TechRadar Reviews

News

Reviews

I tested the GameSir G8+ Bluetooth across Android and iOS — iPhone users are getting the roughest deal
This is one of the most interesting and comfortable gaming keyboards I’ve ever tested — but also one of the most divisive
Hori won me back with its Wireless Horipad Turbo for Nintendo Switch 2, but some annoying design quirks stop it short of greatness
The Valve Steam Machine should be the perfect 'couch gaming' PC—but after testing it out, I'm not convinced it's worth the price
'Not the USP I wanted': Nothing’s new Ear (3a) earbuds sound good and the ANC is effective, but they hide a troublesome secret I found it hard to get past during testing

URL: https://www.techradar.com/rss/reviews

Updated: 2 hours 24 min ago

HuggingChat AI review

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 08:39

HuggingChat is Hugging Face's free, open-source chat interface . It might be the most underrated AI tool available right now. You get access to over 120 open-weight models including Llama, Mistral, Qwen, DeepSeek, and Falcon, all without spending a cent. The newest addition is Omni, a routing layer that automatically picks the most suitable model for your request.

What makes HuggingChat worth paying attention to is the sheer scope of model access it bundles into a single free product. I've been reviewing B2B software at TechRadar Pro for the past 10 years and our team covers the AI space closely. Take a look at our 2026 best AI tools roundup and read our in-depth explainers on open-source platforms like OpenClaw and Moltbook.

What is HuggingChat?

HuggingChat is the conversational AI interface built by Hugging Face, the company behind the world's largest open-source AI model repository. Instead of locking you into a single proprietary model, it lets you chat with any of 120+ community-hosted, open-weight models directly from your browser.

It's aimed squarely at developers, ML researchers, and technically curious users who want to compare model outputs, test different architectures, or simply avoid handing their data to a closed-source provider. For anyone evaluating an open-weight model before self-hosting it internally, this is an obvious starting point.

The platform also works for general use cases: writing, coding help, document analysis, and Q&A. But it's at its best when the person on the other end knows what they're asking of each model.

HuggingChat: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

User-selectable from 120+ open-weight models including Meta Llama, Mistral, Qwen, DeepSeek, Falcon, and Cohere Command R+

Best for

Developers testing open models, researchers, ML engineers, privacy-conscious users

Distinguishing functions

Multi-model switching, Omni routing, web search, custom Assistants, document upload

UI features

Clean single-column chat interface with persistent model selector and sidebar conversation history

Subscription costs

Free (unlimited), Hugging Face Pro at $9/month

API pricing

Via Hugging Face Inference API; pricing varies by model and hardware; starts from $0.03/hour for CPU instances

Buy it if…

You want to compare open-weight models side by side. HuggingChat is the fastest way to test how Llama, Mistral, and Qwen handle the same prompt without switching tools.
You need a free AI chat tool with no usage caps. Unlike many free tiers, HuggingChat doesn't cut you off after a certain number of messages per day.
Avoiding vendor lock-in matters to your organization. Every model on the platform is open-weight, meaning you can evaluate it here and self-host the exact same model later.

Don't buy it if…

You want a polished, feature-complete interface. There's no canvas mode, no voice input, and no image generation. That puts it behind ChatGPT and Claude for everyday productivity use.
Consistent response speed is critical. Inference speed varies depending on server load, and the free tier runs on shared infrastructure. Peak hours can slow things down noticeably.
You need mobile-first access. HuggingChat is browser-only with no dedicated iOS or Android app, which limits how well it works on the go.

My time with HuggingChat

My first impression was that HuggingChat is more of a research tool than a daily driver. The interface is minimal: a chat window, a model selector, and a sidebar. That's about it. Once I got past the expectation of feature parity with ChatGPT, I found myself appreciating how little gets in the way of just talking to a model.

The Omni routing feature is a genuine improvement. Rather than guessing which model handles a given task best, In my testing, Omni made sensible choices more often than not. For users who don't want to manage model selection manually, it reduces friction considerably.

Where I ran into friction was speed. During busier periods, response latency was noticeably longer than on paid commercial platforms. For quick back-and-forth conversations, that's tolerable. For longer document analysis tasks, it started to feel slow.

HuggingChat: Features

The model catalog is HuggingChat's biggest selling point, and it's hard to overstate how much value that represents for free. At the time of writing, you can chat with 120+ models including Llama 3.1 405B, Mistral Large 2, Qwen 2.5 72B, DeepSeek V3, Command R+ from Cohere, and several Falcon variants. The list updates regularly as new community models are released.

Web search integration is available and works well enough for pulling in current information, which helps avoid stale knowledge cutoff responses. It's not as tightly integrated as Perplexity's approach, but it does the job without requiring a separate tool.

Custom Assistants let you set system prompts, attach knowledge bases via retrieval-augmented generation, and share a pre-configured assistant via a direct link. This is particularly useful for teams who want a repeatable AI workflow without paying for an enterprise platform. Document upload is also supported, which lets you drop in a PDF or text file and ask questions against it.

HuggingChat's limitations are harder to ignore if you're coming from a commercial product. There's no image generation, no voice mode, no plugin system, and no equivalent of ChatGPT's canvas or Claude's Projects feature. For general productivity use, those gaps matter.

HuggingChat: User experience

The interface is clean and gets out of the way quickly. A new conversation starts within seconds. The model selector is easy to find, and conversation history is accessible from the sidebar once you're logged into a Hugging Face account. There's no learning curve beyond understanding what each model is good at. That knowledge gap is real for non-technical users.

Hugging Face has been transparent in interviews about positioning HuggingChat as the open-source community's answer to proprietary chat products. That framing shows in the design decisions: the priority is access and transparency over UX polish. For the target audience of developers and researchers, that's a reasonable trade.

