Technology

• The average UK SMB now invests 36% of its annual revenue in new tech
• Finances and payments are common use cases
• Only 1% of companies remain non-tech-users

Britain's small and medium-sized businesses are investing more than a third (36%) of their annual revenue in new tools and technology, new Worldpay data has said, with most (90%) also agreeing tech investments have already significantly boosted efficiency.

Among the most popular areas for new tech investments across all type of UK SMBs are financial management (54%), marketing and sales (49%) and payment processing (47%), with employee management, inventory control and CRM also seeing a healthy boost.

On the flip side, only 1% of SMBs are now not using any technology, compared with one in five (20%) a decade ago, marking a huge departure from old ways.

UK SMBs are mostly tech-first

"This digital transformation is not just a trend - it's a vital evolution that enhances productivity, efficiency, and customer satisfaction," Worldpay GM for SMB International Chris Wood explained.

A number of factors could have contributed to the rise in spend on digital platforms, but the post-pandemic behavioral shift could lead them. Customers now expect contactless and omnichannel services that are fast and instant.

Then, there are the regulatory hurdles, for example HMRC's Making Tax Digital mandate which requires bookkeeping to be completed using certain reporting software.

"Worldpay is on a mission provide SMBs with the right technology, empowering independent businesses to compete on a level playing field and thrive," Wood added.

You might also like

• Small business leaders are struggling to cope with a plummeting UK employment rate
• We've listed the best productivity apps and best online collaboration tools
• Check out the best AI tools and a handy boost

• CMA says UK cloud market is uncompetitive
• AWS and Microsoft account for 30-40% of the UK market each
• The two companies disagree with the CMA's findings

The UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has determined Britain's cloud market shows too many anticompetitive traits, with Microsoft and AWS each holding around 30-40% of the UK market in 2024 and hyperscaler concentration especially high in infrastructure-as-a-service.

At the same time, fewer than 1% of customers switch providers annually and multicloud usage is rare (particularly among SMEs with more limited budgets).

The CMA has blamed high egress fees, incompatible interfaces, latency and skills gaps for widespread vendor lock-in, which is ultimately weakening competition.

CMA worried about AWS and Microsoft cloud market dominance

Behind the two hyperscalers, Google accounts for just 5-10% of the market, with others like IBM and Oracle having even smaller shares. Although AI capabilities are yet to change market dynamics drastically, existing positions are likely to be amplified, thus the CMA has stepped in to ensure competition remains healthy.

In its Final Decision ruling, the CMA took the biggest hits at Microsoft over its unfair licensing practices, which make it costlier to run Microsoft software on rival cloud providers.

A Microsoft spokesperson told TechRadar Pro: "The CMA Panel’s most recent publication misses the mark again, ignoring that the cloud market has never been so dynamic and competitive, with record investment, and rapid, AI-driven changes. Its recommendations fail to cover Google, one of the fastest-growing cloud market participants."

"Microsoft looks forward to working with the Digital Markets Unit toward an outcome that more accurately reflects the current competition in cloud that benefits UK customers," they continued.

"The action proposed by the Inquiry Group is unwarranted and undermines the substantial investment and innovation that have already benefited hundreds of thousands of UK businesses," an AWS spokesperson added.

On the flip side, Google supported the CMA's findings: "The conclusive finding that restrictive licensing harms cloud customers and competition is a watershed moment for the UK."

Elsewhere in the industry, the CMA has been criticized for not acting fast enough and addressing persistent issues like cloud credits, lock-in and procurement bias.

"We urge the CMA to use the powers at its disposal now to address these harms, rather than embark upon a new investigation that may not give customers relief for years to come," Coalition for Fair Software Licensing Executive Director Ryan Triplette shared.

Looking ahead, the CMA's next step is to designate Microsoft and AWS with strategic market status (SMS) under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act, allowing it to impose legally binding, targeted conduct requirements on the two giants.

