $10 cheaper.

The bottom carries a fan grille cut as a field of staggered rectangles rather than the usual honeycomb, with the company logo embossed across the middle and four polished exposed screws at the corners. The side panels get the company and series logo, as well as a scattered pixel-dot pattern in grey. The specification label is found at the top. The specification label deserves a read before purchase: 62A on the 12V rail for 744W, 100W combined on the minor rails, and a separate line stating 450W for the 12V-2x6 output. That is a hard limit on what you can hang off the single native Gen5 connector, and it is printed on the unit and on the connector rather than buried in a datasheet, which is at least honest.

The rear face is somewhat straightforward, with an AC receptacle and a rocker switch, with the only difference being that these are all white. Even though one is pictured in the manufacturer’s website, there is no switch for the semi-passive mode, so the fanless mode is automatic and not something you can override in either direction. The front of the unit hosts the connectors for the modular cables. The top row starts with the dedicated 12V-2x6 socket and continues with five shared 8-pin sockets marked CPU and PCIe. The bottom row has three sockets for the SATA and Molex cables, then two for the motherboard cable.

Internal Design

Cooling comes from a 120 mm Yate Loon D12SH-12, a 12V/0.3A sleeve-bearing fan rated for 2200 RPM in Yate Loon's catalog. Yate Loon is a long-standing name, and the D12SH has been turning up in power supplies for years, but a sleeve bearing is a sleeve bearing - it is the cheapest part of an otherwise decent bill of materials. The fan is white to match the chassis rather than the usual black part hidden behind a grille.

The platform is Helly's, and the layout is tidy. We have proper heatsinks rather than basic aluminum plates, sensible component spacing, and a restrained amount of glue holding the taller parts down. Transient filtering begins at the AC receptacle and continues on the main board, totaling three X capacitors, four Y capacitors, and two filtering inductors. Two bridge rectifiers sit on their own dedicated heatsink, which is more than this class usually gets.

The APFC stage uses a pair of Oriental Semiconductor OSG55R190F MOSFETs, sharing the long heatsink with the primary side inversion switchers. This is a common cost-and-space-saving arrangement but hardly matters when the heatsink is large enough. The bulk capacitor is a Nichicon rated 560 μF at 420V and 105°C and the choke beside it is on the small side and unshielded. Primary inversion is a half-bridge LLC resonant arrangement driving two PIP PTA25N50 MOSFETs, which is the standard and entirely sensible topology for a 750W Gold unit.

On the secondary side, four Fuxin FXN0204C MOSFETs generate the 12V rail through synchronous rectification, and the 3.3V and 5V rails come off two vertical DC-DC daughterboards standing near the modular connector board. Capacitor sourcing is the pleasant surprise, with the secondary electrolytics coming from Rubycon and Nippon Chemi-Con and APAQ polymers filling the rest. That is a fully Japanese set of capacitors on a unit that sells for under $90, and it is the single strongest argument that the 8-year warranty is more than a marketing number.

Cold Test Results (25°C Ambient)

Cold Test Results (25°C Ambient)

For the testing of PSUs, we are using high-precision electronic loads with a maximum power draw of 2700 Watts, a Rigol DS5042M 40 MHz oscilloscope, an Extech 380803 power analyzer, two high-precision UNI-T UT-325 digital thermometers, an Extech HD600 SPL meter, a self-designed hotbox, and various other bits and parts.

At 25°C ambient, the AMP GH 750 averaged 91.0% at 230 VAC and 89.0% at 115 VAC across the full load range, peaking at 92.3% (230 VAC) at around 300W and holding 90.8% at a sustained 750W. The curve is well shaped. It climbs fast, is stable between 250W and 450W, and loses very little ground at the top end, which is exactly the profile you want from a PSU that will spend its life between 30% and 70% load. At 115 VAC, the equivalent figures are 90.6% at peak and 87.5% at full load. The 80 PLUS Gold asks for 87% at 100% load on 115V, so the margin is half a point. It is a pass, but our numbers land roughly one point below the CLEAResult published certification report, which is dated 4/8/22 and lists the same PH-P750GH_01 model code. That certificate predates the ATX 3.1 revision of this unit by some margin, so it is describing an earlier configuration sharing the model number.

