Iran's spiritual leaders tend to call the U.S. the Great Satan to express their spite, but it turns out that its military, surveillance, propaganda, and even allied Houthis are eager to use American-built AI technology to target the U.S. Navy and develop weapons, surveillance, and propaganda, Anthropic's September 2026 threat report revealed.

Arguably, one of Anthropic's most remarkable findings is that an Iran-linked threat actor used an American AI model, Claude, to support military reconnaissance and develop targeting recommendations against U.S. naval forces in the Middle East. The perpetrator combined publicly available ship and aircraft transponder identifiers with commercial satellite imagery and information on U.S. naval movements, and even extracted the names of U.S. military personnel from captions of publicly available military photographs. It also researched potential vulnerabilities in communications equipment used aboard ships, including known flaws affecting Cobham Sailor VSAT terminals, Cisco communications equipment, and Schneider Electric EcoStruxure systems. Anthropic said it banned the account, introduced additional detection mechanisms, and shared its findings with government authorities.

Another striking case involved a cell in northern Yemen controlled by Houthis (which are in turn controlled by Iran) that used Claude Code to support three weapons programs: a guided rocket that uses a phone-class flight computer that assists terminal guidance, a multistage ballistic missile targeting a range of more than 2,000 km, and an R2000 missile family that included a hypersonic glide vehicle variant. The group used Claude to develop guidance, navigation, and control software; integrate an open-source autopilot with a phone-class flight computer; write control and position-estimation code; tune parameters; build firmware; and even run flight simulations. Essentially, the group used multiple Claude instances instead of a group of software engineers for coding, code review, research, and simulation.

While Houthis are technically not Iranians, they can certainly share their research and development results with their allies and potentially use Iran's industrial capacity to build their weapons.

In addition to building targeting recommendations against American naval forces as well as speeding up the development of weapons, Iran used Claude for surveillance tools.

One Iran security-linked unit used Claude to analyze 155,216 tweets to profile, identify, and surveil 6,388 opposition individuals in a single year. Another group used the model as an engineering pipeline to develop domestic tracking tools, including the production-deployed "al-Najm al-thāqib" Firefox extension designed to mass-harvest user identities across major social platforms. While Anthropic has banned 16 Claude accounts associated with Iranian paramilitary and domestic security agencies, that does not mean it has banned all of them.

Iran-linked actors and Houthis are not the only entities using Anthropic's AI technologies for weapon development. China and Russia are also actively using Claude for their military programs.

According to a report from The Maine Wire, the FBI has arrested and charged Terry “Jiajia” Liu, a Customs and Border Protection supervisor based in Calais, Maine, for theft and damage to government property. Liu allegedly stole computer hardware, including Intel 14th Generation Raptor Lake Refresh processors, memory modules, and hard drives, from at least 46 Department of Homeland Security computers across three Maine border facilities. They replaced the stolen parts with inferior hardware and exchanged the stolen equipment through Newegg’s trade-in program for store credit.

Liu’s official responsibilities were limited to information-technology support, so they did not have access to modify any government computer. Port Director Theodore Cummings made the restriction abundantly clear to Liu in a written order: “Please do not move any computers or computer parts.” However, criminals rarely listen.

Hidden surveillance cameras captured Liu opening government computers and swapping hardware during the midnight shift. The perpetrator would take the systems to a training room to commit the crime. One camera recording showed Liu using a screwdriver to scrape thermal paste off a processor and installing a replacement chip in one system. Meanwhile, another recording caught Liu removing a memory module from a system and storing it in their desk drawer.

According to the affidavit, investigators found that thirty-nine computers had their processors replaced, six machines with memory modules swapped, and eight had hard drive changes. The original systems used Raptor Lake Refresh chips but were later discovered to have older hardware, sometimes downgraded to Pentium chips. Beyond the processor swap, other computers had less memory and storage capacity than their original configurations.

Instead of trying to sell the stolen hardware on the open second-hand market, Liu used a less conspicuous approach: Newegg’s Trade-In program. According to investigators, Liu sent 13 emails between a personal account and an official CBP email address containing shipping labels and trade-in receipts for processor models matching the missing components from the government computers.

The Newegg trade-in offers varied between $200 and $210 per processor. According to the transaction records from the U.S. retailer, Liu traded in Core i7 Raptor Lake Refresh chips 16 times over 14 months, from May 2025 to July 2026. Investigators also found three $200 credits from Newegg in Liu's American Express records.

During an interview, Liu confessed to replacing hardware in the government computers with lower-performing parts bought on Amazon and Newegg. They also acknowledged submitting the government-owned parts to Newegg's Trade-In program. At first, Liu claimed their actions were motivated by a desire to improve the computers' performance and how long computer repairs took. However, they later admitted that the changes resulted in degraded performance.

Restoring the stolen hardware could cost about $20,460, while fully replacing all 46 compromised computers with equivalent hardware would cost an estimated $105,800. However, additional labor to configure each system for government use will drive the bill even higher.

It’s been a heck of a time lately for PC gamers willing to get their hands dirty with mods. Hot on the heels of the discovery of the DLSS 5 DLL in a prerelease version of NBA 2K27, modder dashdogy found a way to bring Multi Frame Generation, one of the crown jewels of GeForce RTX 50-series graphics cards, to RTX 40-series (and earlier) products.

As already elevated graphics card prices seem set to continue rising, and hardware upgrades get further and further out of reach of the average PC gamer, more and more folks are going to want to hold on to the RTX 40-series hardware they have for as long as they can, especially if smoothness-boosting features like MFG are just a few clicks away on those older cards.

So we had to see MFG working on Ada for ourselves—assuming it works at all. We grabbed the mod files and got to playing with them in Cyberpunk 2077, since it’s likely in many TH readers’ Steam libraries already and has a healthy modding community. You can find the latest instructions for enabling MFG on Ada through dashdogy’s GitHub page.

Before spending a ton of time testing, we verified that the mod works at all. While spinning the camera at a high, constant speed, we could indeed see that increasing MFG multipliers beyond the officially supported 2X factor on Ada cards does greatly increase perceived smoothness or fluidity of motion in Cyberpunk 2077, as you would expect.

Another tell is that the same visual artifacts are visible in certain regions of the screen on both RTX 40-series and RTX 50-series graphics cards as you add more generated frames. MFG 4X and above, especially, tend to add some visual “junk” at the bottom of the frame that appears regardless of the game, and we could see that artifacting on Ada.

At least in Cyberpunk 2077, then, we’re confident that MFG is really doing its thing on RTX 40-series cards with this mod.

We also didn’t see any perceptible issues with frame pacing or frame delivery, although playing on a high-refresh-rate, G-Sync-Compatible monitor like our test bench’s ROG Strix XG27UCS smooths out all but the worst such issues. If you don’t have a high-resolution or high-refresh-rate monitor to begin with, the utility of MFG will be seriously limited for you anyway.

The latency question

So is this a free lunch? Is Nvidia soft-locking MFG to Blackwell purely for marketing reasons? That’s where performance testing comes in, since it has the potential to reveal whether there’s a catch in running MFG on Ada. The question is not so much whether MFG juices output frame rates, but whether it runs on Ada within acceptable latency thresholds.