"A significant driver of high cloud computing bills is the consolidation of the market into a handful of players. Until recently, these companies have been the only game in town, so they’ve been able to set the rules of the market, for example, including egress fees for switching, long lock-in periods, and more. In fact, Gartner has observed that most customers spend 10% to 15% of their cloud bill on egress charges," noted Akamai's John Bradshaw.

"UK businesses are under huge cost pressures. We need to make it easier for them to switch cloud computing providers and find pricing options that better fit their balance sheets."

You might also like

• These are the best cloud hosting providers
• We've listed the best cloud storage and best cloud backup platforms
• Microsoft hits back against UK competition lawsuits, slams AWS and Google once again

Cyber-attacks continue to dominate headlines, disrupting operations and putting sensitive data at risk. In the wake of the AI boom, threats are growing more complex. The endless game between attacker and defender is intensifying, and defenders know the stakes are high. Operational, financial, and reputational damage can be severe when an attack succeeds.

At the same time, security teams face a widening skills gap, growing threat complexity and tighter budgets. It’s a perfect storm for burnout. In fact, 79% of cybersecurity professionals reported that escalating threats are impacting their mental health, highlighting the need for an empathetic approach to these challenges.

Prevention as the shield, resilience as the backbone

Historically, organizations have measured cybersecurity success by how well they prevent attacks. But with 90% of IT and security leaders reporting cyber incidents in the past year alone, it’s clear that prevention alone is no longer enough.

It’s time to shift the focus towards recovery, transparency, and resilience. Resilience shouldn’t be seen as a fallback – it needs to become the frontline. This shift in mindset not only better prepares organizations for inevitable breaches but also reduces pressure on teams by redefining what success looks like.

When teams are judged on their ability to recover and minimize disruption (not just prevent attacks), they’re empowered to focus on what matters; early detection, rapid response, and recovery planning. This reduces burnout and builds stronger long-term security posture.

We must also accept a hard truth; breaches will happen. Rather than fueling a culture of blame, we need to equip teams to respond effectively and confidently.

Securing the security team with transparency

As ever, collaboration in a crisis is critical. Security teams working closely with backup, resilience and recovery functions are better able to absorb shocks. When the business is confident in its ability to restore operations, security professionals face less pressure and uncertainty.

This is also true for communication, especially post-breach. Organizations need to be transparent about how they’re containing the incident and what’s being done to prevent recurrence. Trust drives everything and must be built into architecture, communication, and response, from user behavior to board confidence.

Shared risk, shared responsibility

As seen with the recent retail cyber-attacks in the UK, the implications of a cyber breach can be business critical. Yet many CISOs still struggle to get alignment at board level. Over three-quarters (77%) of UK CISOs feel that their IT budget is not completely reflected by their board’s objectives for cybersecurity.

To make matters worse, this is heightened when it comes to regulatory pressures. New legislation like DORA and the upcoming Cyber Security and Resilience Bill is turning up the heat, with over half (58%) of CISOs feeling the pressure as a direct result.

There is also an element of the blame game going on, with everyone keen to avoid responsibility for an inevitable cyber breach. It’s much easier to point fingers at the IT team than to look at the wider implications or causes of a cyber-attack. Even something as simple as a phishing email can cause widespread problems and is something that individual employees must be aware of. Security is everyone’s business - the attack surface isn’t just focused on IT, it’s every team, tool, and workflow.

This critical gap jeopardizes not only an organizations' security posture but also their ability to meet evolving regulatory demands. CISOs, boards, and other stakeholders must work together to ensure that cyber resilience priorities are clearly defined, adequately funded, and effectively implemented to meet the evolving regulatory landscape.

The weight of responsibility for cyber security shouldn’t just lie on the security team’s shoulders. Cyber resilience is business resilience and security leaders, boards and stakeholders all have a part to play.

