Since RGB software entered the PC market many moons ago, it’s been a disorganized mess. Every company that makes hardware with RGB has its own software to control it. Few of these utilities, if any, can sync with one another. So you might have Corsair RAM, an Asus GPU/motherboard, and an NZXT CPU cooler, all with RGB. Good luck getting any synced-up lighting pattern going between those components.

This fractured RGB software ecosystem has been the bane of bling-loving gamers for years. Additionally, the software is usually unintuitive and crash-y. At least, that’s our experience with utilities from Gigabyte, Asus, MSI, and Corsair. Now Microsoft is stepping into this quagmire with what could be a divine solution: integrating RGB control directly into Windows 11.

News of Microsoft’s plans was revealed in a recent Insider build. It shows a new section named “Lighting” listed under the Personalization area in Settings. Twitter user @albacore posted screenshots showing various RGB devices listed in the menu. They include a mouse, an Asus CPU cooler, a Steam Deck, and a generic keyboard. This still leaves out memory, mousepads, and GPUs, but it does seem to include all RGB devices connected to the system. This isn’t the case with most current RGB software, which usually only shows devices from the software manufacturer.

A second panel allows you to tweak each device’s lighting. The options are limited; instead of getting about a dozen presets to choose from, there’s just a handful. The lighting effects seem limited to a solid color, blinking, or a rainbow. That’s quite pedestrian, at least compared with our personal experience using Corsair iCue. This software presents myriad options and also allows you to download custom profiles.

What’s interesting is the source also posted a link to a request made by a Microsoft employee to create this in 2018. The technical paper clearly states the problem: a wide range of devices have “lamps” with no universal location to control them. According to OP, it was thought that work on this feature was cancelled, which apparently isn’t the case. It now appears in Insider Build 25295, even though Microsoft didn’t mention it in the release notes.

Even the most jaded Windows user would welcome this addition to Windows. In fact, this feature alone could be enough to convince people to “upgrade” to Windows 11, in our opinion. It’s been such a long-running national nightmare that a lot of users have given up on the dream of ever unifying all of their RGB lighting. There are alternatives like OpenRGB, but it’s not easy to use in our experience. Plus, in addition to making it easier to control lighting, you’d no longer have to install four or more separate utilities to change the lighting on something. If you’re reading this, Microsoft, please bring this to the masses as soon as possible.

Now read:

• Microsoft Is Planning a Modern Redesign of File Explorer for Windows 11
• Microsoft Testing PC Game Pass Widget for Windows 11
• Windows 11 Collects an Awful Lot of Telemetry About Your PC

 

Credit: John Burek

(Photo: John Burek)If you’re an executive at Intel or AMD and in charge of sales forecasts, you likely projected some big numbers for the end of 2022. Both companies had unveiled their new platforms, promising next-gen performance and features. Since many people could not upgrade their PCs during the pandemic, all the ingredients of a booming holiday sales period were present. Added to the mixture were all-new, high-powered GPUs as well. Overall, it seemed like the perfect time to build or buy a new PC. Oddly, that did not come to pass. Instead, Q4 ended up being the worst period for CPU sales in 30 years, according to Mercury Research.

The market analysis company’s president, Dean McCarron, discussed the somber news with our colleagues at PCMag this week. CPU sales declined year-over-year by 34% and quarter-over-quarter by 19%. Those are the biggest declines for both metrics Mercury has ever tabulated in its 30 years of existence.

The reasons for the decline include excess inventory and low demand for CPUs. Intangible factors may also be at play, such as global economic uncertainty. The numbers mirror those from IDC, which also posted a gloomy Q4 report recently for PC shipments. IDC’s numbers from 90 countries showed a 28.1% decline year-over-year. That drop-off was twice as high as in Q3, making Q4 a particularly bloody quarter for the PC industry.

