With so many cloud-enabled services allowing you to stream music, movies, and even games from just about any device (or browser), why can’t we do the same for operating systems? Microsoft has already dabbled into this foray with Windows 365, its cloud-based Windows virtual machine offering aimed at businesses.

With Windows 365, each user is given their own custom Windows virtual machine hosted in the Windows 365 service. Since it’s a cloud-based service, each Windows virtual machine can be accessed using a web browser or an app on Windows and Mac devices. Even more flexibility is afforded with support for iOS/iPadOS and Android devices. 

So, what if Microsoft extended the capabilities it currently bills to businesses on a per-user, per-month basis to general consumers? That is precisely what the Redmond, Washington-based company is envisioning, according to internal documents [PDF] made public thanks to the FTC vs. Microsoft hearing currently taking place. While the court case revolves around the FTC’s attempt to block Microsoft’s proposed $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision-Blizzard, ancillary details about the company’s business units have also come to light.

As first reported by The Verge, an internal Microsoft presentation entitled “Modern Life Strategies and Priorities” talks about the company’s ambition to “empower people to make the most of their time.” Microsoft also talks about its goal to serve in excess of 1.5 billion people daily across its software platforms. 

The presentation, dated June 2022, also reveals that one of Microsoft’s long-term goals is to use the foundation it created with Windows 365 to “enable a full Windows operating system streamed from the cloud to any device.” By shifting Windows to the cloud, Microsoft says it will leverage the “power of the cloud and client to enable improved AI-powered services and full roaming of people’s digital experience.”

The idea of a fully “in the cloud” Windows for consumers may have seemed far-fetched a decade ago, but Microsoft has already eased its customers into such a transition. Office has been one of Microsoft’s big tentpole applications for decades in corporate and home settings. With Office 365, Microsoft moved from a monolithic software application that saw a new release every one to two years to a software-as-a-service model where customers pay a monthly or yearly subscription to access cloud-backed Office apps like Word, Excel and PowerPoint. 

This subscription model means reliable, recurring revenue for Microsoft versus a one-time purchase that customers may choose to keep for years without upgrading. Transitioning Windows to this model seemed inevitable for a large, mature company like Microsoft that is perennially tasked with adopting clever ways to increase revenue.

Perhaps one of the first steps in Microsoft’s Windows 11 in the cloud model is Windows 365 Boot. This feature was announced a month ago and allows users to boot directly into an Azure-based cloud PC instance without first logging into their local Windows 11 install. Windows 365 Boot is currently available in Windows 11 22H2. 

Elsewhere in the slide, Microsoft talked about its desire to bolster both its Windows software and Surface hardware business by investing heavily in silicon partnerships. Microsoft already partners with Qualcomm on custom Arm chips for its Surface Pro X convertibles, and the company is actively recruiting senior project engineers for the “Microsoft Silicon Team.”

Microsoft's Build developer conference is all about AI. The 2023 show, which is taking place both online and in person, is being headlined by AI, Bing Chat, and new tools for developers using Windows, GitHub, and the Windows Terminal. Every change, big or small, is being touched by artificial intelligence.

There's plenty of developments for the cloud, like AI in Azure, as well as a new analytics system that Microsoft is calling Fabric. But here are the AI announcements Microsoft is making at Build that you're most likely to see coming to tools you use soon:

AI Plugins

At Build, Microsoft said that it will use the same plugin standard as its partners at OpenAI use for ChatGPT. This should allow developers to make plugins that are interoperable between ChatGPT, Bing Chat, Dynamics 365 Copilot, and Microsoft 365 Copilot.

Microsoft is also announcing support for new plugins for Bing Chat. Newly announced add-ons include those for Instacart, Kayak, Redfin, Zillow, Klarna, and many others, alongside OpenTable and WolframAlpha. Communications head Frank Shaw told the press that as part of Microsoft 365 Copilot, there will be more than 50 plugins announced at Build, including from Atlassian, Adobe, Thomas Reuters and Mural, with "thousands" of plugins by time Copilot it hits general availability.

Copilot coming to Edge, Windows 11

Microsoft is bringing some of its Copilot features (which are currently in a private preview in MIcrosoft 365) to the Edge browser.

Microsoft 365 Copilot already uses large language models to answer requests from Microsoft 365 apps such as Excel, Word, Teams, Outlook, and PowerPoint. Now, the Copilot will also work with Edge, so people will be able to use the AI in conjunction with their web browser. Perhaps they'll get a PDF that opens in the browser, and users can ask Edge to summarize it.

Windows 11 will use Bing Chat along with third-party plugins and Microsoft's own. Windows Copilot will let people change settings, open apps or perform other actions with AI, while also mixing in Bing Chat to answer questions from the web. It will be able to be parked aside in a panel for easy access.

Media Provenance

At Google I/O, Google discussed features that would secretly mark images and videos made by AI so they could be identified as such. At Build, Microsoft is following suit with "media provenance" abilities being added to Bing Image Creator and Microsoft Designer.

Microsoft's tech will use cryptographic techniques to "mark and sign AI-generated content with metadata about its origin." The company says that this signifier will be in accordance with  standards set by the Coalition for content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), of which Microsoft is a co-founder. Microsoft says it will start by supporting "major images and video formats" when the initiative ramps up in the "coming months."

Microsoft Store Gets an AI Hub

The Microsoft Store will be filled to the brim with AI. The Microsoft Store will get a section specifically for AI apps and experiences. Developers can submit their AI-focused apps to be featured.

 AI is also coming to review summaries. Reviews in the app store will be scanned by AI, which will compile them and recapitulate. Additionally, developers will be able to fill their listings with AI-generated keyword suggestions to improve search engine optimization.

Dev Home

Beyond its AI tools, Microsoft also doubled down on Windows as a tool for developers with a new feature called Dev Home. Available in preview, it lets users set up a machine, connect to GitHub and build dashboards and other extensions, as well as use GitHub widgets and track CPU and GPU performance.

Microsoft is also adding WinGet configuration to the Windows Package Manager, taking care of setup and, according to Microsoft, dropping setup time from days to just hours. WinGet's configuration file will ensure you get the right version of software packages and frameworks.

There's also a new storage volume, Dev Drive, which Mifcrosoft says is based on the Resilient File System (ReFS) and offers a 30% improvement in build times, partially due to a "performance mode" in Windows Defender. Microsoft hasn't said much about this new mode, other than that  this "new performance mode is more secure for developer workloads than folder or process exclusions, providing a solution that balances security with performance.  

But of course, dev tools are also getting the AI treatment. Windows Terminal is gaining support for GitHub Copilot X, and will be able to use an "experimental chat experience" to use language both inline and in chat to learn more about errors, get recommendations and to perform actions throughout Terminal. Microsoft says it also wants to add GitHub Copilot-style AI in other developer tools, such as WinDBG.

We'll likely learn more about all of these features during the Microsoft Build keynotes. CEO Satya Nadella will start the show today at 9:00 a.m. PT / 12 p.m. ET. 

Microsoft rebranded Office 365 to Microsoft 365 in Oct. 2022, part of its effort to slowly take the long-running "Office" brand out of the limelight. At the time, the company didn't make any significant changes to the subscription tiers or features offered. But that will change later this month with the addition of a new Microsoft 365 Basic tier, which will cost $1.99/month ($19.99/year).

Microsoft 365 Basic slots between Microsoft 365 (free) and Microsoft 365 Personal ($6.99/month). It replaces the previous 100GB OneDrive storage subscription and adds some perks. Microsoft says customers can expect these features with the new tier:

• 100GB cloud storage
• Works on Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android
• Web and mobile versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, OneDrive, and more
• Ad-free Outlook web and mobile email and calendar with advanced security (data encryption, suspicious link cheer, malware scanning for attachments)
• Microsoft technical support

The extra functionality seems like a nice upgrade for users currently getting by with just the 100GB OneDrive storage tier. In addition, Microsoft says it will add "even better advanced security features" later this year, including shared links that are password-protected, and ransomware recovery.

While the inclusion of Office is welcome, we should note that this tier only includes the basic, web-based versions of Microsoft's popular productivity apps, which are available for free. To access the "premium" desktop versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote, you'll have to step up to Microsoft 365 Personal.

Microsoft was quick to point out that Jan. 29, 2023 marks the 10th anniversary of Office 365. The high-end Office 365 Home Premium subscription initially included only 20GB of cloud storage. Today, the Microsoft 365 Personal tier offers 1TB of OneDrive storage. In addition, the flagship Microsoft 365 Family tier for consumers ($9.99/month) supports up to six people, each with their own 1TB allotment of OneDrive storage.

Microsoft 365 Basic will be available starting Jan. 30. Current 100GB OneDrive subscribers will automatically be shifted to the newer, more feature-packed tier.

Microsoft is preparing to retire or at least deemphasize its decades old Office brand in favor of Microsoft 365 branded cloud productivity tools. Users should expect to see the changes permeate throughout the Microsoft cloud ecosystem in the next few weeks. Meanwhile, PC stalwarts using offline standalone Office suites and applications will probably not notice any difference.

The news was secreted within Microsoft’s announcement of a new Microsoft 365 app on Wednesday. On that page you will find a FAQ which helpfully spells out what is changing with regards to Microsoft 365 and Office brands, when changes will be pushed through and what it means to users of either branded products / suites. It also explains that “over the last couple years, Microsoft 365 has evolved into our flagship productivity suite,” and this is seemingly behind the decision to transition Office.com, the Office mobile app, and the Office app for Windows into Microsoft 365 branded products.

The key thing for many users of Microsoft's flagship office productivity tools, is that they are not going away. Microsoft says that “as part of Microsoft 365 you will continue to get access to apps like Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Outlook.” Also, Office 365 subscribers in business / enterprises will not be moved to Microsoft 365 plans. Importantly to many readers, those seeking the most recent offline / perpetual Office editions will still have the opportunity to buy apps as one-time purchases via Microsoft’s Office 2021 and Office LTSC plans, too.

While the branding change is a pretty big deal, once you read all the small print, it isn’t very impactful. However, the same could be said of any branding or naming change. The most affected will be personal consumers, students, and small home offices which currently use the Microsoft 365 cloud-powered productivity platform via mobile and web-apps. Existing users of these cloud office tools won’t have to do anything; existing accounts, profiles, subscriptions, and files won’t be disrupted, even if you are accessing them from the new app with new branding and icon. In a way, the naming changes help emphasize the difference between the cloud-powered and the perpetual Office releases; with the online version highlighting collaborative tools like Teams and OneDrive being used alongside more traditional office productivity apps in the new hybrid working world.

Expect to see many of the above changes arrive with the rebranding of the unified Office app to Microsoft 365 in November, with the whole rebranding effort expected to be completed by January 2023.

The age of subscription services may be well upon us, but Microsoft isn't liable to leave any revenue sources on the table. The company today started rolling out its Office LTSC (Long Term Servicing Channel) for Windows and macOS, which is a version of Office specifically geared for government and commercial clients who don't find value in the company's cloud elements for Office 365, and whose systems might go without any service update for years at a time. Baked into that announcement, however, was also the commercial release of Office 2021 for general consumers. Mark the date: October 5, 2021. That's the same day as the Windows 11 launch. 

Jared Spataro, Corporate Vice President for Microsoft 365, said that "While it [Office 2021] offers performance improvements and expanded accessibility, it will not offer the cloud-based capabilities of Microsoft 365 Apps like real-time collaboration and AI-driven automation in Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, as well as security and compliance capabilities that give added confidence in a hybrid world." 

The standalone, perpetual license version of Office 2021 includes a number of performance and feature improvements, including Dark Mode support as well as support for version 1.3 of the OpenDocument format. Four new Excel functions will be made available (XLOOKUP, LET, XMATCH and dynamic arrays); PowerPoint will introduce support for presenter video recording, ink recording, and laser pointer recording; and of course, all Office 2021 apps will see a visual language update to keep them in line with the new Windows 11 interface and design philosophy.

Microsoft will offer five years of "Mainstream Support" for Office 2021, and there are no plans for extended support programs beyond October 2026 - a year after support ends for both Office 2016 and Office 2019, which have enjoyed longer mainstream support commitments from Microsoft.

The company also announced that pricing will remain the same for Office 2021 as compared to previous versions of Office which means $150 for the Office Home & Student version, and $250 for a single Office Home & Business license.

Though there are free alternatives available, for many, there’s nothing quite like the familiar, comfortable workings of Microsoft Office, from Word’s superior spell and grammar check to the ease and sense of security of storing files locally on your own PC and not online.

Before you can get Office for free, cheap or any price, you should know there are two main variants. Microsoft 365 (formerly Office 365) gives you constant updates but requires a monthly or annual subscription fee. Office 2019 is a fixed package of software, but you only have to pay for it once. Microsoft really wants you to use the subscription-based Microsoft 365 service, of course.

The Office 2019 package is slightly different than Microsoft 365. On top of that, there are companies besides Microsoft selling Office for free (both Microsoft 365 subscriptions and Office 2019 keys) or cheaper than Microsoft. And you can even run Office apps for free online. So what’s the best and cheapest way to get your productivity on?

From Office for free to paying $150 or subscriptions, here’s a breakdown of the best and cheapest ways to get Office (we focus on personal versions, rather than business ones).

Office 2019 vs. Office Online vs. Microsoft 365

Download Office 2019 From Microsoft: $149.99

Despite shifting focus to Microsoft 365, which used to be called Office 365, Microsoft still sells Office Home & Student 2019 for a one-time charge of $149.99. This includes Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote but lacks some solutions Microsoft 365 has. These missing solutions may or may not be relevant to you: Outlook, Publisher (PC only), Access (PC only) and the OneDrive and Skype cloud services.

You can buy some pieces of the Office suite individually, but considering Word 2019 is $139.99, if you plan on using even 1 more Office app, it’s a better deal to buy the whole platform.

No matter where you get Office 2019, it won't be updated monthly like Microsoft 365 is. That means you’ll never see new features added. What you buy is what you get. However, you will get security patch updates “as required,”  Daniel Vargas, Microsoft director of product marketing, told Tom’s Hardware.

It's very possible that you don’t care if your Office software is updated regularly. Heck, you may even be okay with an older version of Office, say Office 2016, which you can still find keys for from third-party sellers for cheaper than Office 2019. However, Office 2016 has reached end of life (EoL), meaning Microsoft no longer provides security updates for it. If you can settle for the 2016 version of Office, you can, as of this writing, get it from Kinguin for PCDestination for about $50. But customer service may be lacking (more on that later). 

Remember, to use Office 2019, you need to be running Windows 10. Luckily, we’ve already detailed how to get Windows 10 for free or cheap.

If Office 2019 is your preferred choice, you can get it for significantly cheaper than the $149.99 Microsoft charges by buying it from a third-party retailer.

Download Office 2019 Key From a Third-Party: ~$45

Microsoft charges $149.99 to download Microsoft Office Home & Student 2019, but you can save a lot of money if you’re willing to buy it from a different store.

Newegg sometimes sells the same download key for $123.99, so it's worth checking. If you can wait for a physical key, Walmart currently sells the key card for $124, Amazon occasionally has it for $125 and Kinguin has it for a shockingly low $36 (and even lower with a Kinguin discount code). 

But before you take out credit card, let's talk about the reasons you might want to avoid these retailers. 

The Downsides

Saving over $100 on Office 2019 sounds like a no-brainer. However, since you’re not buying from Microsoft, you’ll have to exert some caution. You’re probably comfortable shopping at a well-known retailer like Newegg or Amazon; however, you’ll want to check their return policy on software.

You may be more hesitant to buy from key reseller website like Kinguin. Many question their legitimacy or morality behind such deals. To learn more about its Office 2019, we spoke with Kinguin directly.

“Only the original developer or publisher of a digital product can generate keys, so all of the Office 2019 keys come from this source. From there, either a seller buys them directly from the publisher or from the wholesaler, who also got them directly from a publisher, and sells them on Kinguin for a fair market price,” Michał Puczyński, PR Manager at Kinguin, told Tom’s Hardware in September 2019.

Puczyński admitted there are “a few bad apples” in its marketplace but said this is inevitable since there are “tens of thousands of Office 2019 keys sold by thousands of sellers on Kinguin.” However, he claimed that only one out of 700 postings aren’t legitimate, and an even smaller percentage of shoppers actually get scammed.

“Our fraud prevention team manages to stop nearly 100% of these attempts before they take place. When a scammer is detected through our custom fraud technology, that person is banned for a lifetime from selling on Kinguin,” Puczyński explained.

Kinguin also offers a $5.69 “Buyer Protection, ”which guarantees you a refund if you get a bum key.” However, even if you don't buy this protection, Kinguin is willing to work with you for a potential refund if your key doesn’t work.

“We always put the customer first and work to find a solution for any problem the customer has encountered, which may include issuing a refund,” Puczyński said. “The Kinguin Buyer Protection is an optional feature designed to provide added protection while purchasing in our store, as well as additional services, but that doesn’t mean the customer will get inadequate treatment without it. Kinguin does reserve its right not to accept any returns of already delivered items or game keys to protect itself from scams.”

Regardless, we've heard of customer complaints regarding slow customer service or the company offering refunds rather than dealing with individual complaints. We haven't been able to get in touch with Kinguin for a response. 

Get Microsoft Office Free: Online and Mobile Apps and More

As its name implies, Microsoft Office Online doesn’t live on your PC. Instead, you can only access these services with an internet connection. You also have to have a Microsoft account. You can get to Office Online by signing in with your Microsoft account here. Once you do so, you have access to free Office tools. 

The service is a good alternative to G Suite, especially if you don't like some of that platform’s limitations. Your files will still be at the mercy of the web, but you’ll be able to use Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, Outlook, OneDrive, Skype, Flow, Forms and Sway without paying any money. Plus, since everything is internet-based, you can access it from any computer connected to the web.

As of November, Microsoft consolidated Word, Excel and PowerPoint into a single mobile app on both Android and iOS smartphones. The app is available on the Google Play Store and Apple App Store.

Free Office Online may not be a good fit for your largest or most complex projects, since features are more limited than what's offered in Microsoft 365. It has less menu options. For example tabs like Draw and Design are missing from Word online. 

The free Office Online does come with 5GB of OneDrive storage, but that’s actually skimpy compared to the 15GB of free storage you get with Google Drive.

Similarly, there are free iOS (varies from iPhone to iPad) and Android (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneDrive, Outlook, OneNote and SharePoint) versions of Office software that are also available for free but with fewer features.

Note that you may also end up getting Microsoft 365 for free through a sale. For example, from now until April 18, LG is offering a 12-month subscription of Microsoft 365 Personal for free if you buy a 2021 LG Gram laptop. 

Buy Microsoft 365 From Microsoft: $69.99 or $99.99/year

On April 21, Microsoft renamed Office 365 to Microsoft 365. In addition to a new name, Microsoft 365 brings new features, including artificial intelligence, new templates and content and "cloud-powered experiences," according to Yusuf Mehdi, Corporate Vice President, Modern Life, Search & Devices at Microsoft. 

Microsoft 365 Personal, which is for one person across multiple devices, is $6.99 a month or $69.99 a year. You can use Microsoft 365 Home for free through a one-month trial. Microsoft 365 Family, for up to six people, is $9.99 a month or $99.99 a year. 

Microsoft 365 is a great option if you don’t mind paying for your productivity suite on an annual or monthly basis. It won’t be long until you’ve paid more for Office 365 than you would have for Office 2019, but it does come with more apps than Office 2019. In addition to Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote, Office 365 includes Outlook, Publisher, OneDrive and Skype. PC users also get Publisher and Access. 

Perhaps the best part is you can install Microsoft 365 on an unlimited number of devices and log into your subscription on up to 5 of those devices simultaneously. Additionally, Office 365 Personal subscribers get 1TB of OneDrive storage for up to 1 user, and Office 365 Home users can share their cloud storage with 6 users. You also get 60 minutes of Skype calls to real phone numbers for 1 or 6 users, depending if you get Office 365 Home or Personal. 

Another advantage Microsoft 365 has over traditional Office 2019 is its monthly updates, which vary but can include new features, functionally and security updates, “ and often it is all of those each month,” Microsoft’s Vargas told us in September 2019. 

“Most importantly, Microsoft 365 is connected to the cloud, so you can access your content from any device, co-author with anyone in real-time (regardless of whether or not they’ve purchased a copy of Office) and use the power of artificial intelligence to create more impactful content with less effort,” he added.

You can get a free trial for Office 365 Home (only), but it’ll last a mere month.

Buy Microsoft 365 From a Third-Party: $49.99 or $79.99/year

You can also buy or renew your Microsoft 365 subscription from a third-party retailer in one-year packages that are cheaper than what Microsoft charges for its one-year subscriptions.

At the time of writing, Newegg has a 15-month Microsoft 365 Personal subscription for $69.99 if bought with another product or $60 for a 12-month Office 365 subscription, (note that you won't get the features of the current Microsoft 365), which will have to be delivered. 

Amazon has Microsoft 365 Personal for $40 but is charging the same price as Microsoft for Microsoft 365 Family. It doesn't offer the older Office 365. 

Note that you still get free Microsoft technical support for the duration of your subscription, even if you buy your subscription outside of Microsoft. But Microsoft won’t handle subscription or billing issues, such as cancellations or refunds. This is because “Microsoft has limited access and visibility over subscription purchased through a third-party retailer,” according to Vargas.

Get Office Free: Microsoft 365 Education for Students, Teachers

If you’re a student or teacher, you can actually get an Microsoft 365 subscription for free, if your school qualifies. The subscription includes SharePoint, Sway, Forms, Stream, Flow, PowerApps, School Data Sync, Yammer, which aren't included in regular Office 365 subscriptions. However, you miss out on Outlook, Publisher and Access.

To see if you’re eligible for free Microsoft 365 Education, head to Microsoft’s website.

Bottom Line

Microsoft Office is a productivity staple. If you insist on the traditional procurement method of buying and owning the software for life and don’t need the software to be updated monthly, you should stick with Office 2019, just know that EoL will eventually come. You can also buy a legitimate key from a key reseller for as low as about $45, saving you around $105 from Microsoft’s pricing.

If you’re not doing big projects but instead just basic documents, spreadsheets, presentations etc., you may be able to get away with free Office Online or mobile apps. Just be sure you have an Internet connection.

But for heavy-duty productivity, the world is moving toward subscription-based software. Microsoft 365 comes with more offerings than Office 2019, monthly updates, the ability to share among multiple devices, plus a heaping 1TB of free cloud storage. You can get it for cheaper if you buy it outside of Microsoft, for as little as $50 for a year. But make sure it’s a retailer you trust, in case of billing or subscription questions. If you’re okay with making monthly or annual payments to continue creating and editing files, Microsoft 365 -- is tomorrow’s productivity suite.

Apple’s new Silicon-based laptops are gearing up to be genuinely exciting, more powerful additions to the Apple lineup, but there’s a catch that’s got some Apple fans worried: program compatibility. Because Apple Silicon uses a unique new architecture, apps built for previous chips aren’t always going to have native support for Silicon MacBooks. Apple’s got emulation-based workarounds for everything from games to productivity favorites, but whether Microsoft Office will have native support has been plaguing prospective buyers ever since Apple Silicon was announced. Now, Microsoft’s got the answer: eventually.

In a new post on the Microsoft Office support website, Microsoft explained today that while it is working on a version of Office that will "natively support both Apple Silicon and Intel chipsets within the same executable," that version’s not going to be available on Apple Silicon laptops at launch. Instead, the Office Suite will rely on Apple’s Rosetta 2 emulation to run the Intel version of the software on Apple Silicon. Microsoft suggests updating to the November 2020 Office release for the best experience, though it doesn’t seem necessary just to run the programs themselves.

"There are no features differences," Microsoft stresses, but that doesn’t mean the emulation is perfect. The downside here is that, as Microsoft puts it, "the first launch of each Office app will take longer as the operating system has to generate optimized code for the Apple Silicon processor."

Specifically, you can expect to see the emulated apps "'bounce' in the dock for approximately 20 seconds"  as it is translated by Rosetta 2 when you first open them, after which "launches will be fast."

We’re also not sure how emulating Office will affect performance, even if the programs themselves will remain unchanged. Rest assured, though, that you will be able to access some version of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OutLook, OneNote and OneDrive on Apple Silicon machines from day one.

Apple is transitioning its Mac computers to its own custom chip designs based on Arm. The company is detailing its transition away from Intel's processors at its annual WWDC  (Worldwide Developers Conference). Apple calls the new chip 'Apple Silicon.'

Apple's Johny Srouji, head of the company's chip design, said Apple's CPUs are often more powerful than PC laptops. He said he wants Apple Silicon to be more powerful while consuming less power.

Srouji said the GPU and battery life would be better, and privacy would be paramount. CEO Tim Cook said the company will launch the first Mac with an Apple CPU by the end of the year, while there are still more Intel Macs in the pipeline. He suggested the entire transition will take roughly two years.

The first silicon will be on Macs with macOS 10.16, Big Sur. Apple made every app it has produced to operate natively with the new chips, and developers will merely have to recompile in xCode. Universal 2, a new binary that works on Intel Macs and Apple Silicon Macs, can use the binary for all of their users. Apple's Craig Federighi said Microsoft and Adobe are already working on apps. Those include Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Lightroom and Photoshop.

Federighi said all demos during WWDC ran on a development system using Apple's 12Z Bionic chip.

A new version of Rosetta, Rosetta 2, will let you run apps made for Intel Macs on Apple's own systems. It translates code when apps are installed, but can also do it while you use apps. Apple also showed gaming, including Shadow of the Tomb Raider, working through Rosetta 2 at 1080p with emulation.

Big Sur will have virtualization for Linux and Docker. You'll also be able to run iPhone and iPad apps natively on new Macs, all without developers changing anything.

There will be a Quick Start program for developers, including forums, sample code and access to Apple support. There will also be a hardware developer kit: a Mac Mini with A12Z, 16GB of RAM and a beta of macOS Big Sur.

Analysts have often estimated that Apple's computers make up between 5 to 7% of Intel's client computing business.

"Apple is a customer across several areas of business, and we will continue to support them," an Intel spokesperson told Tom's Hardware. "Intel remains focused on delivering the most advanced PC experiences and a wide range of technology choices that redefine computing. We believe Intel-powered PCs—like those based on our forthcoming Tiger Lake mobile platform—provide global customers the best experience in the areas they value most, as well as the most open platform for developers, both today and into the future."

Apple developing its own chips in-house will allow it further control of its ecosystem, including not tying new computer releases to Intel's schedule. Apple already uses its own processors in the iPad, iPhone and Apple Watch. Its own T2 chip has already taken over some security and SSD controlling processes in its Macs alongside Intel processors, and the company has also made its own GPUs for the iPhone and iPad. Srouji said Apple had shipped over 2 billion SoCs on those devices.

This isn't the first time that Apple has transitioned between processor architectures on the Mac. It moved from the Motorola 68000 series to PowerPC, and then announced a transition from PowerPC to Intel at WWDC in 2005.

Updated June 22 at 3:15 p.m. ET with Intel's response.

We've been waiting for Intel to launch its 10th Generation Comet Lake-H processors for mobile devices. This week, HD Tecnología, a hardware news outlet in Argentina, published PowerPoint slides that claim to reveal specifications for the looming chips.

The Intel Core i9-10980HK will be the crown jewel of the Comet Lake-H lineup. The leaked slides compare the chip to an enthusiast-level PC from three years ago, claiming that the Comet Lake-H chip delivers up to 54% higher frame rates in games and 44% better overall performance.  The slides also tout up to double the performance in rendering and exporting 4K resolution video.

• The best gaming laptops you can buy
• The best gaming desktops you can buy
• News: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X 16-core chip lands in XMG Apex 15 gaming laptop

According to the leaked information, Intel might just end up releasing up to six different Comet Lake-H processors, spanning from four cores up to eight cores. AMD has a more generous offering, as the AMD Ryzen 4000 H-series (codename Renoir) lineup starts at six cores.

Intel 10th Generation Comet Lake-H Specifications*

*Specifications in the table are unconfirmed.