Building teams that thrive

To build and retain a capable cybersecurity team amid the widening skills gap, CISOs must lead a shift in both mindset and strategy. By embedding resilience into the core of cyber strategy, CISOs can reduce the relentless pressure to be perfect and create a healthier, more sustainable working environment.

But resilience isn't built in isolation. To truly address burnout and retention, CISOs need C-suite support and cultural change. Cybersecurity must be treated as a shared business-critical priority, not just an IT function. This means aligning investment with board expectations, embedding security into daily operations and ensuring every employee understands their role.

With regulatory pressure rising and the threat landscape evolving, resilience isn’t just a technical necessity, it’s a strategic imperative. CISOs who champion collaboration, drive cultural change, and lead with empathy will be best positioned to build security teams that are not only effective but built to last.

We list the best employee recognition software.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro's Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

Here are the answers for The New York Times Mini Crossword for Aug. 1.

This packaging label mishap could lead to unintentional alcohol consumption. Here's how to check if you bought these cans.

Here’s how I kept my favorite electronics fully charged, even in the heart of the wilderness.

The next Battlefield game is getting a public beta next weekend. Tune into your favorite streamer to get into it.

• Nvidia has announced that support for GTX 10 series GPUs ends in October 2025
• After that, these graphics cards, including the GTX 1060, will only get security fixes
• It also announced that Windows 10 support will run through to October 2026, mirroring Microsoft's extended support program for the OS

Nvidia has released a new graphics driver and announced that it'll soon be drawing the curtain on support for GeForce GTX 10 series GPUs, as well as GTX 900 models - and the end for Windows 10 gamers will follow a year later.

As Ars Technica highlighted, the release notes for driver version 580.88 came with the revelation that graphics cards based on Maxwell and Pascal architecture - meaning GTX 900 and 10 series products - will witness their final driver release in October 2025.

After that, they will only get quarterly security updates to patch them against vulnerabilities, and that's all. Security patches will finish in October 2028 for these products, too.

If October 2025 rings a bell, that's because it's also the month when Microsoft casts aside support for Windows 10, and that's also wrapped up in this Nvidia announcement.

Team Green said that it's extending Game Ready Driver support for Windows 10 to October 2026, to mirror the extended support Microsoft is offering consumers who want to stick with the OS, and not upgrade to Windows 11 yet. Or indeed people who may not be able to upgrade to the newer operating system, due to their PC not meeting the hardware requirements.

This move comes as no surprise, as Nvidia already told us back at the start of July that the v580 drivers would be the last to support Maxwell and Pascal graphics cards - we just didn't know exactly when the cut-off was coming, and now we do.

(Image credit: Nvidia)If you're affected, what does this mean exactly?

As stated, there are two categories of PC gamers who this affects: those with GTX 10 model GPUs, like the GTX 1060, and those running Windows 10. Further, some folks will be in both camps, no doubt - maybe quite a few.

GTX 10 series graphics cards are still reasonably popular in some cases (whereas GTX 900 products have pretty much dwindled away to nothing). In fact, the GTX 1060 is actually the 12th most popular GPU according to the latest Steam hardware survey - and once reigned supreme - so it's still seeing a lot of use.

After October 2025, this GPU, along with other 10 series offerings like the 1070 and 1080, will only receive security updates. That means they'll still be safe to use - patched against any exploits in drivers that may be found by the bad actors out there - but they won't get support for new games or features.

So, as time rolls on, you'll find that your trusty GTX 1060 becomes wonkier and less reliable with new games, as its final driver version ages and generally gets more erratic. Note that if you stick with old games, which were catered for before game support was frozen, you should be fine, at least in theory.

As for those on Windows 10, you'll be okay for another year yet. You'll still have full driver support through to October 2026, as noted, so you'll be fine until then. Assuming you keep Windows 10 itself secure, of course - using Microsoft's offer of extended support, which is now free, with a slight catch.

After October 2026, though, you'll need to upgrade to Windows 11, or you won't get new drivers – so no game support, or security patches either – no matter how new your Nvidia GPU is.