Acoustically, the cold run is the unit's best showing. The fan stays completely stopped up to nearly 300W, which is almost 40% of its maximum rating, comfortably wider than the 30% Phanteks claims. It will easily cover any system idling and even performing medium-power tasks as well. It comes on at 31.6 dB(A) and climbs gently, crossing 38 dB(A) only past 590W and topping out at 43.2 dB(A) at a sustained 750W. That is audible in a quiet room but not intrusive, and you have to be pushing a 750W load through a 750W supply to get there. Thermals are unremarkable but in a good way, with both the exhaust and internal temperatures well within the acceptable margins while the fan is largely idling. Nothing here is working hard.

Hot Test Results (~45°C Ambient)

Hot Test Results (~45°C Ambient)

Inside the hotbox at roughly 45°C (five degrees past the unit's own 40°C rating), efficiency degraded far less than we expected. The 230 VAC average fell from 91.0% to 90.3% and the full-load figure from 90.8% to 89.8%, a single point for a twenty-degree increase in ambient. At 115 VAC, the average went from 89.0% to 88.3%, with full load dropping to 86.5%, which does slip under the 80 PLUS Gold threshold. That threshold is defined at 23°C ambient, so what we have here is a note rather than a failure. Full-load losses rose from 69W to 76W. This is a better hotbox result than most mainstream Gold units manage, and it says something reassuring about the heatsink sizing and choice of components.

Heat makes little impact on the unit’s electrical performance, but noise is where it makes itself felt. The fanless window narrows from about 300W to roughly 220W, and from there the ramp is much steeper than it was at room temperature: 38 dB(A) at 450W, 46 dB(A) at 600W, and 50.2 dB(A) at a sustained 750W. That is loud, and the sleeve-bearing Yate Loon is working hard. The trade-off is that internal temperatures stay very well controlled, so the fan is doing real work rather than spinning for the sake of it, with the designer obviously favoring reliability over acoustics when ambient conditions are tense. Even though sustained full output in a 45°C environment is outside this unit's specifications, it handled it without complaint and without shutting down.

PSU Quality and Bottom Line

Power Supply Quality

Voltage regulation is the standout result of the whole test. Across the 20% to 100% load span, the 12V rail moved by just 0.4%, an enthusiast-tier tightness on a sub-$90 unit and better than several platforms costing twice as much. The 3.3V and 5V rails came in at 1.2% each, which is ordinary but perfectly fine given DC-DC conversion and the negligible loads modern systems put on them. There is no sign of the minor rails dragging the 12V line around under uneven loading.

Ripple suppression is equally comfortable. The 12V rail peaked at 38 mV under full load against the 120 mV ATX limit, leaving nearly 70% headroom, while the 3.3V and 5V rails topped out at 24 mV against their 50 mV limits. Nothing in this data set gets anywhere near a limit, with the Japanese capacitors on the secondary clearly backing their reputation.

During our thorough assessment, we evaluate the essential protection features of every power supply unit we review, including Over Current Protection (OCP), Over Voltage Protection (OVP), Over Power Protection (OPP), and Short Circuit Protection (SCP).

All protection mechanisms were verified and triggered correctly during testing. With the unit hot, OCP tripped at 150% on the 3.3V rail, 148% on the 5V rail, and 138% on the 12V rail. OPP shut the unit down at approximately 1050W, or 140% of rated output. Those are loose thresholds and generous enough that a genuine fault has room to develop before anything intervenes. However, these are not unusual for the ATX 3.1 class, and every protection engaged cleanly when it should have.