HuggingChat: Customer support

Support for HuggingChat itself is primarily community-driven, via the Hugging Face Discord and forums. There's no in-product live chat or dedicated help desk for the free tier, which means troubleshooting usually involves hunting through documentation or community threads.

Hugging Face Pro subscribers gain access to prioritized support channels, and Enterprise customers get dedicated support. For individual users on the free plan, the documentation is thorough but the response loop can be slow if you hit an edge case.

(Image credit: HuggingFace.co)HuggingChat: Pricing

Free: Full access to all 120+ models, web search, document upload, and custom Assistants with no daily message limits
Hugging Face Pro ($9/month): 20x inference credits, 10x private storage, ZeroGPU priority access, Spaces Dev Mode, and early access to new features
Team ($20/month per user) and Enterprise ($50/month per user): Adds SSO, audit logs, storage regions, SCIM provisioning, and dedicated support

The free tier is impressively generous and covers most use cases without restriction. Upgrading to Pro makes sense if you're a developer who also uses Hugging Face's broader platform for model hosting, inference, or dataset work. The credits and storage benefits extend well beyond HuggingChat itself.

There's no standalone HuggingChat subscription. The Pro plan is a Hugging Face platform upgrade, which means you're paying for the full platform rather than just the chat product. That's either good value or unnecessary overhead, depending on how embedded you are in the HF ecosystem.

HuggingChat: alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT (OpenAI): The most polished AI chat product on the market, with voice mode, image generation, and a canvas editor. Better for general productivity but fully proprietary and locked behind a subscription for advanced features.
Claude (Anthropic): Strong at long document analysis and nuanced writing. More consistent response quality than most open-weight models, though it's closed-source and doesn't offer model selection flexibility.
Perplexity AI: A strong alternative if web search and real-time information retrieval are your main use cases. Less flexible on the model side but more tightly integrated with live web data.

How I tested HuggingChat

Ran identical prompts across Llama 3.1, Mistral Large 2, and Qwen 2.5 to evaluate output consistency and quality differences.
Tested web search integration, document upload, Omni routing, and custom Assistant creation over multiple sessions.
Ran tests across different times of day to assess latency variability on the free tier.

Testing covered both technical tasks (code generation, document Q&A) and general use cases (writing, research, open-ended reasoning) to give a representative picture of day-to-day performance.

Categories: Reviews

The Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan is a good go-anywhere fan, but you might want to play some music to drown out its drone

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 06:15

Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan: two minute reviewSpecifications

Type: desktop

Speeds: 4

Oscillation: none

Dimensions (HxWxD): 6.7 x 11 x 7.4 inches / 17 x 27.9 x 18.7cm

Controls: power and speed buttons

Battery life: 4-15 hours

Noise level: 36dB to 43dB

Dimplex makes lots of floor, table and pedestal fans, and the Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan is designed to address one of their weaknesses: they can only go where your plug sockets or extension cables can go. This affordable fan works as wired one via its USB-C port but also includes a rechargeable battery delivering up to 15 hours of air, or around four hours at full speed. That means you you can take it into the garden on a hot evening or take it to your bedroom and run it overnight.

The Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan doesn't oscillate but you can tilt it vertically up to 90 degrees, and it folds down almost flat so it's easy to keep in a drawer or toss into a bag. There are four speed settings here but the high speed one is not recommended while charging, as it depletes the battery faster than the USB-C connection charges it.

The fan works well and is fairly quiet, but it does make a noticeable drone at all speed settings; on a hot day, running the fan at high was very distracting. Of course all fans make some noise, but as this is a small fan with a 6.7 inch / 17cm diameter and 5.1 inch 13cm blades, you need to have it close to you to feel the benefit. In my home office the Dimplex on quiet setting at half a meter distance was noticeably louder than a much larger air circulator running at 50% speed one meter from me. If noise annoys, this may not be the fan for you.

(Image credit: Future)Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan review: price and availability

Launched July 2025
UK only
£34.99 (about $50 / AU$70)

The Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan, model DXRCFN, launched in the UK in July 2025. It has a recommended retail price of £34.99 (about $50 / AU$70), making it the most affordable model in the current range of Dimplex cooling fans and about £10 more expensive than a similarly sized wired desktop fan. It isn't currently available in Australia, and Dimplex doesn't sell its home cooling products in the US.

This fan has been cheaper – it was £25.45 during Prime Day 2026 – but I wouldn't expect to see any price cuts during the summer months in the UK.

Value for money: 4/5

(Image credit: Future)Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan review: design

Supremely portable
Finger-friendly grille
USB-C charging

The design of the fan is rather clever. It's been made for maximum portability, folding in on itself to resemble a small squashed football for travel or storage. It charges via USB-C and takes about four hours to charge fully. Because it's USB you can charge it with a phone charger or power bank, which makes it a good option for travelling. The battery is sealed inside and is not user-replaceable.

In addition to its internal bladed fan there's a circular louvred grille on the front that rotates and enhances the airflow. Although it spins quickly, the front grille is finger-friendly and won't hurt you or a child if you or they touch it (although you can lock it in place if you don't want it to spin).

The Dimplex fan doesn't oscillate, but you can adjust its vertical tilt by up to 90 degrees by moving the fan section up or down. It stays put without having to be screwed in place. Controls are simple, with just two buttons: power and speed. There's no remote control and no smartphone/smart home features.

Design: 4/5

(Image credit: Future)Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan review: performance

Decent airflow for its size
Four speed settings
Distracting sound

There are four fan speeds — quiet, low, medium and high — and I found that for my home office desk the quiet setting delivered a nice breeze without making me feel like I was in a wind tunnel. High speed was a bit intense up close but worked well from a little further away. Dimplex recommends only using High when you're on battery power as it can still deplete the battery when you're recharging it; at its lowest, quiet setting I managed 14+ hours from a single charge.