At this point, you're really looking at a Windows 11 upgrade - or a switch to something else entirely - unless Microsoft extends Windows 10 support further for consumers beyond 2026 (which seems unlikely, but could happen). In which case, Nvidia might again mirror the move with its own drivers - given that's what has happened here - but nothing's guaranteed by any means.

You might also like

• Need a new GPU? Nvidia's RTX 5000 Super models may be coming sooner than you expect
• Nobody wants 8GB GPUs from Nvidia and AMD – and this retailer just made that clear
• AMD isn't giving up on high-end GPUs – a new leak hints at a new Radeon GPU challenging Nvidia's next-gen flagship graphics card

• One in six US workers say they lie about using AI to meet job expectations
• Engineers who use AI are the new threat, not the tools themselves
• Many workers copy AI-literate peers just to appear competent in modern workplaces

As AI tools spread across office environments, many US workers now find themselves in an odd situation: pretending to use artificial intelligence at work.

A recent survey by tech recruitment firm Howdy.com found that one in six employees claim to lie about using AI.

This phenomenon appears to be a reaction not only to managerial expectations but also to deeper insecurities around job stability in an AI saturated landscape.

Survival of the most artificial

Underneath the behavior is what some are calling “AI-nxiety,” an unease born from conflicting narratives.

On the one hand, companies urge employees to embrace AI to boost productivity; on the other hand, those same workers are warned that AI, or someone more skilled at using it, could soon replace them.

This sense of pressure is particularly acute when considering workers who fear being displaced by technically skilled peers, such as engineers who actively use LLM based systems and other AI tools.

As one commenter put it on The Register: “You may lose your job to an engineer who uses AI.”

For some, the message is clear: adapt or get left behind.

In late 2023, a survey by EY found that two thirds of white collar US workers feared being passed over for promotion by AI savvy colleagues.

In this environment, mimicking the behavior of the AI literate becomes a way to hedge against obsolescence.

Further complicating the picture is the lack of adequate training.

Howdy.com reports that a quarter of workers expected to use AI receive no instruction on how to do so.

Without proper guidance, many are stuck between expectations from management and the reality of poorly integrated AI systems.

Some give up on mastering the tools and simply act like they are already doing it.

Meanwhile, contradictory workplace norms deepen the confusion.

Another survey from Slack’s Workforce Index found that nearly half of global desk workers felt uncomfortable telling managers they use AI, worrying it may make them appear lazy or unoriginal.

Thus, some pretend not to use AI even when they do.

At the heart of the issue is a growing mismatch between what companies signal, “AI is the future,” and what employees experience: unclear expectations, low support, and shifting norms around competence.

Whether AI actually replaces jobs or not, the psychological toll is already here, and pretending to be an AI user has become a strange new survival strategy.

You might also like

• These are the fastest SSDs you can buy right now
• Take a look at some of the best external hard drives available
• The semiconductor industry is losing billions of dollars ever year because of this obscure little quirk

Here are hints and the answers for the NYT Connections: Sports Edition puzzle for Aug. 1, No. 312.

Here are some hints and the answers for the NYT Connections puzzle for Aug. 1, #782.

Here are hints and the answer for today's Wordle for Aug. 1, No. 1,504.

Here are hints and answers for the NYT Strands puzzle for Aug. 1 No. 516.

It feels like everyone and their aunt is making AI / AR smart glasses nowadays, especially as someone who tests the best smart glasses around. But something caught my eye when reading a description of Brilliant Lab’s new Halo glasses – as with their long-term memory capabilities, they promise to remind you of details of conversations and objects you’ve seen “years or even decades later.”

In real-time, Brilliant Labs’ specs can apparently offer contextual information based on what it hears and sees, too. This style of assistive help in the moment and later on sounds like a more ongoing version of features like the Ray-Ban Meta glasses’ visual reminders, features that Meta and others have said they plan to make (or have already made) an optionally always-on tool.