Bottom Line

The AMP GH 750 is a better PSU than its price implies at the time of this review, but the reasons are not the ones Phanteks leads with. Phanteks spent considerable effort and resources on the aesthetics of the unit, leading their marketing campaign with the appearance and quality of the wires. It is undeniable that the cables of this unit have been exceptionally well designed and made, with extreme attention to quality and detail. The same is true about the unit itself, the construction and appearance of which are immaculate and attractive.

While unquestionably important, aesthetics can only take you so far when we are talking about any tech equipment. What makes the AMP GH 750 really worth buying is the bill of materials and the electrical results. Japanese capacitors throughout, amazing regulation on the 12V rail, and ripple that never gets within two-thirds of the ATX limit. Helly is not a famous name amongst enthusiast cycles, but this is a well-executed platform, and the 8-year warranty behind it looks like a considered commitment rather than a gamble.

The measurements may look indifferent, but the results are honest. Efficiency clears 80 PLUS Gold at both input voltages and holds its curve well, but that level of performance is hardly stellar by today’s standards. Our numbers sit about one percentage point below the CLEAResult certification report on file for this model code, a report dated 2022, which predates the ATX 3.1 revision the unit ships as today. There are no Cybenetics or PLPP certifications at the time of this review. We feel that two things hold the AMP GH 750 back. The first is the 12V-2x6 connector's 450W rating. On a 750W unit, that is not fatal; anything you would sensibly pair with 750W stays under it, but anyone planning to move a heavier card into this system later will be facing a limit. The second is the fan. The Yate Loon D12SH-12 is a sleeve-bearing part that does not match the eight-year warranty's ambition.

At $109.99 MSRP for the white unit and $99.99 for the black, and at the time of writing, $84.99 and $89.99 respectively at Newegg, both landing at $74.99 after Phanteks' mail-in rebate, the value case is straightforward. Under $80 buys you Japanese capacitors, near-flat 12V regulation, a 300W fanless window, and 8 years of warranty. The compromises are a connector limit you should check against your GPU plans, and a fan that will remind you it exists in a warm case. For a mid-range build that lives between 200W and 500W most of the time, which is exactly what a 750W supply is for, that is an easy recommendation.

MORE: Best Power Supplies

MORE: How We Test Power Supplies

MORE: All Power Supply Content

A few years ago, Nvidia was expected to release the RTX 3070 Ti with as much as 16GB of VRAM instead of the 8GB we actually ended up getting. Only database listings ultimately indicated its existence until a physical prototype showed up, but we never really got to see it working. Fast forward to today, however, and Brazilian YouTuber fmklab, aka Fabian, has recreated the card on his own. Using an RTX 3070 PCB with a transplanted 3070 Ti core and GDDR6 chips from Samsung, fmklab broughall those parts together to achieve a 16GB memory pool.

The card was stripped down to its PCB, and the RTX 3070 GPU was removed and replaced with a 3070 Ti chip. The reason for the swap is that the RTX 3070 uses GDDR6 instead of the GDDR6X the retail version of the RTX 3070 Ti is equipped with, which presented an interesting challenge.

Fabian could've put all 16GB of GDDR6X memory on a 3070 Ti card, but it would've been far too expensive, so he swapped the Samsung-made HC14 (8Gb) GDDR6 chips that were already on the board with HC16 (16Gb) chips. That changed the VRAM capacity from 8GB to 16GB, but when the card booted, GPU-Z only recognized 8GB. The PCB's memory straps needed to be reconfigured in order for it to use the entire memory pool.

Using the Nvidia BIOS Reader tool, Fabian figured out exactly what straps to adjust and went ahead with the soldering process. Afterward, MATS properly recognized the full 16GB VRAM capacity with no errors. GPU-Z also showed the RTX 3070 Ti equipped with 16GB of GDDR6 memory, similar to the prototype that popped up years ago. But verifying that the card recognized the additional VRAM was just the first step.