As we’ve long emphasized, when you have essentially arbitrary control over output frame rates like MFG allows, input lag becomes the final barrier to a playable experience. So in the performance results that follow, we’ll certainly present output frame rates as you would expect. But you should view those in the context of your own monitor’s refresh rate. As long as the delivered frame rates we recorded exceed your display’s peak refresh rate, you have headroom to play with to keep your monitor at or near that number during gameplay.

The real issue, then, is whether both RTX 40-series and 50-series cards deliver an acceptable input latency under our test conditions. In our past testing, we’ve determined that a roughly 60ms average latency threshold, as indicated by Nvidia’s FrameView app, is the point at which player inputs and displayed frames start to become noticeably decoupled in AAA single-player experiences like Cyberpunk.

If you’re only slightly on the wrong side of this threshold, a game might still be playable, but if you totally blow past it, you’re likely to notice laggy inputs and increasingly distracting visual artifacts as the MFG model struggles to fill in the gaps between sparser and sparser input data.

Testing methods and notes

As one of the biggest technical showcases of the current PC gaming era, Cyberpunk 2077 lets us enable all the modern rendering features we’d want for Nvidia cards. It implements not only ray tracing and path tracing, but DLSS Super Resolution, Ray Reconstruction, and Multi Frame Generation. The number of AI-generated pixels per frame can be quite high in this title.

We enabled all those features to expose the full potential complexity of running all of their associated AI models in a modern rendering pipeline. If RTX 40-series cards are going to stumble for some reason with modded MFG enabled, we want to put as many obstacles in their way as possible.

And because benchmarking the performance of an unofficial mod is venturing into the Wild West anyway, we also added a DLSS 5 mod to the mix to see whether Blackwell GPUs have a distinct edge in the neural rendering future that the arrival of that feature promises to usher in. DLSS 5 is supposed to come to RTX 40-series cards later this year, so we think it’s good to understand where performance sits today, even if it’s subject to the same disclaimers as this MFG mod.

For reference, then, we tested Cyberpunk with maxed-out raster settings, path tracing, and MFG 4X at three resolutions: 1080p with DLSS Balanced, 2560x1440 with DLSS Performance, and 4K with DLSS Ultra Performance upscaling enabled.

We only tested cards ranging from the RTX 4090 down to the RTX 4070 for these experiments, both because of time and Cyberpunk’s VRAM requirements. We didn’t want to deal with potential performance pitfalls due to running out of VRAM, so the 12GB RTX 4070 is where we’re drawing the line for now.

Modded Cyberpunk 2077 1080p performance

At 1080p, Cyberpunk 2077 with MFG 4X scales fine on Ada, but it’s clearly scaling better on Blackwell. The RTX 4090 lands between the RTX 5070 Ti and RTX 5089. Introducing DLSS 5 to the mix doesn’t change any relative standings, although it does create some larger gaps between average frame rates and 1% lows than we might like on the RTX 4070 Ti Super, RTX 4070 Ti, RTX 4070 Super, and RTX 4070. The RTX 5070 has no such trouble.

But again, the real story is in our latency results. Here, we can see that every card we tested falls under our 60ms threshold with MFG 4X alone. But Blackwell hardware has a clear advantage in the standings, as even the RTX 5070 delivers a lower input latency than the RTX 4090 with our DLSS 5 mod off and a comparable input latency with it enabled. All the other Ada cards shake out as you would expect from there. But in absolute terms, even with DLSS 5 enabled, only the RTX 4070 Super and RTX 4070 are far beyond our acceptable latency thresholds.

Blackwell might have a latency edge with MFG enabled and a smoothness edge with a modded version of DLSS 5 on top, but at least with the RTX 4070 on up, there’s certainly enough headroom to use the feature on Ada.

And as we went to press, a version of the RTX 40-series MFG mod came out that removes the need for ReShade. That more streamlined approach might cut down latency, but we couldn’t test it because it currently crashes Cyberpunk 2077. Again, this is the Wild West, not a validated, bulletproof solution from Nvidia like you get with RTX 50-series products.

Modded Cyberpunk 2077 2560x1440 performance

At 2560x1440, generational performance standings and scaling between cards remains much the same as we saw at 1080p. The RTX 4090 still falls short of the RTX 5080, and the RTX 4080 duo falls behind the RTX 5070 Ti.

We also still see the wide gap between average frame rates and 1% lows rear its head on more Ada cards with our DLSS 5 mod enabled, though to be fair, these lows are still being smoothed over by MFG to the point that you’re unlikely to notice them with a high-refresh-rate, variable-refresh-rate monitor like we’re using.

On the latency side, all of the Ada cards except the RTX 4070 still run our modded MFG 4X with acceptable input latency. But enable the DLSS 5 mod we’re using, and input latency climbs past 60ms for all Ada cards except the RTX 4090. The RTX 4080 Super and RTX 4080 still provide acceptable performance under this full load, as they’re only slightly over our latency threshold. But for any less powerful RTX 40-series cards, you’d need to start choosing between DLSS 5 and other eye candy, like lighter RT settings instead of path tracing or no RT or PT at all.

Modded Cyberpunk 2077 4K performance

Our modded performance results at 4K with DLSS Ultra Performance demonstrate why it’s so important to discuss MFG-boosted frame rates in the context of input latency. If you’re not mentally dividing by four, everything on our output frame rate might look playable.

At this high output resolution, the RTX 4090 finally takes the lead over the RTX 5080, both with plain MFG 4X and with our DLSS 5 mod on top. The 16GB of VRAM of the RTX 4070 Ti Super would seem to be giving it an edge over the RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 5070, and the RTX 4080 duo would seem to beat out the RTX 5070 Ti.

Our latency chart for MFG 4X shows a weird, but entirely reproducible result: input latencies at 4K with DLSS Ultra Performance are actually much lower than they are at 2560x1440 for most Ada cards, despite the fact that both of these output resolution targets share the same input resolution.

We’re not sure why Ada cards run into such a latency hump with this MFG mod at 2560x1440 with DLSS Performance, but we double-checked our results, and this behavior is reproducible. Blackwell cards experience the more linear rise in input latency as output resolutions rise that you would expect.

Again, this is the Wild West of modded performance, and we have nobody to blame but ourselves here, but it’s an unfortunate result given the prevalence of 2560x1440 monitors. Perhaps the maintainers of this mod can track down the root cause and fix it, but nothing is guaranteed.

In any event, input latency with MFG 4X alone at 4K with DLSS Ultra Performance isn’t an issue for any card here. You might be pushing your luck with the RTX 4070, but both Blackwell and Ada cards are delivering on the promise of MFG here: smoother output with responsive input.

Add DLSS 5 to the latency picture, though, and as we’ve come to expect, you really want an RTX 5090, RTX 4090, or RTX 5080 for acceptable responsiveness. And you’re pushing it with the RTX 5080. No other cards in this bunch need apply.

Bottom line

Our experience with the purportedly Blackwell-exclusive Multi Frame Generation on RTX 40-series cards through modding suggests that there isn’t any glaring reason why Nvidia couldn’t enable the feature for Ada Lovelace cards, and that’s kind of wild given how heavily it was touted as a Blackwell-exclusive feature back when those cards launched.