Comet Lake-H is practically another derivation of Skylake and is still trapped on Intel's 14nm process node. While Comet Lake-H will retain the core and cache counts as their Coffee Lake-H predecessors, the new chips flaunt higher operating clock speeds. The Core i9, i7 and i5 chips will reportedly boost up to 5.3 GHz, 5.1 GHz and 4.5 GHz, respectively.

According to the slide, the Core i9 and Core i7 models will also be the only ones that take advantage of Intel's Thermal Velocity Boost (TVB) feature. The i7-10875H also looks like it'll be the only Core i7 Comet-Lake H part to arrive with eight cores and 16 threads, while the i7-10850H and i7-10750H are limited to six cores and 12 threads. If the slides are correct, it won't be a given that a Core i7 Comet Lake-H CPU will have eight cores, so buyers will have to be pay extra attention to specifications before purchasing.

Intel 10th Generation Comet Lake-H vs. AMD Ryzen 4000-Series

Among the new listed features, Comet Lake-H seemingly brings native support for dual-channel DDR4-2933 RAM, which is a notable improvement over Coffee Lake-H's DDR4-2666. 

Apparently, Intel will introduce the a new feature called Speed Optimizer that overclocks the processor with a single click. The description sounds similar to the Intel Performance Maximizer (IPM) tool. In any case, Speed Optimizer will only work on unlocked chips, like the i9-10980HK. It's uncertain if the software would work with the i7-10850H, since the chip will reportedly be only partially unlocked. 

Lastly, the slides claim Comet Lake-H will feature integrated Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201 support to provide a high-speed wireless performance with low latency.

Comet Lake-H is rumored to launch on April 2. Whenever they come out, it'll be exciting to see how the 14nm chips compare to AMD's 7nm army.

Microsoft announced Monday that it's combining Word, Excel and PowerPoint into a single Office app on mobile devices. The products will remain separate on desktops--even Microsoft wouldn't dare confuse Windows users by consolidating its Office suite into a single app--but will be lumped together on Android and iOS.

"The new Office mobile app represents our vision for what a productivity solution would look like if first built for mobile devices," Microsoft said in the blog post announcing this change in approach. "In designing this new experience, we first considered how people’s expectations differ when using a phone versus a computer, so we set out to optimize for simplicity, efficiency and common mobile needs."

Bringing the Office suite together into a single Office app helped achieve most of those goals. The apps had their own mobile optimizations already: Word and Excel could both create editable documents from pictures, for example, and PowerPoint could use pictures taken directly from the phone's camera roll. This isn't the first time Microsoft's tried to make the Office suite a bit easier to use on smartphones.

But the new Office app will feature other changes too. Microsoft introduced a new Actions pane that's supposed to make it easier to create PDFs, scan QR codes and more. The company also tried to provide easier access to Sticky Notes, and the integrated Office Lens features enable users to "create automatically enhanced digital images of whiteboards and documents."

The new Office app is currently available as a public preview on Android. The iOS version reached the 10,000 user limit Apple imposes on pre-release software distributed via its TestFlight platform the same day it was announced. 

Microsoft said the new app will initially be exclusive to smartphones, but it plans to bring it to tablets some time in the future (it didn't provide a date). 

Users of the Word, Excel and PowerPoint mobile apps needn't fret about their apps going away yet. Microsoft said it will "continue to support and invest in the existing Word, Excel and PowerPoint mobile apps" because it believes "everyone should decide which experience works best for them on their phones." 

But we'll see how long the redundant apps will remain available once people get used to the idea of a single Office app.

Microsoft unveiled its second audio offering, the Surface Earbuds, here at its Surface Event in New York City today. They'll release for $249 sometime later this year.

The devices support Windows, Android and iOS with hand gestures that you make upon the hardware for each operating system. I saw the earbuds in Glacier White, but there's a gray color coming later this year.

I got to try the Surface Earbuds on at the event, and let me tell you this: they're surprisingly comfortable. There are three potential tip sizes: small, medium and large, and each of those inserts comes in the box. Medium worked well for me. You just put it in with the tip facing down and twist it towards your ear canal. Control gestures were simple; one example is swiping up and down to increase or decrease the volume.

Microsoft claims 24 hours of battery: 8 hours of charge and two additional charges in the case.

The sound, in my limited test, was surprisingly good for an earbud. Rock anthems, acoustic strings and even a live Coldplay concert stood out with details and ambience.

Microsoft Surface Earbuds Specs

Office Support

The cool part for big Windows users will be Office 365 support. I was walked through how this works with PowerPoint specifically. Microsoft showed off live subtitling, which has about a 1 second delay. When I did it and turned the language to Spanish, it took an additional second to translate my speech. It was accurate, and I could totally see using this while giving a presentation. You can also use the earbuds to switch slides.

I was not shown how the Surface Earbuds work with Word, Excel or Outlook, but I'm told there will be details on those later. Functionality with the productivity suite should come with an update to Office 365 later this year, I was told.

On iOS and Android, there will be a mobile app, mostly for tuning, but you can also use it to access Cortana.

Hong Kong media XFastest has somehow got its hands on a couple of PowerPoint slides that purportedly provide a ton of confidential information on Intel's upcoming Comet Lake-S (CML-S) line of mainstream processors.

Comet Lake-S is the codename for Intel's desktop processors that will eventually show up to replace the existing Coffee Lake Refresh (CFL-R) lineup. The new processors are very likely carved with an improved 14nm production process. Comet Lake-S chips will carry up to 10 cores, two more than the current flagship Intel Core i9-9900K part. It would seem that the extra cores come with a cost. If the leaked information is accurate, the flagship Comet Lake-S is rated with a 125W TDP (thermal design power), which is 30W higher than the Intel Core i9-9900K's 95W rating. As expected, Intel will continue to offer 65W and 35W Comet Lake-S parts as well.

The core upgrade on Comet Lake-S implicates steeper power requirements, and as a result, calls for fresh motherboards with stronger power delivery subsystems. This could be one of the main reasons why Intel is supposedly moving the upcoming 14nm chips to a new home. Therefore, Comet Lake-S processors will reportedly only fit into a motherboard with an LGA 1200 socket, 49 more pins than the existing LGA 1151 socket. As per usual, new motherboards give Intel the opportunity to introduce new chipset silicon, which in this case, is rumored to be the 400-series.

*Specifications in the table are unconfirmed

As far as other specifications go, Comet Lake-S might maintain compatibility for DDR4-2666 memory modules and have the same 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes as current Coffee Lake Refresh chips. From a platform standpoint, there is support for Wi-Fi 802.11ax, Bluetooth 5, Intel Optane memory, Thunderbolt 3 and up to 30 chipset I/O lanes to distribute among the SATA III, USB 3.1 and USB 3.1 Gen 2 ports.

A recent report from Japanese media ASCII, who covered ECS' Liva event, snapped a photograph of the roadmap for the Liva mini-PC. There is mention of the budget H410 and H470 and enterprise Q470 chipsets. We have no doubts that Intel will also release the high-end Z470 and Z490 chipsets for the forthcoming 10-core Comet Lake-S flagship processor.

The ECS roadmap seems to coincide with XFastest's leaked roadmap on the launch date for Comet Lake-S. We can expect Intel to start rolling out Comet Lake-S processors in the first quarter of 2020.

Microsoft appears to be testing out a new “Office key” on their in-house keyboards. This new key sports the Office logo and seems to replace the existing Menu key - the often overlooked key nestled between the Function and Alt keys. According to the prominent Microsoft leaker @WalkingCat, Microsoft sent a survey to testers who were using a keyboard with the Office key running on a May 2019 update of Windows 10. Questions included if the users had tried any of the Office-based shortcuts, if they enjoyed using the key and if they would want to see it implemented on a laptop.

Microsoft appears to be looking for even more ways in which to integrate their software with their hardware, as the advent of a dedicated Office key could come as a welcome addition for  power users. The value of this key would likely be determined by how and if one uses Word, Powerpoint, Excel and other Office programs. Currently, the Menu key languishes on the keyboard of many PC users, while third party manufacturers have sometimes switched it out for function keys of their own.  

If Microsoft goes through with the proposed changes, the keyboards will presumably debut on Microsoft’s own peripherals or Surface laptops and 2-in-1s. It’s unclear whether or not this modification will make any difference to most PC users, though it does seem like a solid attempt at updating the keyboard for those locked into the Office Suite.

When reached for comment, a Microsoft spokesperson said that the company "doesn’t respond to rumors or speculation."

Updated June 18, 3:35 p.m. ET with comment from Microsoft.

Qualcomm first showed off its 8cx processor at its Snapdragon Technology Summit in 2018, but here at Computex in Taipei, it’s showing how the chip holds its own. The company showed Tom’s Hardware some expected benchmark numbers using PCMark 10, and allowed us to run some of the same tests ourselves to verify them.

There is, of course, the rub: When I was allowed to verify the tests, they were in a room set up by Qualcomm, under their conditions. And notably, the competition's test machine wasn’t present for us to run tests on. The other note is that these machines had slightly different specs and were running different versions of Windows 10 (see below). Also, the Snapdragon laptop wasn’t running emulated benchmarks, so it’s not totally apples to apples.

The tests  included UL’s new PCMark 10 application benchmark, running Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, Word and Edge; as well as an ARM native version of 3DMark Night Raid.

I was provided with scores for a PCMark 10 battery test running the Office test, playing local video and sitting idle, but was not able to replicate this benchmark on my own.

Qualcomm 8cx Application Performance

For all of the tests, we used a reference Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx machine with 8GB of RAM, 256GB of NVMe storage and ran the Windows 10 May 2019 update (1903). The competitor machine (which looked like a Dell XPS 13 in some slides) had an 8th Gen Intel Core i5-8250U, 8GB of RAM, 256GB of NVMe storage and ran the Windows 10 October 2018 update (1809).

On the Office application benchmark, the Qualcomm 8cx came out slightly ahead of the 8th Gen Core i5 CPU overall, though it didn’t win in every single test. In fact, from an overall standpoint, Qualcomm was conservative. it earned scores higher than the projections for a total score, and I heard some representatives behind me considering updating their numbers.

Qualcomm 8cx Graphics Performance

The graphics test consisted of 3DMark Night Raid, which has a native ARM version. The same laptops were used. In these tests, Qualcomm and UL’s results showed that the Snapdragon 8cx’s Adreno 680 integrated graphics outshined those in the 8th Gen Intel Core i5:

Qualcomm 8cx Battery Life

This is one area that I couldn’t see myself, but Qualcomm and UL provided expected scores for both the Intel laptop and Snapdragon reference unit. It’s certainly unsurprising to see that the Snapdragon outperformed on each of these tests - that has been a benefit of the ARM chips - but it should be noted that Qualcomm’s design has an FHD display, while the competitor had a 2K panel.

Based on those numbers, when idle, the Snapdragon PC came just a little over half an hour short of a full day, and ran many hours longer than the 8th Gen Intel Core i5.

Testing Conclusions

From these numbers, it seems like the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx will rival, if not be more powerful than the 8th Gen Core i5. Of course, these tests all took place under Qualcomm’s supervision and without the Intel laptop present.

Still, that’s a promising sign for upcoming Snapdragon-based laptops, one of which, Lenovo’s “Project Limitless,” also featuring a 5G modem, was announced at Qualcomm’s press conference here at Computex.

But Intel will continue to produce its own chips, and it’s entirely possible that, by time Snapdragon 8cx shows up in laptops, there will be stronger Core i5 chips.

When the first devices release, we’ll also want to run our own usual suite of benchmarks, as well as our proprietary battery test.

Other Snapdragon Improvements

Besides the chance to see some benchmarks, Qualcomm also had a few demos to show what the 8cx is capable of.

Perhaps most impressive, I saw what I’m told are ARM native versions of Chromium, Microsoft Edge (the upcoming version based on Chromium) and Firefox. A representative told me Firefox was using multithreading.

The company also had it set up powering three screens: two 4K monitors and the reference design’s built in FHD display, while running Photoshop, PowerPoint, Excel (with pivot tables), local videos, Edge and, in the background, Word.

Microsoft's products are practically ubiquitous. Sure, Internet Explorer is no longer synonymous with the Internet for many people, but the company's Office productivity suite remains a staple for many Windows users. That's great for Microsoft, but Kaspersky Labs' report that 70 percent of the cyberattacks it saw in the fourth quarter of 2018 targeted Office vulnerabilities suggests that it might not be great for the software's users.

Kaspersky presented these findings at its Security Analyst Summit in Singapore last week; ZDNet reported on the presentation on Monday. According to the publication, Kaspersky said Office was involved in just 16 percent of attacks in Q4 2016. That number quadrupled in just two years, and unless there are some dramatic changes with the productivity suite or its popularity, there's little reason to believe it will fall anytime soon.

Not all of the attacks involving Office vulnerabilities actually rely on flaws in the software itself. Kaspersky noted that attacks will often exploit issues with related components in Windows, or they'll use Office files to make their way onto a target device. Even people who manage to avoid Office typically have to deal with its file types--documents are sent as ".docx", spreadsheets as ".xlsx" and presentations as ".pptx". That's just how it is.

That means that Microsoft's efforts to secure Office are in some ways limited by factors outside its control. Promising improved security for people who opt for Office 365 instead of the standalone versions of its software is better than nothing, sure. (Even if it seems a bit silly to pit the products against each other.) But it can't stop attackers from disguising a malicious file as a Word document or sneaking malware into a PowerPoint slide.

This ubiquity, combined with the ease with which attackers can exploit Office vulnerabilities, makes the rise in attacks involving Office seem like an inevitability. Kaspersky reportedly said there's an entire crime network built around Microsoft's productivity suite. That means there's serious economic incentive to discover Office vulnerabilities, exploit them, sell the exploits and then repeat the process once a given security flaw is fixed.

Maybe that would change if Office were no longer synonymous with office work. But the productivity suite has withstood increasing competition far better than Internet Explorer did, and even if it's dethroned, people are still going to use Office file formats until they simply can't do so anymore. Microsoft, Kaspersky, and other companies simply have to manage each problem as it pops up to the best of their collective ability.

19 Fun Pieces of PC History

PCs have come a long way since the 1946 completion of ENIAC, or more recent mainstream PC originals like the Commodore 64. By today's standards, decades-old PCs seem bulky and are often coated in that classic shade of faded gray-beige that makes us grin.

But what is a computer anyway? In the most basic sense, a computer is something you can program to conduct specific operations. The first programming didn’t arrive with PCs--or even room-sized mainframes. It came much earlier, in surprising devices like musical instruments and automated weaving looms.

To find out more, we visited New York City’s Museum of Interesting Things to get our paws on as many pieces of PC history as we could. From self-playing instruments of the 1800s, to IBM’s first machine (and no, it’s not a punch card), to artifacts museum curator Denny Daniels views as the original Google, YouTube and PowerPoint. We encountered a delightful smattering of historical items that all contributed to the computer and PC market in their own way.

Buckle up. It’s time for a blast from the past.

Jacquard Loom

The jacquard loom was invented in 1804 and made textile manufacturing much easier through the magic of programming. It’s often viewed as the beginning of computing, since it was the first programmable machine.

Invented by France’s Joseph Marie Jacquard, these looms carried a piece of hardware (pictured) that would spin and read punch cards before telling the loom what to do. There you have it, the first punch cards, designed to make cheaper textiles.

Self-Playing Instruments

Who needs musical lessons when instruments can play themselves? While pop music has made lip-synching all but acceptable (we're looking at you, Britney Spears), self-playing instruments have long been faking gullibles out, since the early-to-mid 1900s to be more precise.

You've probably have seen player pianos, or self-playing pianos in old movies or at malls before. But did you know there were automated saxophones and harmonicas in the 1800s? These instruments were programmed to play music through an inserted paper roll that told them which notes to hit.

Just be careful who you perform for or else risk being dubbed a phony.

The First IBM

In 1911, the International Time Recording Company, Computing Scale Company and Tabulating Machine company all merged into the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company. That conglomerate would later be re-branded as International Business Machines--aka IBM--in 1924.

The earliest of those three companies is the International Time Recording Company, which invented mechanical time recorders and was founded in 1888. So when you think about ‘the first IBM machines,’ it may be more accurate to think of time clocks like this, which assigned employees a number and allowed them to clock in and clock out with a loud chime.

Google and YouTube: 1800s Style

Museum of Interesting Things’ Daniels calls stereoscopes, also known as steropticons, as the Google and YouTube of the 1800s. Used up until the early 1900s, you could buy a pack of cards with a certain theme, ranging from kid's cartoons to teaching aids, medical devices and places around the world, for your stereoscope. The front of each card had a photo, while the back had text teaching you all about what you were viewing.

“In the 1800s, it was expensive to go to New York or France. Books were expensive. Libraries weren’t everywhere. So what did you do if you wanted to Google something? … You’d get these stereoscope slides and buy them in packs of 25. Learn about the Civil War, France, put in a slide, take out a slide, put in another slide, take out a slide--that’s your YouTube,” Daniels said.

The PowerPoint of the Past

Who needs Microsoft PowerPoint to make a slideshow? Not the techies of yesteryear. Instead, the Magic Lantern played their slideshows, called Magic Lantern presentations. Even Thomas Edison had a catalogue of Magic Lantern presentations, Daniels told us.

Magic Lantern presentations were crafted on glass slides and came with a booklet featuring information for each slide. This is like PowerPoint templates on steroids. Presentations covered a wide gamut of categories, including different historical periods and even secret societies, and were available to rent or own. We saw one priced at a whopping $65 (likely in 1900s dollars).

Magic Lanterns were invented in the 1500s but took off in the early-to-mid 1800s. They first ran on oil lamps (pictured), but eventually they used light bulbs instead. 

Credit: Lomita/Wikimedia Commons

Enigma: The Early Encryptor

Anyone who keeps up with the latest security breach headlines--seemingly a full-time job these days--knows the importance of encryption. Encrypting data helps ensure privacy, secure computing and, in the case of the Enigma, engage in world warfare.

The Enigma is a cipher machine that was created by German inventor Arthur Scheribus toward the end of World War I. As a cipher machine, the Enigma encrypted messages sent by soldiers so the enemy couldn’t read them. Well-documented users include Nazi Germany.

The “First” Laptop

What, exactly, constitutes as the first laptop is hotly debated. But many give the Osborne 1 that title since it was the first to really take off.

Debuting in 1981 courtesy of the Osborne Computer Corporation, these portables used floppy disks as "hard drives." A vent on top managed heat, while a snap-up keyboard and handle led to its "luggable computer" nickname.

Despite the obvious bulkiness, an impressive 10,000 Osbourne 1 machines were sold per month in its first year. But in 1983, facing growing competition, the vendor filed for bankruptcy.

We wouldn’t be Tom’s Hardware without diving into the specs a bit here, right?.

Osborne 1 Specs

• CPU: 4MHz Z80
• Memory: 64KB, made of four rows of DRAM chips
• Display: 5-inches, CRT, 52 x 24 text
• Operating System: CP/M 2.2
• Ports: 1x parallel
• Drives: 2x 100K disk drives
• Connectivity: Optional modem
• Included Software: CBASIC2 (Digital Research, language compiler), MBASIC (Microsoft, game), Colossal Cave (game), Deadline (Infocom, game), dBase II and dBase II Tutor (Ashton-Tate, database), Nominal Ledger, Purchase Ledger, and Sales Ledger (PeachTree Software), SuperCalc (Sorcim, spreadsheet), WordStar (MicroPro, word processor)
• Price: $1,795 (roughly $4,800 today)

The First Smartphone

Most of us are familiar with the clunky cell phones made popular in ‘80s and ‘90s by the likes of Wall Street’s Gordon Gekko and Saved by the Bell’s Zach Morris. Heck, you may have even owned one yourself. However, it’s less likely you owned the first smartphone, the IBM Simon, as it only sold about 50,000 units.

First available in 1995, it sold for $1,100 (or $900, and eventually $600, if you signed a two-year deal with BellSouth). That’s also in line with today's premium smartphone pricing, and perhaps rightly so since this smartphone had several of the same capabilities of today’s smartphones. There were basic apps like Email, Calendar, Notepad, Sketch Pad and To-Do Lists. The Simon featured predictive text and even had a touch screen!

Credit: Bcos47/Wikimedia Commons

The Original Tech Community

We love our community here at Tom’s Hardware, but from 1975 to 1986 there was another platform for PC enthusiasts to gather: the Homebrew Computer Club.

The Homebrew Computer Club may be the reason we have Apple and Microsoft today. Apple’s Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, as well as Microsoft’s Bill Gates and Paul Allen were all members. In fact, the former introduced the first Apple computer there. 

Pretty big names for a tech community, sure, but were their discussions as lively as those on the Tom’s Hardware forums? 

The Original DIY Robot

DIY robots are all the rage. Today's kids are fortunate to have a fun way to dive into STEM and coding with robot toy kits. And parents get to have some fun with their children too. But building your own robots is nothing new.

Heathkits allowed customers to build their own robots, TVs, radios, oscilloscopes and computers from 1947 until 1992. In fact, Steve Jobs was a big fan of the kits, and it just may be what gave him the confidence to build computers for the world.

“[Heathkits] gave one the sense that one could build the things that one saw around oneself in the universe. These things were not mysteries anymore. I mean, you looked at a television set, you would think that ‘I haven't built one of those but I could. There's one of those in the Heathkit catalogue, and I've built two other Heathkits, so I could build that,’” Jobs told the Computerworld Information Technology Awards Foundation in 1995.

This particular robo is the Hero 1. His arm fell off over time, but after some gentle surgery, he'll be capable of walking around and picking things up. When he was born in 1982, he cost $995 (about $2,600 today).

By the way, Heathkits are still around. After filing for bankruptcy in 2012, Heathkits came back in 2015 with an online shop.

The Original DIY Robot

Bonus: Check out one of the catalogues where tech enthusiasts would browse for their next Heathkit. 

Apple Lisa

The Apple Lisa debuted in 1983, making a name for itself as one of the first PCs with a graphical user interface (GUI).

Speaking of names, what’s with the name? While a seemingly clever take on the Mona Lisa painting and said to stand for Local Integrated Software Architecture, it was also long debated whether or not the machine was also named after Steve Jobs’ daughter, Lisa Brennan-Jobs. That debate can now be laid to rest, thanks to Brennan-Jobs’ tell-all book Small Fry, which came out earlier this month. In the book, the author says Jobs admitted to naming the PC after her.

Beyond some controversy, the Apple Lisa is a part of PC history. It represents one of Apple’s least successful pieces of hardware, partially due to its astronomical price. After selling just 100,000 units in its first two years (not a great figure, considering the first Macintosh sold 70,000 units in its first three months), the PC was taken off market. But it remains infamous as helping to almost put Apple out of business.

Apple Lisa Specs

• CPU: Motorola 68000, 5MHz
• Memory: 1MB, expandable up to 2MB
• Display: 12 inches, 720 x 365 resolution
• Operating System: Apple Lisa GUI
• Ports: 1x parallel, 1x mouse, 2x serial
• Storage: 2x 5.25-inch floppy drives, 1x external hard drive, 5MB (optional)
• Price: $9,995 (about $25,000 today)
  

Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The iPad’s Great-Great-Great-Grandfather

Apple has carved a seemingly permanent spot in the portable computer category with its iPads. But the company has been working on this idea since way before the first iPad launched in 2010.

The company’s original foray into this space was actually the Apple Newton PDA, which first appeared in 1993 and was killed off (by Jobs) in 1998. Apple launched four Newton MessagePads in this time period. Pictured here is the first, the MP100.

QWERTY’s Biggest Threat

IBM’s Selectric typewriter click-clacked onto the scene in 1961. What made the machine so successful (selling 13 million units by 1986) was its efficient typing response, made possible after IBM brought a special ball, which had already existed for decades, to the U.S. The ball replaced traditional typewriter bars that would often clump up and stick together if you typed too fast.

However, Daniels tells us that today’s QWERTY keyboard layout, which became common in 1878, was actually designed to slow down typists and prevent that issue. But by the time IBM’s technology came around, people were too used to the QWERTY standard to allow change.

Some, however, remain hopeful.

“Typewriter societies are trying to bring [other keyboard layouts] back, but no one wants to change the keyboard. ... But had we had the ball, we would’ve been using better systems for 100 years, and you never would've known QWERTY existed,” Daniels says.

Need proof? Germany actually had this technology before IBM, making for more efficient keyboard layouts like that seen on 1893’s Blickensderfer #5 (pictured on next page). 

Credit: Scs/Wikimedia Commons and Scharon Harding/Tom's Hardware

QWERTY’s Biggest Threat

See? The Blickensderfer #5 is proof that QWERTY isn't the only way.

IBM Punch Cards

Putting these on the list (or in a museum) was a no-brainer. IBM punch cards were a major update to the bigger, bulkier cards used in jacquard looms throughout the 1800s. 

IBM’s first punch cards “had 22 columns and eight punch positions; then 24 columns and 10 positions (1900); and until the late 1920s, it had 45 columns of round holes and 12 punch positions. But it was not enough, as customers needed to put more data on each card," according to IBM.

So, there was eventually an internal competition, which researcher Clair D. Lake's team won. The winning formula? A 7.375 x 3.25-inch rectangle with smaller holes that were easier for metal tabulators to read, but called for new machines. IBM chose it because “it could be implemented quickly and required the least adjustment in how tabulating machines worked.” And IBM “wanted to move away from round-holed machines, which were more common. Nobody had rectangular holes.”

These cards are also a big part of IBM’s success. The company says the cards helped it make a name in data processing. And as recently as the mid-1950s the cards accounted for up to 20 percent of IBM' revenue.

The First Floppy Disks

Now that’s a lot of floppy! Just look at it overshadowing its 3.5-inch baby brother. The first floppy disks were 8-inchers that came to market in 1971. They first debuted as part of IBM products before companies like Memorex started selling them individually in 1972.

Credit: Thomas Bohl/Wikimedia Commons

PC Gaming Geekdom

Nothing quite beats gaming, huh? What else allows you to be as athletic, musical, violent, boring or non-human as you want?

While there were other PC games before The Hobbit software game (see 1950’s Bertie the Brain, 1952’s OXO, or even IBM’s 1981 Microsoft Adventure), this 1982 Hobbit PC game makes the list, not just because we saw it at the Museum of Interesting Things, but because of the sheer geekiness (The Hobbit, hello) it brought to the PC world.

The Hobbit was originally made for ZX Spectrum PCs before being made available on other platforms, including the Commodore 64 (pictured), BBC Micro and Oric. And if that’s not enough geekdom for you, note the game came with a copy of J.R.R. Tolkien’s book. Score!

And Again....

Similarly, it’s safe to bet this PC game, Star Trek: The Kobayashi Alternative, had an impact on the lives of many an early PC gaming geeks. This game came out in 1985 and was available on Apple II, Macintosh, Commodore 64 and IBM PC.

Getting Light Text on a Dark Background

By default, most software shows dark text on a white background, much like old-fashioned ink on paper. However, many prefer the exact opposite, light-colored text on a dark screen, and find it easier on the eyes. Who wants to stare at a bright white screen in a room with the lights off?

From Windows' setup menu to all three major web browsers to social media sites like Twitter, many programs and web tools offer ways to change into what they call either Dark Mode, Dark Theme or Night Mode. Here's how to get light text on a black background in over a dozen popular PC and web-based apps.

Turning on Dark Mode in Windows 10

To enable dark mode in Windows 10, right click on the desktop and select Personalize. Click Colors in the left pane. Then scroll down and select Dark under Choose your default app mode.

Settings Menus

Entering Windows 10's dark mode makes all of the operating system's setting menus have light text on a dark background. You can control the color of the icons by choosing an accent color in Settings->Personalization->Colors.

File Explorer

In current Windows 10 Insider builds, enabling dark mode in the settings menu also turns it on for File Explorer. However, if you don't want to run an Insider Build of the operating system, you'll have to wait for the next major update.

Microsoft Office Menus

If you want all of your Microsoft Office apps to turn dark, all you need to do is open one of them (ex: Word), navigate to the File tab, click Account and then select Black from the Office Theme menu. These settings will affect the menus in Outlook, Word, Excel, PowerPoint and more.