To actually test his creation's performance, Fabian ran a local LLM on the GPU to see if it would allocate more than 8GB and found that it used nearly the entire 16GB pool. Call of Duty: Warzone ate more than 13GB of VRAM while paired with a Ryzen 7 9800X3D, exhibiting no signs of instability.

Fabian even linked a Unigine Superposition benchmark in the video's description as proof of the card's existence, where he scored 5,367 points, which is actually lower than most real 3070 Ti runs. That's probably because of the decreased memory bandwidth of GDDR6 versus that chip's stock GDDR6X, which is the biggest tradeoff for the higher capacity.

Overall, this was a successful experiment and possibly the only working 3070 Ti 16GB in the world, but there comes a point of diminishing returns. A 3070 Ti is still a powerful card, but it gets smoked by current-gen Blackwell options even with less memory. It would be much more reasonable to buy, say, an RTX 5060 Ti 16GB if you actually need better performance with some future proofing today, not to mention the superior efficiency, feature set, and after-sales support you'd get from a new Blackwell card.

Intel is reportedly set to hike CPU prices by 10%, according to a new Digitimes report. Citing supply chain sources, the outlet says the increase follows two others, one in the first quarter of 2026 and another in July, among some server and client CPUs. Notably, the sources didn't say which products the price increase applies to, though presumably, the increases would come through Intel's mobile and server businesses before desktop client. Citing industry sources, DigiTimes also reports that Intel is set to launch "major annual products" in March 2027, with AMD following up with launches of its own between June and July.

The increases come on the back of Intel seeking higher gross margins for its products as the PC market shrinks. This is a story we've heard directly from Intel in the past. In its most recent earnings call in July, Intel chief financial officer David Zinsner attributed a 13% YoY increase in Intel's client revenue to higher average selling price, not a higher volume of sales.

Although the Digitimes report doesn't clarify which products will see a price increase, server and mobile seem like the most likely candidates. Intel's most recent Panther Lake calls for high-speed LPDDR5X-7467 memory as a minimum, and last-gen Lunar Lake CPUs have on-package memory. Naturally, higher memory prices put more pressure on fully built systems like laptops more so than socketed, standalone desktop processors.

On the server end, there's been an unprecedented increase in demand for server CPUs on the back of agentic AI workloads. That demand led to several consecutive records for Intel's share price, even without any major product announcements. Earlier in the year, Wall Street estimated the server CPU market would rise to around $120 billion by 2030 (currently around $30 billion). Now, those projections go up to as high as $220 billion.

According to the report, Intel is set to launch a major new annual product in March 2027, followed by AMD between June and July. Last week, a leaked Intel roadmap showed the company's next-gen Nova Lake desktop CPUs entering mass production in Q4 2026 with a release in Q1 2027, lining up with DigiTimes' report.

Although the timelines line up, the rumor mill has suggested an early Q1 launch for Nova Lake. It's worth noting that the DigiTimes report doesn't make mention of which product Intel will launch in March. This year, for instance, Intel launched its Xeon 600 CPUs for HEDT in March.

Perhaps more interesting is the AMD timeline. We already know of one major AMD product launch in the second half of 2027, which is Venice-X. Those are Zen 6 server CPUs with AMD's 3D V-Cache, packing up to 1,152 MB of L3 cache on the chip. Otherwise, that timeframe seems to point to AMD's next-gen desktop CPUs with the Zen 6 architecture, codenamed Olympic Ridge.

AMD launched its Venice server CPUs earlier this year, the first sporting the Zen 6 architecture. We haven't heard anything official about Zen 6 in the desktop yet. That's strange given AMD's last several releases. There was about a two-year gap between Zen 3 and Zen 4, as well as Zen 4 and Zen 5, on desktop. We've just crossed the two-year mark for Zen 5, so assuming AMD keeps a similar launch cadence, we'd expect to hear something sooner than June or July or next year.

That same explosive demand in server CPUs could have changed AMD's launch plans, however. Given that we haven't heard anything official about Olympic Ridge at this point, a launch in June or July isn't out of the question.