At least as long as Nvidia doesn’t find a persistent way to lock it out, our experience is that MFG generally just works on Ada. Even if input latencies aren’t quite as low on those older cards as they are on comparable Blackwell hardware, all else equal, they’re still perfectly acceptable, even under the combined load of path tracing, DLSS Super Resolution, DLSS Ray Reconstruction, and MFG 4X in Cyberpunk 2077.

We only had time to test cards ranging down to the RTX 4070 for this quick look, but for folks looking to extend the useful life of their Ada hardware, the availability of MFG could certainly stretch those cards’ lifespans.

But our experience also shows that MFG on Ada isn’t perfect. It’s still a mod in active development, and the unusual and reproducible input latency behavior we charted at 1440p on RTX 40-series cards is the sort of unexpected pitfall you might expect from an unofficial implementation of the feature. Cross your fingers that it’s an issue that can be fixed by the community.

The fact that MFG works as well as it does on Ada, even in this modded form, also makes us wonder whether Nvidia might just enable official support for it at some point, given the apparently bleak prospects for gaming graphics card pricing and future hardware generations as the AI boom shows no signs of abating. And such a move would provide much broader and more immediate performance relief for gamers than re-introducing ancient silicon like the RTX 3060.

Given that Nvidia is already working on bringing DLSS 5 to RTX 40-series GPUs, maybe this mod will convince it to throw in official MFG support, too. Fingers crossed.

IKEA has announced the Kallax Storageborn companion creation for players of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition on PC or Xbox. But who’d want a set of drab utilitarian Swedish shelves following them around during their adventures in this fantastical role-playing game? The answer is quite a lot of people, it would seem, from the social media feedback we’ve seen. IKEA’s free mod for this iconic RPG also appeals to gamers’ pragmatic instincts with its claims that “your inventory woes end here.”

The household furniture giant says it designed this Skyrim mod as it wanted to bring its real world smart storage solutions to the digital domain. Skyrim was chosen, in particular, because gamers in this classic title are “plagued by the evils of encumbrance and disorganization,” asserts IKEA.

Of course, the furniture maker will have invested time and money into the development of this fully voiced companion mod (voiced by comic actor Matt Berry) for the publicity, too. But there's little to complain about as it's free and entirely optional to your Skyrim experience.

If you are interested in adding the Kallax Storageborn companion creation to your Skyrim experience, you can get it directly from Bethesda here, for free. But before using these eminently practical flatpack DIY shelves in your game and “sending clutter back to the fires of oblivion,” you have to discover and assemble your Kallax through a questline. You’ll find it at the Dwemer furniture store, where you’ll also discover the secrets of Kallax’s origin and have to defeat the Clutter Golem.

Naturally, you summon this shelving unit in the game with a call of ‘Aya Key Yah.”

The mod doesn’t just introduce your trusty new Kallax Storageborn companion; you’ll also get access to the Allenblade weapon, some blue and yellow-themed armor, and a Meatball helmet.

It is always interesting to see non-tech brands cross over into our reporting realm. The first example that springs to mind is the KFC console, but IKEA has dipped its toe into tech more recently by expanding its computer furniture ranges to include products such as the Xbox Gaming Den furniture series showcased at Gamescom 2026, plus various smart home accessories.

If you're not yet subscribed to Tom's Hardware Premium, we've got you covered with this weekly roundup of everything we've posted throughout the week.

To kick the week off, our resident GPU guru and all-round inference extraordinaire Jeff Kampman undertook the laborious task of running Qwen 3.8 27B across several devices you might actually be able to afford. The model promises near-enough Frontier levels of performance, without the downsides that come alongside paying for an API-based subscription or tokenized billing.

What Jeff finds out after a dizzyingly large number of benchmarks across devices like an RTX 5090, Mac Mini, DGX Spark, and Strix Halo systems is that configuration matters just as much as the final, raw, tokens-per-second outputs that many clamor over on social media. Benchmarking AI models is still a fairly nascent subject, and the level of detail on offer here isn't something you'll find published anywhere else.

• Benchmarking Qwen 3.8 27B on RTX 5090 and beyond — VRAM capacity alone can't overcome severe software and inference engine bottlenecks

Andrew Freedman headed out to IFA last week, where we saw a slew of new announcements and devices from companies. But there's only one problem. They're all either super-light MacBook Neo competitors or Agentic AI PCs that may well cost more than a car. The original "golden" price point for many enthusiasts, around $1,000, looks a little lonely as a result.

The factors impacting the mid-range of regular old desktops and laptops have been adversely affected by the sheer scale of demand coming from the ongoing AI data center buildout. Meaning that if you're after a system with just enough RAM and storage to get by, prices can skyrocket fast. Andrew explores everything he saw at the show and ruminates on the current state of the systems market, which, for now, appears to be fractured.

• At IFA 2026, computing chased the high and low ends — AI and budget-focused machines left little for the rest of us

Elsewhere in the industry, Ajinomoto, a company usually associated with food products based in Japan, is involved in making some of the most crucial materials in modern AI accelerators. We've taken a look at how the company's ABF substrates sit within the supply chain of the biggest chipmakers like Nvidia, Intel and AMD. But, as with many components in the AI boom, it's strained by more demand than anyone anticipated, which has led to an increase in prices of approximately 30%. We dive deep into the current state of the use of ABF substrates in the semiconductor industry and take a look at the supply chains underpinning it.

• The state of ABF substrates in data center silicon in 2026 — solving the supply crunch and material wall beneath every AI accelerator

Also in the news, TSMC, Intel, and Samsung have all thrown their support behind ASML. The industry is collectively aiming to move towards a shift in High-NA EUV, particularly in the usage of 6×12-inch photomasks. With current standards set at 6×6-inch photomasks, a larger mask would eliminate the need for stitching, which weaves together multiple High-NA exposures, at the cost of efficiency.

We analyze how the move to larger photomasks might shake out, and the trials and tribulations that might face chipmakers during the shift, which, theoretically, will take years.

• TSMC, Samsung, and Intel shore up support with ASML to deploy larger High-NA EUV photomasks — 6×12-inch photomask transition may take years despite unified effort

Lastly, the news has been dominated this week by the release of OpenAI's latest frontier-level model. Named GPT-6 Astra, the AI model quickly topped charts for its intelligence and the ability to complete tasks on a per-task basis lower than other leading AI models. This comes hot on the heels of a fleet of rogue OpenAI agents running amok on internet forums, all in the name of co-ordination.

Astra's release prompted OpenAI to release a blog post, explaining how it believed that Astra was aligned internally. But others believe that the threat of a looming humanity-threatening tech "singularity", powered by powerful models like Astra, is on the way soon.

OpenAI has also claimed to have solved one of the Millennium Problems. The Navier-Stokes problem had been left long unsolved, while mathematician Tristan Buckmaster had been working on a step toward a solution for the problem, alongside a member of Anthropic staff. The pair had been using both Anthropic and OpenAI models in their research, so when the claim came out that an OpenAI model had solved the long-standing problem, it raised more than a few eyebrows. We chronicle the entire saga and the implications for researchers in our exhaustive breakdown.