Now, Brilliant Labs has said its agent Noa will serve as a sort of AI VPN. Like a VPN reroutes your data to keep your online activity more private, Noa promises to offer similar levels of privacy as it communicates with the AI model powering its cognitive abilities.

Other Halo highlights are its “world’s thinnest AI glasses” design, its built-in display that sits in your periphery like some other AI specs we’ve seen announced this year, and it will have a relatively affordable $299 asking price (around £225 / AU$465) when it launches in November.

But even as someone who loves my Ray-Ban smart glasses and can see the benefits of these Halo glasses, I’m worried these smart specs are a sign we're continuing to race towards the death of privacy.

AI in your glasses can be handy (Image credit: Meta)Risk vs reward

Smart glasses wearables with cameras are already, admittedly, something of a privacy conundrum. I think the Meta Ray-Ban specs do it well – only letting you snap pictures or short videos (or livestream to a public Meta account on Facebook or Instagram), and have an obvious light shine while you do so.

But the next generation of utility wants to boast an always-on mentality – cameras that activate frequently, or microphones that capture every conversation you have.

This would be like the Bee wristband I saw at CES (which Amazon recently bought), which promises to help you remember what you talk about with detailed summaries.

You can instantly see the advantages of these features. An always-on camera could catch that you’re about to leave home without your keys, or remind you that your fridge is getting empty, and Bee highlighted to me that you could use it to help you remember ideas for gifts based on what people say, or recollect an important in-person work chat you might have.

However, possible pitfalls are close behind.

How private are we really? (Image credit: Shutterstock)

Privacy is the big one.

Not just your own, though you’re arguably consenting to AI intrusiveness by using these tools, but the privacy of people around you.

They’ll be recorded by always-on wearables whether they want to, or even know they are, or not.

Privacy makes up a big part of media law training and exams that qualified journalists (like me) must complete, and always-recording wearables could very easily enable people to break a lot of legal and ethical rules. I expect that without these people necessarily realising they’re doing something wrong.

Move fast and break everything

(Image credit: Shutterstock)

Big tech has always had an ask for forgiveness mentality. Arguably, because time after time, punishments (assuming they are even punished) are usually vastly outweighed by the benefits they reaped by breaking the rules.

This has seemed especially true with privacy, as our data seems to get mishandled by a company every other month – in small, but also sometimes catastrophic ways.

I’m looking at you Tea.

We’ve also already seen examples of AI companies playing fast and loose with copyright, and I expect the rulelessness will only get worse in the AI space as governments across the globe seem less than keen to properly regulate AI so they don’t hamper their country’s efforts to win the digital arms race.

AI wearables capturing every moment of our lives (from multiple angles to boot) with video and audio are a catastrophe waiting to happen.

Yes, there are always promises of privacy, and optional toggles you can switch on to supposedly enhance your data protection. Still, for every good actor that keeps its privacy promises, we can find plenty of companies that don’t – or quietly change them in new ToS you’re asked to sign.

Cooler than expected, just as scary (Image credit: Oakley / Meta)

We can hope that robust regulation and proper punishment for malpractice might come in and help avoid this disaster I foresee, but I’m not holding my breath.

Instead, I’m coming to terms with the demise of privacy – a concept already on its last legs – and accepting that while Big Brother might look different from how George Orwell pictured it, it will (as predicted) be watching us.

You might also like

• Meta's next wearables announcement might include a smartwatch
• These AI smart glasses are giving me a feature I’ve been desperate for the Meta Ray-Bans to get since launch
• I adore my Meta Ray-Bans, but these new Oakley smart glasses are making me jealous

Shopping for toys isn't easy. Luckily, CNET's staff have playtested a wide range of toys and narrowed it down for you -- from must-haves to educational options and everything in between.