The Dimplex moves a decent amount of air for its size and it's fairly quiet in terms of its overall volume, which ranges from 36dB to 43dB. However, it does make a noticeable and constant droning sound that rises in pitch as you increase the speed. All bladed fans make some motor noise, of course, but desk fans are designed to sit very close to you, which means any noise is much more noticeable. For me it was too distracting at any speed when I sat it on my work desk, although in the bedroom at its lowest setting it didn't keep me awake.

Performance: 3/5

(Image credit: Future)Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan review: should you buy it?

Value

Not much more expensive than a wired fan of similar size

4/5

Design

Designed for maximum portability with fold-flat design, but no oscillation feature

4/5

Performance

Good airflow for such a small fan but we found the noise a little distracting.

3/5

Buy it if...

You like to move it, move it

The Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan is super light and extremely portable, folding down small enough to put in a bag.

You get around

This fan charges via USB-C, runs for up to 15 hours and can be recharged from a power bank or phone charger.

You're in a small space

The relatively small fan blades mean this is best suited to desktop use or close-up positioning.View Deal

Don't buy it if...

Noise annoys

The fan's motor makes a noticeable drone that your reviewer found distracting.

You're far away

This fan only moves air a short distance, so you'll need something more powerful for larger spaces.

Your home's too hot

Fans like this one move air around but don't have any cooling features.

Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan review: also consider

It's twice the price, but the MeacoFan Sefte 6-inch portable air circulator is brilliant, delivering up to 22 hours of impressive airflow and whisper-quiet operation. That's £69.99, and the slightly larger and more powerful 8-inch is £79.99. Both are in high demand so if you want one you should move quickly: the same firm's 10-inch Sefte fans sold out very quickly and are currently out of stock.View Deal

Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan review: how we tested

I tested this Dimplex fan for a week during summery weather as both a desktop fan in my home office, and as a bedroom fan overnight. Both locations are in my house, where indoor temperatures were around 69.8°F to 75.2°F / 21ºC to 24ºC during the daytime and around 66.2°F to 68.0°F / 19ºC to 20ºC at night.

First tested July 2026

Categories: Reviews

I watched the highly anticipated Evil Dead Burn but the horror movie relies too heavily on gore and neglects the lore

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 06:05

Evil Dead Burn is the sixth installment in the horror franchise, and unfortunately, I found the new movie to be the weakest one of the bunch. Considering the 2013 reboot wasn't great, I think that speaks to how much I'm disappointed in the most recent entry.

On the surface, Evil Dead Burn looks promising. It was directed by Sébastien Vaniček, who is most well known for his movie Infested. I liked that one a lot (mostly because spiders terrify me), and so I was excited for his take on the iconic Evil Dead series.

Vaniček's Evil Dead Burn follows a woman named Alice (Souheila Yacoub) who is grieving over the loss of her husband, William (George Pullar), as she seeks solace with her in-laws. One member of her late husband's family is played by Hunter Doohan, who stars in Netflix's Wednesday, and I must admit it was cool getting to see him in a horror movie.

One by one, the family transforms into Deadites, the malevolent, parasitic demonic spirits we've come to fear throughout the Evil Dead franchise. But it goes in a direction I really wasn't expecting.

I do want to preface my mostly negative review by pointing out that there are some good things about this movie. Horror fans with a thirst for gory set pieces will no doubt have fun, as there are indeed some great moments. Some stand-out scenes involve a dishwasher and a car door, and just thinking about them makes me cringe uncomfortably.

Unfortunately, there's not much else to it beyond some standout gory moments that will stick with you. It's not a patch on the Bruce Campbell-led movies we know and love, and pales in comparison to its predecessor, Evil Dead Rise.

Evil Dead Burn centers around a family terrorized by Deadites, but there's a lot of confusion here surrounding how people become possessed. Sometimes you need a transfer of bodily fluids, and sometimes possession takes longer than others. The inconsistency throughout the movies might frustrate fans, as sometimes, a simpler answer is best.

When the family members are possessed, horrible things happen. It is a very unforgiving movie because the Deadites are particularly cruel here, often to an extreme degree. I should warn people now that yes, there is violence towards animals if that bothers you, and the movie feels nastier than its predecessors as a result.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, as we expect to watch a horror movie to feel uncomfortable and scared. But Evil Dead Burn really struggles to balance these shocking, brutal moments with an actual story, to the point where it feels like you're just watching a montage of gory scenes.

There's also a frustrating overreliance on jump scares here, which previous Evil Dead movies steered away from. There's nothing wrong with a good scare, and horror fans love them, but when you have excessive ones you saw coming a mile away, it becomes tedious.

Sam Raimi wove a really cool horror story when he first created The Evil Dead, but this sequel adds very little to the lore. It's basically a long movie where family members brutally attack and maim each other, and by the credits, I was left with more questions than answers.

Even the post-credits scene isn't really worth waiting for, and since there was a three-year gap between Evil Dead Rise and Evil Dead Burn, it's a shame that's all we got.

Ultimately, Evil Dead Burn is another divisive horror movie that will work for some and not others. It really depends on what you want from a horror movie, and if you're content with some over-the-top gore and repeated easy-to-spot scares, then you'll definitely have fun.

If you want more lore with your gore, then you might want to revisit the previous movies instead. Evil Dead Burn doesn't add much to a long-running franchise, and I found it to be a disappointment.

Categories: Reviews

Express AI review

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 05:53

Express AI, launched on March 31, 2026, is ExpressVPN's attempt to answer a question many AI users haven't thought to ask: who can read your chats? The platform offers access to five AI models inside a confidential computing environment, where prompts and outputs are cryptographically isolated from everyone, including ExpressVPN itself. That's a bold claim in a category where privacy policies tend to be long on language and short on enforcement.