• OpenAI's breakthrough solution for the elusive Navier-Stokes problem overshadowed by plagiarism controversy — researcher says OpenAI scraped Codex session and issued career threats
• OpenAI claims GPT-6 Astra is an ethereal 'Alien Mind' with AGI-like qualities — company warns of alignment challenges as new frontier leader emerges

If you'd like to read any of the articles above and gain access to Bench, you'll need to purchase a subscription. Your support goes a long way in helping us to publish deeper, more insightful stories that might otherwise fall outside of our regular areas of coverage.

Iran is likely to study and attempt to reverse-engineer a U.S. Navy underwater drone captured by Iranian forces near the Strait of Hormuz, potentially handing Tehran useful technology while delivering a setback for the Pentagon. According to a Reuters report published September 9, the 19-foot Dive-LD autonomous underwater vehicle malfunctioned while surveying regional waters before Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps recovered it.

Both the U.S. military and the drone’s manufacturer Anduril quickly moved to downplay the significance of the loss. Analysts cited by Reuters also said the captured drone was unlikely to provide Iran with a decisive military advantage. At the very least, however, the vehicle gives Tehran a propaganda victory and an opportunity to examine American undersea technology as the U.S.-Iran war enters its seventh month.

Tehran already appears to be having a field day with the situation, with Iranian embassies around the world mocking the U.S. for losing the drone. In an X post, Iran’s embassy in Ghana compared its recovery to pulling a plastic bottle from a fishing net, adding that it was “still blinking like an idiot.” Iran's embassy in Hyderabad was even more direct about what might happen next, posting: “Unboxing ceremony by our reverse engineers, tomorrow morning!”

A noticeable gap has emerged between how Anduril markets the Dive-LD and how the U.S. military is now describing the captured vehicle. Anduril promotes the Dive-LD as a highly reliable and adaptable large autonomous underwater vehicle capable of operating for up to 10 days in demanding environments, previously calling the platform the most reliable and flexible autonomous underwater vehicle on the market. The Navy, meanwhile, described the lost vehicle as an older, defective model that “neither collected sensitive data nor carried any classified sonar or radar equipment.”

Despite attempts to downplay the incident, Washington has historically taken similar incidents seriously. After Iran recovered an RQ-170 Sentinel stealth reconnaissance drone in 2011, then-President Barack Obama publicly requested its return. Tehran subsequently claimed that it had reverse-engineered the aircraft and unveiled domestic drones apparently influenced by its design. In 2022, the U.S. Navy dispatched a patrol ship and an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter after an Iranian naval vessel attempted to tow away an American Saildrone surface vehicle in the Gulf.

Iran's comical commentary is backed by a genuine ability to extract useful information from captured hardware. Bryan Clark, director of the Center for Defense Concepts and Technology at the Hudson Institute, told Reuters that Iranian engineers “could definitely reverse-engineer the mechanical systems.” However, he was more skeptical about Tehran’s ability to penetrate the software, which reportedly includes defenses intended to frustrate exploitation attempts.

Regardless of any reverse engineering limitations, analysts say Iran will continue to present the incident as evidence of Iranian control around the Strait of Hormuz and U.S. vulnerability there. “This is something that Iran has proven very adept at exploiting for its own benefit in terms of seeking to frame the narrative as one of U.S., in this case, ineptitude and their ability to sort of retain control over the Strait of Hormuz,” said Mona Yacoubian, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The United States and Iran have been at war since Washington launched Operation Epic Fury in late February, with the conflict repeatedly spilling into the technology industry and its supply chains. In April 2026, an Iranian strike halted production at Saudi Arabia’s Jubail petrochemical complex, disrupting supplies of a critical resin used in PCB laminates. Iranian cruise missiles also reportedly struck an Amazon data center in Bahrain in July.

We always like to review Kioxia drives because they usually provide the perfect marriage of performance and reliability. We certainly wish they were more readily available in retail in the U.S., but we can still appreciate a good design when we see it. The Exceria Pro G2 continues in that lineage with all-new levels of performance you can only get with the newest hardware and a PCIe 5.0 interface. It’s like a Kingston Fury Renegade G5 made for OEMs, providing most of the performance you expect from this class of drive with reliability-minded firmware built in.

The important bit is that this drive still delivers what you’d expect. That means high performance, including sustained write performance, good power efficiency, and very low random read latency. These are the hallmarks of a drive that offers an excellent user experience. This is a very fast drive, just not the very fastest, but we make the argument that this is a deliberate trade-off for a drive with roots in an area where reliability is a bigger priority. For some, that might otherwise tip things in its favor. Regardless of your stance, though, its price in areas where it is available is competitive, and we can judge it by that.

Kioxia Exceria Pro G2 Specifications

The Kioxia Exceria Pro G2 is available in 1TB, 2TB, and 4TB capacities. These are the most popular capacities, with 8TB yet again out of reach due to rising prices. The drive can reach up to 14,900 / 13,700 MB/s and 2,300K / 1,950K random read and write IOPS at the highest capacity. Most of this performance is achievable at 2TB, which is likely the sweet spot.

The drive has the usual five-year warranty with up to 600TB written per terabyte. Encryption support is not explicitly mentioned, and for a model in this line, we would expect TCG Pyrite and software encryption support only.

For pricing, we are making estimates based on pre-tax listings in the EU. Kioxia does not officially distribute the drive at U.S. retail, and the Amazon.com listings you find may be imports. These come in at ~$190, ~$340, and ~$650. These estimates make it look downright affordable, with the 1TB and 2TB models well under the WD Black SN8100, and the 4TB is roughly at parity at the time of review. It would be more expensive to import the drive, of course. One reason Kioxia can keep the price of the drive down is that it manufactures the flash it’s using, and its competition there – Crucial dropped out of the market, for one – is reduced.

Kioxia Exceria Pro G2 Software and Accessories

Kioxia supports its SSDs with SSD Utility Management Software, or SSD Utility for short. This SSD toolbox includes a summary of the drive and system, a firmware update feature, drive health monitoring, a secure erase function, password protection, and a section for troubleshooting. For data backup, we recommend MultiDrive for Windows – there is a portable version available, as well as a bootable WinPE image – or Clonezilla for other operating systems.

Kioxia Exceria Pro G2: A Closer Look

This is a single-sided drive in the M.2 2280 form factor. Specifically, the 1TB and 2TB conform to 2280-S3-M, while the 4TB is 2280-S4-M. These are all single-sided, but the 4TB is slightly thicker at 2.63mm versus 2.38mm. This is because it needs 16-die, rather than 8-die, NAND flash packages to achieve 2TB per package. The resulting extra height should not be an issue in most cases but is worth noting for devices with specific limitations.

The rear label has the Physical Presence Security ID (PSID), which allows a security reset to the factory state with an unlocked drive. This fits in with our expectation above that this drive is TCG Pyrite 2.01 compliant. The drive reports support for commands that TCG relies on, but Kioxia does not explicitly advertise hardware encryption.