• Alone – Charity Multipurpose Non-profit WordPress Theme has a 9.8/10 flaw
• The bug allows crooks to create rogue admin accounts
• More than 120,000 takeover attempts already blocked

The "Alone – Charity Multipurpose Non-profit WordPress Theme", a commercial theme used in many WordPress websites, contained a critical vulnerability that allowed threat actors to completely take over the website, experts have warned.

The WordPress theme, designed for charities, NGOs, and fundraising campaigns, features more than 40 ready-to-use demos, donation integration, and compatibility with Elementor and WPBakery.

According to Themetix, around 200 active WordPress sites are running this theme today.

Ongoing attacks

Wordfence researchers claim exploitation started on July 12, two days before the vulnerability was publicly disclosed. So far, the company blocked more than 120,000 exploitation attempts from almost a dozen different IP addresses.

In the attacks, the threat actors try to upload a ZIP archive with a PHP-based backdoor that grants them remote code execution capabilities, as well as the ability to upload arbitrary files. Crooks also used the flaw to deliver backdoors that can create additional admin accounts.

All versions up to 7.8.3 contained a vulnerability that allowed threat actors to upload arbitrary files, including malware that can create admin accounts. That way, crooks can completely take over websites and use them to host other malware, redirect visitors to other malicious pages, serve phishing landing pages, and more.

The vulnerability is now tracked as CVE-2025-4394, and has a severity score of 9.8/10 (critical). It was addressed in version 7.8.5, which was released on June 16, 2025. If you are using this theme, it would be wise to update it as soon as possible, since the bug is being actively exploited in the wild.

WordPress is generally considered a safe website builder platform, but third-party themes and plugins - not so much. That is why security pros advise WordPress users to only keep the plugins and themes they actively use, and to make sure they are always up to date.

Via The Hacker News

You might also like

• A popular WordPress theme has been hijacked by malware - here's what we know
• Take a look at our guide to the best authenticator app
• We've rounded up the best password managers

The crew of a haunted house attraction gets more than they bargained for in this cult classic that's streaming free on Tubi.

• AMD's head of client CPUs says it's looking into dedicated NPU accelerators
• These would be the equivalent of a discrete GPU, but for AI tasks
• Such boards would lessen demand on higher-end GPUs, as they'd no longer be bought for AI work, as they are in some cases

AMD is looking to a future where it might not just produce standalone graphics cards for desktop PCs, but similar boards which would be the equivalent of an AI accelerator - a discrete NPU, in other words.

CRN reports (via Wccftech) that AMD's Rahul Tikoo, head of its client CPU business, said that Team Red is “talking to customers” about “use cases” and “potential opportunities” for such a dedicated NPU accelerator card.

CRN points out that there are already moves along these lines afoot, such as an incoming Dell Pro Max Plus laptop, which is set to boast a pair of Qualcomm AI 100 PC inference cards. That's two discrete NPU boards with 16 AI cores and 32GB of memory apiece, for 32 AI cores and 64GB of RAM in total.

To put that in perspective, current integrated (on-chip) NPUs, such as those in Intel's Lunar Lake CPUs, or AMD's Ryzen AI chips, offer around 50 TOPS - ideal for Copilot+ PCs - whereas you're looking at up to 400 TOPS with the mentioned Qualcomm AI 100. These boards are for beefy workstation laptops and AI power users.

Tikoo observed: "It’s a very new set of use cases, so we're watching that space carefully, but we do have solutions if you want to get into that space - we will be able to."

The AMD exec wouldn't be drawn to provide a hint at a timeframe in which AMD might be planning to realize such discrete NPU ambitions, but said that "it's not hard to imagine we can get there pretty quickly" given the 'breadth' of Team Red's technologies.

(Image credit: Future / John Loeffler)Analysis: potentially taking the pressure off high-end GPU demand

So, does this mean it won't be too long before you might be looking at buying your desktop PC and mulling a discrete NPU alongside a GPU? Well, not really, this still isn't consumer territory as such - as noted, it's more about AI power users - but it will have an important impact on everyday PCs, at least for enthusiasts.