In response to the turbulence, Intel and AMD are now under-shipping CPUs. Both companies’ CEOs admitted to this in their recent earnings calls. AMD’s CEO said it would do less of it in Q1, though. Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger said his company’s “Q4 under shipping [was] meaningfully higher than full year.” Despite this strategy, CPU shipments for both laptops and desktops suffered dramatic declines in what is normally a robust quarter. Intel also suffered from its decision to announce price increases in Q3. That caused some of its partners to buy stock before the price went up in Q4.

Despite the dour report, it’s not all bad for the PC market. In 2022 overall, CPU shipments and revenue were down 21 and 19%, respectively, from previous years. However, that was the pandemic era, a magical time of record profits for all semiconductor companies. Despite the decline, the numbers in 2022 were still better than the pre-pandemic years. Although the red ink is projected to continue to flow for another quarter or two, a turnaround is expected later this year.

One unexpected result from this volatility is it’s allowed AMD to claw market share away from Intel. According to IDC’s report via HotHardware, AMD now has over 30% of the x86 market. While Intel still has more than twice that market share, it lost 5.6% over the past year.

Now Read:

• Nvidia Announces Record $7.1 Billion Q3 Revenue
• IDC: Global PC Shipments Declined 15 Percent in The Second Quarter
• Semiconductor Industry Forecast Projects Huge Gains for AMD, Losses for Intel and Sony

(Photo: AMD)Things move fast in the world of PC hardware. One day you’re sitting on the top of the throne; the next, you’re an also-ran. Such is the case with AMD’s fledgling Zen 4 mobile CPU, the “Dragon Range” Ryzen 9 7845HX. Earlier this week, it appeared out of the shadows and leaped to the top of Passmark’s mobile CPU rankings. Now, just several days later, it’s been usurped by Intel’s Raptor Lake mobile. Those CPUs officially launched this week alongside Nvidia’s RTX 4090 and 4080 laptop GPUs. All is not lost for AMD, though, as it’s yet to launch the flagship SKU, which could even the score.

Two Intel CPUs now stand atop the PassMark mobile benchmark leader boards care of @9550Pro: the Core i9-13980HX and 13900HX. They were both stuffed into expensive, heavy, and powerful next-gen laptops, which were reviewed this week. Each of the CPUs shares the same 8P-core, 16E-core design, offering 32 threads in a mobile CPU for the first time. The 13980HX’s maximum boost frequency of 5.6GHz is 200MHz higher than that of the 13900HX. Its E-cores can also boost 100MHz higher to 4GHz.  Otherwise, the two CPUs are basically the same and share a 55W TDP base power consumption. That can go as high as 157W or as low as 45W.

Intel’s 24-thread, 32-core CPUs went up against the Ryzen 9 7845HX, which is also a 55W CPU. However, it is a 12-core, 24-thread SKU with a maximum boost frequency of 5.2GHz. Clearly, the odds are stacked in Intel’s favor here. Overall, in single-threaded performance, Intel’s CPUs are faster than the AMD 7845HX by 9% and 14% for the 13900 and 13980HX, respectively. In multi-threaded performance, Intel’s CPUs hold an advantage of 11% and 16%, as noted by Videocardz. It should also be noted that AMD has not officially launched its Zen 4 mobile CPUs, so take AMD’s numbers with a grain of salt.

For now, Intel better hold off popping the cork on that champagne bottle. That is, assuming it hasn’t auctioned it off on eBay yet after its most recent earnings report. AMD still has an ace up its sleeve in the form of the Ryzen 9 7945HX. That is the 16-core, 32-thread Dragon Range CPU with a maximum boost clock of 5.4GHz. That’ll put it alongside the Core i9-13900HX on the spec sheet for clocks and threads. Intel still has a small advantage in core count at 24 total. Not to mention Intel also has the Core i9-13980HX with even higher clocks. Still, we expect this battle to be a nail-biter.

AMD is expected to launch notebooks featuring its Dragon Range CPUs this month. It should also be unveiling its RDNA 3 mobile GPUs in them too. Intel and Nvidia have already laid down a heavy marker with their latest hardware. It’ll be interesting to see if AMD can compete and whether it can leverage its AMD Advantage technology to leapfrog its rivals. Its Dragon Range CPUs are also the first mobile CPUs with a chiplet design, so that adds a spicy twist to the proceedings.