There are now several mods enabling DLSS 5 on older Nvidia GPUs, along with even AMD's RDNA 4 cards. Similarly, Nvidia's multi-frame gen has also been ported to prior generations. It can get a bit confusing to keep track of all these developments, and that's where "DLSS Unlocked" comes in. It's a new mod from ShyVox that combines OptiScaler_DLSSNR with DLSS Enabler to bring DLSS 5 and DLSS MFG to all RTX GPUs: Turning, Ampere, and Ada.

DLSS Unlocked serves as a sort of all-in-one package for owners of RTX 20-, RTX 30-, and RTX 40-series looking to enjoy the latest Nvidia goodies on both Windows and Linux. It takes two separate mods developed by other community members and organizes them into one seamless, unified release. You download the executable from GitHub or Nexus Mods and just select the root directory of the game you want to try it on.

As for the requirements, the game must use the DirectX 12 API and already support both DLSS upscaling and frame generation natively. You need to provide your own patched DLSS 5 DLL as well, for legal reasons. The two mods comprising DLSS Unlocked also have their own peculiarities. OptiScaler_DLSSNR is simple; it just uses OptiScaler to add neural rendering on top, but DLSS Enabler works in a more complicated manner.

On RTX 20- and RTX 30-series GPUs, you'll be using AMD's FSR 3.1 to interpolate all of the frames instead of using Nvidia's pipeline. On RTX 40-series, the second frame is generated through DLSS-G (regular frame-gen), but the rest of the frames are handled by FSR 3.1 to get you up to 6X MFG. That handoff is itself possible thanks to another mod called DLSSG to FSR3. See how this web of tweaks can get a bit confusing?

You also need to keep in mind that this is a different approach compared to DLSS 5 Swapper, which enables DLSS 5 inside any game through ReShade (using RenoDX). For DLSS Unlocked, the game must already support DLSS 2/3 upscaling for it to be patched into DLSS 5 and unlock MFG. That's how OptiScaler_DLSSNR works, which DLSS Unlocked relies on.

None of these mods should be used with multiplayer games because the anti-cheat software can detect them as threats and potentially ban you. Ultimately, when you have DLSS Unlocked installed, a DLSS-compatible game should now have DLSS 5 neural rendering while having its frames interpolated up to 4x. You definitely need that, considering DLSS 5 comes with a massive compute cost that can purportedly even melt RTX 5090s.

We're seeing 32GB DDR5 RAM prices regularly push above $400 now. That's just where the market is, and as unfair as it might seem, the world is still turning, and people still need memory for their PC upgrades. Luckily, this TeamGroup T-Force Delta RAM deal drops the price to $389.99 at Newegg, as long as you use the coupon code LUYRF228 at checkout.

● Check out this deal on Newegg

Deals like this continue to be the best way to pick up new RAM as the ongoing global DRAM shortage, caused by the AI boom, rolls on. We're not going to see lower prices for RAM or SSDs any time soon. Deals like this aren't ground-breaking, and we're nowhere near record lows, but they're the best prices in a difficult market. Sans a time machine, or going second-hand, you won't find better pricing today than this.

As for this particular RAM kit, it's a good option for a mid-tier build. It's DDR5-5200, meaning speeds of 5,200 MT/s. That isn't the fastest RAM on the market, by any means, but it's certainly an upgrade over older DDR4 modules, which would usually see speeds of around 3,600 MT/s at best.

You're getting two 16GB DDR5 modules here, with CAS and memory timings of 40-40-40-76. This is perfectly fine memory for workstation and gaming use, with built-in RGB lighting to spice up your build. Yes, it won't be the fastest you've used. If you need to max out a build with the best speeds and lowest latency, you'll need to look for higher-end DDR5 memory instead.