The platform comes bundled with ExpressVPN's Pro plan at no additional cost, positioning it alongside the company's password manager, secure mail, and identity protection tools. I've been covering AI platforms and business software for TechRadar Pro for years, including our 2026 buying guide for vibe coders and our guides on OpenClaw and Moltbook.

For this review, I spent time using Express AI across a range of everyday tasks: drafting, summarising documents, and reasoning through technical problems, to see how it holds up against better-known AI platforms.

What is Express AI?

Express AI is a multi-model AI chat platform built by ExpressVPN and accessible at app.expressai.com. At launch, it offers access to five general-purpose AI models, each selected for a different task type. What separates it from platforms like ChatGPT or Claude isn't the model lineup, but the underlying architecture: every interaction runs inside a confidential computing environment where encryption keys are generated inside the hardware itself, mathematically isolating conversations from cloud providers, model operators, and ExpressVPN.

The platform targets professionals and individuals who routinely share sensitive information in their AI chats, such as financial questions, work documents, and personal communications, and want guarantees that their data won't be retained or used to train future models. It's particularly well-suited to users already in the ExpressVPN ecosystem, since access is tied to the Pro subscription.

Privacy claims in the AI space are easy to make and hard to verify, which is why ExpressVPN commissioned an independent audit from Cure53, a German cybersecurity firm known for rigorous assessments. The pre-launch review, conducted in February and March 2026, covered penetration testing, source code inspection, and analysis of the platform's cryptography and key management. Cure53 confirmed that Express AI processes user interactions within confidential computing enclaves and found no unresolved vulnerabilities at launch.

Express AI: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

Five open-weight models: GPT OSS 120B, DeepSeek R1 Distill 32B, Qwen2.5-VL 32B, Qwen3.5 35B-A3B, and Nemotron 12B

Best for

Privacy-conscious professionals, sensitive document analysis, multi-model comparison

Distinguishing functions

Confidential computing, Ghost Mode, encrypted vault, side-by-side model comparison, zero data retention

UI features

Clean chat interface with per-model selection, credit tracker, file upload support

Subscription costs

Included with ExpressVPN Pro; no standalone free plan

API pricing

No public API access available at launch

Buy it if…

You share sensitive information with AI tools. If your prompts routinely include personal, financial, or professional details, Express AI's zero-access architecture offers a layer of protection that mainstream platforms don't.
You want multiple models without multiple subscriptions. The platform bundles five models covering everyday writing, document analysis, and coding in one interface, which reduces the cost and friction of juggling several accounts.

Don't buy it if…

You're not already an ExpressVPN subscriber. Access requires a Pro plan, so you'd be paying for a full VPN suite alongside the AI platform. That's poor value if you only want an AI chatbot.
You need API access or developer-level control. Express AI has no public API at launch, which makes it a non-starter for developers building on top of AI models.

My time with Express AI

The interface is spare and deliberately uncomplicated. You select a model, type your prompt, and get a response. There's no sidebar full of tools or settings buried three menus deep. I found the model-switching to be the most useful feature in practice: running the same prompt through DeepSeek R1 Distill 32B for a reasoning-heavy task and then Qwen2.5-VL 32B for document analysis took seconds rather than the tab-switching juggle that typically comes with using multiple platforms.

Ghost Mode worked as described: conversations disappeared after the session ended with no residual trace in the history panel. The encrypted vault stores past conversations behind a user-set password, which means chat history isn't accessible server-side, though a forgotten password loses the history permanently. That's a reasonable trade-off for the privacy guarantee, but it's something to keep in mind for anyone who relies on conversation history for workflow continuity.

One honest caveat: I couldn't independently verify the confidential computing claims beyond what Cure53 has stated in its public report. I'm taking the audit at face value, just as most users will. The 500 daily credits at one credit per prompt felt adequate for my testing but could frustrate users running long, iterative research sessions.

Express AI: Features

Express AI launches with five open-weight models rather than building proprietary ones from scratch. GPT OSS 120B handles everyday writing and reasoning; DeepSeek R1 Distill 32B is the pick for multi-step logic and research analysis; Qwen2.5-VL 32B reads and extracts data from images and documents; Qwen3.5 35B-A3B targets coding and complex prompts; and Nemotron 12B from NVIDIA handles technical and math-heavy workloads. In practice, having these in one interface means you can match the model to the task without maintaining separate accounts or API keys.

The side-by-side comparison tool is a standout. You can run the same prompt across multiple models simultaneously to compare outputs, which is especially useful when deciding which model to lean on for a recurring task type. Few standalone AI platforms offer this natively.

Ghost Mode and the encrypted vault address the two main categories of privacy risk. Ghost Mode auto-deletes conversations after each session, leaving no stored record at all. The vault stores history under user-controlled encryption: only the password set by the user can decrypt it, and neither ExpressVPN nor the model providers can access it. These aren't marketing claims; Cure53's February and March 2026 audit verified both mechanisms before launch.

File uploads are capped at 50 MB per file. The 2 GB of secure storage included with the Pro plan is sufficient for most document analysis tasks. I uploaded PDFs and images without friction, and Qwen2.5-VL 32B handled the analysis accurately in my testing. There's also a transparent credit tracker, which shows remaining daily usage clearly rather than burying it in account settings.

What's missing, at least at launch, is agentic capability. Express AI doesn't support tool use, web browsing, or multi-step autonomous tasks. It's a chat interface, and a deliberate one. For users who want AI agents to run workflows or integrate with external services, they'll need to look elsewhere. The no-API position also limits Express AI's appeal to developers, which may narrow the platform's audience more than ExpressVPN intends.