Word Documents

Even if you change the Office theme to black, the actual documents will still show black text on a white background. If you want to change the editing area for all new documents, first open the Normal.dotm file, which is likely located in C:Users[YOURID]AppDataRoamingMicrosoftTemplates.

Navigate to the Design tab and select black from the Page Color pulldown. The text will automatically be white. Save the file. Then navigate to File->Options->Advanced and check "Show background colors and images in Print Layout view."

Existing documents that other people send you will still be black on white, unless you head over to the Design tab and select black from the Page Color menu each time.

High-Contrast Mode for Windows

Windows 10's dark mode changes the menus on the settings menu, File Explorer (in Insider builds) and a few other places, but it doesn't affect the vast majority of traditional apps people use. When you really, really want all of your programs to have light text and dark backgrounds in their menus, you can enable Windows' high-contrast mode.

Keep in mind, though, that high-contrast mode is a blunt instrument and makes a lot of things in UI look very ugly. For example, the live tiles in the Start menu look just awful. However, if you decide you want high-contrast mode, navigate to Settings-> Ease of Access -> High-Contrast and switch it to on.

Skype

Skype has a built-in dark theme. To activate it, navigate to Settings->General->Themes. Then choose Dark. It's that simple.

Twitter Night Mode

Twitter's dark mode is called Night Mode. To activate Night Mode, click on your profile picture and select it from the menu.

Dark Mode for Web Pages in Chrome / Firefox

No matter how dark the rest of your apps appear, most web pages will still have dark text on a black background, unless you use a browser extension to solve the problem.

Download Dark Mode for Chrome or for Firefox. It puts a switch into your browser toolbar and, if you toggle it to on, all web pages change to white on black. It also offers a variety of custom dark modes or modes that are made just for popular sites such as Google, Amazon and Reddit.

Dark Themes in Your Browser

To make the tabs, address bar and toolbars in your browser turn to the dark side, you need a new theme, and there are many options. Chrome's store has a huge listing of dark themes. The Morpheon Dark theme is my favorite. 

Firefox users have a built-in dark theme they can active by navigating to Customize from the settings menu and then selecting Dark from the theme pulldown on the bottom of the screen.

In Edge, navigate to Settings and select Dark from the Choose a theme menu.

Gmail Dark Theme

It's easy to change the color scheme in Gmail so that your inbox listing has light text on a dark background. However, the individual emails you open or write will still be black on white.

To change the theme in Gmail, navigate to settings by hitting the gear icon in the upper right area of the screen. Then select Themes, scroll down and pick the onewith the black background.

YouTube Dark Theme

When you go to the movie theater, they turn the lights off to help you see the movie better, so why would you want a white background surrounding your video player? To turn the lights down in YouTube, click on your picture, select Dark Theme and toggle the switch to on.

Visual Studio Dark Color Theme

If you're writing an app for Windows, chances are that you're using Microsoft Visual Studio. The development environment makes it easy to go into dark mode. Just navigate to Tools->Options->General and select Dark from the Color Theme pulldown.

You can also choose custom background and foreground colors by navigating to Tools->Options->Fonts and Colors.

Notepad++ Dark Themes

My favorite development tool, Notepad++ is a text editor on steroids. This must-have piece of freeware lets you view files side-by-side, do advanced search/replaces and get all kinds of visual cues to help with your coding. 

By default, Notepad++ has light text on a dark background, but the software comes with a ton of preinstalled themes, including many different dark ones. Navigate to Settings->Style Configurator and then choose a theme from the list. I recommend Bespin or Blackboard.

Reddit Night Mode

When you're sitting in a dark room, combing through the posts on Reddit, you don't necessarily want a bright white screen staring back at you. Fortunately, the social network makes it very easy to change to a dark theme. Just click on your username (or a down arrow if the screen is too narrow) in the upper right corner of the screen and then select Night Mode.

Introduction

AMD's Ryzen line-up shook up the CPU market with more cores and threads at lower price points than competing Intel processors. But the series' universally unlocked ratio multipliers are the real key to extracting maximum value from Ryzen.

The Ryzen 7 family redefined what an 8C/16T CPU cost, and the Ryzen 5s do the same in their segment with a powerful duo of affordable 6C/12T options. AMD's Ryzen 5 series also includes the 4C/8T 1500X and 1400, but we think AMD's $220 Ryzen 5 1600 is much more interesting.

Like its $250 1600X counterpart, the Ryzen 5 1600 features six cores and 12 threads. AMD bins the 1600X as a 95W part, while the 1600 falls into the 65W TDP range. As expected, the 1600's lower TDP boils down to reduced voltages, imposing lower stock frequencies and thermal output. The Ryzen 5 1600 features a 3.2 GHz base clock rate compared to the "X" model's 3.6 GHz, and it also incurs a similar 400 MHz deficit to the dual-core Precision Boost frequency.

Ryzen 5 1600 falls neatly into the $40 price gap between Intel's Core i5-7500 and -7600K. Both competitors are quad-core models lacking the benefit of Hyper-Threading. That should make for a lopsided battle favoring AMD in heavily-threaded workloads, such as content creation and rendering. Ryzen processors also provide acceptable performance in lightly-threaded workloads. The Intel CPUs do come with on-die graphics for those who need it, while AMD dedicates all of Ryzen's transistors to host processing. Discrete GPUs are a must-have for enthusiasts anyway, so it makes sense to go the route that AMD chose.

MORE: Everything Zen: AMD Presents New Microarchitecture At HotChips

MORE: Intel Kaby Lake Core i7-7700K, i7-7700, i5-7600K, i5-7600 Review

MORE: Broadwell-E: Intel Core i7-6950X, 6900K, 6850K & 6800K Review

AMD indicates that its non-X models do not feature XFR (eXtended Frequency Range) functionality, which allows the CPU to dynamically adjust its clock rate (for two cores) above the Precision Boost rating based on available thermal headroom. During a single-core Cinebench test, we recorded frequencies that regularly jumped to 3.7 GHz on two cores, so it appears the Ryzen 5 1600 also features XFR. Many of the architecture's other features remain unchanged, including its spacious 16MB of L3 cache, SenseMI suite, and unlocked multiplier.

Intel's carefully segmented stack, which relies on locked multipliers to force specific performance profiles, serves as a liability in the face of AMD's unlocked approach. As we've seen from other Ryzen models, the non-X SKUs tend to hit their overclocking ceilings at lower frequencies and offer less consistent memory overclocking. But your access to the platform's many knobs and dials is the same, no matter which Ryzen CPU you purchase. A bit of tuning often pulls the non-X models into range of their more expensive counterparts, also helping close the gap with Intel's mid-range Core CPUs in lightly-threaded apps.

Much like Intel's K-series CPUs, AMD's X models don't come bundled with thermal solutions. So, their additional frequency headroom is accompanied by a higher platform cost. AMD sweetens the Ryzen 5 1600's value proposition by giving you its 95W Wraith Spire cooler. The 1600, like all other Ryzen chips, drops into Socket AM4. Combining the budget-minded processor with an affordable B350-based motherboard results in a capable 6C/12T rig with plenty of horsepower in reserve for any number of enthusiast workloads.

A lot has been written about Ryzen's challenges in some games, but improved memory support and a trickle of software patches have addressed the most glaring issues. The Ryzen processors are good enough for gaming. But the question is whether they offer enough performance to unseat Intel's incumbents in the important price-to-performance ratio comparison. Let's see if the 1600 has what it takes to usurp Core i5.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Overclocking & Test Setup

Overclocking

The Ryzen 5 1600 is based on the same die as Ryzen 5 1600X, albeit with a lower 65W TDP. So, we expect a fairly similar overclocking experience.

We dialed in a Prime95-stable 3.9 GHz using a 1.425 vCore setting and 1.2V CPU NB voltage (CPU Loadline Calibration set to Auto). We've seen others achieve 4 GHz overclocks with lower voltages, so it's possible that we have a lower-quality sample. We recorded 84°C (per AIDA) with Noctua's NH-U12S SE-AM4 cooler during extended stress tests.

Our vCore voltage is higher than AMD's recommended limit of 1.35V for long-term overclocks. AMD notes that Ryzen processors can withstand more than 1.45V, though a setting that high may have an impact on longevity. Of course, the warranty doesn't cover damage from overclocking of any sort, so proceed at your own risk.

We were able to use our G.Skilll FlareX DDR4 memory kit at 2999 MT/s with relaxed 16-16-16-34 timings, but were unable to achieve 3200 MT/s in tandem with our 3.9 GHz overclock. Notably, we ran the Ryzen 5 1600X with the same kit at 3200 MT/s and 14-14-14-34 timings on the same motherboard. As we've seen with other non-X models (and the Ryzen 5 1500X), it's possible that the memory overclocking disparity is attributable to AMD's IMC (Integrated Memory Controller).

After experimenting with the recently-exposed ProcODT (on-die termination signal) motherboard firmware setting, we found that it has a profound impact on memory overclocking and compatibility. The 40- to 60-ohm range allows us to use various memory kits with Ryzen processors that were previously unusable.

AMD recently released a new v1.0.0.6 AGESA update. Motherboard vendors build firmware upon the AGESA bedrock, so improvements to the underlying code allow manufacturers to provide more options through their own BIOS builds. The latest version exposes 26 more settings that should improve memory overclocking, such as allowing either 1T or 2T command rates (previously limited to 1T) and an expanded range of multipliers that allow 4000 MT/s without BCLK overclocking. We will revisit the 1600's memory overclockability when the final firmware revisions become available.

Comparison Processors

Test Setup

We conducted gaming testing with the MSI B350 Tomahawk. To streamline our workflow, we employed Asus' B350-Plus for application testing. The Ryzen gaming story has changed quickly since the launch as a string of motherboard firmware and chipset drivers, along with game updates, have come to fruition. As such, we retested all processors with updated firmware and drivers.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

VRMark & 3D Mark

VRMark

Futuremark's new VRMark test lets you gauge your system's suitability for use with the HTC Vive or Oculus Rift, even if you don't currently own an HMD. VRMark features both HMD and Desktop modes. Desktop mode works both with and without an HMD attached. If you do have one connected, software caps the frame rate at the HMD's refresh rate (90Hz for both the Vive and Rift), and Futuremark doesn't recommend wearing the HMD during the test. We conducted our tests in Desktop mode on a standard monitor, outputting the same resolution and view (for each eye) as an HMD, but without the 90 FPS cap.

The Orange Room test is based on the suggested system requirements for current-generation HTC Vive and Oculus Rift HMDs. Futuremark defines a passing score as anything above 109 FPS (for both tests), so all of these processors paired with a GeForce GTX 1080 are suitable for modern VR experiences.

An overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X outpaces Intel's stock Core i5-7600K, but the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 lags behind slightly. The Ryzen 5 1600 outpaces its four-core 1500X counterpart, while the Core i5-7500 bests the stock 1500X and 1600.

The Blue Room metric performs a grueling 5K resolution benchmark that mimics the expected performance requirements for future VR devices. It's clear that we're butting up against a graphics bottleneck during the test.

3DMark

3DMark's DX11 physics and DX12 CPU tests quantify the amount of processing power available to a game engine.

The stock and overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X configurations unleash beastly performance during the DX12 physics workload. The 1600 also posts strong results that either beat or challenge the overclocked Core i5-7600K.

AMD's Ryzen processors win the DX11 physics tests. The Intel CPUs fare better during the 3DMark API tests, but Ryzen naturally provides strong threaded DX12 draw call performance.

As we've come to expect, Intel processors perform well in single-threaded DX11 metrics. Even AMD's overclocked CPUs can't match them there. Strong per-clock performance helps explain Intel's advantage in lightly-threaded benchmarks where Ryzen's core count advantage is neutralized.

Once again, even after Futuremark's recent API test update, we note a reduction in multi-threaded DX11 draw call performance for the overclocked six-core Ryzen processors compared to their stock configurations.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

AotS: Escalation & Battlefield 1

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation

Ashes of the Singularity was one of the first games to receive a Ryzen-specific patch, so it illustrates what can happen when a developer spends time optimizing for the Zen architecture's intricacies. We recorded impressive performance boosts after the update.

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation scales exceedingly well with more cores/threads, rewarding the six-core Ryzen processors in both stock and overclocked configurations. Intel's Core i5-7600K has much more overclocking headroom, however, allowing it to take the pole position. In its stock configuration, the -7600K falls into the same range as the other four-core processors.

Notably, AMD's four-core Ryzen 5 1500X bests the Intel Core i5-7500, largely due to improved utilization, which is enabled by its SMT implementation.

The stock Ryzen 5 1600 experiences the most apparent frame time outliers during the test, but a bit of overclocking provides a drastic improvement.

Battlefield 1 DX12

We dialed Battlefield 1 up to the Ultra preset and took an armor-laden stroll across the O La Vittoria landscape.

The Ryzen 5 1600 bests a four-core 1500X, but trails the rest of the field. Overclocking helps propel it to similar performance as the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X.

Battlefield 1 DX11

In Battlefield 1, under the DX11 API, Ryzen processors tend to score better relative to Intel's Core chips. Presenting benchmark results using different settings helps illustrate how even one game can paint different pictures of performance, depending on how it's set up.

The stock Ryzen 5 1600 beats Intel's Core i5-7500, and overclocking widens the gap. We notice a much larger delta between the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X (3.25%) in this test. Then again, there is a 100 MHz difference in clock rate between the two processors (2.5%). The 1600X's 3200 MT/s memory data rate is also higher than the 1600's 2966 MT/s, and given the increased performance we find with faster memory, that likely contributes to the disparity. AMD's forthcoming AGESA update might improve memory overclocking with the Ryzen 5 1600, which would help get it closer to the 1600X.

Those big blue spikes in our frame time over run chart belong to the Ryzen 5 1500X. Not good.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Civilization VI & Dues Ex: Mankind Divided

Civilization VI AI Test

Civilization VI's demanding AI test isolates host processor performance, and historically responds better to high clock rates and IPC throughput than more cores.

Not surprisingly, then, Intel's Core i5-7600K leads in both its stock and overclocked configurations.

The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 nearly matches the more expensive 1600X. However, AMD's 1500X beats the 1600 in a stock configuration due to its higher base and boost clock rates.

Civilization VI Graphics Test

The stock Ryzen 5 1600 encounters some frame time turbulence during the graphics test, but once again, tuning helps smooth out the wrinkles.

Intel's Core i5-7500 falls to the bottom of the group, while its stock Core i5-7600K also struggles. Interestingly, the latter Core i5 still achieves a notably higher minimum frame rate than the stock 1500X and 1600. 

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Deus Ex continues to favor AMD's Ryzen processors, while the Intel CPUs hit a ceiling of some sort around 58 FPS. The average FPS chart reflects this dichotomy.

The game also doesn't respond well to overclocked Ryzen processors. Our 1600X and 1600 samples yield the same average FPS and frame time measurements in stock and overclocked configurations.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Grand Theft Auto V & Hitman

Grand Theft Auto V

We measure performance during Grand Theft Auto V's F-16 flight sequence with the built-in benchmark.

Intel's overclocked Core i5-7600K enjoys an undisputed lead over the other processors. Even the stock -7600K beats the rest of our field.

The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 land one after the other.

In spite of the overclocked Core i5's commanding win, it continues demonstrating the same disturbing frame time outlier we've seen previously. Curiously, it isn't affected if we leave its stock clock rate alone.

Hitman

The overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 falls in line beneath the 1600X by nearly the same percentage observed in previous tests. The Core i5-7500 settles in at the bottom of our chart, and Intel's stock Core i5-7600K lands under both six-core Ryzen chips. Overclocking propels the unlocked Kaby Lake-based CPU into a compelling lead, though.

Separately, the stock Intel processors serve up higher minimum frame rates than AMD's stock Ryzen processors.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Shadow of Mordor & Project CARS

Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor

The value of an unlocked multiplier becomes clear during this benchmark. AMD's stock Ryzen processors land at the bottom of our chart. However, overclocking them adds enough performance to challenge Intel's Core CPUs.

As expected, the Core i5-7600K leads in this older game. But the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600X isn't far behind. A tuned Ryzen 5 1600 lags behind the 1600X by a mere 1.2 FPS on average. We suspect there'd be little difference between them at 4 GHz, in the event your sample is more flexible than ours. The overclocked quad-core 1500X offers nearly the same performance level, too. A stock Ryzen 5 1500X beats the 1600 during this lightly-threaded benchmark by virtue of its 200 MHz XFR advantage.

At the end of the day, all of these processors facilitate a smooth experience in Middle-earth, and their performance is quite similar.

Project CARS

Project CARS responds most readily to high clock rates and IPC throughput. The overclocked Core i5-7600K offers the highest average FPS, but a few frame time outliers crop up during the benchmark. Intel's Core i5-7500 also experiences a few spikes that show up on our chart.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Rise of the Tomb Raider & The Division

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Ryzen processors endure a massive performance deficit under Rise of the Tomb Raider and DX12, so we're switching to DX11 to see how the picture changes.

Intel's processors still enjoy a healthy lead, despite our different API settings. Rise of the Tomb Raider could be a good candidate for a Ryzen-optimized patch. Alternately, if Nvidia's graphics driver is negatively affecting performance under DX12, pairing Ryzen with a capable AMD graphics card (Radeon RX Vega, anyone?) could be what equalizes performance between CPU vendors.

Tom Clancy's The Division

Tom Clancy's The Division is fairly graphics-bound, so, outside of minimum frame rates, it doesn't show much variation between host processors. As we've noted in the past, the Ryzen 5 1500X suffers a distressing drop in performance during the opening section of the scene, which is visible as severe stuttering.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Application Benchmarks

Microsoft Excel 2016 - Word, Excel & PowerPoint

Benchmarking Microsoft Office isn't particularly exciting, but it is representative of software many of us use on a daily basis. The Ryzen processors gain a bit of steam during the PowerPoint workload, but Intel's processors enjoy a lead through most of the tests.

Notably, the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X offer almost identical performance. In either case, aside from the tuned Core i5-7600K, the difference between the various processors is relatively small.

Adobe Creative Cloud

The same trends emerge throughout the Adobe suite, as Intel's Core i5-7600K largely enjoys a lead due to its per-clock performance advantage.

AMD's overclocked Ryzen 1600X and 1600 achieve a higher cumulative score than the Core i5-7500, and the -7400 falls to the bottom of the chart.  

Rendering

The six-core Ryzen processors shine during heavily-threaded workloads. Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 establish convincing leads through our suite of rendering tests, while the overclocked Core i5-7600K jostles for position with Ryzen 5 1500X during a few benchmarks.

The Core i5-7600K, in both stock and overclocked configurations, enjoys a healthy lead in the single-core rendering tests. The tweaked Ryzen CPUs trade blows with the Core i5-7500 in those same metrics, and beat the -7400 during the single-core POV-Ray and Cinebench tests.

Web Browser

During the Kraken Javascript benchmark, Intel's Core i5-7600K leads in its stock and overclocked configurations. But the overclocked Ryzen processors make short work of Intel's multiplier-locked models. Ryzen 5 1500X can't quite keep up with Core i5-7500 during the MotionMark browser benchmark, but the overclocked Ryzen 5 1600 and 1600X both provide a benefit over the locked -7500 and -7400.

SiSoftware's cryptographic test measures performance for both AES-256 and SHA algorithms. Aside from the overclocked Core i5-7600K, Ryzen's hardware AES units provide a tangible performance benefit over the Intel processors in both single-core and multi-core encryption/decryption tasks. The processors also provide faster SHA2-256 AVX hashing performance.

Encoding & Compression

The overclocked Core i5-7600K enjoys a substantial lead in the LAME workload, but the tuned Ryzen 5 1600X and 1600 also provide competitive performance. AMD's six-core Ryzen processors leverage their thread count advantage to great effect during the compression workload. A similar trend emerges during the HandBrake benchmark.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

Final Analysis

As we observed with the Ryzen 7 1700X and 1700, AMD’s unlocked multipliers and similar overclocking ceilings are great for enthusiasts on a budget. You're able to buy a cheaper CPU and realize almost the same performance as higher-end models after a bit of tinkering. We couldn't achieve a 4 GHz overclock with Ryzen 5 1600, which would have matched our results with the 1600X. According to other tests we've seen, though, it’s certainly possible to find a sample capable of 4 GHz. We also couldn't match the 1600X's 3200 MT/s memory speed, but that is fairly common from non-X Ryzen CPUs. Motherboard vendors should have a wave of new firmware versions coming soon that might improve memory overclocking.

We use a geometric mean of average and minimum FPS through our benchmark suite to generate a gaming price efficiency chart. This includes six titles released in 2016 and four older games that launched in 2015.

In the suite, a stock Ryzen 5 1600 provides nearly the same average frame rate as Intel's Core i5-7500. But a bit of overclocking propels it into the lead. An overclocked 1600 can't quite reach the performance of a tuned Core i5-7600K, but it sells for $20 less and comes awful close paired up to high-end graphics. Most systems in this price bracket utilize less powerful GPUs, and the Ryzen 5 1600 should provide enough horsepower to propel mid-range builds to smooth gameplay.

The story changes when we remove older games from our calculation. The second average frame rate chart, which only includes modern games that tend to utilize processing resources more efficiently, places the stock Ryzen 5 1600 ahead of Intel's stock Core i5-7600K. That's quite an impressive feat considering the 1600 also has plenty of spare threads available for more taxing productivity applications. Notably, Intel's CPUs continue to enjoy a substantial lead when we look at minimum frame rates in new and old games alike.

The 1600's low price point is hard to ignore. This CPU features the lowest price-per-core through AMD's Ryzen portfolio, and in light of its solid showing through our application and game suite, it also provides an impressive price-to-performance ratio. The addition of a bundled 95W cooler magnifies the savings relative to Intel's Core i5-7600K and AMD's Ryzen 5 1600X, neither of which include a thermal solution. The Ryzen 5 1600 also provides more performance than Core i5-7500 in a wide range of applications for a little extra money. That should get you thinking about stepping up to AMD's $220 Ryzen instead of buying a locked Intel model.

MORE: Best CPUs

MORE: Intel & AMD Processor Hierarchy

MORE: All CPU Content

In the same presentation where Microsoft discussed the range of specifications for the upcoming wave of mainstream PC-tethered VR HMDs, we got more details about the requirements for the PCs that will power them.

Although we recently learned about the minimum PC specifications at an earlier WinHEC announcement, Microsoft’s session revealed quite a bit more.

A Range Of Specs For A Range Of Applications

It’s funny, but it seems that there are things we instinctively know to be true about PCs that we don’t think about in the XR world. One of the most obvious is the notion that XR users will have a wide variety of needs and use cases, and therefore, there will be a commensurate array of PCs and HMDs to accommodate.

This is the same reason why some people need high-end gaming desktops, some are happy with a $200 Chromebook, and everyone else is everywhere in between. Higher-end PCs cost more and can do more; the same is true of HMDs.

And so, just as Microsoft and Intel have developed a range of specifications for the HMDs, they’ve developed a range of specifications for the PCs that will power them, as well. As we mentioned in an earlier article: “HMDs [...] will be used to do all sorts of different computing tasks, from casual computing (such as web browsing) to communications (Skype) to serious productivity (Excel and PowerPoint floating in front of you) to passive entertainment (watching movies) to active entertainment (such as gaming).

Understanding PC Requirements: A Second Axis

The minimum and recommended specifications for the range of XR HMDs are actually not quite straightforward. To really understand it all, you have to think in two dimensions--on both X and Y axes, if you will. We’re looking at what a range of PC hardware can support, but also what a range of HMD hardware demands.

If you wanted to, for example, play a certain game at a certain resolution, you would need to look at just one axis (let’s say the X axis): Weaker PC hardware means you can get less out of the game, whereas high-end PC hardware will deliver an optimal experience.

With these HMDs, you still have that same X axis; as we’ve discussed, people will be using their PC-connected HMDs for tasks as tame as light web browsing, but also applications as intense as AAA gaming. Therefore, weaker PC hardware is still at the far left of the X axis, and the more powerful PC hardware is on the far right.

However, you can think of the range of HMD hardware as a Y axis. At the very bottom of the Y axis, you’ll have a bare-essentials HMD; at the very top, you’ll get an HMD with the most, and best, features.

Therefore, when you think about PC requirements, you have to consider what applications and HMDs will demand.

If you squint, you can see the X/Y axis present in this slide:

On the far left, the XR experiences are pretty tame: You can use Universal Windows Apps within the Holographic shell (which could potentially be fairly amazing, if the experience is strong enough), play casual games, and view 360-degree images and video. That’s about on par with what you get from a Gear VR-level HMD (with the exception of the apps-in-the-shell business).

On the far right, though, is where the Y axis comes into play. Starting from the left, Microsoft suggests that you get more bang for your PC hardware buck by adding discrete graphics, a better CPU, more memory, and “higher-end input”--all of which is obvious. According to the slide, at the high end (all the way to the right), you’ll also get to play higher-end games and enjoy “premium content.” But also note that “Premium HMD” is listed there, too.

What Microsoft is trying to say is that in order to get all the best stuff, you need robust PC hardware and one of the highest-end VR HMDs. Remember, those HMDs are going to come with a wide range of specifications.

Your task as a consumer will be to balance the capabilities of your PC with those of your HMD. For example, don’t expect to get superb VR performance out of your beastly gaming PC with an entry-level $300 VR HMD, nor with your Ultrabook and one of the best VR HMDs.

PC Requirements: Is There A Time Warp?

Here’s a key slide, but even this one isn’t quite as clear as we’d like (we’ll explain in a moment):

This slide lists the minimum PC requirements for both laptops and desktops. We’ve seen the former before, but not the latter. Note that the requirements are identical, save for the CPU--which mainly has to do with form factor (e.g., an Ultrabook-class chip goes in an Ultrabook, not a desktop). But, hey, apparently we’ll be able to get away with running VR off of a Core i3 (Skylake or Kaby Lake) or an AMD FX4350.

But there’s a wrinkle: These are specs that will run this gear as of “Holiday ‘17.” An adjacent slide shows different specs--primarily around the graphics. Gone is the integrated graphics minimum spec; this one says you’ll need a discrete GPU--a GTX 965M (GTX 960 on the desktop) or AMD RX 460 or equivalent. That means Ultrabooks won’t be able to offer what Microsoft considers an XR experience once the Windows 10 Creators Update lands.

Thought of one way, that’s perhaps disappointing given what we were previously told about the minimum PC requirements; but the Creators Update seems like a big deal, so it follows that perhaps the new capabilities demand better hardware.

Except...the Creators Update is scheduled to land in the spring of 2017. That’s many months before the “holidays” of 2017, but the “holiday ‘17” minimum specs are lower than those required by the Creators Update.

To be honest, we do not know what Microsoft is thinking here. Our assumption is that there will perhaps be further stratification based on the operating system: Windows 10 minimum specs and Windows 10 Creators Update minimum specs.

That’s a lot of juggling--you have to balance the PC hardware with the HMD hardware with the version of Windows 10 that you’re running. (Don’t worry folks; we on the Tom’s Hardware editorial team as well as our wonderful forum members will be here to help you sort these things out when the time comes.)

It’s also possible that, in part, the Creators Update specs are mainly intended as guidance for OEMs who are planning to show off these XR capabilities on their systems. The WinHEC crowd consists of a lot of companies that make things--less so developers (which is what events like IDF and Build are for), and even less so journalists--so Microsoft may just have provided those specs to help ensure that OEMs are using sufficient PC hardware to show off their HMDs.

There’s a final bit that Microsoft shared, concerning ways that OEMs can differentiate their PCs for various XR experiences:

Note that the “move to” dual-channel DDR4 RAM is advisable, which means that the minimum specs require just DDR3. Unsurprisingly, SSDs over HDDs are preferable, and it seems that there are plans for Bluetooth “interactive” accessories. That could mean 3DoF or 6DoF hand controllers.

It’s refreshing to finally get some answers from Microsoft and Intel about mainstream HMDs and PC requirements for them, but even so, there’s much we do not yet know--and I believe that’s because no one yet knows exactly what the market will look like, what people will actually want and use, who will make what, and what it will all cost.