Luckily, you have options there. The next best option with faster speeds is this alternative kit, also from Team Group, for $415.99. The Team Group T-Force Vulcan has CAS and memory timings of 38-46-46-84, with speeds of 6,400 MT/s. Much faster, so ideal for a higher-end rig, but it lacks the RGB lighting. That might be a trade-off you're willing to accept if you've got the extra $27.

Honestly? The best option here, if you do have the extra cash, is the T-Force Vulcan for $415.99. It's faster, only slightly more expensive, and it's still a bargain compared to rival kits that can go as high as $600 or $700 at the moment. That said, a new PC build or upgrade on a budget requires a few compromises, and unless you're pushing your PC to its limits, the Team Group T-Force Delta RAM kit for $389.99 is a solid option.

Either choice is a deal worth considering in this awfully expensive market that PC builders face at the moment. AI isn't going anywhere, and we're probably going to see prices this high, if not higher, for some time. Deals like these, even if they aren't world-beating, are still the best way to get RAM at the moment.

Nvidia's GeForce RTX 50-series (codenamed Blackwell) graphics cards continue to rank among the best graphics cards available today. As a result, these highly sought-after Blackwell graphics cards have become prime targets for criminals seeking to scam unsuspecting buyers. Although scams involving hollow graphics cards are not new, their growing frequency and spread are cause for concern. The latest reports from Germany have revealed at least two buyers who fell prey to the same scam, reportedly from the same seller.

Hollow or phantom graphics cards may not be colloquial terms you hear every day. They basically refer to graphics cards that lack the silicon and memory chips. Criminals remove these components and sell non-functional graphics cards to their prey. Logically, you have no way of knowing these components are not present until you disassemble the graphics card, something that the average consumer does not do. Swindlers have run similar scams with fake memory modules without integrated circuits, or SSDs with microSD cards inside.

The first report, as recounted by respected hardware enthusiast Roman “der8auer” Hartung, uncovers a poor victim who bought a second-hand Palit GeForce RTX 5090 GameRock OC for around $2,090 (1,800 euros). The seller’s asking price was suspicious since a brand-new one starts at around $5,805 (4,999 euros) in Germany. Even for a used one, the dramatic price difference indicates a potential scam.

Many of these scams happen through online transactions. So the buyer went so far as to meet the seller in person, hoping a face-to-face interaction would ensure the graphics card was legit. It did not make a difference, though, because the buyer did not have a system to test the graphics card on the spot. In the end, it was a matter of taking the seller's word for it, and that turned out horribly.

A second report has emerged from a member of the Hardwareluxx forums, who reportedly fell victim to the same deceptive seller. Tragically, this individual ended up paying close to $2,613 (2,250 euros) for the phantom graphics card.

In both cases, the scammer put on a friendly facade and provided what seemed like legitimate paperwork to bolster the buyers' trust. For the first victim, the seller shared an invoice showing the purchase of two graphics cards, claiming to sell one because they no longer needed it. Similarly, in the second case, the scammer furnished an invoice to convince the buyer of the transaction’s legitimacy.

The use of realistic invoices is a growing trend among fraudsters. The first buyer uncovered that the serial number printed on the graphics card itself did not match the serial number listed on the packaging. The second buyer discovered that the serial numbers on the invoice and the packaging matched, but the seller deliberately scratched off the serial number on the graphics card.

The AI gold rush will not be over anytime soon, so we do not expect graphics card pricing to improve. This gives scammers more motivation to prey on buyers' desire for a graphics card and lure them in with prices that seem too good to be true. The two incidents serve as a cautionary tale for anyone trying to procure a graphics card, especially from second-hand sources.

Not that long ago, we reported that Nvidia was dusting off the blueprints for the RTX 3060, in its 12 GB form. At the time, we'd spotted it in stores for about $339.99, but just like with ever-climbing memory, hard drive, and SSD prices, two months passed is an eternity. The same cards are now selling for $489 new, and one particular specimen is the SRhonyra RTX 3060 12 GB Low Profile card, for $495.59.