On the top of the drive, we see the Silicon Motion SM2508 SSD controller, a single DRAM package, and two NAND flash packages. We have covered the controller multiple times, and it has been paired with a range of flash, although the best-known model to use it is probably the WD Black SN8100. Both the Black SN8100 and Exceria Pro G2 are using 218-Layer BiCS8 TLC flash, but the former uses Sandisk BiCS while the latter uses Kioxia’s instead.

When we reviewed the Corsair MP700 Pro XT with Phison’s E28 controller, we noted that the E28 was supplied at one time or another with both types of BiCS. Our understanding is that there is at least one subtle difference between the two – in packaging, or so we’ve heard – and Sandisk has made it a point to emphasize its own flash on its drives. The launch E28 was faster than the prototype we previewed, but we expect firmware maturation was the most significant element. We would rather more carefully say that while Sandisk and Kioxia co-develop and share wafer output, downstream elements – die sorting, binning, package design, and possibly also how I/O speed is maintained – can differ. We wouldn’t lean towards one drive or another based on something like this, but must also point out that WD, Sandisk, and Kioxia all have their own firmware optimizations at play, which are generally more influential.

As for the DRAM, our sample has 2GB of LPDDR4X, but the exact memory will vary from drive to drive. This is not a huge consideration, but we do prefer LPDDR4/4X over DDR4 for even small power savings. The drive does have the correct 1GB-per-TB ratio of DRAM to NAND.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

Comparison Products

The Kioxia Exceria Pro G2, as a high-end drive, faces the stiffest competition we have on hand. This includes the fastest drives we’ve ever tested, the Corsair MP700 Pro XT and WD Black SN8100. We also have drives with the same hardware as the Exceria Pro G2, namely the Kingston Fury Renegade G5. The Crucial T710 uses the same controller but with Micron-made flash rather than BiCS. The T705 slots in as an example of an older high-end Gen 5 design. We also have the proprietary Samsung 9100 Pro, the more budget-oriented Lexar NM1090 Pro with older flash, and an InnoGrit-based offering from TeamGroup in the GE Pro. We are not comparing any DRAM-less drives like the Biwin Black Opal X570, as they are not in this class of drive.

Trace Testing — 3DMark Storage Benchmark

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

The Exceria Pro G2, being a high-end PCIe 5.0 SSD, is bound to be an excellent gaming drive. High bandwidth paired with the newest hardware is a win-win. Still, we like to qualify this with a 3DMark pass. Our finding is that the Exceria Pro G2 scores exactly where we would expect it to – right next to the Fury Renegade G5. These two drives have the same hardware, so no surprise there. The WD Black SN8100, which also has the same hardware, remains tied at the top with the Phison-controlled MP700 Pro XT. As we explained in the Black SN8100 review, this is because WD/Sandisk put some special magic in the firmware. Phison no doubt wanted to match that performance level, and actually did, but we have more than one SM2508-controlled drive to compare, which makes the SMI side of things more interesting.

Let’s look at the T710, for example. Same SM2508 controller but with Micron rather than Sandisk or Kioxia BiCS TLC flash. It’s a good performer, but clearly not as fast in 3DMark. The BiCS8 flash used on all of the fastest drives here has very low latency, which brings excellent results in many of our tests. Latency is, in fact, probably the number one thing enthusiasts look at with SSDs, with dreams of Optane-like performance. Consumer NAND flash, however, is simply not designed with that kind of ultra-low latency in mind. You are also usually bottlenecked elsewhere, to the point that improvements here lead to very little real-world value. Games load faster, sure, but there will be no improvement in FPS. That said, the Exceria Pro G2 will deliver a very good experience even in suboptimal circumstances, such as when the drive is very full.

Trace Testing — PCMark 10 Storage Benchmark

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

In PCMark 10, the Exceria Pro G2 lands a little bit above the Fury Renegade G5 – a good showing, considering they use the same hardware – but behind the MP700 Pro XT and Black SN8100. Performance is excellent in general, particularly for a drive that’s relatively affordable in its target regions. These numbers dwarf decent last-gen drives, with the Exceria Pro G2 scoring about 75% higher than something like the Crucial P5 Plus, for instance. That’s to be expected to some extent, as you have about twice the bandwidth with PCIe 5.0, but this drive also has significant improvements in latency.

Console Testing — PlayStation 5 Transfers

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

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

A PCIe 5.0 drive for the PS5 is overkill, but it’s still important to test to make sure there are no anomalies with the drive. It’s within 1% of the fastest drive in the PS5’s internal read test, so no concerns there. Depending on the price, it can also be beneficial to use a PCIe 5.0 drive in the console. Such a drive will be running at a lower link speed and will be more efficient and cooler-running. Newer drives will use new technology and hardware, which means improved operation even in older host devices.

We generally recommend using less expensive drives for the PS5, but something like the Exceria Pro G2 remains an acceptable option. Kioxia has also validated the drive against Sony’s requirements with its own PS5 testing, relevant if you are someone who prefers to trust a drive so thoroughly tested. It’s also an acceptable use of the drive if you’re buying it ahead of a future build, whether you catch a sale or are trying to avoid future higher prices.

Transfer Rates — DiskBench

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

DiskBench is the Exceria Pro G2’s first misstep and worthy of further discussion since we know this hardware can do more. Read performance is reasonable – beating the MP700 Pro XT, matching the 9100 Pro, and coming close to the Fury Renegade G5 – but write performance is very weak. This also reduces the copy performance below even the 9100 Pro. This is almost certainly by design, in the sense that being conservative with writes is a trade-off. That can reduce wear and also keep thermal output to a minimum. For a retail drive with OEM/client origins, this makes a lot of sense. Obviously, you, as the user, don’t want slower writes, but we think most people would take reliability over burst write performance when push comes to shove.

This means the Exceria Pro G2 is not the drive to get if you want maximum performance, but it’s still very fast. It’s easier to put this into perspective when looking at the benchmark results as a whole. This requires you to look at write performance in our write saturation testing and also at heat output. To close out this section, though, we would point out that the drive still beats the GE Pro and NM1090 Pro in copy performance. We weigh copy performance most heavily for DiskBench as it’s a mixed workload. Those two are more budget-leaning high-end drives that may sometimes end up within a similar price range as the review drive, making any decision between them and the Exceria Pro G2 much easier.

Synthetic Testing — ATTO / CrystalDiskMark

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

We start by looking at ATTO, which gives an idea of how the drive performs at different block sizes. We include the results on logarithmic graphs because that often puts things into perspective. For example, on the standard graph, the Exceria Pro G2 looks fine until it flattens at 512KiB and dips at 1MiB, while on the logarithmic graph it lags the MP700 Pro XT at small I/O, and the gap at larger block sizes is minimized. This lag at small I/O isn’t unusual, as drives with the same hardware, like the Black SN8100, show the same pattern. Both that drive and the Fury Renegade G5 are a little bumpy at larger block sizes, but the MP700 Pro XT is not. Likewise, the T710 is also pretty consistent. This means that the SMI controller and BiCS8 flash combination is less consistent with bigger I/O sizes, but this is only looking at a queue depth of 1.