Express AI: User experience

The interface prioritises simplicity, which suits the platform's core audience. New users can start a conversation in under a minute. There's no onboarding tutorial or feature demo, but the layout is intuitive enough that most users won't need one. The Ghost Mode toggle and model selector are front and centre, so the two features that define the platform don't require hunting through menus.

In terms of design, it reads closer to a focused productivity tool than a full AI platform. That restraint works in its favour for privacy-conscious users who don't want complexity, but it may feel bare to anyone coming from ChatGPT or Claude's more feature-dense interfaces. ExpressVPN has described Express AI as part of a broader privacy ecosystem, suggesting the product will expand, but the launch version makes no concessions to power users hoping for immediate depth.

Express AI: Customer support

Express AI inherits ExpressVPN's customer support infrastructure, which includes 24/7 live chat via the main ExpressVPN site. Response times in my experience have been fast, typically under two minutes for live chat. Support agents are familiar with the VPN suite but may have limited depth on Express AI-specific technical queries, given how recently the platform launched.

The support documentation for Express AI is currently thin. The knowledge base covers setup and billing questions, but more detailed guidance on model selection, credit usage, and the encrypted vault is sparse. Given that this is a new product, that's understandable, but users who run into edge cases may find the documentation less helpful than they'd expect.

(Image credit: ExpressVPN)Express AI: Pricing

Included with ExpressVPN Pro. Express AI is available at no additional cost to Pro subscribers, which makes it the most accessible pricing model for existing users.
Pro plan starts at $7.49/month on a 2-year commitment, rising to $8.99/month on a 1-year plan and $19.99/month month-to-month.
No standalone or free tier. There is no way to access Express AI without an active ExpressVPN Pro subscription.

The pricing is simple once you accept that Express AI is a bundled benefit rather than a standalone product. Pro subscribers get 500 daily credits, 2 GB of encrypted storage, and access to all five models alongside ExpressVPN's other features. For users who already pay for a Pro plan, Express AI costs nothing extra.

For users who don't need a VPN, the value proposition is murkier. The Pro plan at $19.99/month is competitive with some standalone AI subscriptions — ChatGPT Plus costs $20/month, for example — but you're paying for a VPN suite first and an AI platform second. ExpressVPN hasn't announced a standalone plan for Express AI, so that decision point will remain for the foreseeable future.

Express AI: alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT (OpenAI): The most widely used AI platform, with broader model access, API support, and agentic capabilities, but no confidential computing or zero-access architecture.
Claude (Anthropic): A strong alternative for writing and reasoning tasks, with competitive privacy policies, though prompts may be reviewed for safety and model improvement purposes.
Lumo (Proton): A privacy-oriented alternative from the makers of ProtonMail, worth watching as it develops its AI toolset for privacy-focused users.

How I tested Express AI

Used Express AI for drafting, summarising, and answering research questions across multiple sessions to assess model quality and response consistency.
Uploaded PDFs and images to test the Qwen2.5-VL 32B model's ability to extract data and answer questions about uploaded content.
Tested Ghost Mode, the encrypted vault setup, and credit tracking to confirm they behaved as described in the official documentation and Cure53 audit summary.

For this review, I used Express AI as a day-to-day tool across a three-day period, testing each of the five models for their stated use cases and comparing the experience against mainstream AI platforms I use regularly. I reviewed ExpressVPN's official product documentation, the public summary of the Cure53 audit, and third-party coverage from the March 2026 launch to verify the platform's privacy claims and pricing.

Categories: Reviews

Lumo AI review

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 05:38

Most AI assistants are built on a familiar arrangement: you get useful tools, the company gets your data. Lumo, launched by Swiss privacy company Proton in July 2025, refuses that deal entirely. Every conversation is protected by zero-access encryption, no logs are kept server-side, and your chats are never used to train the underlying models.

Lumo runs on a set of open-source large language models, including Mistral Small 3, OLMO 2 32B, and OpenHands 32B, with a routing layer that sends each query to the most appropriate model for the task. The client-side code is open source on GitHub and open to independent review. TIME named Lumo a Best Inventions 2025 special mention, recognizing the broader privacy architecture rather than raw AI performance.

TechRadar Pro has been reviewing business software since 2012. For more of our AI coverage, you can explore our AI tool roundup for 2026.

What is Lumo?

Lumo is an AI chat assistant from Proton AG, the Swiss company behind Proton Mail and Proton VPN. It handles everyday tasks: drafting text, summarizing documents, answering questions, writing and debugging code, and translating between languages. Unlike most mainstream AI tools, Lumo is designed so that neither Proton nor any third party can access your conversation history.

The platform targets individuals and teams who work with sensitive information and cannot pass it to Big Tech services. Lawyers reviewing contracts, journalists protecting sources, healthcare workers discussing sensitive cases, and privacy-conscious professionals who object to their inputs being fed into model training pipelines are all natural fits. Proton launched Lumo for Business in October 2025 to serve team deployments with admin controls and multi-user management.

A Lumo API is in development according to Proton's spring 2026 product roadmap, which would let third-party platforms embed private AI chat into their own workflows. For now, Lumo is available on the web at lumo.proton.me, and through iOS and Android apps.