Now Read:

• AMD Reveals Ryzen 7000 V-Cache Pricing and Availability
• Rumored AMD RDNA4 Specs Indicate 3.5GHz Clocks, Double RDNA3 Performance
• AMD Attempts to Pour Cold Water on Nvidia’s RTX 4080 Launch

(Credit: AMD)

AMD has published a new blog post attempting to convince people of its status as a GPU industry leader. Along the way, it seems to have inadvertently admitted its older GPUs are a better value than the newest models. It reminds us of the oft-used online phrase, “An attempt was made.”

The gist of the blog is boilerplate PR about how AMD Radeon GPUs are the best at every resolution and price point. It notably does not compare its GPUs against Intel or Nvidia with numbers. Anyway, with many AAA titles out currently and more on the way, AMD wants people looking to upgrade to buy an AMD GPU. To help convince them, it provides a handy chart showing the fps-to-dollar ratio for its entire 7000 and 6000 lineups across six games at 1080p: Apex Legends, Valorant, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, The Callisto Protocol, GTA V, and Overwatch 2.

All games were tested at “Max” settings, aside from the entry-level RX 6400, which ran these games at a “Medium” preset. It’s in this chart that it shows its 7900 GPUs offering the worst bang-for-the-buck value of its entire product stack.

If you just pay attention to the grey bars, you’ll note how they start out small at the top. They then proceed to get wider and wider, all the way to the bottom as it ticks through the 6000 series. This essentially shows that as you go down the product stack, fps-per-dollar only goes up. It means that every 6000 series GPU offers more fps-per-dollar than its most recent GPUs.

We’re not sure why AMD’s marketing team felt compelled to point this out. Perhaps it is just stating the obvious, that its newest GPUs have an early adopter tax built into their pricing. Maybe AMD is still happy to be selling RX 6000 series GPUs. We imagine Nvidia is in the same camp, as it needs to clear out its Ampere GPUs to pave the way for more Ada Lovelace purchases. Still, AMD seems to be faring well so far with its RDNA3 GPUs, vapor chamber issues aside.

As we reported previously, the RX 7900 XT is currently the top-selling GPU in Germany. You can insert a David Hasselhoff joke here, but the numbers show it’s been a success so far.

We reached out to AMD to help us understand why it’s pushing this angle, as it paints its older GPUs in a more favorable light than its newer models. We’ll update this article if and when we hear back.

Now Read:

• AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX: Powerful, but Lacking in Ray Tracing
• The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX Is Much Smaller Than the RTX 4080
• AMD Attempts to Pour Cold Water on Nvidia’s RTX 4080 Launch

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger holds an 18A SRAM wafer. (Credit: Intel)

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger holds an 18A SRAM wafer. (Credit: Intel)Intel has reported its earnings for all of 2022 as well as Q4, and it’s so bad that analysts are likely diving for their thesauruses to properly characterize it. “Historic collapse” is how one summarized the losses. One just said there are simply “no words.” Intel reported its worst earnings in more than 20 years. Though the company’s earnings were still within its guidance, they came in at the very low end and mark a historic downturn for the company. The news caused Intel’s stock to fall almost 10% in value. Its earning reports are available in various forms on its investment website.

For 2022, Intel earned $63.1 billion in total, a 20% decline from its 2021 earnings. Its Q4 revenue was $14 billion, a precipitous 32% drop from the same quarter last year. One analyst notes this is the largest year-over-year decline in the company’s history. It posted a net loss of $664 million for the quarter, which almost matches its worst quarterly loss in history: In 2017, it reported a loss of $687 million in the fourth quarter.

Though Intel ended 2022 with $8 billion in profit, last year it made $19.1 billion. That’s a remarkable 60% reduction, which is why the word “collapse” is being thrown around. Its gross margin for Q4 of 39.2% is the lowest in decades as well. Intel used to get 60% margins not that long ago.