If we turn to CDM’s sequential results, we find agreement that the Exceria Pro G2 is a bit weak with QD1 reads at 1MB. This is a fairly realistic workload, as transferring files around this size is common and would usually be at QD1. You can see that the MP700 Pro XT, with the same flash but Phison’s controller, leads everything else here, with only the 9100 Pro coming close. It’s able to get more out of the flash and reduce the overhead – it is simply better at extracting bandwidth, even at low queue depths. To some extent, this is a function of firmware and not hardware, by which we mean the Exceria Pro G2 is not likely physically deficient in any way. It may instead be optimized to provide a slower but reliable experience, perhaps in the interest of inducing less wear on the drive. Reads don’t directly wear flash, but you’re also reducing heat output with this sort of optimization. It’s often said that flash prefers heat, but that only applies to writes. You generally want a lower temperature during reads.

The one place the drive clearly trails its Fury Renegade G5 twin is with high QD random reads. This feels like the firmware may be holding something in reserve rather than being a strict hardware limit. The Exceria Pro G2 still has the excellent BiCS latency, though, coming in under 35µs for 4KB QD1 random reads. This is a fantastic result. It trails what WD and Phison can deliver, but it’s still exceptionally fast even by PCIe 5.0 standards. App and game load times are snappy, and there is a noticeable improvement over last-gen drives. We think this is a good trade-off as you’re more likely to be dealing with low QD random reads.

Sustained Write Performance and Cache Recovery

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

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

The Exceria Pro G2 hits over 12.6 GB/s in its fastest state, writing for over 31 seconds with a ~400 GB cache. On a 2TB TLC-based drive, this is only a moderately sized cache, not the largest it could be, but certainly larger than what was common a generation or two ago. The cache is smaller than what the Black SN8100 and Fury Renegade G5 use and more in line with the T710. It’s also larger than the MP700 Pro XT’s, unsurprisingly the fastest steady state drive on the list. Once the cache is exhausted, the drive settles down to 2.0 GB/s or so, engaging a mixed state where it’s writing to TLC and also copying data over from the cache. It holds there for roughly 13 minutes before recovering to a steady 2.96 GB/s for the remainder of the run. While this is slower than other drives in its class like the Black SN8100 and T710, it needs to be taken in context. It’s almost double what the Fury Renegade G5 manages after 15 minutes, despite the shared hardware, and well ahead of the 9100 Pro. This leaves the Exceria Pro G2 in the middle of the pack but far from slow.

It may sound like we’re making excuses for the drive here, but in reality we’re trying to ram home the point that not all drives are designed equally. There are very good reasons to have a drive behave this way. Having a large pSLC cache, as some of the other drives do, has its downsides. It’s not always the best design from a wear perspective and can leave the drive more vulnerable in certain edge cases. Your drive might run faster for longer, but that’s under an unrealistic workload that’s potentially inducing unnecessary wear.

The Exceria Pro G2 is designed for performance, yes, but also to keep on working in potentially more hostile environments. It needs to be reliable, and that comes with some trade-offs. From the buyer’s perspective, we would say that a drive like this – if you’re weighing it against something like the Black SN8100 – is still a worthy buy if you’re throwing it into an always-on Linux box that needs to be responsive but not always blazing fast. Or, as is becoming more common, in an always-on laptop where you are developing or running routines with AI and don’t really care about WD’s Dashboard or Game Mode. Just be aware of the power caveats, which we cover next.

Power Consumption and Temperature

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

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

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

One question the spec sheet raises: why is the 1TB Exceria Pro G2 rated for more active power than the 2TB and 4TB? Our DiskBench power test fits within the pSLC cache at any capacity, so it is not hitting a slower mode, and therefore the likeliest answer is duty cycle. The SM2508 controller has eight flash channels, and with sixteen dies at 2TB it can switch between dies on each channel, giving every die time to rest. The eight dies at 1TB get no such break yet are still capable of reaching most of the drive’s peak performance, so each one works harder. This should not be taken to mean the 1TB will run hotter, not least because it will run out of pSLC cache faster and hit the slower and lower-power TLC mode. It’s just a peculiarity of having a drive this fast with dense flash.

Power efficiency, in our testing, is a measure of work per watt, but it only tells part of the story. For that part of the story, the Exceria Pro G2 is average among all drives and below expectations for a drive of its class – see the Kingston Fury Renegade G5, which has the same hardware. Yet the drive proved to run as cool as a cucumber – 52C max, more than 30C below the drive’s 83C warning threshold. There are two reasons for this. The first is that, indeed, the Exceria Pro G2 has a heat-spreading label, which can be surprisingly effective. The second is that the drive is providing less bandwidth in the DiskBench test but also not pulling more power on average. This suggests that Kioxia designed this drive for OEMs, where you tend to have tighter thermal requirements. Kioxia’s own materials list the drive’s applications simply as “client desktop and laptop,” which supports our conclusion. Trading a little performance for reliability – with the assumption that running a high-end drive hotter in general is less than ideal – is reasonable here. The secret third reason is that our temperature logging comes from the Iometer-based write saturation run, which is sequential with a larger 1MiB block size. Historically we’ve found that mixed workloads, especially with smaller and random I/O, can push a drive a few degrees hotter than that.

The drive’s high idle power consumption supports this conclusion. We test idle in the worst case, that is, for enthusiast desktops where there is no power saving. OEM systems and especially laptops are more likely to have these features enabled. That’s part of the explanation. The other side is in the drive’s advertised power states. The non-operational states have enter and exit latencies that, in comparison to drives with similar hardware, are consistent with a drive that prefers to stay in a ready state, somewhat like WD’s Game Mode. Our speculation is that it may be tuned that way for OEM machines. If we had results from a workstation-oriented drive like Kioxia’s own XG10, which is a client OEM model, we might find more clarity here. Our guess is that having a drive that can potentially wake faster is desirable.

Nevertheless, we would expect the Exceria Pro G2’s idle result to be more in line with the Black SN8100’s. It’s possible this is platform-specific – the drive might react differently on, say, an AMD system – or simply that it was more reluctant to go to a lower power state for us.

Test Bench and Testing Notes

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

Kioxia Exceria Pro G2 Bottom Line

This is a solid drive that hits all the right notes for us. It has high-end PCIe 5.0 bandwidth, excellent BiCS flash latency, good power efficiency, and good all-around performance, including reasonable sustained write speeds. While it’s not really available in the U.S., its pricing in other regions makes it extremely competitive. We also like the fact that it runs pretty cool and appears to have firmware optimization geared toward reliability, which is always welcome if you intend to run a drive like this in a laptop, an always-on system, or another challenging environment. The drive also advertises the usual NVMe low-power states, so users who want a drive that stays available should be well served, provided power management is properly enabled on their platform.

Where the drive falls flat is in comparison to some of the other fastest drives around, like the Black SN8100, which shares its hardware. Some of these drives are just plain faster and even consistently so, matching or beating it in an array of tests. The Exceria Pro G2 does out-write its hardware twin, the Fury Renegade G5, in steady state, but other contenders offer better efficiency numbers and higher sustained write speeds. It sometimes looks like the Exceria Pro G2 is being held back, which, to be fair, is probably true. The design philosophy behind this drive is closer to what you’d find in an OEM or client drive, where reliability is a big concern. In our opinion, this makes the drive a great addition and alternative in the market. Many users would value this over raw performance, especially if it’s more affordable. If you’re in a position to get this drive at a competitive price, it’s worth weighing your priorities.