Lumo: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

Routes across Mistral Small 3, OLMO 2 32B, OpenHands 32B, and Mistral Nemo based on task type

Best for

Privacy-conscious users, professionals with sensitive workflows, existing Proton subscribers

Distinguishing functions

Zero-access encryption, Ghost Mode, no-log policy, privacy-respecting web search

UI features

Clean chat interface with dark mode (v1.2+), available on web, iOS, and Android

Subscription costs

Free (limited prompts); Lumo Plus at $12.99/month or $119.88/year ($9.99/month effective)

API pricing

API is in development; no public pricing structure published as of mid-2026

Buy it if…

You regularly handle confidential information. Zero-access encryption means even Proton cannot read your saved chats, which matters enormously for legal, healthcare, or journalistic work that no mainstream rival can match.
You're already a Proton subscriber. Proton Unlimited members get free access to Lumo's base tier at no additional cost, making it a natural addition to an existing encrypted workflow.
Your business needs GDPR-compliant AI. Lumo is hosted on Proton's Swiss servers, subject to European data protection law, a real advantage for teams with regulatory obligations.

Don't buy it if…

You need frontier-level AI output. Lumo's open-source models are capable for everyday tasks, but they fall noticeably short of GPT-4o or Claude on complex reasoning and nuanced long-form writing.
Image analysis is part of your work. As of mid-2026, Lumo does not support image uploads. If visual understanding matters to your workflow, you'll need a different tool.
You're a light user unwilling to pay. The free tier's prompt limits create real friction for anything beyond occasional queries, and Lumo Plus is harder to justify if privacy isn't a top concern.

My time with Lumo

You don't need an account to get started, just open a chat as a guest at lumo.proton.me and start typing immediately. There's a single text input, a web search toggle, and a Ghost Mode button for sessions you want to vanish when you close the window. I found the onboarding frictionless by any standard.

For routine tasks like summarizing a PDF, drafting a short email, or explaining a technical concept, Lumo performed competently. Response times were reasonable throughout. Where I noticed the ceiling was in longer, more structured outputs: the model occasionally lost the thread in extended conversations, and answers on analytical questions felt thinner than comparable responses from Claude or ChatGPT Plus on the same prompts.

Ghost Mode is useful in practice and cleanly implemented. One click opens a session that leaves no trace on any server when you close it. That's a meaningful practical feature for sensitive queries, and I haven't seen any mainstream competitor offer it this simply.

Lumo: Features

Lumo covers the standard AI assistant toolkit: document analysis, code writing and debugging, text translation, email drafting, brainstorming, and general Q&A. The routing system automatically directs coding queries to OpenHands 32B, general conversation to Mistral models, and deeper reasoning tasks to OLMO 2. You don't choose the model manually; Proton's routing logic decides what handles each query.

The privacy architecture is the main event. Zero-access encryption means saved chats are only decryptable on your own device with your password, and no server-side logs are kept. Your inputs are never used to train the underlying models, and the optional web search feature routes through privacy-respecting search engines rather than ad-supported services.

Lumo 1.1, released August 2025, upgraded the model stack and delivered meaningful speed improvements. Version 1.2 in October 2025 added dark mode, bug fixes, and basic chat personalization. Lumo for Business followed that same month at $11.99 per user per month (annual billing), adding team admin controls, usage management, and data handling aligned with GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA.

The feature gaps are real. There's no image input, no voice mode, no plugin marketplace, and no memory system for personalized responses across sessions. For privacy-focused everyday use those absences are manageable, but power users comparing Lumo to ChatGPT's tool ecosystem or Claude's extended context handling will notice the difference.

Lumo: User experience

The interface is minimal, fast, and easy to navigate. A new chat takes one click, history is searchable when signed in, and the settings panel is straightforward. Dark mode arrived in v1.2, and the mobile apps on iOS and Android closely mirror the web experience with no major feature gaps between platforms.

Customization options are sparse by design: no system prompt settings, no pinned model preferences, no memory configuration. The routing logic is entirely automated, and you largely have to trust Proton's judgment on which model handles what. Users who want fine-grained control will find that frustrating; those who just want to start typing will appreciate how quickly they can get going.

Lumo: Customer support

Proton covers Lumo support through its help center at proton.me/support/lumo, which includes getting started guides, feature documentation, and troubleshooting articles. A community forum on Proton's user voice platform lets you submit and vote on feature requests. Account-based support tickets can be filed through the dashboard.

There's no live chat or phone support at any tier, which may cause issues for business users dealing with time-sensitive problems. Lumo for Business likely offers more direct support access, but Proton hasn't published detailed SLAs for that plan. For most users, the self-serve documentation is clear enough, but enterprise buyers should confirm escalation options before committing.

(Image credit: ProtonVPN)Lumo: Pricing

Free tier: Guest access (no account required) with a limited number of prompts per session. A free Proton account unlocks encrypted chat history and more daily messages.
Lumo Plus: $12.99/month, or $119.88/year ($9.99/month effective). Includes unlimited chats, document uploads, history search, priority response times, and access to all available models.
Lumo for Business: $11.99 per user per month, billed annually. Adds team admin controls and compliance-ready data handling for GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA.

The free tier is functional for sporadic use but constrained enough that the weekly prompt limit becomes friction quickly. At $12.99/month, Lumo Plus sits below ChatGPT Plus and Claude Pro (both $20/month), and the value calculation depends on how much the privacy guarantee matters to you. If you're primarily after output quality and don't mind where your data goes, there are more capable options at similar price points.

Proton Unlimited subscribers ($14.99/month or $9.99/month on annual billing) get free access to the base Lumo tier as part of their existing plan. Lumo is also bundled into the Proton Workspace Premium business plan alongside encrypted email, VPN, and cloud storage.

Lumo alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT Plus ($20/month): OpenAI's platform offers stronger reasoning, image analysis, voice mode, and a plugin ecosystem. The privacy trade-off is significant, but capability-wise it remains the field benchmark.
DuckAI (free): Duck.ai routes queries through multiple AI models via privacy-respecting proxies and requires no account. Encryption depth is less thorough than Lumo's zero-access approach, but it's a capable free alternative for casual use.
Claude Pro ($20/month): Anthropic's Claude handles long documents and nuanced writing particularly well. It offers no comparable encryption architecture, but output quality on complex tasks is a step above Lumo.