These standalone NPU cards will only be needed by individuals working on more heavyweight AI tasks with their PC. They will offer benefits for running large AI models or complex workloads locally rather than on the cloud, with far more responsive performance (dodging the delay factor that's inevitably brought into the mix when piping work online, into the cloud).

There are obvious privacy benefits from keeping work on-device, rather than heading cloud-wards, and these discrete NPUs will be designed to be more efficient than GPUs taking on these kinds of workloads - so there will be power savings to be had.

And it's here we come to the crux of the matter for consumers, at least enthusiast PC gamers looking at buying more expensive graphics cards. As we've seen in the past, sometimes individuals working with AI purchase top-end GPUs - like the RTX 5090 or 5080 - for their rigs. When dedicated NPUs come out from AMD (and others), they will offer a better choice than a higher-end GPU - which will take pressure off the market for graphics cards.

So, especially when a new range of GPUs comes out, and there's an inevitable rush to buy, there'll be less overall demand on higher-end models - which is good news for supply and pricing, for gamers who want a graphics card to, well, play PC games, and not hunker down to AI workloads.

Roll on the development of these standalone NPUs, then - it’s got to be a good thing for gamers in the end. Another thought for the much further away future is that eventually, these NPUs may be needed for AI routines within games, when complex AI-driven NPCs are brought into being. We've already taken some steps down this road, cloud-wise, although whether that's a good thing or not is a matter of opinion.

You might also like

• Need a new GPU? Nvidia's RTX 5000 Super models may be coming sooner than you expect
• Nobody wants 8GB GPUs from Nvidia and AMD – and this retailer just made that clear
• Where to buy AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT and RX 9070: the best retailers in the US and UK to check for stock

The full moon takes place a mere three days before the Perseids meteor shower peaks, and 11 days before the next planet parade.

OLED vs mini-LED is a battle that’s been raging on for a few years now. While LG, Sony and Panasonic sit firmly in the OLED camp, Samsung, Hisense and TCL place their trust more in mini-LED. Granted, most of these brands have both TV types in their lineups, but it’s clear which one each favors.

Samsung and LG are makers of some of the best TVs, and you’ll regularly find Samsung at the top of our best mini-LED TVs list and LG at the top of the best OLED TVs. Each has had a strong showing with their flagship models in 2025, with both the Samsung QN90F (mini-LED) and LG G5 (OLED) earning five stars in their reviews. But what about the mid-range models?

I recently tested the Samsung QN80F and gave it four stars in my review, mainly due to its average sound quality, reflective screen and a sometimes inconsistent picture. I also had a chance to evaluate it side-by-side with LG’s most entry-level OLED: the LG B5. While these TVs sit in different places in their respective lineups, they’re priced very similarly, with the 55-inch QN80F selling for $1,299 / £1,199 and the 55-inch B5 for $1,299 / £1,399.

So, how does the QN80F fare against the ‘cheapest’ 2025 OLED on the market, and which TV is worth the money?

Color me impressed

Both the Samsung QN80F (left) and LG B5 (right) have great color reproduction, and while the QN80F may be brighter, the B5's picture has greater depth and clarity. (Image credit: Universal Pictures / Future )

Samsung and LG TVs both have exceptional color reproduction, with colors on Samsung mini-LED models generally looking bright and punchy, and LG OLEDs looking deeper and richer. Putting the QN80F mini-LED next to the LG B5, this was once again the case.

With both TVs set to their Movie picture modes, I watched the Wizard & I scene from a 4K Blu-ray of Wicked, and the B5 demonstrated bolder and more engaging colors. Pink flowers, blue details on walls and uniforms, and Elphaba’s green skin all looked more vivid on the B5, primarily due to the B5’s stronger contrast. Colors still appeared bright and vibrant on the QN80F with the same scene, but they didn’t have the same depth.