Personally, we’re fond of the drive for what it does differently while still delivering an excellent user experience. A PCIe 5.0 drive is still overkill for most things, and SSDs are rather expensive at the moment. However, if you want to invest in something that will carry you for a long time, the Exceria Pro G2 is a reasonable choice. We think a lot of users will have a better time with the Black SN8100 – it may be more readily available and beats the Exceria Pro G2 in some areas – but at this performance level it’s kind of hard to go wrong. We’d lean towards the Kioxia if you want something more focused on a reliable experience with a drive that just works without ever being slow.

MORE: Best SSDs

MORE: Best External SSDs

MORE: Best SSD for the Steam Deck

A Reddit user has stumbled upon a GPU jackpot by claiming two old cryptocurrency mining rigs with 12 Zotac-branded Nvidia RTX 3070 graphics cards. The machines were reportedly used during the COVID-era mining boom and had been sitting unused in a basement, probably since the day Ethereum mining became unprofitable. The discovery was shared on the r/PCMasterRace subreddit, and judging by the photos, all of the parts look surprisingly undamaged despite the long period in a basement.

Apart from the graphics cards, the setup also features an MSI MPG Z390 Gaming Plus motherboard, a 1000W Gold-rated Rosewill power supply, two 4GB sticks of DDR4 RAM, and a pair of 120GB solid-state drives. Upon closer inspection of the GPUs, the Reddit user noticed minor silicone bleeding across most of the cards, which is a common occurrence caused by thermal pads breaking down and releasing oil over time. Commenters pointed out that while the cards might require a clean-up with isopropyl alcohol, as well as new thermal pads and thermal paste, the hardware is very likely salvageable.

Launched in 2020 as an upper mid-range graphics card, the RTX 3070 is based on Nvidia’s Ampere architecture with 5,888 CUDA cores and 8GB of GDDR6 memory. It was designed to deliver strong 1440p gaming performance and became one of the more popular GPUs of its generation. The card also arrived during the cryptocurrency mining boom, where its combination of performance and power efficiency made it attractive to miners.

GPUs used for mining aren't necessarily a bad proposition for gaming. Mining rigs were often configured to run GPUs at reduced core voltages and power levels to lower temperatures as well as electricity costs. This also helped in reducing stress on the silicon itself when compared to standard gaming.

For now, the Reddit user does not plan to keep all 12 graphics cards for themselves. Their first step is to test the RTX 3070s individually to find out how many are still in working condition. If most of the cards pass testing without issues, the user says they plan to sell 10 or 11 of the GPUs and keep at least one for themselves. With each RTX 3070 carrying 8GB of VRAM, the haul represents 96GB of VRAM in total, which in today's economy is a valuable amount of graphics memory, particularly due to the soaring prices of newer GPUs.

Architectural enhancements and significantly higher clock speeds enable Apple's A20 Pro application processor (AP), used in the company's latest iPhones, to deliver not only a substantial generation-to-generation performance boost but also to outperform leading desktop CPUs from AMD and Intel by up to a whopping 32% in the single-thread Geekbench 7 benchmark, setting the record for the highest single-thread performance. While high-end PC CPUs still have more oomph for multi-threaded workloads, the tiny A20 Pro is still faster than mainstream laptop CPUs even when many threads are involved.

Fastest smartphone SoC

Apple's A20 Pro system-on-chip (SoC) delivers 4,006 points in single-thread and 11,460 points in the multi-thread Geekbench 7 benchmark, which represents a 23.3% higher ST performance and 27.1% higher MT performance compared to the immediate predecessor, the Apple A19 Pro, according to an early submission (which may or may not demonstrate performance of actual A20 Pro-based products, so take the results with a grain of salt).

The new SoC delivers the highest generation-over-generation performance improvement for Apple's smartphone processors in years and is currently the highest-performing mobile AP. Furthermore, the A20 Pro beats AMD’s 16-core Ryzen 9 9950X3D by 26% and Intel’s Core i9-14900KS by 32% in single-thread performance.

When it comes to the single-thread Geekbench 7 benchmark, Apple's A20 Pro outperforms its closest rivals — Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen5 (SM8850) and Xiaomi's XRing O3 — by 31.5% - 33.7%. In fact, both SM8850 and XRing O3 perform on par with Apple's two-years-old A18 Pro. The six-core A20 Pro also beats the eight-core SM8850 by 12.2% in multi-thread workloads in Geekbench 7 and offers roughly similar multi-thread performance to the 10-core XRing O3.

Compared with other flagship smartphone processors, Apple's A20 Pro holds a commanding lead in Geekbench 7. It is 76% faster in single-thread and 48% faster in multi-thread performance than MediaTek's eight-core Dimensity 9400, while it nearly doubles the performance of Google's eight-core Tensor G5, with advantages of 99% and 96%, respectively. But the most striking gap of A20 Pro is with Huawei’s Kirin 9050 Pro: Apple's flagship is 290% faster in single-thread and 139% faster in multi-thread Geekbench 7 workloads.

A great laptop CPU

While Apple's A20 Pro continues to feature 'only' six cores like many generations before it, this time around the processor packs two 'super' desktop-class general-purpose cores running at up to 4.93 GHz, four efficiency cores running at lower clocks, and a memory interface that delivers +50% higher memory bandwidth compared to its predecessor (allegedly using a 96-bit memory I/O).

The architectural enhancements of advanced CPU cores running at nearly 5 GHz, along with a more capable memory subsystem, not only enable a massive generational performance uptick, but also allow the chip to offer unbeatable single-thread performance and massive multi-thread performance that is comparable to that of laptop CPUs, including previous-generation laptop CPUs from Apple.

Indeed, Apple's A20 Pro is 7% faster than M5, 20% faster than M4, and 43% faster than M3 in single-thread performance. Its six-core design cannot match its multi-thread performance, trailing the 10-core M5 by 39% and the 10-core M4 by 27%. Yet, it is only 5% behind the eight-core M3.

When compared to Intel's Panther Lake, the A20 Pro is 48.7% faster in single-thread performance than the flagship Core Ultra X9 388H, yet the 16-core Panther Lake processor is 63% faster in multi-thread workloads. Against lower-end Panther Lake parts, the A20 Pro is 74% – 88% faster in ST workloads and even leads the Core Ultra 5 325 and Ultra 5 332 by 3% and 64%, respectively, in multi-thread benchmarks.

The particularly striking results of Apple's A20 Pro are the 26% – 33% single-thread advantage over flagship AMD and Intel desktop CPUs, though the desktop processors remain dramatically faster in multi-thread workloads.

First 2nm smartphone SoC

When Apple transitioned to TSMC's N3B (3nm-class) process technology from N4 (4nm-class) with its A17 Pro SoC back in 2023, the new processor was barely 9.8% faster in ST and 6.8% faster than its predecessor A16 Bionic. By contrast, with its first 2nm smartphone SoC made on TSMC's N2 node, Apple offers a massive performance boost over the A19 Pro produced on N3P.