How I tested Lumo

Ran Lumo through document summarization, email drafting, code debugging, and general Q&A across multiple sessions to assess response quality and consistency.
Tested Ghost Mode, web search with and without the toggle enabled, document uploads, and the iOS mobile app across both guest and signed-in access.
Cross-referenced plans against Proton's official support documentation, product announcements, and other company material.

My testing spanned the web app and iOS client over several days. I compared output quality against Claude and ChatGPT Plus on identical prompts to gauge where Lumo sits in the current AI field. Privacy claims were assessed against publicly available documentation, open-source client code, and independent technical analysis.

Categories: Reviews

Duck.ai by DuckDuckGo review

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 05:16

Duck.ai is one of the only AI chat platforms where you can hold a conversation with GPT-5 or Claude Opus without registering an account. Launched by DuckDuckGo in early 2025, it sits inside the company's existing search and browser ecosystem. You can access it at duck.ai, through the DuckDuckGo browser, or via desktop browser extensions.

Two things set it apart from other AI chat tools. Every conversation goes through DuckDuckGo's anonymizing proxy before reaching the model provider, stripping out identifying information. Providers such as OpenAI and Anthropic are also contractually prohibited from using those chats for training purposes, which is a meaningful commitment that most direct-to-model platforms don't offer.

At TechRadar Pro, we've been reviewing business software since 2012. Our AI coverage includes an AI tools roundup and a 2026 vibe coding buying guide, among other platform reviews and news features.

What is Duck.ai?

Duck.ai is DuckDuckGo's AI chat service, designed so that you can talk to leading AI models without creating an account or sharing personal data. It's available at duck.ai, through DuckDuckGo's browser extensions, and inside the DuckDuckGo app on iOS and Android.

The service routes all conversations through a privacy proxy. Your prompts are anonymized before they reach the AI provider. DuckDuckGo also holds providers to strict contractual limits on data use, meaning chats are not stored on DuckDuckGo's servers and cannot be used for model training by either party.

It works for typical AI tasks: drafting emails, summarizing documents, answering questions, writing code, and general chat. Privacy-conscious professionals, freelancers, and anyone who wants frontier AI access without a recurring account will find it useful.

Duck.ai: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

Free: Claude 4.5 Haiku, GPT-4o mini, GPT-5 mini, gpt-oss-120b, Llama 4 Scout, Mistral Small 3 24B. Plus: GPT-4o, GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Llama 4 Maverick. Pro: adds Claude Opus 4.7.

Best for

Privacy-conscious users; general AI chat tasks; no-signup AI access

Distinguishing functions

Privacy proxy routing, no-login access, multi-model switching, voice chat

UI features

Minimal chat interface with left sidebar for model switching; chat history stored locally on device

Subscription costs

Free; Plus: $9.99/month or $99.99/year; Pro: $19.99/month or $199.99/year

API pricing

No public API — consumer product only

Buy it if…

You want AI chat without an account. Duck.ai is one of few platforms giving you access to capable models, including GPT-5 mini, without registration or a credit card.
Privacy matters to your workflow. DuckDuckGo anonymizes every chat through its proxy and holds AI providers to strict data-use agreements, making it a stronger privacy choice than signing up directly with OpenAI or Anthropic.
You want multi-model value. The Plus plan at $9.99/month pairs GPT-5.4 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 with a full VPN and identity protection, making it genuinely competitive.

Don't buy it if…

You need a developer API. Duck.ai has no API. If you're building products or automations on top of AI models, go directly to OpenAI or Anthropic.
You already have a VPN. The paid plans bundle AI with VPN and identity services. There's no AI-only subscription tier, so you may end up paying for things you don't need.
You depend on predictable limits. DuckDuckGo doesn't publish exact daily message limits, which makes it difficult to plan for high-volume or time-sensitive work.

My time with Duck.ai

I tested Duck.ai across the free and Pro tiers over several weeks. On the free tier, the experience is clean and fast with no friction, no sign-up, and six models ready to go. Switching between GPT-4o mini and Claude 4.5 Haiku is a single click. Both handled research queries and writing tasks without issue.

The Pro tier adds Claude Opus 4.7 with extended reasoning. The improvement shows on complex tasks: I ran the same multi-step analytical prompt across the free and Pro tiers. Opus 4.7 returned a more structured and well-reasoned response. For everyday writing or quick lookups, the free tier is more than enough. Pro earns its keep on specialist, multi-step work.

My one persistent frustration was the opacity around usage limits. DuckDuckGo's policy is to keep limits vague to prevent abuse. During testing I didn't hit a ceiling on Pro, but I can imagine high-volume users running into walls without much warning.

Duck.ai: Features

The defining feature is the privacy proxy. Every message goes through DuckDuckGo before reaching the AI provider. The company holds providers to contractual restrictions on data use, which matters most if you're typing sensitive information into an AI: prompts about financial decisions, health issues, or confidential business matters are much less exposed than they would be via a direct provider account.

The free tier's model roster is unusually strong for a no-login service. Alongside GPT-4o mini and Claude 4.5 Haiku, you also get GPT-5 mini and OpenAI's gpt-oss-120b, both capable models that would cost real money through direct API access. Meta's Llama 4 Scout and Mistral Small 3 24B round out the lineup for users who prefer open-weight options.

Paid subscribers get meaningfully stronger models. The Plus plan adds GPT-5.4 and Claude Sonnet 4.6, which excel at long-context tasks and following detailed instructions. The Pro plan goes further with Claude Opus 4.7 and extended reasoning, suited to the kind of multi-step analysis that trips up smaller models.