However, make no mistake: If two of the most important personal computing companies in the world believe that XR is the future, it will be, one way or another. And you, the consumer, will help shape it.

On May 19, Microsoft released Office for Android phone preview, and just five weeks later the company has made the apps available for general release. The company said it received feedback from users all around the world, and the software was tested in over 83 countries and on 1,900 different phone models.

During that period, Microsoft heard from thousands of users and said that much of the feedback has been incorporated into the current release. One such change is easy access to third party cloud storage such as Dropbox and Google Drive, in addition to the company's own OneDrive solution.

The Android phone version of Office integrates directly into the cloud to sync up with Office365 accounts. Microsoft said that transitioning from a PC to the phone will pick up right where you left off.

Word will let you read and edit documents, and easily add or change comments. Excel lets you create charts easily, and formulas have been optimized to use touch control. Power Point allows you to run a full presentation, complete with animations and transitions, directly from your phone.

Microsoft has been working with partners around the globe to sell phones with Office apps pre-installed. Over 30 OEMs including Samsung, Sony and LG will be selling phones later this year with Office already included.

Word for Android, Excel for Android and PowerPoint for Android are available now, at no charge, in the Google Play store.

Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Jared Spataro, general manager for Microsoft's Office 365 marketing team, recently updated the Office blog with news that Microsoft has unleashed new Office for Android Preview apps for smartphones. Confused? Don't be. The previous Office for Android Preview launched back in January was for Android tablets only.

To check out the new apps on an Android smartphone, testers must first be enlisted in the Microsoft Office for Android community. After that, users can click on the "Become a tester" button and download and install Word, Excel and PowerPoint from Google Play. However, potential testers may not be able to retrieve these apps immediately.

"After 'Become a tester,' your access permissions to preview builds becomes active only after a few hours while Google Play replicates your access permissions," the FAQ said. "So, please try downloading the Apps after ~4 hours from the same links. In the absence of access permissions to preview version of apps, Google Play store app shows you currently publicly available Android Tablet version which isn't compatible for Phone devices."

Microsoft also provided a list of devices that are not compatible with the new Office apps for phones. This list reveals devices provided by Asus, Google, Hewlett Packard, LG, Lenovo Mobile, Samsung, Sony and a number of others. The fine print says that Microsoft is "working towards enabling support for many of the large screen phone devices."

Microsoft Word was the only app that could be downloaded for this article (the other two are waiting on permissions). After the initial sign-in process, the app asks for the user's Dropbox credentials. Once that's done, users are provided with a screen that lists documents under "Today," "Last Week," "Two Weeks Ago" and "Three Weeks Ago."

However, at the top, Word offers a choice of opening a doc or creating a new one. Hit the "Open" option and users can grab documents from "Recent," "This device," OneDrive, Dropbox and "Other cloud storage." This last option shows the "Downloads" folder, Google Drive and Microsoft OneDrive. Users can also add a place to retrieve files: OneDrive Personal, OneDrive Business, Dropbox or a SharePoint location.

All in all, Word is really slick on an Android smartphone. Once a document is opened, users can zoom in and out with one tap, save a document and share the file as a link or an attachment. A menu tucked away on the left side provides additional options such as "Save As," "Share," "Print," "Close" and even "Feedback."

As of this writing, the "Print" feature saves the document as a PDF or sends it to Google Drive (Cloud Print). There's also an "All Printers" option, which presumably shows the local printer along with an option to save to Google Drive.

"Bringing these apps to Preview first provides you with an early look at the apps, while enabling us to gather critical user feedback helping us shape and improve the app experience on a wide range of Android phones across the world," Spatoro said. "The feedback we received from the Office for Android tablet Preview in January was critical to ensuring a high quality and consistent Office experience across Android tablet devices."

To join the Microsoft Office for Android community, head here.

Follow Kevin Parrish @exfileme. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Microsoft on Wednesday finally released a version of Office 365 for Android smartphone users. Unfortunately, if you're in the UK, you won't be seeing any of that action. Not to worry, though, you're not alone. Microsoft's Julia White wrote in a blog post that the application is currently for Android users in the United States. 

Similar to the launch of Office 365 for iOS, the app is for Office 365 subscribers only, which means you'll have to get a subscription to Microsoft's Office 365 Home Premium and ProPlus before you can use the app. If you don't have an Office 365 subscription and don't fancy forking over the cash just to try the app, you can get a 30-day trial of Office 365 on office.com and take the app for a spin as well. 

The app will give you mobile access to the likes of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, SkyDrive and more. Though you'll have to be in the USA to enjoy Office for Mobile on your Android phone right away, Microsoft has promised to release the app in other countries over the coming weeks. Hopefully we won't have to wait too long.

Richland APUs Make Their Way To The Desktop

AMD's Kabini: Jaguar And GCN Come Together In A 15 W APU showed us what the company's Jaguar and GCN architectures could accomplish between 4 and 25 W TDPs. But, on the desktop, AMD isn't quite ready to make the leap to a next-gen design. It just introduced its desktop-oriented Richland APUs, which aren't really new at all. Rather, you can think of them as power-optimized Trinity parts, sporting the same Piledriver-based x86 cores and VLIW4 graphics configuration. Moreover, Richland-based APUs have been available to mobile device makers for months. The only real revelation is that we're getting this update in the desktop and low-voltage mobile spaces now.

In the table above, we see the new mobile-oriented options spanning 17 to 25 W TDPs. Richland isn’t much different from Trinity, but it's more efficient thanks to specific Turbo Core optimizations that include a greater number of P-states to facilitate more granular power and performance levels.

And then we have the desktop-specific Richland parts. The very fastest model enjoys a 300 MHz base clock rate bump compared to the A10-5800K, along with official support for 2133 MT/s DDR3 memory (the other SKUs top out at 1866 MT/s memory). Also, its GPU is 44 MHz faster than the prior-gen version. And yet it fits within the same 100 W TDP.

On the other hand, the A10-6700 looks a lot like the -5800K, aside from a 100 MHz-lower base clock, a 100 MHz-higher Turbo Core ceiling, and a slightly quicker GPU. That one drops to a 65 W thermal limit.

Like the Trinity-based APUs before them, these Richland designs plug into a Socket FM2 interface. A BIOS update should be all that you need for compatibility with existing A55, A75, and A85 platforms.

And what about those shiny new Radeon model numbers? That's marketing being bad. We were already dealing with Radeon HD 7000-series naming on APUs, which was confusing because AMD's desktop 7000-series GPUs are commonly associated with the GCN architecture. Now we have 8000-series nomenclature. And yet, we're still working with the VLIW4 configuration that was around back when AMD was shipping Radeon HD 6900-series cards. Architecturally, the only difference between Richland's Radeon HD 8000 graphics and Trinity's Radeon HD 7000 graphics is the name.

Again, the top-end A10-6800K gets 2133 MT/s memory support, which is particularly meaningful for its on-die graphics engine given a lack of shared L3 cache. The theoretical 34 GB/s of DDR3 bandwidth should go a long way to improve frame rates in the games we'll be testing. With that said, let's move on to why we aren't able to test Richland's Dual Graphics feature today...

AMD Dual Graphics: Not Ready For Benchmark Results

AMD’s Dual Graphics technology, once referred to as Hybrid CrossFire, allows the APU to work cooperatively with a discrete graphics card to deliver higher game frame rates than either component flying solo. At first glance, this seems like a great way to extract value, offering an upgrade path not available on any competing platform.

Unfortunately, there are limitations. First, this is a software-based capability that only works with DirectX 10 and 11 game engines. Second, the APU is quickly outclassed by most discrete cards. So it really only works with Radeon HD 6450, 6570, and 6670 boards, maintaining balance between the two parts.

We've long since wanted to dig deeper into Dual Graphics; after all, as you can see in the screen capture above, AMD claims it serves up a serious performance increase. But in our subjective experience, this feature does not necessarily appear to yield smoother game play. For the company's Richland introduction, we were excited to finally test Dual Graphics using our FCAT tools, capturing the raw display output and analyzing the stream to determine if frames were being dropped entirely or rendered in a series of full and tiny (runt) frames.

Unfortunately, our video-based analysis turned up an unexpected issue that prevents us from reporting the performance of Dual Graphics. Intermittently, we'd see a frame rendered, followed by a piece of the following frame, a piece of the original frame, and the rest of the following frame. This artifact is accompanied by a tear across the screen as Dual Graphics puts the two frames together. 

It's consequently impossible to run our FCAT analysis on the output, since the frame sequence can't be measured. Fraps-based testing in this case would clearly be inaccurate. So, it's better to hold off on trying to quantify the performance of Dual Graphics until AMD can provide a solution that composites the frames free from artifacts or tears. The company is aware of our findings and is working to address them. As of yet, though, we don't have an explanation of why this is happening.

Test Setup And Benchmarks

We're testing the Richland-based A10-6700 and A10-6800K APUs against their predecessor, AMD's Trinity-based A10-5800K. We have an Ivy Bridge-based Core i3-3220 in our Canadian lab with HD Graphics 2500. Unfortunately, we didn't have an opportunity to snag a Core i3-3225 before leaving for Computex, so the comparison to HD Graphics 4000 will have to wait.

The good news is our testing facility in Hillsboro, Oregon already ran the numbers comparing both Core i3 chips and A10-5800K. The pertinent data can be found in Gaming At 1920x1080: AMD's Trinity Takes On Intel HD Graphics. For the time being, Core i3-3220 reflects the x86 performance of both Intel chips in today's tests, and in the same $130-150 price range these new Richland-based APUs are expected to sell for.

In order to maximize performance in our game tests, we used DDR3-1866 and -2133 data rates, which are the highest officially-supported settings on AMD's new APUs. In addition, we included results with a discrete Radeon HD 6670 DDR3, a baseline mainstream gaming card.

And here are the benchmark details:

Results: Synthetic Benchmarks

Sporting the same number of Radeon cores (384), it's hardly surprising that all of the A10s score fairly similarly. A slight 44 MHz clock rate increase gives the Richland-based parts an imperceptible speed-up. The Core i3-3220's HD Graphics 2500 engine is ill-equipped to fight off any of AMD's APUs, though we know full-well that HD Graphics 4000 and 4600 do narrow the gap.

The Physics module is a pure measure of x86 processing performance though, and in this one, the dual-core Core i3 finishes in first place (albeit just barely).

Although PCMark 8 launched a couple of days ago, AMD wasn't able to get us the test before we needed to board planes and head to Taipei for Computex. At least for one last processor launch, PCMark 7 will have to do. We don't see this as a problem; the benchmark is build using components of Windows 7, which many enthusiasts continues to use, and is representative of many common desktop workloads.

It's not much of a surprise why AMD doesn't care for PCMark 7, though. The Core i3's two Hyper-Threaded cores outperform AMD's two Piledriver modules in the Overall, Creativity, and Productivity subtests.

Intel's IPC advantage gives Core i3 the lead in Cinebench's single-core test. AMD comes surging back in the threaded component of this test, though, as its four integer pipelines outperform SMT technology.

Intel's Core i3-3220 returns higher integer and floating-point results in Sandra's Arithmetic module, though the A10-6800K isn't far behind in either metric.

Intel has a bad habit of using important features to differentiate its processors. The Core i3s, for example, arbitrarily lose AES-NI support. So, the Core i3 performs dismally in this measurement. Meanwhile, AMD's APUs process instructions as fast as they can be fed from memory, resulting in the great AES256 numbers.

This is an interesting result. Intel's two x86 cores deliver the top OpenCL-based result in LuxMark. All three Radeon-based graphics engines fare roughly the same when we limit processing to the GPUs. And the A10-6800K scores a first-place finish with both the CPU and GPU working cooperatively.

Remember, though that we're only testing Intel's HD Graphics 2500 engine. If you want some interesting data from HD Graphics 4000, check out this page in The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn. The A10-5800K's numbers match almost identically. But HD Graphics 4000 and 4600 kick performance up significantly, suggesting that a Core i3-3225 would make a big difference in this test.

Results: F1 2012 And The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

As far as average frame rates go, All of the APUs are playable at 1920x1080 using Medium quality settings, maintaining at least 30 FPS. As we might have guessed, using system memory running at 2133 MT/s makes an appreciable difference, slightly outpacing the same APU complemented by a discrete Radeon HD 6670.

We knew going in that HD Graphics 2500 would have been unplayable. Intel figured the same thing out quite a while after introducing its modest Core i3-3220; the -3225 didn't become available until quite a while after. The company redeems itself, however, when we drop in the same Radeon HD 6670, though. Alleviating the A10's processor bottleneck allows AMD's add-in card to achieve much higher frame rates.

Charting frame rate over time gives us a clearer look at the peaks and valleys of each solution, though we don't derive any additional insight.

All of our tested configurations exhibit fairly low variance in the time it takes to render one frame to the next. Even when frame rates get slow, then, at least you have this consistency to look forward to.

No surprise; Intel's HD Graphics 2500 implementation isn't cut out for gaming. For that, you'd want to look to HD Graphics 4000, at least.

But even then, data from Chris Angelini's review of Core i7-4770K shows that Intel cannot keep up with AMD's APUs in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. It's not even close. HD Graphics 4600 doesn't even do the trick.

Faster memory isn't a huge deal for the AMD parts in this title, though we will note that the 2133 MT/s kit helps A10-6800K outperform Intel's Core i3 complemented by discrete graphics.

The frame rate over time chart shows how 2133 MT/s memory helps push the A10-6800K to the top during this benchmark run.

Unfortunately, playable frame rates don't guarantee smooth performance. When we look at worst-case scenarios, each one of these solutions incurs more than 10 ms of variance between frames. That's definitely a difference you're going to feel as you're playing. And indeed, our experience in Skyrim reflected relatively moderate consistency in how frames are delivered.

Results: Tomb Raider And Metro: Last Light

While we're able to run Tomb Raider at 1920x1080 using on-die graphics, we had to drop the quality settings as low as they go (except for keeping FXAA and 8x AF turned on).

Again, we see that HD Graphics 2500 aren't viable in a 3D workload like this. Also again, there's plenty of data in Chris' Core i7-4770K review to show that neither HD Graphics 4000 or HD Graphics 4600 can overtake A10-5800K. So, A10-6800K is probably safe unless Intel decides to enable its GT3/GT3e configuration on the desktop. The company currently has no plans to do this.

Mapping frame rates out over time simply gives us a little extra detail.

Although the variance between subsequent frames appears low in general, we found this title to suffer from noticeable stuttering. Perhaps it was simply a result of lower overall frame rates giving the perception of less-smooth performance.

Metro: Last Light is easily the most demanding title in our suite, requiring us to drop the graphics details to their lowest settings and dial the resolution back to 1280x720. Fortunately, the game still looks good at those settings.

A demanding benchmark sequence pushes frame rates under 20 at times, despite decent averages from the A10 APUs. The discrete Radeon HD 6670 doesn't do any better, and Intel's HD Graphics 2500 isn't viable at all.

As you can see, the APUs manage to maintain frame rates in excess of 30 for much of the test, but are pushed under 20 FPS in several cases. It's tempting to say that you'll see better real-world performance from this title, though we know taxing sequences like the built-in benchmark are when gamers most commonly decry the inability of their hardware to perform.

Variance between subsequent frames isn't bad, but we simply cannot get around the fact that the experience in this title suffers from frame rates that are simply low.

Results: Media Encoding

It's clear from the pages of benchmarks we just ran that Richland's graphics subsystem has little trouble making quick work of Intel's HD Graphics 2500 engine. And we can be fairly certain from Angelini's evaluation of the Core i7-4770K that AMD's A10-6800K is going to be faster than HD Graphics 4000 and even HD Graphics 4600, too. But what happens when we shift away from the 3D applications and focus more intently on x86 apps? We'll start with a couple of single-threaded audio encoding titles.

iTunes is notoriously single-threaded, giving Intel's Ivy Bridge architecture a notable advantage. The A10-6800K manages to improve on AMD's A10-5800K, but it can't come close to the Core i3.

The same applies to LAME, another single-threaded audio encoding title.

HandBrake exploits multi-core architectures well, yielding an advantage to AMD's Piledriver design. Two Hyper-Threaded Ivy Bridge cores simply cannot keep up.

As the Lame results mirror iTunes, so does TotalCode Studio emulate the outcome of HandBrake. In general, software-based video encoding workloads favor the CPUs with more cores to work in parallel. It's true that AMD's Piledriver modules do share certain resources. However, Hyper-Threading isn't enough to keep Intel's efficient dual-core configuration ahead.

We should also note that these are software-based video encoders. A build of HandBrake recently emerged with optimizations for OpenCL and Intel's Quick Sync technology. Factoring in hardware acceleration affects performance and quality, so keep that in mind when you start looking at encode jobs that exploit other resources.

Results: Adobe CS6

After Effects tends to demonstrate sensitivity to available memory per core, so perhaps we should have expected the dual-core Core i3 to establish a lead early on.

Premiere Pro CS6 scales much more reliably according to core count. Although AMD's cores don't get as much done per clock cycle, the fact that there are four of them earn the A10-6800K a first-place finish in this benchmark. 

Remember, we have two distinct Photoshop benchmarks. The CPU test consists of several threaded filters that tax each CPU's x86 cores. The OpenCL benchmark uses filters that leverage CPU and GPU resources.

In the CPU-heavy test, Intel's two Hyper-Threaded cores trail the three AMD APUs we're testing, all of which have a pair of Piledriver modules. Conversely, the combination of HD Graphics 2500 and x86 cores puts the Core i3-3220 ahead in our OpenCL-based metric. AMD's processors aren't far behind, though.

Results: Productivity

Our Acrobat benchmark involves exporting a PowerPoint presentation to PDF format. It's the last single-threaded test in our suite.

Not surprisingly, the Core i3 ends up on top. The APUs aren't far behind, at least.

On the other hand, a well-threaded application like 3ds Max gives each A10 APU an opportunity to stretch its legs. The four integer cores you get from two Piledriver modules outmode the best efforts of two Hyper-Threaded Ivy Bridge cores.

Blender puts the Core i3-3220 and A10-6800K on equal footing, with the other APUs slightly behind.

FineReader is also well-threaded, which is why AMD's quad-core APUs manage to eke out a win, despite lower per-core performance.

Despite the threaded nature of our Visual Studio test, Intel's Core i3-3220 scores a first-place finish. The two APUs finish a couple of minutes behind. Clearly, something else is bottlenecking AMD's processors.

Results: Compression

Given the differences between platforms up until now, it's unexpected to see the A10s separated by almost 30 seconds. However, it appears that AMD's latest APU matches the Core i3-3220.

Only a few seconds of difference distinguish the contenders in 7-Zip, though the A10-6800K claims a technical victory in this benchmark.

Intel's Core i3-3220 wins in our CPU-oriented compression test. Enabling OpenCL hands the win to AMD's A10-6800K. And the EZ test, which maximizes compression, also favors the Richland-based chip.

Results: Power Consumption

Although power consumption has less of an effect in the desktop space compared to notebooks, it remains an important point of comparison between Intel's Core i3 and AMD's top-end APUs. Can Richland's efficiency-oriented optimizations help close in on the efficient Ivy Bridge architecture?

The A10-6700 exhibits an impressive 25 W drop compared to AMD's A10-5800K in our Metro: Last Light benchmark. But that's hardly an achievement next to the 61 W Intel's Core i3 uses in the same test. 

Even still, that's a tough comparison to make. AMD averages 30 FPS, while the Core i3 achieves less than half of that. It'd be a lot more interesting to substitute in a more capable CPU, though Intel's Core i3-3225 includes HD Graphics 4000 and is also rated for a 55 W thermal ceiling. Looks like the A10s are destined to be more power-hungry given their higher TDPs. The 65 W A10-6700 just can't come anywhere close to the 55 W Core i3.

When you aren't taxing their graphics components, AMD's APUs naturally use a lot less power. Of course, so does Intel's Core i3. The difference narrows in our Web browsing workload, though. Notably, the Richland configurations reduce power consumption by about 10 W compared to Trinity.

Again, the Richland-based parts are almost 10 W under the Trinity-based A10-5800K in our video playback test. Meanwhile, Intel's Core i3 is decisively in the lead here.

As Expected, Richland Is A Little Better; Not Massively So

The following chart reflects aggregate performance of the four CPUs we tested. The red bar is the average of all benchmark performance categories, and the aquamarine bar gives us average power efficiency.

If you took the time to flip through our individual benchmark results, none of these results should surprise you. The A10-6700 offers similar performance as a stock A10-5800K, but offers greater efficiency. Unfortunately, it's also multiplier-locked. I have to believe that if you're willing to spend $150 on a 65 W A10 that can't be overclocked easily, then you're probably better off with a 55 W Core i3 that's also stuck in place for $10 less.

How about the unlocked models? AMD's A10-6800K is slightly faster than the -5800K it succeeds, roughly matching the Core i3-3220 in applications, while killing its HD Graphics 2500 engine in games. Based on performance data generated in The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn, we also know that an A10-5800K's graphics component is faster than HD Graphics 4000 and HD Graphics 4600. Unless Intel finds a way to get its higher-end graphics configurations on desktop processors, AMD's APUs maintain their top position for mainstream gaming.

The Intel chip's performance in single-threaded apps is exceptional. It holds its own in more parallelized workloads. And it offers the best efficiency, without question.

At the end of the day, AMD's Richland design is an iterative evolution of the Trinity architecture. It's not a game-changer. The only real surprise in this story is that, complemented by 2133 MT/s memory, the A10-6800K manages to elbow past the same processor with a discrete Radeon HD 6670 DDR3 installed. That's what we consider an entry-level gaming card, so the APU's achievement is a significant one. A quick price check shows that dual-channel, 8 GB, 1866 and 2133 MT/s kits start around $70. Armed with that, you can get low-end game performance without spending more on a graphics card. Consider this a landmark of sorts; a number of games are playable at reduced details using Richland-based parts, just as they were with Trinity.

Of course, when you have a little more money to spend, we also see that the Core i3's x86 cores allow even cheap graphics cards to performance closer to their peak potential without imposing a bottleneck. As far as gaming goes, then, the APUs fill a fairly narrow niche, above which you're better off with an add-in GPU and fewer restrictions on the settings you can use. 

Calling Richland a stopgap between Trinity and the next-gen Kaveri would be just about right. From what we hear, Kaveri should still land sometime late this year. So, although Intel took a big step in catching up to AMD with its HD Graphics 4600 engine, the integration of GCN should help AMD widen that gap again. Steamroller-derived x86 should help as well, as should the implementation of hUMA (heterogeneous unified memory architecture). Unfortunately, Kaveri requires a new socket interface, so it won't be an upgrade path for anything with Trinity or considering Richland.

Temash And Kabini: AMD's Mobile Future

A little over a year ago, we sat in an auditorium in AMD's Sunnyvale, CA office to hear Rory Read and his executive team explain how the company planned to stay competitive, despite what we saw as lagging positions in the client and server computing segments. At no point did he mention taking back the high-end x86 CPU crown from Intel. Rather, the rallying cry revolved around APUs: deliver a compelling user experience across device categories using what was lauded as disruptive APU technology, and propel these devices into ultra-low-power markets.

The three keys to executing this vision were listed as the reuse of SoC IP, an improved design methodology, and better time-to-market. Based on the roadmap AMD showed off at that event, it hasn't quite found its stride yet. Most notably, Sea Islands didn't become the new architecture with HSA-oriented features we were expecting, so it looks like we'll be testing with GCN-based boards for the rest of 2013.

But AMD is delivering on the Temash and Kabini designs it outlined at that analyst day, the former a low-power APU powering notebooks and the latter an ultra-low-power APU diminutive enough to drive tablets. Both feature AMD's Jaguar x86 core design and the already-familiar Graphics Core Next GPU architecture. 

These aren't the only Jaguar-based SoCs being talked about lately. The PlayStation 4 and Xbox One center on eight-core Jaguar-based APUs, too. Reuse IP? Leverage the company's GPU architecture in new markets? Deliver a compelling experience across device categories? Check, check, and check. Although Rory's team looks a little different today than it did in 2012, the company appears to be satisfying some of the important goals it set forth. 

The fact that Microsoft and Sony are leaning on AMD's Jaguar design is pretty telling. But of course, we don't have have access to the next-generation PlayStation or Xbox. We do, however, have a prototype notebook powered by Kabini in our possession. We can also talk about the details surrounding AMD's Temash SoC.

To give you an idea of the range we're talking about, the highest-power Kabini APU is a 25 W part, while the lowest-power Temash-based chip uses up to 3.9 W.

These processors are destined for tablets, convertibles, and ultra-thin notebooks. AMD intends to fill the gap between low-power ARM-based tablets and high-performance laptops with silicon that seems to slot in between the Silvermont-based Atom architecture Intel just announced and mid-range mobile CPUs based on the same company's Ivy Bridge design.

If you ever wanted a decent Windows-based tablet, and hoped to pay less than the $1,000 Microsoft charges for a Surface Pro, Temash could be promising. How about a desire for a low-cost ultra-thin notebook with great battery life and graphics performance that shames Intel's Atom? If AMD's claims are to be believed, Kabini is the answer there.

Let's have a look inside both APUs to see if the specs tell us a compelling story.

Jaguar: A Low-Power x86 Core

We've already introduced you to a number of AMD's APU designs, which combine general-purpose and graphics processing resources onto a single die. First it was Llano in the mobile space with The AMD A8-3500M APU Review: Llano Is Unleashed. Then it was Trinity on the desktop in AMD Trinity On The Desktop: A10, A8, And A6 Get Benchmarked! But both of those APU designs followed AMD's more performance-oriented roadmap with the Stars- and Piledriver-derived CPU architectures.

For an example of the company's low-power efforts, we have to go all the way back to January of 2011 for ASRock's E350M1: AMD's Brazos Platform Hits The Desktop First. The Brazos platform came armed with a Zacate APU. Within Zacate, AMD integrated two 1.6 GHz Bobcat-based x86 cores and its Cedar (Radeon HD 5450ish) GPU. 

The Jaguar architecture we're looking at today is an iterative improvement over Bobcat. In approaching Jaguar, AMD says it had three design goals. First, improve IPC. Bobcat was (in)famously slow, barely outperforming Intel's 2008-era Atom 330. Second, bring the ISA's functionality up to more modern standards, introducing instruction sets like SSE4.1/4.2 and AVX. Third, augment portability for the future, making Jaguar easier to take to new process technologies and fab partners.

As end users, that last point isn't our problem. The modern list of features is nice, but once you know what Jaguar supports, it's easy to anticipate the gains in specific, optimized workloads. AMD's efforts to improve IPC are much more interesting, though.

Let's start with the basics. Jaguar (as it shows up in the SoCs we're talking about today) is available in dual- and quad-core configurations. Bobcat-based SoCs were limited to dual-core arrangements. The quad-core variants based on Jaguar require active cooling, while the dual-core chips should run cool enough for passive cooling. 

The CPU core is manufactured using 28 nm technology, and AMD's chief technology officer, Joe Macri, points out that the x86 design team leveraged some of the software tools used to build GPUs, squeezing more resources into smaller area than more custom previous-gen cores. As a result, each Jaguar core occupies 3.1 square millimeters of die space. That's notably smaller than the 4.9 square millimeters each Bobcat core monopolized.

Now, where does Jaguar improve over Bobcat? In the front-end, Jaguar's instruction cache offers similar throughput, though it delivers this bandwidth at a lower power cost thanks to a selective read process that only activates one-fourth of the banks. A 4x32B loop buffer is also added; when the execution pipelines can use information stored there, the instruction cache can stay powered-down, yielding the double benefit of lower latency.

In addition, the instruction buffer is about 30% larger than it was on Bobcat, circumventing some of the hit you might take after a cache miss.

Finally, the execution pipeline grows by one decode stage. As we saw so painfully when Intel introduced Pentium 4, longer pipelines are actually detrimental to IPC. However, breaking the pipeline up does help improve scalability. The assumption is that AMD is countering the IPC hit with higher clock rates.