As far as where the hits came from, it’s in both data center and client computing. It earned $6.6 billion on the client side, which is down 36% from last year’s Q4. Total revenue for client computing in 2022 dropped 23% compared with 2021. Its Data Center and AI (DCAI) group’s revenue fell 33% YoY, and 15% for the year as a whole. The only bright spots were gains in Mobileye, Intel Foundry Services, and its graphics division. All three divisions posted increases, with its foundry services posting a surprising 30% improvement for the quarter.

Despite the grim report, Intel says it’s still on target to achieve its long-term goals. It notes it’s still pursuing its “five nodes in four years” strategy laid out by CEO Gelsinger upon his arrival in 2021. This will theoretically allow it to achieve industry leadership in both transistor performance and efficiency leadership by 2025. To that end, Gelsinger says it’s looking to begin its ramp for Meteor Lake in the second half of 2023. If that occurs, we’ll be surprised as it’s been rumored to be delayed. Instead, we may see a Raptor Lake refresh.

“We are at or ahead of our goal of five nodes in four years,” said Gelsinger in the earnings report. “Intel 7 is now in high-volume manufacturing for both client and server. On Intel 4, we are ready today for manufacturing and we look forward to the MTL (Meteor Lake) ramp in the second half of the year,” he said.

Unfortunately for Intel, it doesn’t anticipate a quick rebound from its financial nadir. Its CEO predicted continuing “macro weakness” through the first half of 2023. However, he noted there’s a possibility of an uptick later this year. Given the uncertain economic conditions though, Intel is only providing guidance for Q1 of 2023 and nothing beyond that. That guidance is even more brutal than this report: It predicts YoY revenue will be down 40%, with gross margins hitting 39%.

Intel’s earnings report follows news this week that it has canceled a planned $700 million R&D facility in Oregon. It was also announced this week that it was laying off 544 employees in California as it begins to tighten its belt. It’s stated it plans on reducing expenses by $3 billion in 2023, with that number increasing to $10 billion by 2025.

Now Read:

• Leaked Slides Offer Details on Intel’s Meteor Lake, Arrow Lake CPUs
• Intel CEO: Chips Will Have 1 Trillion Transistors by 2030
• Intel’s 6GHz Core i9-13900KS Is Already Available at Newegg

Axville/Unsplash

(Photo: Axville/Unsplash)We’ve been waiting a long time to see how DirectStorage performs in the real world. Forspoken is the first game to support it and it was released this week after a multi-month delay. Now it’s in gamers’ hands and we finally have some numbers to pore over, thanks to some benchmarks a hardware testing site in Germany has posted. They’re not for loading times but for overall performance. As it turns out, offloading asset compression from the CPU to the GPU does impact gaming performance. Your mileage may vary, of course, but in the first tests, it’s up to an 11% penalty in frames per second.

The tests were performed by PC Games Hardware. To test DirectStorage 1.1, it set up a test bench with a Core i9-12900K and an RTX 4090. On the SSD side, they tested three models: SATA, and PCIe 3.0 and 4.0. Oddly, the testers didn’t say which models of SSDs they used for testing. Regardless, DirectStorage doesn’t work with SATA, so we’re able to glean the effects of the asset decompression happening on the GPU instead of the CPU. The tests were run in 4K and showed some clear results.

In an unexpected twist, the SATA SSD offered the highest fps, coming in at 83.2 on average. When switching to the fastest PCIe 4.0 SSD, the average frame rate was 11% slower at 74.4fps. The PCIe 3.0 drive was just as fast as PCIe 4.0, averaging a single fps more on average. Since they only tested at 4K, we don’t know if this situation is the same at lower resolutions. The good news for gamers is the 1% and 0.2% fps averages were essentially the same across all three drives. This would indicate that the player would not notice any performance spikes while playing.