Indeed, Apple's A19 Pro packs two 'desktop-class' 'super cores' whose design is 'driven in part by increased front-end bandwidth, a new cache hierarchy, and enhanced branch prediction,' as Apple described its 'super cores' inside the M5 processor earlier this year. Such architectural enhancements obviously massively increase performance in single-thread workloads at the cost of increased die size, transistor count, and power. Apparently, N2 enabled Apple's designers to squeeze two desktop-grade CPU cores into a smartphone SoC.

Speaking of M5, it is noteworthy that A20 Pro delivers 7.1% higher single-thread performance than M5 while running at a clock speed that is 7.1% higher than that of M5, which is probably a good indicator that Apple's A19 Pro uses the same 'super cores' as M5.

While some may consider using PC-grade general-purpose CPU cores in a smartphone chip an overkill, Apple is known for using and supporting PC technologies in its mobile SoCs (NVMe, PCIe, DisplayPort-over-USB-C, hardware virtualization, etc.). Keeping in mind that Apple also uses A-series SoCs inside iPads and inexpensive laptops, it makes a great sense to have these technologies in its smartphone application processors. With desktop-grade cores inside the A20 Pro, the company greatly expands use cases of these CPUs while also solidifying their position in traditional segments that they will address in the coming quarters.

Without any doubts, Apple's transition to TSMC's N2 starts with a massive general-purpose performance increase, driven by 'fat' super cores and a memory subsystem featuring 50% more bandwidth compared to the A19 Pro. Over the next few weeks, we are also going to learn how Apple upgraded the GPU, NPU, and other aspects of the A20 Pro, and we are going to find out whether the upgrades are as impressive or incremental. In any case, so far, the A20 Pro looks very good.

In a recent lawsuit against Sony, the firm argued that "reasonable consumers would not be misled" into believing they own digital games that they "purchased" on the PlayStation Store. Folks on the Consumer Rights Wiki have now compiled a humongous list of specific instances in which Sony currently states that users do, in fact, own their digital PS4 and/or PS5 games. The list is currently up to 44 specifically documented statements, but actually notes hundreds of examples where Sony explicitly states that users do, in fact, "own" their games across its various services and pages.

In this case, Sony says that no "reasonable person" would believe that, when they add a game to their cart and click "Purchase" on the PlayStation Store, they are entering a contract that entitles them to ownership of the digital goods in question. Instead, Sony believes it's obvious that what you're paying for is a limited, revocable license for a service that only remains available as long as Sony offers it, which is quite different from ownership in a legal context.

The case isn't exactly about ownership, though; it's really about consumer disclosure and product representation. The plaintiffs aren't arguing that buying a digital game somehow transfers ownership of Sony's underlying intellectual property, but rather that Sony's use of words such as "buy," "purchase," and "own" could reasonably lead consumers to believe that they were acquiring a durable right to use the game, rather than merely obtaining a revocable license. That distinction matters because Sony's defense depends in part on the claim that no reasonable consumer would interpret the transaction that way. At the same time, the plaintiffs have produced a substantial body of evidence showing that Sony itself routinely uses precisely that ownership language when describing the digital games its customers have purchased.

This issue is in particularly sharp relief now that Sony's digital store is confirmed to be the only way to purchase new PlayStation games from next year. The publisher's announcement that it would stop producing game discs in January of 2028 caused quite an uproar among gamers who value physical copies of games as a token of ownership. It's worth noting that most players do purchase games digitally (as much as 85% of PlayStation games, by some reporting), and also that disc production and usage become less practical as the manufacturing of both disc drives and discs slowly winds down.

The gamer outrage isn't really about the end of discs, though. This fury has been simmering for a good while now, as gamers resent perceived anti-consumer practices. The realization that discs are going away simply forced a lot of gamers outside the enthusiast sphere to confront the reality that they do not own their digital purchases and that they can be taken away at any time, just as Sony has already done in the past. This is especially pointed in light of the price increases asked by game publishers in the last few years, where games have gone from a typical ceiling of $60 USD up to $70 and now, more recently, $80 (with Mario Kart World, Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom, and now Grand Theft Auto VI), despite often struggling to provide the same level of satisfaction and enjoyment as older titles.

And so we come back around to the Consumer Rights Wiki and its list of times that Sony has explicitly used ownership language on its website and on its digital storefront. The Wiki catalogs these quotes with both links to live pages as well as archived snapshots and screenshots with the relevant text highlighted. The Consumer Rights Wiki was of course founded by consumer rights advocate and YouTuber Louis Rossmann, but much of the work was done by the community that has sprung up around the site as people rebel against the continuous erosion of their consumer rights, particularly by technology companies that argue against their own responsibility.

It's unfortunately still not clear if this case is actually going to trial yet. Sony is attempting to have the case moved to private arbitration, citing that all four plaintiffs agreed to such when signing up for the PlayStation Network; in that case, Sony will likely pay a small cash award to each plaintiff and the matter will be settled, legally speaking. If the case goes to trial, there's a possibility for real legal precedent to be set by a public ruling, at least in California. For the sake of consumer transparency on the PlayStation Store, let's hope that the court agrees to hear this one.

Simulating animal brains seems to be the latest buzz. Hot on the heels of teaching a fly to play Doom, an engineer from the Coinbase cryptocurrency service has elected to turn one into a day trader with Stonkfly. If you want to see Stonk trade live, you can watch here.

The open-source project has a simulation of a male fruit fly brain and eyes, and shows it a standard-issue candlestick graph with historical pricing. The fly can choose to buy, sell, or hold any given currency — although they get shown to the fly in round-robin fashion — and gets rewarded for profitable trading.

A rising portfolio value triggers a dopamine rush as a positive reinforcement signal to 15 cells, while a loss lights up two aversive cells. Trading fees count as losses. The author notes there are no pain or emotional mechanisms at play. Displaying far better judgement than most human traders, the fly cannot use leveraged positions (trading multipliers) or shorts (betting on drops).

The brain has 166,700 neurons and 25.6 million connections. The virtual fly sees the graph as a 320x180 display across its left and right eyes, with an intersecting center portion. The simulated photoreceptor cells get fed the RGB pixel values rather than pricing information. By default, the fly "thinks" and acts every 500 ms, and the market data gets refreshed every 60 seconds, and it can bet up to $10 on any one order, up to 24 times a day.

The author notes that this small project doesn't prove anything other than the connection between the input mechanisms, visual signals, and synapse changes. Naturally, he warns users against assuming that said changes are any indication of actual trading ability, especially in the face of a general rise in crypto prices that "can make any buyer look skilled." You can bet that some fly-brained investor will still infer meaning from the experiment, though.

If you're interested in getting your own Stonkfly, you need only download the repository on macOS (it's definitely a fruit fly) or Linux, have 16 GB of RAM available, and Python 3.11 and a C++ 17 compiler. The simulation defaults to using paper trades and $100 in virtual balance, but it uses real BTC-to-USDC data. There are instructions on how to set up a live account to see if your trading skills are a match for an insect.