The integer pipeline is augmented with a divider unit pulled over from Llano's Stars architecture and modified for Jaguar. Support for a number of familiar complex operation (cops) instructions is included, in addition to hardware CRC units to help the CPU's x86 code execution efficiency. Schedulers and re-order buffers are anywhere from 30 to 70% larger, improving the parallelism of code executed out-of-order.

The L2 cache and its interface with the execution cores is completely redesigned. It is now shared, 2 MB-large (broken up into 512 KB banks), and 16-way associative, no longer 512 KB dedicated to each core. AMD says this is a nod to efficiency, as software can take advantage of a little or a lot, depending on a thread's needs. 

Bobcat's L2 cache ran at half of the CPU's clock rate. Jaguar's interface runs at full processor frequency. Pre-fetching is improved; AMD's algorithm pays better attention to data patterns, assisting the predictor in making better choices. Sixteen additional L2 snoop entries act as a probe filter to avoid look-ups whenever possible, again, saving power and improving latencies. According to AMD, its shared L2 is one of the greatest contributors to IPC improvements in Jaguar compared to Bobcat.

The load/store unit between the the execution pipeline and L2 cache, and the data cache, are improved to help make AMD's L2 enhancements more tangible. Jaguar combines loads, utilizing a much bigger buffer to avoid store data shuffling and perform load bypasses at lower latencies.

The sum of AMD's changes to Jaguar add up to a 22% single-threaded IPC increase over Bobcat, the company says. That's a per-clock improvement, so optimizations for clock rate should push that number upwards as this architecture hits higher frequencies. Naturally, we'll be putting those claims to the test in just a few pages...

The First APUs With AMD's GCN Architecture, Plus Power Management

In addition to a redesigned x86 core architecture, Temash and Kabini are also AMD's first APUs sporting the Graphics Core Next architecture.

Insofar as it applies to API support, the GCN-based logic built in to Kabini and Temash is identical to AMD's discrete parts. DirectX 11.1, OpenGL 4.3, and OpenCL 1.2 are all supported. The fixed-function Video Codec Engine is present, accelerating video decode and H.264-based encoding. Of course, this feature requires third-party developer support, and adoption has been slow thus far.

A new component of the VCE is called scalable video encoding, or SVC. This is able to encode multiple streams in one output pass, creating content that can be pushed to backwards-compatible devices. In other words, you're able to scale temporally and spatially, enabling playback at less demanding bitrates on lower-end hardware.

Like the Zacate-based APUs with the Cedar graphics core, this APU's graphics engine is identical across the line-up, differentiated only by clock rate. Every Kabini and Temash processor comes equipped with two compute units, each with four texture and four vector units. As you can see in the visualization above, a vector unit contains 16 ALUs and a register file. All told, one APU plays host to 128 ALUs and eight texture units. A single render back-end facilitates four full-color raster operation pipelines. Put more simply, think of this as one-fourth of a Radeon HD 7750, with lower clock rates and less memory bandwidth.

There are some notable differences between these APUs and AMD's discrete GPUs, though. For example, the GCN-based GPUs we've reviewed thus far all employed two asynchronous compute engines, which dispatch work to the compute units. In Tahiti, two ACEs served 32 CUs. Here four ACEs serve two CUs. Also new is a set of flat instruction accesses that allow an address to be issued in a load/store operation. This purportedly makes function calls simpler.

AMD says the new APUs support Ultra HD (2160p) output over HDMI and DisplayPort, Wi-Fi-certified Miracast, DisplayPort panel self-refresh to cut power consumption on compatible displays, dynamic refresh rates to save power when screen updates aren't necessary, and dual-display Eyefinity.

Power Management

Temash and Kabini use logic in each x86 core to calculate instantaneous power based on weight events and leakage. That result is fed into a power control unit called the Turbo Core Manager, along with GPU power and the on-die Fusion Controller Hub's consumption. A fourth input from the display interface yields a pretty complete picture of what each APU subsystem needs from the total available TDP. Using a credits-based system, Turbo Core can then change the chip's P-states, optimizing performance within a thermal ceiling.

AMD adds even more practicality to its power monitoring capabilities with the Turbo Dock concept. This hybrid form factor leverages active cooling inside a detachable keyboard to increase cooling performance and potentially double the platform's thermal ceiling.

As a result, you can use an APU-powered tablet on its own and still get a reasonably-fast experience, or dock with the keyboard to improve performance substantially.

AMD's E-Series and A-Series APUs, Along With Their Bundles

So, let's have a look at the individual SKUs that AMD is announcing. Note that there are some new Richland-based ULV APUs on the list, too.

That's a diverse range of APUs from 3.9 to 25 W. The quad-core Temash-based A6-1450 is particularly interesting at 8 W, and we'd like to see how that solution might fare in a tablet (Ed.: though that thermal ceiling is pretty high for a tablet).

AMD Elite Experience Program

As a minimalist, I'm no fan of most value-added software. Often, those apps are included free for a good reason. With that said, AMD is both creating and licensing a lot of software it plans to use as a means of creating baseline experiences on devices powered by its hardware. It's not uncommon to find mobile devices loaded up with software able to expose the products differentiating capabilities. And the idea here appears to be similar.

AMD's bundle is tiered according to APU hierarchy. The E2 and A4 families reside at the bottom of the stack, and include Steady Video (an application for smoothing out sudden movements in shaky video clips; this is already available in the Catalyst driver package), Perfect Picture HD (image quality enhancements for video playback, also available in the Catalyst driver already), and Quick Stream technology (an Internet QoS app, again, already value-added by AMD).

Stepping up to an A6-class APU adds Screen Mirror (powered by ArcSoft) to the bundle, allowing you to broadcast your system's display output across your home network. An A8 APU piles Face Login on top of the other features, delivering facial recognition capabilities that take the place of typing in a password by using a webcam. Gesture Control is also included, yielding Microsoft Kinect-like control over certain applications.

Systems with A10 APUs get a "regionally-assorted game bundle." Given fairly modest graphics engines, we're still unsure of what this really means. Surely you can't expect the pricey bundles shipping with AMD's discrete cards.

AMD's Kabini-Based Prototype And Our Benchmarks

Prototypes generally don't emphasize industrial design. However, our Kabini-based ultra-thin notebook with an A4-5000 in it is surprisingly svelte.

Although we used a number of different notebooks for our benchmarks, we used the same hard drive and memory in all of them to keep our comparisons as valid as possible. We want to zero in on platform performance after all, and not the difference between a mechanical disk and SSD.

AMD suggests that Kabini's prime adversary will be low-priced Pentium laptops. To that end, we secured a Pentium B960-equipped notebook for testing as the most inexpensive platform we could find with Intel's CPU inside. It sells for $350 on Newegg.

At the other end of the spectrum, Core i3-3217U is another good match-up. This processor sports a similar power envelope and is available in notebooks starting around $400.

And here are the benchmark details:

Results: Synthetics

Although synthetic metrics aren't representative of real-world performance, they do help us drill down into specific subsystems. Let's start by looking at graphics.

The HD Graphics engine in Intel's Pentium B960 does not support DirectX 11, so we have 3DMark Vantage (the green bar) as a secondary measurement. 3DMark 11 does yield viable results on the other two platforms.

Obviously, the Pentium B960 gets outclassed in 3DMark Vantage. Intel's HD Graphics 4000 engine is quite a bit faster in Vantage, though it's only slightly faster in 3DMark 11. AMD's GCN architecture tends to fare best in more modern titles, so this really isn't a surprise to us.

PCMark 7 yields conflicting results. The Pentium gives us the best Overall and Productivity suite scores. AMD's A4-5000 leads in the storage test. And the Core i3-3217U performs best in the Creativity suite.

Cinebench doesn't do AMD any favors; regardless of whether you're looking at single- or multi-threaded performance, the Intel cores are quickest.

The A4-5000 fares well against the Pentium in Sandra's floating-point benchmark. However, it's beaten in raw measures of integer performance.

With support for AES acceleration, the A4-5000 achieves a great result in Sandra's encryption/decryption subtest, moving data as fast as its memory subsystem allows. This is one of those features that Intel strips off for the sake of differentiation. As such, Kabini is handed an easy win.

Intel's Sandy Bridge architecture only supports OpenCL on its CPU cores. Ivy Bridge added support for HD Graphics, though the test only ran in Compute Shader mode for us. Meanwhile, AMD's A4-5400 is able to tackle Sandra's OpenCL workload across its x86 and graphics resources.

LuxMark tells a different story, though. We expect Intel to serve up potent performance from its x86 cores. However, the HD Graphics engine serves up great results as well compared to Kabini's 128 ALUs. It's not exactly clear why AMD's architecture, which is known for its compute alacrity, suffers so badly in this test. The Pentium-based notebook does not work in LuxMark, though its general-purpose cores should support OpenCL.

Results: F1 2012 And The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

Codemasters' racing games are notorious for scaling down to lower-end hardware, so we're testing F1 2012 at 1280x720 using the most entry-level detail settings available.

The Core i3's HD Graphics 4000 component maintains frame rates in excess of 30 FPS, while the A4-5000 dips as low as 23 FPS. This isn't a smooth result, but it's still fairly playable. That's more than we can say for the Pentium.

A small step up in quality, enabling shadows, hits all processors equally. The Pentium is still not playable. A4-5000 is marginal. And the Ivy Bridge-based Core i3 is still smooth enough to enjoy.

We couldn't get any benchmark numbers from the Core i3 due to an incompatibility between the CPU, driver, and game at the 1024x600 resolution we wanted to use. No worries, though. We'll make up for this in the next chart.

Both the A4 and Pentium are playable, though.

Our resolution issue goes away when we set all systems to 1280x720. Both the A4 and Pentium are now too slow to claim viability, while the Core i3 serves up a respectable performance level.

Results: Tomb Raider And Metro 2033

The previous two games were fairly lightweight titles, and we frankly expected them to run on Kabini at 15 W. Tomb Raider is more demanding, so we're not sure what's going to happen.

At the lowest detail settings, using a resolution of 1024x768, Tomb Raider is barely playable on the A4-5000, completely unplayable on the Pentium B960, and quite smooth on Intel's Core i3-3217U.

Bumped up to 1280x720, AMD's APU is no longer playable, while the Core i3 is still fast enough to enjoy.

Even at the bottom-end detail settings and a modest 1024x768 resolution, Metro: Last Light is unplayable on these low-power parts. There's really no point to pushing a more taxing configuration.

Results: Media Encoding

The game results caught us a bit off-guard; based on what we saw from Llano and then Trinity, AMD had a clear bias towards graphics performance that lent itself to gaming. With Kabini, that seems to be lost, as Intel's HD Graphics 4000 component on the 17 W Core i3 is quite a bit faster.

On the flip side, we're hoping to see AMD's improvements to its x86 hardware materialize as more competitive performance in more general computing apps.

iTunes is single-threaded, so clock rate and IPC win this one. The 2.2 GHz Pentium B960 scores a first-place finish, followed by Intel's Core i3. AMD's A4-5000 trails by a substantial margin.

Also single-threaded, Lame yields the same outcome.

HandBrake is threaded, so the Core i3 with its Hyper-Threading technology manages to outperform the Pentium. AMD's quad-core A4-5000-based platform finishes in last place again, though the outcome isn't as severe.

Although the Intel-based chips trade places once again, one outcome that doesn't change is Kabini's inability to keep up at what we anticipate to be a competitive price point.

Results: Adobe CS6 Suite

Time and again, After Effects demonstrates a sensitivity to available memory, particularly as core count increases. In this case, the quad-core Kabini-based A4 turns in the last-place finishing time, a ways behind the Pentium and Core i3.

Hyper-Threading again propels the Core i3-3217U into a first-place finish in this very well-threaded workload. The dual-core Pentium achieves its second-place result through more aggressive clock rates. Even with four physical cores, though, the 1.5 GHz A4-5000 just can't keep up.

Results: Productivity

This next test is a single-threaded workload that sees us take a PowerPoint presentation and print out a PDF file of it.

Unable to fully utilize its four cores, the 1.5 GHz A4-5000 gets worked over pretty bad. Perhaps 3ds Max can better-demonstrate the benefits of a quad-core APU.

We thought this might have been Kabini's chance to shine, but the higher-clocked dual-core Pentium scores a first-place finish.

The Core i3's Hyper-Threading capability is more of a boon in Blender. The A4 can't catch a break, though.

The same goes for ABBYY's FineReader OCR application.

Results: Compression

The outcome in WinRAR appears pretty familiar after the past several pages of benchmark results.

7-Zip puts the A4 and Pentium much closer together, though the Core i3 wraps up our workload almost three minutes faster.

Regardless of how we benchmark WinZip, using the same folder full of data, he finishing order remains the same: Core i3, Pentium, A4-5000.

Power Consumption

AMD's Kabini-based APUs cannot be evaluated based on performance alone. This 15 W processor is meant to go into mobile devices driven by batteries, and lower power use translates to more compact and lighter platforms.

Let's measure consumption in three disciplines: gaming, Web browsing, and HD video playback. The following tests are run by removing each notebook's batteries, plugging them into the wall, and logging power use. In order to factor out each system's LCD, we turn them off and in favor of an external monitor.

Although the A4-5000-based notebook is soundly bested in our F1 2012 benchmark, it also uses a lot less power than the Core i3- and especially the Pentium-based laptop. 

The 14 W delta between A4 and Core i3 is particularly notable since the processors driving those platforms have TDPs only 2 W apart.

Web browsing doesn't apply as much of a graphics load, so we're seeing more impact from the x86 cores. The field narrows substantially, but A4-5000 remains the most power-friendly option.

All three of these platforms feature fixed-function logic able to accelerate H.264 playback in hardware. So, the workload isn't much more demanding than simply browsing the Web. 

Each solution appears equally adept at offloading the decode process, so we again see the A4-5000 in first place, with Intel's Core i3 just 2 W higher.

The Kabini-Based A4-5000: Mediocre Performance, But Great Efficiency

Before we try to reach any conclusions, check out the following chart summarizing performance in each of our benchmarks. Pay particular attention to those orange bars, which represent power efficiency. This is the relationship between each platform's power draw and average performance.

On one hand, the Kabini-based A4-5000 doesn't fare very well when it comes to charting frame rates in games and the time it takes to complete our wide range of desktop workloads. It gets beaten by the dual-core Pentium B960 in every discipline except gaming. But the efficiency bar tells a very different story. Even if you can get Pentium B960-based notebooks fairly inexpensively, you certainly cannot expect them to deliver great battery life with that 35 W processor in there.

So what about the Core i3-3217U, a 17 W processor? Surely that one is a more virile competitor, and not much more expensive than the Pentium. Core i3's on-die HD Graphics 4000 engine with its 16 EUs stomps all over the A4's 128 ALUs, despite the backing of AMD's capable Graphics Core Next architecture. Now, AMD claims that Kabini isn't meant to go up against Core i3. But we found notebooks with this exact CPU selling for as little as $360 on Newegg. It may turn out that the free market doesn't let AMD choose which Intel-based platforms its Kabini-based APUs contend with. 

Fortunately, the A4-5000 roughly matched the Core i3-3217U's efficiency. More than likely the A4 is going to give you slightly better battery life at the expense of performance. The bad news for AMD is that 17 W CPUs from Intel already pin Kabini into the budget notebook space, and that's before an onslaught of Haswell-based parts from the top and Silvermont-based options down below.

Truth be told, though Kabini isn't the solution that has us most interested. Sure, it's great to see some compelling hardware from AMD up into the 25 W range. However, we really want to get our hands on Temash. AMD needs to work with OEMs to enable compelling form factors that change the way we work. We have several Atom Z2760-based tablets in the lab. It's great to have x86 compatibility on a handheld device with a full copy of Windows 8, but the build quality of those things frankly sucks. We're talking bending, flexing, intermittent dock connections, and cheap plastic. That's no way to tackle the tablet space. Oh, and we'd really like the flexibility to play something other than Angry Birds, too (though, based on the lackluster gaming numbers in the 15 W range, consider our expectations tempered down at 8 W). 

At the end of the day, AMD's next-gen APUs likely have the best chance of success in well-built Windows 8 tablets at the right price. Given a choice between something running Android, an iPad with iOS, or a Surface with Windows RT, the hamstrung Microsoft option seems to get beat up on pretty savagely. But show me an unconstrained Windows 8 device for $100 more and I'll pull my wallet out for you. It's really a shame that AMD talked up what it has planned in this quickly-maturing space and then sent over a notebook that was outgunned in a segment Intel already has saturated with options. 

Lastly, it's a bit of a bummer that neither Temash nor Kabini incorporate AMD's heterogeneous unified memory access (hUMA). This is the feature that will allow the GPU and CPU to share system memory without copying it back and forth, eliminating a massive source of latency in today's APUs. This is where we expect the company's SoCs to stand apart from some of the other highly-integrated processors being designed. Unfortunately, we won't see hUMA in a shipping APU until Kaveri is released later this year.

Does Windows 8 + x86 + Tablet = Success?

As we made clear in Microsoft Surface Review, Part 1: Performance And Display Quality and Microsoft Surface Review, Part 2: Battery Life, Multi-Monitor, And More, there's a lot we like about the Surface tablet. Its integrated kickstand and Type Cover work well together. But the Surface isn't perfect.

Beyond the performance hiccups we managed to impose on it, Windows RT's restrictive software compatibility story is far from ideal. We had Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Skype, and a respectable-enough email client. What more could we want from a productivity-oriented tablet? Early on, we were forced to accept that everything we needed either came with the Surface or was available through the Windows Store.

Au contraire. Our CMS is optimized for Firefox and Chrome. Being forced to use IE10 made it painfully clear that playing in Microsoft's sandbox doesn't always work out (especially for Tom's Hardware editors who need to put stories into our system on the road).

What's the solution? We're not jumping back to iOS or Android. So, it looks like we're counting on Windows 8. The full version of it, which doesn't restrict what you're able to install. Microsoft's Surface Pro is coming soon, but extra thickness and a significant reduction in battery life (according to Microsoft itself) are going to have a fairly negative impact on our opinion, we're anticipating.

Besides, there are already other Windows 8-based touch-oriented tablets available, such as Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T, already available.

What does it mean to go from ARM-based hardware running Windows RT to an x86-based Atom processor able to support Windows 8? Well, to begin, we're looking at a significantly different form factor. Whereas the Surface set out to be a tablet, first and foremost, with a thin little screen cover that just so happened to serve as a keyboard, Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T is more of a netbook able to detach from its keyboard.

The docking station is an important part of this story, both for what it does and for what it takes away from the tablet itself. Whereas you can attach the Touch Cover to a Surface and add just 3 mm of thickness and almost no weight, Samsung's dock is a lot more substantial. It incorporates a keyboard, a touchpad, and two USB 2.0 ports. But it lacks a supplementary battery. Consequently, the tablet is heftier than the docking station, making the two pieces a top-heavy, somewhat unsteady combination resting on your lap.

In our hands, the Surface's chassis feels much better-built, although its matte finish shows fingerprints very readily. Samsung employs tons of gloss, so you see nothing but shine when you look at the device itself. However, the more slippery body also feels cheaper.

This is not helped by chintzy plastic port covers plugging up each of the ATIV Smart PC 500T's I/O options. An impressive complement of micro-HDMI, USB 2.0, and microSD connectivity grace the edges of Samsung's tablet and dock. But the fact that you have to pull those covers off and leave them dangling any time a peripheral or cable is attached bothers us.

With its Intel Atom Z2760 (Clover Trail) SoC, the 500T is a lot more portable than any of the slates we've reviewed in the past, which also leveraged desktop-class operating systems as a selling point. Of course, we can't expect it to perform like a Core-based platform, either. This could cause trouble in a flexible environment like Windows 8, where you're free to install any number of applications that simply won't run well on a tablet.

But it's that dual-core, Hyper-Threaded x86 processor that emancipates us from Windows RT. So, even if it means paying a hefty premium, needing to buy Office, and tolerating a thicker, heavier form factor, we're willing to give ATIV Smart PC 500T a shot. This is far from a sexy piece of hardware, but sometimes you need a workhorse to get the job done.

Although Samsung markets its ATIV Smart PC 500T as a 64 GB tablet, a little more than 51 GB is user-accessible. And, once Windows 8 is installed, you're only left with 39 GB. There's another potential problem. Ever tried to use a 60 GB SSD on your desktop? It's just not enough space. Our install was as minimalist as possible, too. Samsung gives you a long list of bundled extras that enthusiasts will want to uncheck (and we did). Some of the install processes crashed, though, and others were actually required before Windows' device manager would recognize all of the tablet's hardware.

Windows 8's On-Screen Keyboard And Handwriting Recognition

We covered Windows 8's on-screen keyboard in The Definitive Windows 8 Review And User Guide. But, as it pertains to a digitizer-equipped tablet like Samsung's, the keyboard is worth covering again. 

There are two on-screen keyboards. The first displays a standard QWERTY layout, adding apostrophe, comma, period, and question mark punctuation keys. Backspace, Enter, Caps Lock, the space bar, and left and right cursor keys are also available. That layout works well enough when the tablet is lying flat on its back like a physical keyboard.

But if you're holding on with both hands, stretching your thumbs across the screen requires a lot more dexterity. Enter the split layout, which lets you type quickly using both thumbs on their respective sides of the display. Even though the keys are smaller, it seems easier to be more accurate. For each keystroke, a larger reverse-color (white with black letters) pop-up appears directly over the keys you press.

If you instead plan to use a digitizer pen, handwriting input is the other layout option you can pick after pressing the lower right-hand keyboard icon.

Handwriting recognition continues to be a learning process. The more you write, the more accurately Windows 8 detects your personal style. During the first few weeks of use, this means manually picking out improperly-detected words and writing out their individual letters. Microsoft does its part to help, though. For example, when you enter a URL into a Web browser, the "http://" and “.com” parts of the link are already written out.

The QWERTY and split-screen keyboards, along with the handwriting panel, share the same space. This lets you switch back and forth between layouts quickly. The input window gets overlaid on top of other programs and applications. Though convenient, this behavior covers much of a smaller tablet's screen, often hiding the fields you're typing into. Hit the maximize button in the application's upper right-hand corner to solve this. It'll resize the window so it populates whatever is left of the display not already monopolized by the input window.

Doodling With The 500T's Active Digitizer And S-Pen

Beyond simple handwriting recognition, the ATIV Smart PC 500T also features a Wacom active digitizer. That's something we've seen from higher-end slates, but typically not mainstream tablets (aside from Samsung's Galaxy Note). The digitizer allows you to use a pen on the device's screen as if you were writing or drawing on paper, and it registers different levels of pressure in kind.

The 500T's digitizer pen slides into the bottom-right side of the tablet; you simply catch it with your nail and tug to pull it out. Although it's smaller than some of the other pens we've used, it's still easy enough to control. Pressing it against the screen once registers a left-click. Holding down the button on the pen and tapping the screen is a right-click. Notably missing is an eraser end, though we've heard reports that other Wacom styli are compatible.

If you're an artist, this functionality is necessary. A great number of digitizers offer 256 levels of pressure sensitivity. However, Samsung confirms for us that the 500T supports 1,024 levels. With that said, we're not creating artwork that would demonstrate a more sensitive digitizer to be an advantage, nor do we expect professional artists to lean on an Atom-based tablet for their work.

The Intuos5 pen tablet I use yields superior results to the 500T, as it should. But it's also not a very portable solution, either. For what Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T sets out to do, its functionality is solid. Biology diagrams in OneNote are never going to be a problem (unless you start creating very large files, in which case the Atom is going to hurt performance).

The Atom Z2760: Specs And Theoretical Processor Performance

Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T is made possible by Intel's Atom Z2760 processor, formerly known as Clover Trail. Sub-2 W power consumption helps facilitate passive cooling, despite the fact that this SoC employs a pair of cores (with 1 MB of L2 cache) at 1.8 GHz, a dual-channel memory controller, PowerVR SGX545 graphics at 533 MHz, and all of the other north/southbridge components you'd normally find spread across a PC motherboard, optimized for a tablet, of course.

According to Intel's data sheet, the Atom Z2760 employs Burst technology, though we weren't able to observe the SoC speeding up beyond 1.8 GHz using any of the tools at our disposal. Moreover, Intel isn't clear about the circumstances in which Burst is triggered, or how long it can be sustained. The Atom Z2760 supports Hyper-Threading as well, so each physical core shows up as two logical processors to Windows 8.

The SoC's Graphics Media Accelerator component incorporates a handful of features, including Imagination Technologies' PowerVR SGX545 engine operating at up to 533 MHz. Almost three years old now, this is not particularly new hardware. It is, however, D3D feature level 9_3-compliant, giving it Shader Model 2.0 support. Not that you'll be playing many 3D games; the Atom's 3D capabilities are only slightly better than what you'd find in a Kindle Fire HD, and it's slower than Nvidia's Tegra 3.

Intel also endows the GMA with hardware-accelerated video encode and decode support, including 24-FPS H.264 and VC-1 at 1080p (up to 20 Mb/s). It also handles several stages of MPEG-2 decoding in hardware. The company claims MPEG-4 Part 2 is supported as well, but only in software mode. Likewise, Flash decoding is not accelerated.

H.264 can be accelerated in hardware at 30 FPS using a 1280x720 resolution. 

An integrated display controller with two independent pipelines means that Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T can drive its own screen and output to a 1080p display over HDMI 1.3a at the same time, too.

Theoretical CPU Performance

Although it's a synthetic benchmark, Geekbench is useful in this case for comparing a number of dissimilar platforms, from Apple's iPad to this new Atom and Intel's higher-end Core i5 CPUs. 

Geekbench would have us believe that the Atom Z2760 delivers 23% of the Ivy Bridge-based Core i5-3320M's performance, 43% of the Sandy Bridge-based Core i5-2467M's score, 52% of whatever an Arrandale-based Core i5-470UM can do, 72% of Qualcomm's S4 Pro, and 91% of Nvidia's Tegra 3. But that's the suite's overall ranking. We can break its analysis down even further.  

It's most important for us to look at the outcome of integer math, since that's most prevalent in mobile-only operating environments like iOS and Android for performance reasons. Of course, you can put whichever applications you want on an ATIV Smart PC 500T.

But the synthetics suggest the Atom is only narrowly faster than Qualcomm's S4 and Nvidia's Tegra 3 in the integer test. Meanwhile, the S4 Pro platform enjoys great floating-point throughput. Given these numbers, we can't wait to see how it does in Windows RT-based tablets.

On the bright side, Intel's Atom Z2760 is a massive improvement over the Atom N450 on our Dell Mini.

The new Atom's two 32-bit memory channels, populated with low-power DDR2-800, should be able to move up to 6.4 GB/s. That puts it under the S4 Pro and Tegra 3 platforms.

Web Browser Performance: SunSpider, Octane, And BrowsingBench

As the tablet space becomes increasingly crowded, we look to compare the performance of multiple hardware architectures supporting iOS, Android, Windows RT, and now Windows 8 as well. That's not easy, since Microsoft and Apple, in particular, are restrictive about the software running on their platforms. As of now, there are no cross-platform benchmarks available for Windows RT.

Right now, Web browser-based benchmarks represent the only way for us to compare the Surface to other devices. We're consequently revisiting these tests to pit Samsung’s Windows 8-based tablet against the competition from Microsoft. 

These tests aren't the last word on performance, though. Browser support varies by operating system, and we know that, even on a consistent platform, performance varies between each Web browser. So, when you consider the many different tablets we're testing today, along with the permutations of software available for them all, these numbers are affected by several variables. Fortunately, Windows 8 lets us test IE10, Chrome, and Safari, creating parallels to other hardware with those same browsers.

Fortunately, we don't have do a ton of extrapolation in SunSpider, since the ATIV Smart PC 500T takes first, second, and third place running the three browsers we wanted to measure. Our results show that IE10 enjoys an advantage in JavaScript performance, something we've seen in past Web Browser Grand Prix stories, too.

Here's one sure to raise eyebrows. The V8 Benchmark Suite was created by Google specifically to test the runtime performance of JavaScript in Chrome, so it's little surprise to see the three platforms running Chrome secure the top spots. Only considering that trio of results, though, our Windows 8-based Samsung tablet takes a very commanding lead. 