• SRhonyra RTX 3060 12 GB Low Profile card - $495.59

This card and its price may raise more than a few eyebrows, but there are reasons why it exists. First off, it's a one-slot model, making it easy to put many of them to work in the same machine with relatively little concern for airflow. They have no power inputs and rely on 70 W delivered by the PCIe slot alone, eschewing the need for a high-end PSU and lots of cables. Third, the low-profile form factor makes it possible to place them in potent puny personal computers.

Attentive readers might surmise that one (or more) of these would be good candidates for an entry-level local LLM rig. That's precisely how SRhonyra is pitching the card, calling it "capable of local AI" and "running 7B [to] 13B LLMs." A standard-dimensioned, fully powered RTX 3060 is capable of drawing a maximum of 175 W, so it's fair to assume the performance of the diminutive variant will sit below that of its full-sized brethren, given it ought to only draw 70 W of juice from the PCIe slot.

Even then, it's likely that people interested in these cards are looking to use them either as secondary GPUs, or use more than one in the same box to be able to virtually pool their VRAM and use larger models than you'd otherwise be able to. The low power draw also means they're a simple, thoughtless drop-in to an existing system, whereas larger, more power-hungry cards require careful consideration with physical spacing (or lack thereof), power supply sizing, and ever-annoying cables.

A computing enthusiast has shared images of a fat stack of DDR4 RAM sticks that they found at home. VastOption8705 told other tech fans on Reddit that they “found 10k worth of RAM sitting in my garage.” We count 30 sticks of DDR4-2666, and three sticks shown separately are all 64GB modules. If they are all 64GB modules, that number of sticks would add up to 1,920GB of RAM…

How did this huge amount of RAM end up in VastOption8705’s garage? The story goes that the Redditor was allowed to keep an old server from their workplace. Such 'generosity' isn’t unheard of, and it might have actually saved the company some recycling fees.

Is server DDR4 useful?

Numerous comments on the Reddit post jokingly pitch for RAM stick donations. But they might be barking up the wrong tree. Looking more closely at the sticks, where the labels are clearly readable, reveals that they are Samsung 64GB DDR4 ECC registered DIMMs (RDIMMs).

These kinds of RAM sticks are commonly used in servers built around Intel Xeon, AMD Epyc, or AMD Threadripper platforms. Sadly for their market value and the folks on Reddit hoping for some spare RAM, they aren’t consumer PC friendly. Even if you have a DDR4-supporting motherboard, these ECC RDIMMs will be both physically and electrically incompatible with your home creator/gaming PC.

Pricing and the Australia question

A quick poke around eBay U.S. listings shows that a single 64GB DDR4-2666 stick like those shown can be bought for between $350 and $425. So, we could roughly value the 30 sticks at $12,000 if a price of $400 per stick were achieved. The OP’s touted $10K valuation wasn’t far off. But if VastOption8705 lives in Australia, as they seem to, and guesstimated the value in Australian dollars, AU$10,000 currently equates to ~US$7,200 – quite low.

If you have spare RAM in your garage, don't share your address on public forums. The best I could find is a pair of 8GB DDR4 SO-DIMMs in my drawer. I also had some 30-pin SIMMs, SDRAM, PowerMac ROMs, and DDR3 modules probably worth just pennies, despite the RAMpocalypse.

Arm is bringing its next-gen Neoverse CSS N4 platforms to the cloud, sporting up to 128 cores per die, built on TSMC’s N3P process. Arm’s Compute Subsystem, or CSS, is a semi-custom program that allows customers to design a chip based on Arm’s IP, configuring components like core count, cache size, I/O, and connectivity to fit their specific needs. It’s the same platform we’ve seen at work everywhere from CPUs at Azure and Google Cloud to DPUs at Nvidia and Intel.