Measuring UHDA-P3 color gamut on both TVs yielded results of 93.05% on the Samsung QN80F and 99.5% on the LG B5, so it’s no real surprise that the B5 had the edge when it came to color depth and detail.

Brightness and reflections

The Samsung QN80F (left) has both higher peak and fullscreen brightness than the LG B5, and that can be a real benefit with certain movie scenes (Image credit: Universal Pictures / Future)

Brightness is where the Samsung QN80F takes a big win. While mini-LED is traditionally a brighter display technology than OLED, flagship OLEDs such as the LG G5 and Samsung S95F have made great strides in giving OLED a brightness boost, with both hitting over 2,000 nits. But, then again, these pricey TVs use new, advanced OLED panels (QD-OLED on the S95F, and ‘four-stack’ OLED on the LG G5).

The LG B5 uses a standard W-OLED panel, and when it comes to brightness, it shows. When I measured the B5’s peak HDR brightness, it hit 668 nits in Movie mode, whereas the Samsung QN80F clocked in at 1,106 nits in the same mode. A near-500 nit brightness difference is easy to appreciate, and as Elphaba ran through a wheat field in the same Wizard & I scene from Wicked, the sun appeared brighter on the QN80F thanks to its high HDR brightness in peak highlights, and the wheat itself had a glossier, more eye-catching look.

One thing that couldn’t be ignored in my comparison was how reflective the screens on both TVs were. I anticipated this from the B5, mainly due to its low measured fullscreen HDR brightness (a meagre 131 nits), but I expected the QN80F, which clocked in at 754 nits on the same test, to perform better. In bright room lighting conditions, both of these TVs suffer from distracting mirror-like reflections when watching darker scenes. In dimmed conditions, they perform better, but there can still be visible reflections.

Black levels: OLED’s best friend

Black levels are slightly raised on the Samsung QN80F (left), but look much richer and deeper on the LG B5 (right) (Image credit: Warner Bros. / Future )

Despite a very reflective screen on both TVs and their struggles with bright room viewing, they display decent contrast in most environments. The QN80F’s higher brightness gives a stronger perceived contrast thanks to the higher brightness difference between light and dark tones. But look closer, and it’s clear that contrast and black levels are areas where OLED shines.

Watching the subway fight scene and opening crime scene in The Batman, the B5 demonstrated superb contrast, and while there was a hint of black crush at times, shadow detail was also excellent. I found the QN80F to have solid contrast in isolated viewing during my testing, but next to the B5, there was an obvious winner. The B5’s sharper textures and finer details also gave the picture a more 3D-like effect.

Blacks on the B5 also have that inky quality that OLED fans love. In both The Batman and in Nosferatu, particularly the scenes where Hutler first arrives at Orlock’s castle, the QN80F’s black levels were slightly raised, taking on a grayer tone, whereas the black of the forest and the night sky were truly as foreboding and ominous as intended on the B5.

Final thoughts

Samsung QN80F (left) and LG B5 (right) (Image credit: Future)

Both the B5 and QN80F have a strong feature set, especially for gaming, and the new versions of LG’s webOS and Samsung’s Tizen smart TV platforms are arguably the best to date. But both TVs will require one of the best soundbars to provide a cinematic experience at home, so my comparison all comes down to picture quality.

The QN80F takes a big win for brightness, but I couldn’t help but prefer the B5’s overall picture during my side-by-side test. Its superior colors, deeper blacks and more realistic-looking textures gave it the edge. If I had the money to spend, I’d be picking the LG B5.

You might also like

• I tested LG, Samsung and Sony's elite 2025 OLED TVs side-by-side – here's the one I'd buy with my own money
• I tested Samsung and Sony’s 2025 QD-OLED TVs side-by-side, and it’s a battle for the ages
• Glare-Free vs anti-reflection: This is how Samsung and LG's flagship OLED TV screens fared when I tested them