Previously, it was reported that DirectStorage can lead to a huge increase in data transfer speeds. In that test, it was Intel’s GPU that was the fastest, beating out pricier GPUs from AMD and Nvidia. Clearly, more testing is needed across the GPU spectrum. We’d also be curious to see what a PCIe 5.0 SSD could do with Forspoken. Sadly, those drives are not quite ready yet. Also, keep in mind this is just one data point. Another YouTuber named Bang4BuckPC Gamer also has a SATA vs. PCIe 4.0 side-by-side, and in the majority of the scenes, the performance is the same. Sometimes, though, the NVME drive is noticeably faster than the SATA drive.

At this point, we need to see more SSDs and GPUs tested to see what the performance penalty is (if any). Though 11% is a higher number than expected, the game’s frame rate was still well above 60fps and it looks very smooth in the video. We also don’t think the RTX 4090 is the best GPU to test this on, as someone with that card never really has to worry about fps in any game, even at 4K. We’d be curious to see what the impact is on Windows 10 as well, as it has a watered-down version of DirectStorage.

Now read:

• SSD, HDD Reliability More Similar Than Thought
• Samsung 990 Pro SSD Owners Are Reporting Rapid Drop in Drive Health
• Samsung Blames Pandemic for Bait-and-Switching Customers

As the famous poet Carl Johnson once said, “Ah sh*t, here we go again.” Apple’s newest MacBook Pros with M2 SoCs were just released and are now being subjected to teardowns. This has allowed us to peek under the hood at the SSD configurations. Sadly, it appears Apple is doubling down on hobbling the SSD speeds on the base models, 9to5mac reports. It did the exact same thing last year. Therefore, it’s not a huge surprise, but still a disappointment on a laptop with pricing that starts at $1,999.

What Apple has done this time is a replay of the M2 launch almost a year ago. When it announced the M2 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro it was discovered the base model used one NAND chip instead of the two in their M1-based predecessors. For example, on the M1 laptops, 256GB of storage was divided between two 128GB NAND modules. However, as time goes on, density goes up. So Apple switched to a single 256GB chip for the base models. The spot where the second chip used to be was empty and only filled if the customer upgraded its storage. Thanks to how SSDs rely on parallelism to boost performance, this meant the base model’s SSDs offered just half the speeds of machines with two NAND chips.

Now we see it happening again on the new M2 machines as well. Despite the fact that the new M2 MacBook Pros offer 512GB of storage for the base models, Apple can now cover this amount with half the chips. Teardowns confirm the M1 MacBook Pro used four NAND modules and the M2 machines use just two. Benchmarks confirm a significant impact on performance, though 9to5mac’s speeds (above) are actually showing less of an impact than other reviewers are reporting.

For example, Max Tech compared the 16-inch M1 and M2 Pro laptops with 512GB of memory. The benchmarks show the M1 system is twice as fast in read speeds compared with the M2. In CrystalDiskMark, the M1 hit 6887MB/s, compared with 3462MB/s on the M2. For a 22GB file transfer test, the M2 system was 56 seconds slower than its M1 predecessor.

In a multitasking and file export test in Adobe Lightroom, the M2 Pro showed noticeably slower performance than the M1 system as well. He exported 499 photos from Lightroom while clicking between 15 browser tabs. The M2 system took 70 seconds longer to export the photos. It also stuttered briefly during this process when switching tabs. The M1 never hitched at all in this multitasking comparison. Although, to be fair to Apple, the hitching was very brief. Also, in some CPU-based tasks, the improvement in CPU power of the M2 can make up for the SSD speeds, depending on the task.

As MaxTech states, when this happened with the M2 Air and 13-inch MacBook Pro, it was mostly excused as those were inexpensive machines. The M2 laptops cost over $2,000, though, with the 16-inch model starting at $2,500. How much this will impact people in the real world is hard to quantify. But we can sure see it in the benchmarks, both synthetic and real-world. At the very least, it would be handy if Apple informed people of the situation before they bought one.

Now Read:

• Apple Updates MacBook Pros, Mini With M2 Silicon
• Apple’s M2 Max-Powered 16-Inch MacBook Pro Delivers Stunning 27 Hours of Battery Life
• Apple’s $50,000 Mac Pro Is Worth Less than $1,000 If You Sell It to Apple