We also see that the Atom/Windows 8 combination from Samsung is almost twice as fast as Tegra 3/Windows RT under IE10. Moreover, the ATIV Smart TV 500T gives you the freedom to ditch IE10 altogether and install Chrome to realize that first-place finish. The Surface lacks this flexibility.

Octane is Google's newest JavaScript-based benchmark. It incorporates the eight original tests from V8, along with five additional tests that focus on runtime performance. Regardless of the new content, we don't need to draw any new conclusions. The top three finishers are the same, and for the same reason. Windows 8 and IE10 remain notably faster than Microsoft's browser under Windows RT, likely due to the Atom's advantages over Tegra 3.

Our next test, BrowsingBench, was created by the Embedded Microprocessor Benchmark Consortium, a non-profit organization tasked with developing testing methodology for embedded hardware. While it's meant for testing "smartphones, netbooks, portable gaming devices, navigation devices, and IP set-top boxes," it's just as useful for measuring browser performance in general.

Unlike SunSpider or V8, BrowsingBench evaluates the total performance of a browser: page loading, processing, rendering, compositing, and so on. This helps reflect real-world use, unlike an exclusively JavaScript-based metric.

Again, we see the Samsung ATIV Smart PC 500T demonstrate why an open ecosystem is a good thing, as Chrome on Windows 8 finishes in first place. Two iPads interestingly take second and third place, followed by Samsung's tablet running Safari and IE10. A trio of Tegra 3-based devices bring up the rear.

Can A Tablet-Oriented GPU Handle Desktop Gaming?

If you follow our tablet coverage, you've seen our GLBenchmark charts with Imagination Technologies' PowerVR hardware riding high and mighty up on top. But that's a synthetic, mostly intended to represent tablet-oriented gaming. Can the SGX545 apply those chart-topping GLBenchmark numbers to an entry-level PC title?

This was probably wishful thinking, but since we have an x86 processor with Windows 8, we had to install a mainstream game like World of Warcraft to see if the little Atom could handle it. After all, what good is the freedom to install whatever you want on a device without benchmarks addressing the viability of such a position.

We've seen World of Warcraft run acceptably on netbook-class hardware at the lowest detail settings. Unfortunately, even at 800x600, we wouldn't consider the Atom Z2760 to be powerful enough for a workload like this one.

We are left with a few interesting thoughts, though. First, the single-core PowerVR SGX545 is a little quicker than the older Graphics Media Accelerator 3150 found in Intel's Atom N450. The iPad 2's dual-core SGX543MP2 should deliver close to two times as much performance, while the third-gen iPad's quad-core SGX543MP4 might be expected to increase that result four-fold. Given that Qualcomm's S4 Pro tops both Apple SoCs, it wouldn't be unrealistic for it to drive a game like World of Warcraft smoothly.

Of course, that's all theoretical since those other graphics engines are part of ARM-based SoCs. Intel would need to license a more advanced GPU in order for us to confirm, which would require dedicating more power budget to graphics. More power means less battery life, and we know the direction that goes. Alternatively, AMD could show us a tablet-oriented APU, which would be interesting, too.

PCMark 7: A Look At Storage Performance

The ATIV Smart PC 500T is a tablet with notebook-like aspirations. Its IA-32-based brains and Windows 8 heart mean you can install whatever you want, even if you probably shouldn't. How much slower is an Atom-based platform than one of Intel's Core processors? If you were to believe PCMark 7, it's not altogether than bad, coming close to Asus' Eee Slate with an Arrandale-based CPU. As we'll see on the next page, though, real-world apps don't reflect the same closeness.

But processor, memory, and graphics performance are only part of the story. Storage plays a big role too, and Samsung's tablet is interesting in that it allows us to benchmark an eMMC-based SSD under Windows 8.

If you're not already familiar with the differences between eMMC and the regular NAND found in SSDs, check out page 11 of The Amazon Kindle Fire: Benchmarked, Tested, And Reviewed, where we break them down. In short, eMMC puts block management and ECC onto the NAND itself, which you can see in the slide above.

The storage numbers show us that, in some cases, the 500T's eMMC-based storage can be substantially faster than a mechanical hard disk. That test is full of random reads, though. There are other storage subtests where the 500T is actually slower than the mechanical drive. In short, there are workloads where the Smart PC's storage performance is fairly impressive, and others where it's downright slow.

Benchmark Results: Photoshop, iTunes, And WinRAR

We're able to use one set of tests to compare Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T against tablets. But when you drop the Atom-powered device into its docking station, it becomes more of a netbook or lightweight notebook. So, how does it perform in that role? Again, the full version of Windows 8 gives us access to our usual benchmark suite.

It's easy enough to install Photoshop, but using the software in any serious way (here, to apply filters to a TIF file) is painfully slow. Beyond our scripted test, we spent some time actually using Photoshop and found it to be impressively responsive, both with a mouse and the digitizer pen. It's really only when you tax the 500T's limited resources that they buckle.

Even though the Photoshop chart looks bad, the fact that a sub-2 W tablet takes four times longer to finish this workload than a 17 W Sandy Bridge-based notebook is respectable.

This task is a little more realistic on a tablet. It involves converting the Terminator 2 soundtrack from WAV to AAC. Intel's 1.7 W Atom Z2760 again takes the longest to finish up. But when you consider its power footprint, the outcome isn't altogether bad (particularly compared to the 35 W A8-3520).

The numbers in WinRAR are fairly similar, even though this test is better-optimized to take advantage of multiple cores.

Beyond IE10 And Multi-Monitor Browsing

The previous page's performance numbers didn't surprise us. We knew that the freedom to run whatever we want on a Windows 8-based tablet would be weighted down by anemic hardware. Still, the ATIV Smart PC 500T should be expected to handle more common tasks with grace. How does it do browsing around on the Web? How about hooked up to an external monitor?

In our Microsoft Surface review, we had little trouble bogging Nvidia's Tegra 3 down with tabbed browsing under IE10. The same workload is just as hard on Intel's Atom Z2760. Flash- and JavaScript-heavy sites bog the SoC down noticeably, animations stutter, and you'll see screen-tearing on YouTube as you scroll down the page.

Fortunately, Windows 8 isn't married to IE like Windows RT. As it turns out, getting Chrome onto the Smart PC 500T is a big improvement. The experience isn't a completely smooth one, but it's at least quite a bit better. Animations and videos don't stutter as severely. Switching around between tabs is much more responsive.

Using multiple monitors is a good way to help improve productivity, and Samsung's tablet offers a micro-HDMI output to accommodate an external screen. With another display attached, performance during basic tasks ranges from acceptable to marginal. Typing in Word while playing back a YouTube video in the background is usually OK, though frames tend to get skipped during motion-heavy sequences. In contrast, the Surface has a harder time keeping up, and playback suffers as a result.

LCD Performance Analyzed

Between the thick LCD glass and the digitizer layer, we can't get a clear look at the screen's subpixels. However, there's enough definition for us to identify this as an IPS panel.

It's not just any IPS panel, though. Samsung uses the same SuperBright Plus Technology (SPT) that originally debuted on its Series 9 notebooks, and then the Series 7 11.6” Slate. Most IPS screens deliver around 300 nits of luminance, but SPT-enabled displays are purportedly capable of 400 nits without sacrificing 170^o viewing angles.

Rendering ~48% of the AdobeRGB 1998 and ~67% of sRGB gamuts, Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T trails the company's Series 7 11.6” Slate, which is surprising considering that they both employ 11.6” SPT screens. Some improvements are apparent, though; we’re finally able to hit ~400 cd/m2 brightness, something the Series 7 11.6” Slate wasn't able to do.

Overall, the 500T's display is really crisp, due in large part to its ability to achieve a high brightness spec. Unfortunately, high-luminance IPS displays are usually handicapped when it comes to contrast ratio. As with most things though, you cannot generalize. The 13.3” Series 9 notebook's contrast ratio was a relatively weak ~689:1, whereas the Series 7 11.6” boasts ~1,136:1. Fortunately, the ATIV Smart PC 500T doesn't seem to have those issues, achieving a 1,220:1 contrast ratio, even besting Samsung’s previous Windows-based tablet.

Battery Life And Recharge Time

Battery Life & Recharge Benchmarks (Background Info)

The ATIV Smart PC 500T's six-hour battery life is unremarkable compared to tablets with ARM-based SoCs. When you compare it to tablet PCs like Samsung's Series 7 11.6" Slate, however, which only run for roughly three hours, it represents a major improvement.

We were naturally dubious of Intel's claims that it could match the battery life of ARM-based architectures, but here we have the 500T just under the Kindle Fire HD in our H.264-encoded playback test.

Let's try another workload less affected by fixed-function resources.

On the back of its two x86 cores, the 500T fares even better in our Web browsing and MP3 playback workload, passing a number of older tablets. Google's Nexus 7 and Amazon's Kindle Fire HD are both standouts in this test. Aside from those two, the Atom-powered system hangs right in there with the iPads and Surface.

Normalized Brightness Benchmarks (Background Info)

Though it might be common to use your mobile computing device with its screen at maximum brightness, that's not necessarily a balanced way to compare battery life. So, while we continue to include those numbers as an example of real-world use, we normalize to 200 nits for a re-match.

At first, doing this hit the ATIV Smart PC 500T particularly hard, knocking it to the bottom of our stack. It's hard for us to rail too hard on Samsung here; the 500T still delivered more than seven hours of run time in the video playback and Web browsing workloads. However, it's possible to get 10, 11, or 12 hours from competing tablets in the same tests.

Right before we published ARM Vs. x86: The Secret Behind Intel Atom's Efficiency, Intel let us know that new firmware and drivers were available for Samsung's tablet that should help its battery life. In fact, representatives mentioned, vendors continue tweaking their software infrastructures to further optimize what they're able to get from available battery power. So, we went back and updated any driver versions that had been released after our first round of numbers was run. H.264-encoded playback went up by 30 minutes, and our Web browsing workload picked up 23 minutes, just about tying Microsoft's Surface.

Now, that's not quite as impressive as what Intel showed us in its lab using Acer's Windows 8-based tablet. Again, though, the company readily admits that each vendor is doing something different, and our workload involves different power-consuming components, too. It'll take running battery numbers on more devices to get a clearer picture of how the Atom-equipped tablets fall in with the ARM-based competition.

Perhaps as a result of its pared-back graphics engine, Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T delivers some of the best battery life available in a gaming environment. Originally, it was bested only by Apple's iPad 2. But after our driver updates, the ATIV Smart PC 500T finishes in first place.

We also noticed that all of the graphics effects (blur, splashes, etc.) that were supposed to be exclusive to Nvidia's Tegra 3 are also present on the ATIV Smart PC 500T. On an Android-based platform, you have to have a device with Tegra 3 inside to get those features. On iOS, you need an iPhone 5 to get them.

Vector Unit, the developer, tells us that Riptide GP normally detects hardware before turning up the detail settings. However, when the company published to Microsoft's Windows Store, hardware detection was removed altogether. As a result, you'll see the nicer graphics on any system running Windows 8, including Samsung's Atom-based tablet.

Recharging

The ATIV Smart PC 500T’s charging time to 90% capacity is just under two hours. To reach a full charge, you only need two hours and thirty-seven minutes. That's slightly faster than Microsoft’s Surface, but significantly faster than the first-, second-, and third–generation iPads.

In short, for every minute you spend charging the ATIV Smart PC 500T, you get a little over two minutes of use (at maximum brightness). With the Kindle Fire HD, every minute hooked up to the wall returns less than two minutes away. The third-gen iPad gets you between 1-1.5 minutes away for every minute of charge. In short, this is one of the ATIV Smart PC 500T's strengths.

We already know that Samsung's docking station contains no supplemental battery, unlike Asus' Transformer family. That means it doesn't matter if you have the keyboard attached or not; recharging time on the 500T is the same. The Transformer Prime's battery life nearly doubles with the docking station connected, but we're not including those numbers here because our focus is on the tablet alone.

On Paper, A Compelling Windows 8 Tablet

There are tablets, and then there are tablet PCs. Thus far, tablets have limited us to mobile-oriented operating systems. They've employed touch almost exclusively for input. And they've typically employed SoCs centering on ARM's processor architecture. The latter category leverages hardware more commonly found in the notebook world. Tablet PCs are most often controlled by digital pens, Samsung's Series 7 11.6" Slate a shining example. 

Both serve distinct purposes. Tablets are lighter-weight devices that typically handle content consumption well enough, but fall short when it comes to getting stuff done. On the road, they don't replace your notebook. In fact, in many cases they actually become a second device to carry around, creating heft rather than alleviating it. 

Before now, Microsoft's Surface came the closest to bridging those two worlds. But, with constant use, we've discovered situations where we needed an app not already on the Windows Store, and not likely to ever appear there. Microsoft's approach is hampering a potentially stellar product, and that's disappointing.

And so we continue the search for a product able to live between the tablet and notebook worlds, endowing us with exceptional battery life, easy navigation, and diminutive dimensions, along with enough performance to run the apps we need, a keyboard, and an open software ecosystem. With its ATIV Smart PC 500T, Samsung has the right idea.

We might be willing to forgive the little system's so-so performance in common desktop apps and outmoded graphics performance, recommending against installing apps that simply demand more than the hardware can comfortably serve up. We're less happy about the glossy, cheaper-feeling tablet and very much plastic docking station, which, together are both thicker and heavier than the Surface. Moreover, while the 500T is sold with 64 GB of storage space, a baseline Windows 8 install immediately takes you down under 40 GB. Samsung is asking more than $750 for this thing with its keyboard, and we'd have a hard time living with the compromises it makes as a product.

Conversely, the ATIV Smart PC 500T emerges as a conceptual victory, giving us most of the attributes of a tablet, and a notebook's biggest productivity-oriented advantage: a keyboard. It simply falls short of perfection. Samsung manages to overcome much of what, after weeks of use, bothers us about the Surface, but in a form factor that's two times heavier, almost twice as thick, and not a whole heck of a lot faster. Yes, the docking station is easy to pop off when you don't need it. However, as far as we're concerned, once you leave the house with tablet and dock connected, that's the device you're lugging around all day.

Too bad tablets can't get drunk and hook up; we'd love to see what the kids of Samsung's ATIV Smart PC 500T and Microsoft's Surface would look like.

Microsoft's Office Next blog reports that Windows RT devices will ship with a pre-release version of Office Home & Student 2013 RT next month.

According to Microsoft, the pre-release version will contain preview editions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote. Once the final version is released, the Windows RT device will be automatically updated for free via Windows Update. An actual launch schedule will be provided on October 26, but expect to see the full upgrade starting in early November through January, depending on the customer's native language.

Thursday's blog actually goes into detail regarding what consumers should expect from Office for Windows RT. The update even points out the differences between it and the Windows 8 x86/x64 version which, according to Microsoft, are "subtle" at best. Office Home & Student 2013 RT includes the vast majority of Office Home & Student 2013 features available on PCs, and the features customers use most, the company said.

Here's the list of differences:

* Macros, add-ins, and features that rely on ActiveX controls or 3rd party code such as the PowerPoint Slide Library ActiveX control and Flash Video Playback
* Certain legacy features such as playing older media formats in PowerPoint (upgrade to modern formats and they will play) and editing equations written in Equation Editor 3.0, which was used in older versions of Office (viewing works fine)
* Certain email sending features, since Windows RT does not support Outlook or other desktop mail applications (opening a mail app, such as the mail app that comes with Windows RT devices, and inserting your Office content works fine)
* Creating a Data Model in Excel 2013 RT (PivotTables, QueryTables, Pivot Charts work fine)
* Recording narrations in PowerPoint 2013 RT
* Searching embedded audio/video files, recording audio/video notes, and importing from an attached scanner with OneNote 2013 RT (inserting audio/video notes or scanned images from another program works fine)

"In doing research for Office for Windows RT, we spoke to people to understand how they use current, in-market tablets," Microsoft states. "We wanted to understand what was missing that would make for a more compelling experience. One answer was nearly unanimous – people wanted a complete Office experience; not just a viewer. However, they also wanted a version of Office that was optimized for the tablet form factor – most importantly supporting touch and providing long battery life."

Customers will also notice that Office on Windows RT will stop blinking the cursor after a few seconds if the user stops interacting with the application. Believe it or not, that's to save battery power given that there's no hardware or operating system support for a blinking cursor. When the user is away, Microsoft merely shows a fixed, non-blinking cursor which requires no timer and is "the best power citizenship option."

"The most actionable thing that drives battery utilization is how often we wake up the CPU to do work, especially when the user is not actively typing, scrolling, etc. CPU power state transitions are expensive," Microsoft writes. "To reduce these transitions, we want to avoid breaking up work across multiple CPU wake ups. Instead, whenever possible, we try to do all the required work at once. We focused on two things to reduce net wake ups: 1) coalesce timers and 2) remove the need for some timers entirely."

To read the full blog, head here.

_{Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback}

Microsoft has made dramatic changes to the Windows operating system with its upcoming Windows 8 platform; it seems one change includes re-branding its editions.  Simply put, Microsoft has decided to ditch its old branding (Home Premium, Ultimate, etc.) and condense them. The company is introducing three main editions: Windows 8, Windows 8 Pro, and Windows RT -- but only two of these will be available as upgrades from Windows 7.

The edition known as just Windows 8 condenses what was Home Premium and Home Basic previously. A notable change however is the addition of Language Packs, which were available exclusively on Enterprise/Ultimate editions in the past. The Windows 8 edition will be available as an upgrade from Windows 7 Starter, Home Basic, and Home Premium.

Windows 8 Pro contains functionality you would find in what was Professional and Ultimate editions in the past. Exclusive features include Bitlocker, VHD Boot, Client Hyper-V, Domain Join, File Encryption, Group Policy, and Remote Desktop (host). The new “Windows 8 Pro” also comes with an available Windows Media Center add-on. This edition is upgradeable from Windows 7 Professional and Windows 7 Ultimate editions.

Perhaps the most interesting edition is Windows RT, which comes preloaded on devices running ARM processors and will not be available as an upgrade. Windows RT includes a bundled, touch-optimized desktop version of Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote. This edition is designed to offer the fullest experience of Windows 8 on x86 processors, on devices with ARM chipsets.

Microsoft also made note of a Windows 8 Enterprise edition, which expands upon the Windows 8 Pro edition by including features for PC management, security, and more.

According to the blog post, we can expect pricing details and promotions in the coming months.

More Than A Month With Windows Phone 7.5

After several unsuccessful mobile offerings, Microsoft has released Windows Phone 7 (WP7). With 71% of smartphone owners using either an Android or iPhone device, according to Nielsen, it might not seem like Microsoft's new mobile operating system stands much of a chance. However, quite a few companies have announced their support for WP7, and we believe the WP7 is worth watching.

The name "Windows Phone 7" is somewhat misleading. Microsoft unveiled WP7 in 2010; in 2011, a massive update added a mobile version of IE9 supporting Web standards, Twitter integration, and multitasking. This update was called Windows Phone 7.5 (also referred to as Mango). However, the mobile operating system still goes by the name WP7. Specific references to version history usually make use of the code name.

For the folks considering a smartphone with WP7, accepting and growing accustomed to a very different Microsoft-driven ecosystem will probably represent the biggest change. Indeed, for most of the crew at Tom's Hardware, much experience with Android- and iOS-based devices has colored our expectations of mobility. Consequently, I made sure to take my time getting used to WP7 before writing this review, making Nokia's Lumia 800 my personal smartphone for the last month and a half. After acclimating to Windows Phone 7, I'm convinced that anyone shopping for a new phone should at least consider Microsoft's mobile operating system as a viable environment on the right piece of hardware.

Today, we take a closer look at the usability of WP7. And we can take our time. This wasn't forced under the constraint of a tight embargo, but rather allowed to emerge after a lot of real-world experience. This isn't just another gadget review; it's more than a month living with a new mobile device.

History And Home Screen

The home screen isn't immediately visible when you turn on a WP7-based smartphone. Like iOS, there's a lock that functions as a privacy shield, displaying only the date and time, Wi-Fi signal strength, and battery level. You reach the home screen by sliding up the image.

Microsoft's overall aesthetic is minimalistic, with large fonts set against a solid background. Although the inspiration behind the Windows Phone Design System isn't specifically called out in the company's documentation, slides of public transportation signs reveal a proclivity for clean, clear, and modern typography. As we discussed in Windows 8 In Videos: An Operating System Reimagined?, Microsoft is using Metro design principles to unify the look of its products.

Back to our phone. Its home screen follows the same basic tents of Microsoft's desktop and Start menu formula. You see a number of shortcuts, similar to what you might find on a Windows desktop. However, swiping to the left reveals the full list of installed applications, similar to what you'd see in the Start menu.

Each of the squares on the home screen, which Microsoft calls tiles, are analogous to app icons in Android and iOS. There doesn't seem to be a hard limit on the number of tiles you can have, and you're able to rearrange and pin them in much the same way you would on a desktop PC. Interestingly, up to 15 of the tiles can be live at any given time, meaning their appearance constantly changes. For example, the "People" tile continuously rotates images of your contacts and the "Picture" tile constantly cycles through pictures you've taken with your camera. The downside is that some live tiles have a background agent responsible for downloading updates when the phone is on, which drains battery life and your data plan.

But because WP7 is designed to be power-conscious, whenever the screen is locked, all Wi-Fi connections are turned off unless the phone is streaming multimedia or downloading something. It'd be nice to have the option to disable live tiles manually. However, that's only possible if you pay $99 bucks to get developer access and unlock the phone.

The only major complaint we have about the home screen is that it makes ascertaining the battery's life difficult. As you get down into the 10 to 30% range, it's not immediately clear how close you are to running out of talk or standby time, given the small icon. You have to browse into the phone's Settings panel for a more in-depth read-out.

As far as customization is concerned, you're really only able to change the home screen's color palette.

The Basics: Navigation And Bing Searches

Navigation

Microsoft requires that every WP7-based smartphone have dedicated back, home, and search buttons. Their functions are all self-explanatory, although the search button operates a little different than what you'd expect from Android or iOS.

Bing Searches

Previously, the search button allowed you to look for something within an application. The Mango update changed that behavior, though, limiting searches to Microsoft's Bing engine.

Hitting the search button and using Bing is not the same as a search performed in Internet Explorer. However, punching in a query brings up a list of results that, if clicked, does open a Web browser.

Finally, there are some added Bing services in WP7 that you won't find on your desktop:

• Local Scout: Provides information on restaurants, shops, attractions, and events near your current location.
• Music: Allows you to identify songs that are currently playing.
• Vision: Scans barcodes, QR Codes, Microsoft Tags, books, CDs, and DVDs.
• Speech: Voice recognition function (powered by Microsoft Tellme) that allows you to perform a Bing search, call contacts, or launch applications.

Bing Services: Local Scout, Music, Vision, Speech

Local Scout

Local Scout, WP7's guide to your current location, is completely integrated into WP7, although it requires location permission and a data connection to operate. When you click on an entry, such as a restaurant, you're provided with details that let you generate turn-by-turn navigation directions and call the business.

Music

Music provides an integrated music identification service that gives you the title, artist, and album of a particular song playing in the vicinity of the phone. This service requires a data connection.

Vision

Vision lets you scan codes and tags, provided that you have a data connection. It's also useful for helping translating text on flat images. Curved, open books don't work well.

The translation quality is similar to that of other automated services, which means that it often contains errors. Translations from European languages are generally of better quality than translations from Asian languages.

Speech

Speech is a simplified voice recognition system capable of calling, texting, searching, and opening applications. It can be accessed from the Vision icon or by holding down the home button. However, there's a slight difference between these two methods. Speech does not work without a data connection when it's used through Vision, but it does when you hold down the home button.

Page Orientation: Portrait And Lanscape

WP7 generally supports screen reorientation. However, the home screen, directory menu, and some applications only appear in portrait mode.

The transition between portrait and landscape orientations is smooth, overall. Icons even change with the screen so that they are easily identifiable.

Keyboard Layout And Text Input

Keyboard Layout

The size of the virtual keyboard in WP7 depends on the size of your smartphone's display. However, the layout is identical on every hardware platform, since Microsoft doesn't allow vendors to create customized keyboard profiles. Our only nitpick is that Microsoft leaves some horizontal space empty in landscape mode so that the keys stay rectangular.

Text Input

The text input engine features character correction and word prediction. If you need to input a diacritic, such as an umlaut, pressing and holding the original letter provides you with an array of options.

Moving text around is the only process we've found to be tedious. Because you only get the option to copy a word, shifting words around involves copying, deleting, and pasting. A simple cut command could have easily simplified that.

Characters from other languages, such as Chinese and Japanese, can be inserted quickly. Hitting the "Eng" key turns the keyboard into a pad on which you can write the character with your finger. The recognition system isn't perfect, though. For example, WP7 sometimes detects the character incorrectly when the spacing between strokes is too wide or too narrow.

Touch Gestures And Multitasking

Windows Phone 7 On Nokia's Lumia 800

Touch gestures work just as they do on other mobile operating systems. However, scrolling has more of a glide effect compared to Apple's inertial mechanism.

Multitasking

Mobile operating systems technically aren't designed for multitasking, since applications don't continue to execute code while they're in the background. Two exceptions to this are push notifications and background audio, which allow you to receive alerts and to listen to music while doing other things. Instead, fast app switching (FAS) facilitates quick movement between multiple applications.

FAS has been supported on Android and iOS for a while. Microsoft didn't support FAS on Windows Phone 7 initially, but it was added with the Mango update. Overall, this feature is easier to use on WP7 than on Android or iOS because each individual application is represented by a large picture that displays the status of each program. In order to switch to a previous application, you just have to hold down the back button to enter the FAS interface and swipe between apps like you would a deck of cards.

Internet Explorer, Email, And Calendar

Internet Explorer

WP7 uses a version of Internet Explorer Mobile based on IE9's rendering engine. The interface is surprisingly well thought out for a phone-oriented browser. IE supports up to six tabs that run at the same time; the active tab doesn't lock the others up. Additionally, you can save pictures on websites and share links. The ability to search within a page was removed in the Mango update, but it might return in the future.

Video streamed in WP7 isn't played back in the Web browser. Rather, the video player opens to handle that. Check out the video below for an example.

Email

WP7 provides email support for an extensive array of services, such as Exchange, Hotmail, Gmail, Nokia, Yahoo, and other POP- and IMAP-based services. Just be aware that if you configure email access manually through POP or IMAP, WP7 won't synchronize the contacts and calendar appointments associated with that account.

Email is shown in a thread view, but you can search for individual messages using queries for the subject, body, sender, or receiver.

Calendar

WP7 makes calendar management easy. The default view sorts your upcoming agenda in a scrollable, chronological format, rather than displaying a standard monthly view that would be harder to see on a smartphone's small screen.

Maintaining Contacts, Calling, And Messaging

Maintaining Contacts

WP7 provides easy-to-access information about your contacts. When you click on the "People" tile from the home screen, you immediately see a news feed of your contacts' latest activity on Twitter and Facebook. Swipe to the left, and you're presented with tiles for people you recently contacted. Swipe left again, and you'll see a directory of all contacts.

The "Me" section of the "People" tile provides a convenient way to update your own social media status, check into Bing or Facebook places, and set your Facebook chat status. You can pin individual contacts to the home screen; their tile images are their profile pictures.

Contact management continues to be a challenge, regardless of the mobile operating system. Microsoft takes large strides to make connectivity across multiple networks less overwhelming in WP7. For example, you can either manually enter contacts, or import them using Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn. If you have a contact on multiple networks, you can link the accounts so that the person's information appears under a single card. You can also sort contacts into groups, which allows you to see information from a particular group on a single page.

Calling & Messaging

Updated with Microsoft's Metro UI, the look at feel of calling and messaging in WP7 is impressively clean.

Multimedia: Music, Videos, And Pictures

Music

The music interface is locked into portrait mode. You need to navigate text entries in the user interface if you want to select particular songs. Missing, however, is a way to quickly flip through albums using associated images like iOS' Cover Flow. Android has something similar, but navigating large music libraries still requires extra effort in WP7.