Arm says Neoverse CSS N4 supports between eight and 128 Neoverse N4 cores, running up to 3.8 GHz. Presumably, the clocks drop as the core count rises; Arm didn’t clarify the maximum clocks for each possible configuration. At a system level, Neoverse CSS N4 can scale beyond 128 cores, with support for multi-chiplet and multi-socket designs, and with support for UCIe through chip-to-chip interconnects, as well as “partner-specific PNYs.”

The platform supports either DDR5 or LPDDR6, and features up to 256 MB of L3 cache per die. For local cache, Arm includes up to 2 MB of L2 per core, as well as 64 KB of L1 instruction cache and 64 KB of L1 data cache per core. For I/O, Arm supports up to 128 lanes of PCIe 7/6 and CXL 4.0.

It’s a significant upgrade over the Neoverse CSS N2 platform, which topped out at just 64 cores, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache, paired with either DDR5 or LPDDR5 and 64 PCIe 5.0/CXL lanes.

With 128 cores running at 3GHz and 2MB of L2 cache per core, Arm says Neoverse CSS N4 delivers twice the socket performance of Neoverse N3, 1.25x performance per watt, and 1.75x the memory bandwidth.

Arm’s N-series cores are optimized for performance per watt, while its V-series cores are targeting maximum performance. For instance, Arm used the Neoverse CSS V3 building blocks for its own AGI CPU, and Nvidia used Neoverse V2 for its last-gen Grace CPU (the Vera CPU uses a custom core). AWS has also used Neoverse V-series cores for its own Graviton chips, as does Google Cloud for Axion.

N-series cores aren’t usually deployed in high-performance CPUs. Rather, they fit into less-performant accelerators, such as Intel’s IPU Adapter E2100, which is built on Neoverse N1 cores. We’ve also seen it deployed in less-demanding, cloud-based workloads, such as through Microsoft’s Azure Cobalt 100, which is built on Neoverse N2. Cobalt 200 moved onto Neoverse V3.

We don’t know much about the Neoverse N4 cores, codenamed Dionysus. Arm’s 2024 roadmap indicated we’ll see Arm Neoverse CSS V4, as well, codenamed Vega.

Unlike a traditional announcement from Intel, AMD, or the various partners that build on Arm, we won’t see Neoverse N4 cores in the wild for a while. The announcement Arm is making is for those who are building on the CSS platform, leveraging Arm’s validated building blocks to create semi-custom silicon quickly. Arm has yet to announce any partners, though traditionally, only a few large CSS contracts are needed.

Additional Arm AGI CPU deployments

Alongside the announcement of Arm Neoverse CSS N4, the company revealed additional deployments of its own AGI chip, which is built with Neoverse V3 cores. The company revealed that Oracle and ByteDance will deploy AGI chips, alongside previously announced deployments at Meta, Lenovo, SAP, OpenAI, Cloudflare, and others.

Although Arm has talked a lot about AGI, including a deep dive into the chip’s architecture at Hot Chips, we’ve yet to see real-world performance numbers. That’s not uncommon, especially among more recent Arm-based chips. For instance, we only have gen-on-gen comparisons for Microsoft’s Azure Cobalt 200 and AWS’ Graviton5. Arm has vaguely referenced performance by saying AGI offers “more than 2x the performance per rack compared to the latest x86 systems,” though those claims are based on internal estimates, not real benchmarks.

AGI is a dual-die CPU with up to 136 Neoverse V3 cores and up to 272 MB of L3 cache that can clock up to 3.7 GHz. It has the specs to match any high-end x86 design currently on the market, built on a 3nm node and packing up to 6TB of memory capacity per chip, running at up to DDR5-8800. Perhaps the biggest difference compared to AMD and Intel was Arm’s decision to include the memory and I/O on the same die as compute, which it says leads to sub-100ns memory latency.

It’s Arm’s first attempt at its own production silicon, though it’s also been positioned so far as a vehicle for the broader applications of Arm in the data center. Microsoft, Nvidia, Meta, Google Cloud, and others build custom chips based on Arm IP, which still seems to be the primary goal, even with AGI in the mix.