Microsoft's volume adjustment panel also gives you the ability to skip songs and resume playback, so you don't have to return to the Music hub for those features.

Videos

Conversely, videos are locked in landscape mode. The controls are basic and consist of rewind, play/pause, fast forward, and fill screen/fit to screen.

Pictures

The Picture tile has a news section similar to the People hub, which only lists news posts with embedded pictures. Even though this is an interesting feature, most people will probably prefer to see all tweets/posts, and not just the ones with pictures.

The Picture tile also lets you navigate to albums and sort pictures based on their parent album, date, contact who took the picture, and favorites.

Document Management In Mobile Office

Unlike other mobile operating systems, WP7 comes ready with document editing capabilities. Mobile Office organizes all of your Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote, and SharePoint Workspace documents into tiles based on color. SkyDrive and Office 365 get all of that data onto the cloud, enabling online access without worrying about synchronization.

Overall, Word does a great job of preserving the original formatting of .doc and .docx documents.

Excel doesn't maintain formatting as well as Word. Although the layout of individual spreadsheets is generally preserved, charts may or may not look the same as they do on a PC with Office 2010. The two charts in the screen shot above should both be 2D contour charts; however, they appear as bar charts in Mobile Excel.

Marketplace And Xbox Live

Marketplace

Windows Phone Marketplace is analogous to Apple's App Store and Google's Play (formerly Google Market). You can either make purchase from your desktop computer using Zune or directly from Marketplace on your smartphone. Videos are the exception since you have to buy and download them on your PC, and then sync them to your smartphone.

Xbox Live on Windows Phone 7

A dedicated tile lets you view your Xbox Live profile, including avatar, game scores, and leaderboards. You can even message your friends. Microsoft claims that the capability to play real-time multiplayer games on WP7 will be available in the near future.

Syncing: Windows And Mac

Syncing: Windows

We believe that one critical weakness of WP7 is the imposition of using Microsoft's Zune software to sync. You can't sync contacts with Outlook like you could in previous versions of Windows Mobile.

Furthermore, music, videos, pictures, and podcasts have to be synced using one of three schemes: All, Items I Choose, or Manual.

All: Automatically syncs everything of that media type in your collection with your player or phone. When you sync, any media items you added to your collection are also added to your device—as long as there’s enough storage space available. Any items you removed from your collection are also removed from your device.Items I choose: You choose which specific items or categories of items you want to be synced automatically (for example, you can choose to sync artists, genres, playlists, picture folders, and so forth). Choose an item by dragging it to the Device icon. When you do that, a sync group is created that includes the item. When you sync your device with your collection, any changes you made to items in your collection that are part of a sync group will also be made on your player or phone.Manual: Choose manual sync to control exactly what gets synced to your device, rather than having Zune Music + Video automatically sync the changes in your collection. When you sync, you manually add and remove items from your device.

The Zune software sorts videos into five categories: TV, Music, Movies, Other, and Personal. You aren't able to edit video tags like you do for music, though. Instead, you have to use freeware software to alter metadata.

Syncing: Mac (Instructions)

Given Apple's effort to create harmony between its devices, we have a hard time picturing a Mac user buying a WP7-based smartphone. At least one person at Tom's Hardware falls into that unlikely category, however, because he likes the WP7 interface and lower smartphone price tag.

Syncing on a Mac is hardly ideal; there is no Zune software for OS X. Instead, you need to use the Windows Phone 7 Connector, which enabled sync'ing through iTunes and iPhoto. Transferring to the phone is pretty easy. But going the other way is more difficult because you have to import pictures and videos through a directory listing. If you're shutterbug or enjoy recording videos, previews only appear as a small thumbnail, which can make hunting for specific files more challenging. In addition, you don't get Marketplace support or the ability to sync wirelessly.

Apps: Room To Grow, But Most Bases Covered

In comparison to the number of apps available through Apple's App Store, Microsoft's repository is lacking. This is likely to change, though, as more people start to pick up WP7-based smartphones. And as we've discussed in the past, Microsoft revealed a more aggressive smartphone plan at Mobile World Congress that should help encourage development on its platform.

Furthering the company's cause, already-modest minimum hardware specifications to run WP7 are even lower now. This purportedly increases Microsoft's potential customer base by 60 percent, and, based on estimates provided by Qualcomm (graph above), Windows Phone/Mobile is expected to overtake BlackBerry within the next two years.

Although Microsoft's app selection could certainly be better, the current ecosystem shouldn't leave you wanting. The most popular apps found on Android and iOS are also found on WP7, including Facebook, YouTube, Shazam, Slacker Radio, Twitter, Angry Birds, Netflix, Adobe Acrobat, GasBuddy, Air Hockey, and Skype.

Windows Phone 7: A Solid Mobile Operating System

Among the many things we heard at Mobile World Congress, one reoccurring sentiment was a wish for another company to come along and challenge the status quo. Smartphone vendors and carriers want a third mobile operating system to balance the power of Android and iOS. Although WP7 is off to a slow start, we think it's in a good position to be that alternative option.

Before the year's end, Microsoft wants to be within reach of the number two spot, behind either Android or iOS. Even though the company's WP7 faces a long road to more mainstream acceptance, we think that it's a solid operating system with a lot to like. The user interface is clean and easy to navigate. Contact integration is solid, and the Bing services are useful on a day-to-day basis.

A few months ago, Microsoft started shipping 25 000 WP7-based smartphones to developers in the hopes of increasing dedication to WP7. With a little luck, this will result in the availability of new apps later this year.

OnLive announced on Thursday that iPad owners no longer have exclusive dibs to its Desktop app, as the service is now available on Google's Android Market.

As with the iOS version, the free OnLive Desktop app for Android tablets streams a virtual Windows desktop to the device, packing full "installed" programs like Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint software and Adobe Reader for PDFs. Users also get 2 GB of free cloud storage for storing desktop documents.

For the uninitiated, OnLive Desktop actually resides on remote PCs in the cloud that are connected by Gigabit Ethernet to the Internet. Using the same tech that OnLive uses to stream PC games to PCs, tablets and smartphones, the OnLive Desktop app acts like a "receiver," providing an instantly responsive, seamless Windows environment and Web experience. The app also includes a full PC on-screen keyboard, handwriting recognition and support for an optional Bluetooth PC-compatible keyboard or mouse.

In addition to the free account, OnLive provides two premium accounts and an Enterprise account. Whereas the free OnLive Desktop Standard account provides as-available access (meaning wait in line), OnLive Desktop Plus ($4.99/month) packs all the features of Standard but gives subscribers priority access. Subscribers also get access to the cloud-accelerated Web browser featuring lightning-fast attachment transfers and full Flash and Acrobat PDF plug-ins.

As for OnLive Desktop Pro ($9.99/month), this model builds upon the Plus version by adding 50 GB of cloud storage (appears as a Documents folder) and the ability to customize the virtual desktop with additional PC applications. There's also OnLive Enterprise which features an IT-managed environment for businesses and organizations. This version is available for custom integration by independent software vendors and consultants.

OnLive collaborative services—including live desktop spectating and desktop sharing with voice chat for small groups or thousands of simultaneous users—are coming soon to OnLive Desktop Pro and OnLive Enterprise, the company says.

"Android tablets are a great platform for OnLive Desktop," said Steve Perlman, OnLive Founder and CEO. "With full HD resolution, PC keyboard/mouse support and available 4G LTE, Android tablets deliver an excellent experience with full Microsoft Office and Adobe Reader PC applications, not to mention gigabit-accelerated browsing through OnLive Desktop Plus—even over 4G LTE."

To Get OnLive Desktop for your Android tablet, head here.

On Monday OnLive revealed plans to stream a Windows 7-based desktop and applications like Word and Excel to a number of platforms, starting with the iPad tablet. Called OnLive Desktop, the initial touch-based offering will launch for free on Thursday via Apple's App Store here in the States and "soon" in the UK.

As for other platforms, OnLive Desktop will arrive on Android, smartphones, and the stand-alone OnLive MicroConsole (with Bluetooth and keyboard/mouse support). The Windows-based virtual desktop will also arrive on the PC and Mac clients with support for your typical desktop LCD and HDTVs. So far there's no word on when these will be available, only that they are "coming soon."

According to the company, the free OnLive Desktop client will include Windows 7-based applications like Word, Excel and PowerPoint software supporting instant-response, multi-touch gestures while offering a full on-screen Windows keyboard and handwriting recognition.

"iPad users will now be able to simply and securely view and edit cloud-hosted documents with full-featured Windows desktop applications like Microsoft Office, just as if they were using a local high-performance PC," said Steve Perlman, OnLive Founder and CEO. "Multi-touch gestures respond instantly and smoothly, while HD videos, animations and PC video games—never before usable on a remote desktop—play seamlessly."

The Free OnLive Desktop app comes with 2 GB of secure cloud storage and as-available access to a cloud-based Windows 7 desktop pre-populated with Microsoft Word, Excel and PowerPoint, plus several utilities and touch games.

Later, OnLive will release a Pro version that comes with 50 GB of storage, the previously-reported OnLive web browser, additional PC apps and more for $9.99 USD per month. OnLive Enterprise will be available for businesses and organizations of all sizes, seeking centralized, secure computing resources, as well as Independent Software Vendors seeking to deliver custom applications. IT professionals and ISVs are asked to contact OnLive at this email address for OnLive Enterprise details and pricing.

For more information and to set up a free account early, head here.

I believe it would be fair to say that investors do not approve, or, at the very least, do not especially like HP's new plan how the company plans to sail into the future. The company said that it be trying to sell its personal computer business, which is a major revenue source for HP. This was questioned not just outside of HP in the investor community, but especially by the services guys inside HP who never missed a chance to trash HP's interest in building consumer PCs.

Of course, there was also news that HP canceled its webOS hardware devices and is now leaving the future of the software in question, which essentially will cost HP at least about $2.5 billion to get rid of one of the greatest opportunities it had in a long time and is now left with the only choice to kill whatever is left of Palm, the company that pioneered mobile devices as we know them today. HP is served a broadside from the financial community today, with the most critical piece being Jeff Reeves' article that compares HP to the "worst of corporate America."

I would not be so dramatic, but he has a point and there is much in this claim why webOS failed inside HP. WebOS failed for the very same reasons why VoodooPC failed as part of HP as well, for example.

HP today: Invent?

A few months ago, we heard HP CEO Leo Apotheker saying that he would hope that HP could be as cool as Apple is today. However, realistically, what is HP today and what do we think it will be without webOS and the PC business? A printer manufacturer? An enterprise services company that uses fancy names for trivial technologies described in Powerpoint presentations that put the company's clients to sleep in a matter of minutes? Even in its enterprise business, HP seems to have lost its fire and we know that the company has been searching for direction for some time. A direction that has changed course several times since CEOs Carly Fiorina, Mark Hurd and now Leo Apotheker.

In servers, HP always had issues going after IBM and it was the profitability of IBM services that drove HP into this market as well. Yet HP never achieved the high profile and reputation of IBM in this market and could only grow its reach via substantial acquisitions, such as Autonomy now. It is not difficult to see that HP will be moving much more into the enterprise market and services than ever before. However, even in that space, HP may have problems at the very core as the company is turning into a giant that is the opposite of being nimble.

Its perennial rival IBM may be larger than HP, but it does much better job at being perceived as an innovation driver across all of its business segments -- for example, with chips that are built using neuron-like structures. HP has its famous labs as well, but, honestly, when was the last time you heard about a significant innovation that has come out of HP? You can take this innovation game even further and look at the patent space. HP filed 2 patent applications with the U.S. PTO this week, IBM filed 44 and Samsung filed 98. On an average week, Samsung is filing for 130 new patents every week, IBM for about 120 and HP for about 15. The activity coming out of HP does not reflect the size of the company. If the number of filed patents that protect any innovation in fact are a sign for the innovative power of a company, then I would claim that "invent" is not be the best word to describe HP anymore.

A Colossal Mistake: webOS

The acquisition of Palm and webOS was an interesting move. For pocket change ($1.2 billion), HP bought itself an ailing, but very capable platform that could have changed the face of HP. WebOS was the foundation of a platform that screamed "innovation" much more than anything else HP has in its product portfolio today. There was initial enthusiasm for webOS and an opportunity that connected nicely to HP's position as leading PC manufacturer -- its aspirations as a smartphone company as well as the emerging tablet market that so heavily depends on a functioning platform. HP had the resources to build webOS into something great. What HP did not have was time and passion.

HP gave the Touchpad 49 days to succeed or fail. 49 painful days that jailed a fantastic OS in barely adequate and over-emphasized hardware. 49 days that proved that consumers will not just buy a $500 tablet because we all suddenly think that they are the best thing since sliced bread. In Leo Apotheker's more pragmatic words: "Our WebOS devices have not gained enough traction in the marketplace with consumers and we see too long a ramp up in the market share. Due to market dynamics, significant competition and a rapidly changing environment and this week's news only reiterates the speed and nature of this change, continuing to execute our current device approach in this market space is no longer in the best interest of HP and HP's shareholders. Therefore, we have made the difficult but necessary decision to shut down the webOS hardware provisions within Q4 2011." What Apotheker failed to mention is that it was not "market dynamics, significant competition and a rapidly changing environment" that killed webOS hardware -- it was HP.

When HP acquired webOS with Palm, it was clear that this was a very fragile foundation for a new and highly marketed environment that required as much brainpower as risky and substantial monetary investments. The Touchpad was the first attempt. Like all Android tablets on the market today, the Touchpad lacked the reasoning, vision and passion that makes the iPad so successful. HP did not court webOS developers. Instead of a truly unique tablet, it produced an iPad copycat and sold it for the same price as the original. What reason would consumers have to buy the Touchpad over the iPad, if there are fewer apps, if there is a questionable future, if there is no platform integration, if there are no compelling phones, and if the iPad carries the innovation mindshare and all bragging rights? Releasing the Touchpad in its current form was driven by negligent market and consumer research at the very least.

HP had tremendous opportunities with webOS. It could have given the software away for free to invite developers. It could have create a huge platform spanning from PCs, appliances, smartphones to tablets. What is left is webOS with nowhere to go. There is talk that HP may try to license it to HTC or Samsung. I am not quite sure what HTC would do with webOS. HP calls this strategy now "optimizing the value of WebOS" after it virtually killed it with sub-par hardware.

Failure by design

HP has always had trouble integrating young companies and new ideas into an aging corporate structure that may not be so competitive anymore. Rahul Sood from VoodooPC left HP's PC business earlier this year and joined Microsoft. VoodooPC, at least temporarily, gave HP the perception of being an enormously innovative company that took a playful and risky approach to set trends and not follow them.

WebOS is a deeply emotional product that failed inside HP most likely because of the same reasons companies like VoodooPC failed. Unless HP recognizes the opportunities it is given, unless it returns to the roots of innovation and becomes much more nimble and passionate than it is today, HP is simply stuck in a time that is slowly fading away. Apple is the poster child of what passion for its legacy and products can do for a company. HP needs to embrace the same spirit that is driving companies such as Apple and Google, whether it deals with business or home users.

WebOS represented the passion that HP so desperately needs. The strong reaction of investors that sent HP's stock down 20% to a six-year low may only be one indicator of HP's shaky future. Hp cannot afford to miss many opportunities such as webOS.

Can Downsized Mini-ITX Platforms Do The Job?

Downsizing is a key trend across a lot of industries recently. When you get small, you often save energy and resources (at least, that's the idea). But that's not always the case with PC platforms, since power consumption has little to do with size and form factor.

On the bright side, at least small computers can be quite attractive, so long as they deliver the performance and features we expect.

The Mini-ITX (Integrated Technology Extended) form factor has been around for many years. Initially driven by VIA, it has outgrown its low-cost, small form factor origins and has become an industry standard for SFF computing, regardless of specific sub-segments. Sporting a footprint of only 170x170 mm, Mini-ITX is 61% smaller than full ATX, less than half the size of microATX, and even one-third smaller than FlexATX.

Early Mini-ITX solutions were typically equipped with low-end hardware, such as VIA’s Eden processor. Recently, Mini-ITX has become popular for Atom-powered nettop PC solutions. However, motherboard manufacturers have discovered this form factor as an attractive option for enthusiasts that don’t insist on products being fully equipped so much as blending performance, features, and small dimensions. Arriving at a LAN party with an SFF Mini-ITX PC capable of outperforming most big towers is pretty freaking sweet.

We used an AMD and an Intel platform to look at what state-of-the-art Mini-ITX solutions can do today. The AMD machine is based on a Sapphire-based motherboard sporting AMD's 785G chipset. Our Intel candidate utilizes a Zotac-based platform with Intel's H55 chipset. In both cases, we tried various processors to cover different price points and performance segments. Who came out on top?

AMD Platform: Sapphire IPC-AM3DD785G (AMD 785G)

Sapphire's product page emphasizes that the "highly-integrated" IPC-AM3DD785G consumes less than 100 W of power. While this is true, we should add that this doesn't only apply to Mini-ITX boards. Similar ATX or microATX boards can also be low on power—even down to an idle draw between 35 W and 44 W, depending on the processor used. But even Sapphire's peak power stayed below the 100 W mark, ranging from 50 W to 97 W. The 50 W result is particularly interesting. We also tested to see if this low power consumption translates into high power efficiency.

The AM3DD785G is a fully-featured Socket AM3 motherboard. It only has two (instead of the usual four) DDR3 slots, supporting 8 GB maximum. There just isn’t room for more on the 170 x 170 mm motherboard. Sapphire pairs AMD's 785G chipset with the SB710 southbridge and provides four SATA 3Gb/s ports, the UltraATA/133 port for two legacy drives, and a total of ten USB 2.0 ports. Gigabit networking comes complements of an Atheros PHY and PCI Express x1 link.

If your case can fit it, Sapphire's single x16 PCI Express 2.0 slot will accept a double-slot graphics card, and the three-phase voltage regulator should accept almost all Socket AM3 processors. The new Phenom II X6 and other X4 processors require a 125 W or even 140W thermal envelope. This board offers VGA and HDMI display outputs, so it's set for HTPC applications, whether or not you install add-on cards.

Intel Platform: Zotac H55-ITX WiFi (Intel H55 Express)

There are a few LGA 1156-based Mini-ITX options. DFI and Intel sell two of them, but Zotac is probably the most popular. Since Sapphire's board comes ready to support either built-in or discrete graphics, we decided to do the same for the Intel platform and got ourselves a Zotac H55-ITX WiFi. Armed with dual-band 802.11n (via a Mini PCIe module), DVI, and HDMI, Zotac obviously skews this board toward more flexible, demanding uses with the latest in connectivity options.

The H55-ITX WiFi features six SATA 3Gb/s ports, two DDR3 slots (8 GB maximum), and a x16 PCI Express 2.0 slot for add-on graphics. A four-phase voltage regulator supports most current LGA 1156-based processors. The I/O panel not only sports 10 (yes, ten—with another four optional) USB 2.0 ports, but also a system reset switch, gigabit Ethernet port, 7.1 analog and SPDIF audio connectors, and an eSATA port.

AMD Processors: Athlon II X2, Phenom II X3, And X4

AMD provided four different processors for testing with our Sapphire board. Why not try all of them?

AMD Athlon II X2 240e

The 240e is a low-power, dual-core processor that stays within a 45 W power envelope. Two cores running at 2.8 GHz should still provide more than enough performance for office and multimedia applications. The processor costs just over $100.

AMD Athlon II X2 260u

The "u" stands for ultra-low voltage, and we'd agree that 25 W is seriously low. To reach that level, AMD throttled the clock speed to only 1.8 GHz, which noticeably impacts performance benchmarks. This chip isn’t really efficient, but it's the lowest-power solution we can think of without jeopardizing desktop features. Still, Intel platforms provide lower idle power at much higher performance.

AMD Phenom II X3 705e

The Phenom II X3 705e is AMD’s low-power, triple-core offering, coming with 6 MB of L3 cache and three cores that run at 2.5 GHz. The chip specifies a 65 W TDP.

AMD Phenom II X4 905e

Last but not least, we tested the quad-core Phenom II X4 905e, also 2.5 GHz and based on a 65 W thermal envelope. However, the 905e packs more horsepower than the 705e. The benchmarks, particularly our efficiency run, prove that this CPU delivers the best performance per watt.

Overview Table

Intel Processors: Core i3-530 And Core i5-661

We didn't use any Intel quad-core processors, since these are typically rather expensive. Instead, we opted to use an entry-level and a top-end dual-core model, both based on LGA 1156.

Intel Core i3-530

The Core i3-530 is specified to run at 2.93 GHz with two physical cores and Hyper-Threading support, providing four logical processors to the operating system. Our second Intel CPU, the Core i5-661, comes with Turbo Boost technology enabled, dynamically increasing clock speed when needed. Unfortunately, the Core i3 lacks this feature.

However, the i3-530 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache and a 73 W TDP. Operating in the real world, our Intel system provides a relatively low peak power figure of 82 W. An idle power of only 30 W is even more impressive.

Intel Core i5-661

The Core i5-661 is based on the same 32 nm Clarkdale dual-core design as the Core i3-530. Notably, though, the Core i5 offers Turbo Boost and a higher nominal clock rate of 3.33 GHz.

In Turbo Boost mode, it can sprint to 3.6 GHz, ensuring that this processor dominates almost all of our benchmarks, including those that scale well on more than two Phenom cores. The 32 nm Core i5 series carries an abundantly evident advantage in encryption testing thanks to its AES acceleration.

Comparison Table

Source: IntelARK

Test Setup

Benchmarks and Settings

Benchmark Results: Synthetics

Four AMD cores are required to compete with two Intel Core i3/i5 units.

Nothing beats Intel’s AES new instructions when it comes to encryption with this algorithm. Since this type of workload scales well with additional cores, the AMD triple- and quad-core chips do well compared to Intel’s Core i3-530.

AMD’s quad-core wins if no encryption acceleration is used. Keep in mind that the processor is cheaper than the Intel Core i5 offering.

3DMark Vantage favors the Intel processors with few exceptions­.

Benchmark Results: Applications

Creation of a PDF document from a 100+ page PowerPoint file takes quite some time, and it's quickest on the Intel dual-cores, since the app isn't very well threaded.

Photoshop is well-optimized for multiple threads, allowing AMD’s Phenom II X4 905e to compete with the Intel dual-core CPUs.

WinRAR is thread-optimized, but it doesn’t run as well on AMD's quad-core model as it does on Intel's dual-core chips.

WinZip is single-threaded. Since Intel pairs high clock speeds with more performance per clock, it dominates here.

Benchmark Results: Audio/Video

With the exception of MainConcept and Handbrake, which take full advantage of multiple processing cores, Intel dominates again with its Core i3/i5.

Benchmark Results: Power Consumption

System idle power is probably one of the most important results if you intend to run your machine 24x7. A low idle power translates directly into lower energy costs, as well as lower system temperatures.

In our testing, we enabled all power saving mechanisms, so the AMD system took advantage of Cool’n’Quiet, while the Intel system used Enhanced SpeedStep and all of its deeper C-states to reduce power during idle. Nevertheless, more cores for AMD translates into higher idle power. It takes AMD’s lowest-power processors to even get close to Intel’s power consumption levels, which are reached without any extra optimization.

Peak power depends on the processor's TDP rating. The AMD CPUs that stay within 25 W and 45 W TDP remain at low power levels. A 50 W peak power on the Athlon II X2 260u is impressive. Intel’s processors are extremely low on idle power, but they require more power when operating at peak loads. Yet, this combination could be ideal to dominate the efficiency tests.

Benchmark Results: Single-Thread Efficiency

The single-threaded workload finishes quickest on the solutions with the fastest clock speeds, naturally.

The average power required between our test systems stays fairly similar.

However, total power for the efficiency workload is much lower on Intel's CPUs because they complete the workload much faster.

Benchmark Results: Multi-Thread Efficiency

In the multi-threaded workload, AMD looks much better, as the triple- and quad-cores are competitive.

Interestingly, average power between the fastest AMD and Intel processors is actually even. It’s two cores against four, 3.33/3.60 GHz against 2.5 GHz.

Total power used is again a bit lower on the Intel machines, but the AMD quad-core comes very close. This proves impressively that a quad-core CPU provides better performance per watt when it's kept occupied.

Benchmark Results: Overall Power Efficiency

The total time taken for the full efficiency run, including single- and multi-threaded applications, is lower on the Intel machines because of their advantages in the single-threaded section of the test run. AMD’s dual-cores fall behind.

Average power for the full efficiency workload is lower on the AMD quad-core chip than on Intel’s high-speed dual-core processor.

Once again, the total power required is lowest on the Intel systems.

Efficiency-wise, nothing beats the Intel dual-core CPUs. They simply deliver the best performance per watt. However, AMD’s low-power quad-core chip doesn't trail far behind.

Conclusion

Our two Mini-ITX motherboards come with impressive feature sets, and they have nothing to fear from comparisons against mainstream ATX motherboards. Due to their compact footprints, Mini-ITX solutions won’t ever be seen with multiple expansion slots, extra memory sockets, or a plethora of add-in components.  But all of the features you’d expect from a decent, modern PC are present: plentiful USB 2.0 connectivity, a handful of SATA ports, HD audio, gigabit Ethernet, support for more than 4 GB of memory, and accommodations for powerful processors and discrete graphics cards.

Zotac’s H55-ITX WiFi, outfitted with DVI, HDMI, S/PDIF, eSATA, and dual-band 802.11n, is geared for high-end PC and HTPC environments. Sapphire’s AM3DD785G is a bit cheaper, but also less feature-laden. You’ll have to live without WiFi, DVI, and digital audio.

Processor choice makes a huge difference in performance, power consumption, and power efficiency. Zotac's H55-ITX WiFi benefits from the very low idle power and high performance per clock of the Core i3/i5 processor family. Even the entry-level Core i3 does very well, beating all four AMD systems in many benchmarks, including idle power and power efficiency. AMD only shines in a few heavily-threaded workloads.

On the other hand, AMD has the more comprehensive low-power portfolio. Although no AMD setup was able to reduce system idle power to Intel's amazing 30 W levels, the low- and ultra-low voltage Athlon II X2 offerings restrain peak power consumption to numbers lower than Intel's. To get there, though, forget about performance. You're looking at basic office systems or industrial applications that won't need much cooling.

Lastly, consider cost and your expected applications. AMD still provides better bang for the buck with these Mini-ITX platforms. Intel costs more on average, but it will give you more performance per watt. The more you work with threaded applications, the easier it is to go with a quad-core AMD machine, as these are significantly cheaper than Intel’s lineup.

Power And Efficiency: Atom Versus Core i3

This is no apples to apples comparison here. The two products we're pitting against each other belong in different market segments, with Intel’s latest Pinetrail-based Atom platform going up against Core i3. Atom solutions are meant to be cheap and small, while Core i3 is a fully featured and far more powerful processor for desktops.

Still, because both are aimed at the value segment of the market, it's understandably easy to confuse their roles and capabilities. This review should make it clear just how dissimilar these two chips really are.

Plenty of PC buyers are looking for versatile, low-cost PC solutions. Such systems have to deliver adequate performance and should not require more power than necessary. It's also important to point out that we’re not focusing on performance or power consumption alone, but on balancing performance, power, and cost together.

Atom vs. Core

With Atom-based nettops and netbooks available for only a few hundred dollars, Atom is clearly cost-effective and power-conscious. Both attributes are great, and they enable Intel to address new markets sensitive to even lower price points, such as emerging countries. But then, Atom was never meant to be a strong performer. Consequently, it's not a great choice for anyone who does more on his or her PC than write emails and surf the Web. Frankly, Atom can't even beat an old Pentium 4 on performance.

Intel’s desktop processor lineup also requires a critical view. Although today's Core offerings deliver higher performance, lower power consumption, and thus, much improved efficiency over their Core 2 predecessors (as well as the AMD competition), Intel's mainstream chips carry higher overall costs. Whether we're talking about the processor, chipset, or platform, the full range of products, from Core i3 to Core i7, is consistently more expensive than AMD’s portfolio.

Atomic Fission

Our 2008 article Core 2 Nukes Atom on the Desktop compared an Atom 230 against a very basic Core 2 Duo E7200. We found that the system idle power of a mainstream Core 2 Duo system was quite similar to an Atom system’s power requirements. However, power consumption has to relate to performance, because a slow, low-power system might require much more power to complete intensive workloads if it needs more time to finish the job, too. Only a few months later, we updated our comparison and put the dual-core Atom 330 against the same Core 2 Duo platform. It did better, but even the dual-core Atom still trailed in the distance.

Why is This Shootout Important?

Style is a great persuader, and the attractive cost of many Atom solutions might lure the uninformed. Many Atom systems can't even play HD content without stuttering or responsively multitask while decompressing a ZIP file. Users who care about cost, power, and performance should read on.

The Predecessor: Atom 230 And ECS 945GCT-D

Atom 230 (Diamondville) was released in 2008 and still roundes out Intel’s portfolio at the entry-level. All Atom solutions come with the processor soldered onto the motherboard, which is advantageous when squeezing into the mini-ITX form factor. At the same time, this means that an Atom platform has no processor upgrade path. You get what you get, period.

Atom 230 is a single-core product with Hyper-Threading support, giving the operating system two virtual processing cores. It is 64-bit-capable, but other desktop features, such as SpeedStep, Virtualization Technology, Trusted Execution Technology, and others, aren’t available. Atom 230 runs at 1.6 GHz and comes with 512KB of L2 cache. Its 4W TDP is amazingly low, but you still have to add 22.2W for the 945GC chipset (Lakeport) and 3.3W for the ICH7 southbridge.

We tested with an ECS 945GCT-D. The board comes with the 945GC chipset and Atom 230 processor, and features a PCI slot, one x1 PCI Express port, and two DDR2 DIMM sockets. Lacking any digital display or audio outputs won't endear the board to sophisticated users, but it should serve well enough in point-of-sale (POS) and kiosk applications.

The ICH7 southbridge offers two SATA 3Gb/s ports and an UltraATA/100 channel for legacy parallel ATA devices. Four USB 2.0 ports are available on the connector panel. Four more can be enabled through two headers and slot adapters.

We did not include a dual-core Atom solution in this review (Atom 330) since the majority of systems shipped are based on single-core models.

Today: Atom D510 And Intel D510MO

The latest Pinetrail Atom is still based on Intel’s 45 nm manufacturing process, and it runs at similar clock speeds as the Atom 230/330 predecessor (1.66 GHz). The chip now features 1MB of L2 cache, rather than 512KB. However, the Atom D510 now has two cores, and it implements Hyper-Threading, meaning that the operating system can harness four logical cores. The D510 is still designed for embedded solutions, meaning that the CPU can't be upgraded.

TDP has increased from 4W to 13W because the graphics core moved from the chipset into the processor along with the DDR2 memory controller. As a result, the new NM10 chipset specifies only a 15.1W thermal power envelope. Both chips combine to make a 28.1W TDP, which is slightly less than a Diamondville platform on paper. However, in real life, Pinetrail consumes less power by a significant margin.

For more on the Pine Trail platform, check out our launch coverage from December 2009.

The D510MO is an Intel desktop motherboard featuring the new Atom D510 processor. Unfortunately, it's not very well-equipped, either, offering no digital display or audio outputs, or any of Intel’s platform technology features, such as vPro. Still, it’s comparable to the ECS motherboard with Atom 230.

The Intel board provides a PCI slot for expansion cards, a PCI Express Mini Card slot, two DDR2 DIMM slots, four USB 2.0 ports, gigabit Ethernet, and two SATA 3Gb/s ports. Three more USB 2.0 ports are available internally.

The Challenger: Core i3-530

Last but not least, we have the challenger, for users who care about more than cost. Judging by its specs alone, the Core i3 seems appropriate for this comparison. Then again, the i3 line starts at $115 while an Intel D510MO costs only $75—and that still leaves you having to purchase a motherboard for Core i3. Let’s read on before discussing these details.

Core i3-530 is based on the 32 nm Clarkdale dual-core design and mainstream LGA 1156 socket. Still, this processor is the cheapest entry point into a full-featured Intel desktop platform. We reviewed the Core i5-661 top model and looked at its efficiency in January 2010. In February, we determined the chip's most power-efficient overclocks.

Like the Core i5-600, the base model Core i3 has 4MB of shared cache with 512KB of discrete L2 cache per core. The Core i3-530 runs at 2.93 GHz, but it doesn’t support Intel’s Turbo Boost feature that would allow the processor to automatically increase clock speeds for as long as thermal headroom allows. The i3-530 also doesn’t support AES new instructions (AES-NI).

Core i3 and i5 dual-core processors are rated with a 73W TDP, and you still have to add platform power draw. This might make a comparison between Atom and Core i3 look totally off-base, but that’s only true if you stare at cost within the entry-level market segment. From a more experienced user’s point of view, the differences may be relevant in a purchase decision.

Zotac H55-ITX WiFi

Lastly, we’d like to mention the H55 motherboard we used to run the Core i3-530. We wanted a solution that was as similar as possible to the Atom 230 and D510 boards, so Zotac's mini-ITX product, the H55-ITX WiFi, made great sense. This board starts at $150, making the combination with a $115 Core i3-530 rather expensive compared with Atom, but you get a lot in return.

This motherboard offers DVI and HDMI outputs, together with ten USB 2.0 ports. You'll find gigabit Ethernet and even eSATA. There's an optical S/PDIF output, as ports for two WiFi antennas (the required Mini Card module is included).

One x16 PCI Express slot is available for any type of PCIe add-on card, including graphics. Two DIMM sockets accommodate DDR3 modules of up to 8GB. Four phases on the voltage regulator deliver sufficient power for even a Core i7-800-series quad-core CPU. This board even has six SATA 3Gb/s ports, while most mini-ITX solutions offer only two. In short, this is a fully featured desktop solution in a minimum size footprint.

The Mini Card module for PCI Express is included with the H55-ITX WiFi.

Processor Comparison Table

Source: Intel ark (ark.intel.com)

Test Setup

Benchmark Results: Applications

Rendering our default image is a piece of cake on the Core i3. Thanks to its computing horsepower, the i3-530 crunches the image in less than seven minutes. The new Atom D510 takes roughly four times longer, and the Atom 230 requires almost six times longer.

3ds Max benefits from better thread optimization, which is not the case for the creation of a 115-page PDF out of Microsoft PowerPoint 2007. This process executes in 1:38 on the Core i3, but it takes almost eight and nine minutes on our two Atoms.

More frustrating facts await in the Photoship CS4 benchmark. Our image filtering scenario applies six built-in Photoshop filters to a 69MB TIF image. This takes less than four minutes on the Core i3-530. Run this operation on the Atoms and you'll have time to eat lunch.

Fritz is a chess game that delivers better performance with every megahertz and processing core it can get. However, the results show clearly that Atom isn’t here to sprint. Only play chess on an Atom if you’re after a game of relaxation, not competition.

Benchmark Results: Archiving

7-Zip is one of the most efficient archiving tools (check out our article Four Compression and Archiving Tools Compared). The new Atom D510 does well, but it doesn’t stand a chance against the Core i3 system.

The results are similar with WinRAR.

WinZip is single-threaded, but it also requires patience if you want to compress and archive our 650MB data set at best compression.

Benchmark Results: Audio/Video

We use HandBrake to transcode MPEG-2 into H.264 video at high quality. What takes five minutes on a Core i3 will require nine times longer on an Atom 230. Fortunately, the Atom D510 is much better here, but still requires four times the i3-530's processing time.

iTunes can convert digital audio (WAV) into AAC, which also requires significant time on Atom systems. We use the Terminator II soundtrack to test this type of workload.

Lame does very much the same, but it converts audio data into MP3 format.

Benchmark Results: Power Consumption

This is interesting. Both Atom platforms are very similar and don't come with a plethora of add-on features. Meanwhile, the Core i3 solution comes with more connectivity and a WiFi module. We're amazed to see that it requires less idle power than the Atom 230 system. Intel’s D510MO, based on the Pineview Atom, is lower on idle power but not by much. We already found that it's possible to get even lower idle power consumption numbers, as you can see in our Maximum Efficiency: A 25W Performance PC Using Core i5 article. Clearly, Atom has no advantage whatsoever when it comes to low system power consumption.

The situation is entirely different if we put the test systems to work. The Atom's peak power increases by only a few watts (+4W for the Atom 230 and +5W for the Atom D510) while the Core i3 system requires more than 80W in full swing. In the context of low-cost PCs and the Atom in particular, this is certainly a lot, but let’s recall the performance levels. Core i3 was many times faster than Atom 230 or D510 in all benchmarks, but it doesn't require many times the power.

Benchmark Results: Efficiency In Single-Threaded Applications

First, we decided to look at a single-threaded workload consisting of iTunes, Lame, PDF creation using MS PowerPoint and Adobe Acrobat, and WinZip.

The long workload runtime for Atom solutions isn’t surprising.

Power consumption is more interesting, because the Core i3 system is far below its peak power. The average power consumption of roughly 50W is more than acceptable. Atom 230 required an average of 36W and the Atom D510 stayed below 30W.

The total power required to complete this first workload is determined by the system power requirements as well as the time required to complete the task. Our Core i3 requires a fraction of the time to complete its homework and therefore is better on overall power consumption. It actually requires half the power that an Atom D510 would burn.

Benchmark Results: Efficiency In Threaded Applications

The multi-threaded applications in the second part of our efficiency testing were 3ds Max, 7-Zip, Adobe Photoshop CS4, HandBrake, Lame, MainConcept, and WinRAR.

The runtime for these multi-threaded applications is much closer now—at least if we compare Core i3 to the Atom D510. The older Atom 230 remains way behind.

Since these workloads tax two processing cores, the Core i3 requires more power on average. The Atom D510 also jumps over the 30W mark.

If we look at the total power required to complete the multi-threaded workload test, i3 handily wins. It only required a quarter of the power that an Atom 230 needed to finish the job.

Benchmark Results: Overall Efficiency

Let's look at overall efficiency defined in performance per watt-hours of power used.

The runtime needed to complete workloads differs considerably. The Core i3-530 took 36 minutes to complete our tasks. Our Atom D510 required two hours and 16 minutes, and the older Atom 230 system finished after three hours and 45 minutes. These differences are clearly more than cosmetic.

The average power required during the efficiency test was almost twice as high on the Core i3 than on the Atom D510.

The total power required for the entire workload (single- and multi-threaded applications) is lowest on the Core i3 machine.

Here is the overall result: Atom D510 almost doubles power efficiency (performance per watt-hours) when compared to the Atom 230 thanks to the fact that it offers more performance and two cores at decreased power consumption. But the Core i3-530 again provides almost twice the performance per watt-hours than the Atom D510.

A picture can convey a thousand words; this one conveys thousands of seconds. Our power diagram shows clearly that the Core i3-530 requires the most power when at work, but it finishes hours earlier.

Conclusion

Before talking about the results and implications for system buyers, I would like to reiterate that we compared two different worlds in this article. Atom was designed for nettops and netbooks, emerging markets, and low-cost system environments. Core i3 is the entry-level product of Intel’s desktop processor lineup, and both more expensive and powerful than the Atom. An Atom D510 motherboard with onboard processor typically costs $70 to $100, while this is the minimum cost for an H55 motherboard. Add another $115 and you'll have comparable base configs, but you're facing at least twice the cost for a Core i3 motherboard and processor.

At this point, you have to add memory, hard drive, case, power supply, and optical drive components, which all favor the Core i3 system because the relative price difference to an Atom system shrinks as the absolute cost increases. This is our key point: you can either go for a nettop system starting at $300, or you can consider an entry-level Core i3 machine. The latter will cost more, but this article proves that the additional value is extremely significant.

Our H55 test system with Core i3-530 was many times faster and much more efficient than the Atoms.

If you’re looking for a convenient solution to occasionally process email, documents, simple spreadsheets, browse the Web, or watch standard-def video, then there's nothing wrong with an Atom system. But we recommend staying away from Atom if you have the slightest expectations for how systems should perform, if you’re impatient, or if you regularly run workloads through your system.

Specific examples of such workloads would include HD video playback, all sorts of audio and video conversion, encoding, transcoding, file archiving, image or audio editing, and so on. You get the point. If this is the case, Pinetrail turns into Paintrail. Get many times better performance and save significant time with a real PC and boost power efficiency along the way.

Introduction

Welcome the third installment of Tom's Definitive Linux Software Roundup. This time around, we're shining a spotlight on office apps. This article is also a part of our ongoing coverage of Linux for Windows users. If you've wanted to get your feet wet, these guides are designed to present replacements for some of the most common and popular Windows titles. The series thus far includes:

Tom's Linux Series For Windows Power Users

Part 1: Ubuntu Linux Installation Guide

Part 2: Run Windows XP In Ubuntu Setup Guide

Part 3: Internet Application Roundup

Part 4: Communications Application Roundup

Part 5: Office Application Roundup

In this segment, we'll cover all the productivity applications needed to get you back to work on your mission critical tasks. This means office suites, word processors, spreadsheet apps, presentation software, simple database titles, desktop publishing, project management, financial software, and more. We know, we know. You're still waiting for us to get into gaming. But before most folks take a jump from Windows to Linux, they have to address these very-necessary applications. Don't worry, there will be time to play later.

For now, boot into your favorite Linux distribution (distro), virtual machine, or live CD. Or hang out in Windows. Some of these apps are cross-platform, so you can stick with what's familiar (even if it's a Mac), and still learn plenty about these freely-available apps.

Skip around and take advantage of the links to grab some of this great free software for yourself.

If your work is with video, audio, or image files, you'll just have to wait for our next segment: Multimedia Apps. If you were expecting to find personal information managers (Outlook replacements), then check back to our last installment, Communications Apps.

Standards, Methodology, Test System Specs, And Legend

Standards

What follows is a collection of easy-to-install applications intended for those making, or even thinking about making the switch from Windows to Linux. This essentially means that these applications must fall in line with the realistic expectations of an average end-user in either a home or office desktop environment. The three main criteria for these apps are: usability, quality, and popularity.

As usual, I've opened up the test bed to include the top three distros: Ubuntu, openSUSE, and Fedora. For an app to even appear in this article, it has to be available in one of the top three Linux distros' official software repositories (repos), or as .deb or .rpm files from the software vendor's official Web site. If you need a refresher, please reference Desktop Linux for the Windows Power User for an explanation of package management.

Apps that had too many bugs, crashes, or fails were left out. The quality of an app is determined by comparing its feature set to the industry-leading title in that category (whenever one exists). In the event that there are no clear industry-leading apps to compare against, don't worry. Anything that looks like it came out of a Win9x time capsule doesn't pass. Since Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) is in a constant state of bug-reporting and fixing, the most popular apps will have the most complete sampling of users, in turn producing an even better title. Also, because support is mainly handled by the community of users, popular software naturally has more documentation and fewer compatibility issues. Therefore, popularity greatly influences the order in which equally-usable apps of comparable quality are listed. This includes extra weight given to multi-platform applications. For a more comprehensive explanation of the standards applied, please reference the Standards and Methodology page from Internet Apps.

Exclusion #1: Web Apps & Online Services.

Almost every article showcasing Web apps and online services is applicable to Linux as well as Windows, even if not specifically stated.

Exclusion #2: Windows Apps

Though I include a page on virtualization and emulation, it is to showcase the actual virtualization/emulation software. I do not delve into the details of getting any specific Windows app running in Linux. For a guide on setting up VirtualBox (a popular VM application) in Ubuntu, see How To: Windows XP Mode In... Ubuntu Linux?

Exclusion #3: Preferences

User preferences like the alluring 3D desktop effects, screen savers, and panels/launchers are not covered in this series. There is an upcoming how-to piece for the different preference options.

Exclusion #4: Games

Native casual games, free games, indie games, retail games as well as virtualized platforms and emulation will be covered in a future rundown of Linux gaming.

Exclusion #5: Servers

This is a follow-up to the first article and therefore concentrates on Linux as being an alternative OS for consumers. Nothing server-side, only client-side.

Methodology

This article is the third of five (or so) in Tom's Definitive Linux Software Roundup, and my production machine has undergone a few upgrades since the series began. The new hardware configuration is in the table below. However, the software has changed as well. I started out with Ubuntu 9.04, but switched to Kubuntu 9.10 over the holidays. Therefore, some of the versions may have been from Jaunty and not the newer Karmic repos. Also, some screenshots are GNOME and others KDE.

Test System specs:

In order to determine Ubuntu compatibility, I used a fresh and updated virtual machine (VM) installation of Ubuntu 9.10 (32-bit), with the default GNOME graphical user interface (GUI). To check openSUSE and Fedora compatibility I used openSUSE 11.2 (32-bit) with the KDE GUI, and Fedora 12 (32-bit) with GNOME.

Virtual Machine specs:

In order to test drive the feature sets of these applications (and to determine 64-bit friendliness), I fell back on my host OS, a native (non-VM) and fully-updated installation of 64-bit Kubuntu 9.10. When an application was not available for the 64-bit architecture, I used the 32-bit VM installation of Ubuntu. The version number that I evaluated appears in parenthesis next to each application's name. This may not necessarily be the latest version or the same version available via your distribution's software repository.

Legend:

   An application's logo links to its home page (for example, Firefox = mozilla.com/firefox).

indicates availability in the default Ubuntu repos (via Synaptic).

indicates availability in the Ubuntu repos if KDE is installed (still runs in GNOME).

indicates availability in the default openSUSE repos (via YaST2).

indicates availability in the default Fedora repos (via YUM).

links to an available .deb package download.

links to an available .rpm package download.

indicates that the app has no official 64-bit binary (though source/shell may work).

links to an available Windows download.

links to an available Mac download. indicates that the application is a retail product.

Note: The icons used in this article were borrowed from the hydroxygen icon set by deviantdark and hosted on GNOME-look.org along with a host of other high quality theming elements.

Office Suites

While Linux is known for its staggering amount of choice and customization potential, the operating system also conveys an undeniable attraction to simplicity. Office suites are perfect for those who want a collection of different productivity apps, but either don't want to choose each app separately or prefer consistency between them.

Only office applications that are made available as part of a greater suite are listed here. For a more detailed description of the applications included in these suites, simply skip ahead to the pages dedicated to a specific type app (e.g. word processor, spreadsheet, database).

OpenOffice.org (v3.0.1)

OpenOffice.org (OO.o), besides being a great free alternative to Microsoft Office for current Windows and Mac users, is currently the go-to office suite for Linux. Ubuntu and most other modern Linux distros have at least the Writer word processor, Calc spreadsheet software, and Impress presentation app from OO.o installed by default. Rounding out the full suite is the Base database app, Draw graphics editor, and Math formula/equation software.

One of this suite's best features is the ability to open, edit, and save MS Office file formats with ease. Also, the default file type for any documents created with OO.o is the Open Document Format (ODF) which should be transferable to most modern office applications. Due to corporate sponsorship by the late open source champion Sun and functional compatibility with MS Office, OO.o has the popularity (and therefore the documentation and support) needed to remain leader of the pack for the foreseeable future (unless, of course, Oracle changes the arrangement).

SoftMaker Office (2008 trial edition)

SoftMaker Office is a retail office suite that covers the basic productivity trifecta of word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation software. SoftMaker Office is not the only retail Linux office suite available, but it is the only one to pass the usability screening for this roundup. Kudos to SoftMaker for selling a product that the consumer can actually install.

SoftMaker Office can be purchased for $79.99 either on CD or by download. There is also a 30-day trial version available, so try it out for yourself. *Version 2010 is now available for Linux as well as Windows.

KOffice (v1.6.3)

KOffice is part of the complete K Desktop Environment (KDE) project, and it is without a doubt the most expansive office suite in this roundup with a whopping eight apps in the full collection. The basic "Productivity Applications" include the KWord word processor, KSpread spreadsheet app, KPresenter presentation software, and Kexi database software. The "Creativity Applications" include Kivio for flowcharts (a Visio replacement), Karbon14 for vector graphics, KPlato project management, and the Krita image editor.

Please note that I used KOffice version 1.6.3 for this roundup. Version 2.0 of KOffice gets full KDE 4 integration and a major face-lift. Though the long-awaited 2.0 has been officially released, it was not yet available via the official repo of any major distribution at posting time. Also, the KDE project tends to make its .0 releases the first look at the development of a new version, not a stable milestone like most other software houses.

GNOME Office

Unlike the other offerings, the GNOME Office Suite is a loose mash-up of a few productivity apps with no integration features or discernible brand uniformity. This suite includes the Abiword word processor, Evolution PIM, GNUmeric spreadsheet, and GNUCash financial software.

Because GNOME Office was possibly never intended to be an office suite, it's not the first choice for a complete productivity package. The included apps are all fine when considered by themselves, some are even excellent, but collectively they do not add up to a complete office suite.

A Different Kind Of Office Suite

Lotus Symphony (v. 1.3)

At first glance, IBM's Lotus Symphony appears to be a very basic office suite with only the core word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation applications. A closer inspection reveals that Symphony is not an office suite at all, at least not in the traditional sense. Instead of serving as a collection of separate applications, Symphony is actually one application that performs multiple functions. You can open documents, spreadsheets, and presentations in different tabs, all within one Symphony window. Thus the entire “office suite” will be covered here, instead of being broken up into the word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation categories.

In order to easily switch between tasks, the main toolbar is located below the tab bar, as opposed to directly below the menubar. Additional toolbars appear as sidebars on either side of the currently-opened file. Along with the main toolbar, the sidebars change functions depending on the type of file open in the active tab. The tabbed approach makes Symphony's user interface unfamiliar for an office app, yet strangely familiar because of tabbed browsing.

Along with word processing, spreadsheets, and presentations, Symphony has built-in Web browsing capability. Symphony's browser will definitely not replace Firefox, but it is nice to open the hyperlinks in a document within the same application, as opposed to opening a new browser window.

Surprisingly, Symphony was able to open this article with all links, icons, and special formatting completely intact. However, all the text in the document had jagged edges. When I saved this article as a .doc file and opened it in Word 2007, it had the same loss as every other word processor I included: the links within pictures no longer appeared. As with OO.o Writer, the tables lost all borders, but the pictures remained properly aligned to text.

Lotus Symphony's spreadsheet function has small cells by default. This caused entries with more than seven characters to appear as pound signs (#) until column width was manually adjusted (Ed.: Excel does this, too). Symphony did open my test .xls file with all data intact. I saved a Symphony spreadsheet as an .xls file, which opened in Excel 2007, also intact.

The presentations were actually natural with the sidebar-style toolbars in Lotus Symphony. It imported a test MS PowerPoint .ppt file with no loss of formatting or transitions. However, the featureset is lacking compared to PowerPoint and OO.o Impress.

Overall, Symphony is visually appealing and unmistakably modern. Unfortunately, while the color scheme appeals to the eyes, text within the document body, toolbars, and menus are downright unpleasant to behold, mostly due to heavy pixelization. The icons in the toolbars appear to be of different sizes, creating an overall “choppy” look. Also, Symphony treats tooltips and drop-down menus in the body and sidebars as windows, with all of the associated desktop effects for windows. As you can imagine, this can become annoying very quickly. Using any 3D effect animations for windows will cause tooltips and drop down boxes in Symphony to use those animations as well. That won't be a problem if you disable desktop effects, or simply choose conservative animations for your windows. IBM has assured me that this bug is being addressed. They have also said they are evaluating the possibility of adding 64-bit deb/rpm support sometime in the future.

Symphony definitely takes a new approach to the age-old office suite. If IBM can smooth out the rough edges, this app could easily replace the basic productivity suites currently pre-installed on most distros, maybe even Corel or MS Works on Windows machines. However, being so unfamiliar could potentially discourage users simply looking for an easy MS Office replacement. At the very least, IBM's Lotus Symphony is an application worth watching.

Word Processors

The foremost criteria for word processor inclusion is MS Word .doc compatibility. Being able to collaborate or just share with other users, many of whom likely use MS Office on a Windows machine, is essential. Not being able to do so is a deal-breaking situation for most. To test compatibility with MS Word .doc files, I found a test .doc online which includes a number of different formatting options. This is not an extremely complicated document, nor is it in the newer .docx file type. It simply includes a number of different headers, footers, indents, lists, bullets, colors, tables, etc. Nothing super fancy, just the stuff that appears in everyone's documents.

In order to apply a quick test on performance, I used the .odt file for this article, which is rather large and contains complex formatting. This article was also saved as a .doc in each app, to test backwards compatibility into MS Word 2007.

OO.o Writer (v.3.0.1)

OO.o Writer is the fastest and most responsive word processor available for Linux today. By the time I added many of the icons and links to this article, all other word processors became sluggish, unresponsive, and in some cases even crashed.

Writer's feature set is also unparalleled, with functionality near that of MS Word 2007. It also has a pleasantly familiar user interface which makes it a natural fit for anyone who has used any pre-2007 version of MS Word. As far as compatibility, Writer opened the test .doc file, only displaying minor differences from Word. There were two numerals that appeared highlighted that shouldn't have been. In one cell of a table, the bottom border lost some thickness. When this article was saved as a .doc and opened in Word 2007, the tables lost all borders and links embedded in the pictures did not make the transition.

Unless you're constrained to a larger organization's software environment, or your .docs have extremely intricate formatting, Writer is professional-ready software.

TextMaker (2008 Trial Edition)

This article, which has a ton of images and hyperlinks, caused TextMaker to experience some scroll-lag when fully loaded, but the document did load rather quickly and it displayed all elements properly. Image sharpness in TextMaker is fantastic; it's even better-looking than in OO.o Writer.

TextMaker also handled the test .doc file flawlessly. In the trial version, I was unable to save a document as a .doc file, so I could not test cross-compatibility. My only real issue with TextMaker was the small size of the icons in the toolbars. If you're like me and do not care about MS Word compatibility, and mostly print or export documents to PDF, you can't beat OO.o Writer's price tag.

AbiWord (v. 2.6.6)

AbiWord is one of the oldest Linux word processors still being actively developed and has the cleanest interface in this category. Abi does have a rock solid backup system which creates a documentname.extension.SAVED file, in the event of an unexpected halt or interruption. This feature actually saved my work multiple times, but unfortunately, it was AbiWord's Insert/Symbol function that caused all of the crashes.

Another feature that left me with mixed feelings was the default view being Page Width. While this improves on-screen readability, it tends to distort the perceived font size. Fortunately, this can be easily changed from a drop-down box in the standard toolbar. I began writing this article in AbiWord, but was forced to switch back to OO.o due to severe slowdown caused by Abi's overzealous grammar checker. It saw every period as the end of a sentence, and that's problematic for a technology writer (e.g. OO.o, .exe, .zip).

Another mark against AbiWord is that it uses its own .abw file type by default. It does so even though it can open, edit, and save a plethora of other document formats, including the industry standard MS Word .doc and the preferred .odt open document standard. Links embedded within pictures and picture-to-text alignment did not survive the transition from the AbiWord .doc file to MS Word 2007. If you seldom create new documents, yet still need more than the barebones feature set of a text editor, AbiWord is a good option.

KWord (v. 1.6.3)

KWord is fast. It's probably the fastest-loading and maybe the most responsive word processor in the roundup. This was despite the fact that I was running KWord in Ubuntu with GNOME. It should run even more smoothly from its native KDE GUI.

One feature that sets KWord apart from the pack is the document structure sidebar that breaks down documents into elements (text, tables, images) and sorts them in a file tree. This could come in handy for large or complex documents with multiple elements, or when using a template.

The first issue that I noticed in KWord was pretty major. It broke up and hyphenated large words at the end of a line, auto- matically...yikes! The second issue was that image quality was noticeably poor when compared to the other word processors in this roundup. Again, this isn't nearly as apparent when run from within KDE. The overall pixelized look of the document did transfer to MS Word 2007 from KWord's saved .doc file. Like AbiWord, the links and formatting of pictures did not carry over. On a more positive note, the hyphenation of words at the end of a line didn't carry over either. Overall, this isn't my first choice in word processors.