Voice chat, launched in February 2026, lets you speak to an AI model through an encrypted relay connection. Audio is not stored by DuckDuckGo or OpenAI after the session ends, keeping the privacy principles consistent. The feature currently uses OpenAI as the model provider, so model choice for voice is limited.

File uploads are not yet supported, which is a gap compared to ChatGPT or Claude.ai. If you need to analyze a PDF or document, you'll need to paste content manually. DuckDuckGo has indicated uploads are on the roadmap.

Duck.ai: User experience

The interface is intentionally minimal. There's no dashboard, no settings maze, and no onboarding flow. The left sidebar shows your chat history, stored locally on your device rather than on DuckDuckGo's servers. You switch models by clicking the current model name at the top of the conversation. New users can start a chat in seconds.

AI features are also fully optional. DuckDuckGo lets you hide Duck.ai buttons and AI overlays in search settings, which is a meaningful gesture from a company that treats privacy as more than a marketing position. The option to disable AI without losing other features is something many platforms don't offer.

Duck.ai: Customer support

DuckDuckGo maintains detailed help documentation at its Help Pages site, covering Duck.ai's privacy policies, model availability, usage limits, and subscription management. The documentation is well-organized and answers most common questions without requiring you to contact anyone.

There's no live chat or phone support channel. For subscription or billing issues, you can reach support through the subscription settings menu, but response times aren't publicized. Businesses planning to rely on the Pro plan for critical work should factor this in when evaluating the service.

(Image credit: DuckDuckGo)Duck.ai: Pricing

Free: Six models, no sign-up, with unspecified daily usage limits.
Plus: $9.99/month or $99.99/year, which adds GPT-4o, GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Llama 4 Maverick, plus VPN, Personal Information Removal, and Identity Theft Restoration.
Pro: $19.99/month or $199.99/year, which adds Claude Opus 4.7, extended reasoning, and 2x usage limits versus Plus.

The free tier is one of the best no-login AI offers available right now. Getting GPT-5 mini and Claude 4.5 Haiku at zero cost, with genuine privacy protections, is a hard proposition to dismiss. The Plus plan at $9.99/month undercuts both ChatGPT Plus and Claude Pro (each $20/month) while providing access to frontier models alongside a bundled VPN.

The Pro plan at $19.99/month is harder to recommend to most users. Claude Opus 4.7 with extended reasoning is a premium experience, but only for tasks that genuinely require deep multi-step analysis. There's no standalone AI-only option, so if you already pay for a VPN elsewhere, you're likely paying twice. The subscription is available internationally with localized pricing: UK users pay £9.99/£19.99 per month for Plus/Pro respectively, and most EU countries are priced at EUR 9.99/19.99 per month.

Duck.ai: Alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT: OpenAI's direct interface costs $20/month for Plus and offers GPT-4o access alongside file uploads and image generation, two features Duck.ai currently lacks. The downside is that ChatGPT requires an account and uses conversation data for service improvements unless you opt out.
Claude.ai: Anthropic's own interface gives you Claude Opus at $20/month on the Pro plan and is stronger for deep reasoning work. It requires registration, doesn't offer multi-model switching, and has weaker privacy protections than Duck.ai's proxy approach.
Perplexity AI: A strong alternative if you want AI answers grounded in real-time web search. Perplexity Pro costs $20/month and supports file uploads, though it doesn't match Duck.ai on privacy routing.

How I tested Duck.ai

Ran identical prompts covering research queries, email drafting, and complex analytical tasks across the free, Plus, and Pro model tiers to compare quality and speed.
Reviewed DuckDuckGo's published privacy documentation, provider contracts policy, and help pages to assess how well its privacy proxy claims hold up.
Tested the subscription sign-up, model switching, voice chat, and local history access on both desktop and mobile across several sessions.

Response latency on the free tier is slightly higher than a direct ChatGPT session, consistent with traffic being routed through a proxy. The difference was small enough that it wasn't noticeable mid-conversation. Pro-tier responses were fast regardless of model choice, with Claude Opus 4.7 taking marginally longer on extended reasoning tasks — which is expected given the additional processing involved.

Categories: Reviews

DeepSeek AI review

Mon, 07/13/2026 - 04:54

DeepSeek landed like a thunderclap in January 2025, when its R1 reasoning model briefly dethroned ChatGPT as the most downloaded free app on the iOS App Store in the United States. Built by a Hangzhou-based AI lab backed by Chinese hedge fund High-Flyer, it claimed to match frontier AI performance at a fraction of the development cost. That claim sent Nvidia's stock tumbling 17% in a single session and sparked a global conversation about who was actually winning the AI race.

Since then, DeepSeek has grown to roughly 97 million monthly active users and released multiple model generations, most recently the V4 family in April 2026. Its API pricing stands out: the V4 Flash model starts at $0.14 per million input tokens, cheaper than most "lite" tier models from OpenAI and Google yet competitive on coding, math, and reasoning benchmarks. The open-weight licensing under MIT also means teams can self-host the models and sidestep per-token costs entirely at scale.

We've been reviewing B2B software at TechRadar Pro since 2012, with AI platforms among our most active coverage areas in recent years. Our AI tools roundup, vibe coding guide for 2026, and explainers on OpenClaw and Moltbook give you a sense of the tools we track. DeepSeek is one of the more polarizing platforms we've tested: impressive in many ways, but not without significant red flags.

What is DeepSeek?

DeepSeek is an AI chat platform and API service developed by Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co., Ltd., a Chinese company founded in 2023 and funded by the quant hedge fund High-Flyer. It offers a free web and mobile chat interface at chat.deepseek.com alongside a paid developer API, both powered by the same underlying model family.

The platform runs on DeepSeek's own large language models, specifically V4 Flash and V4 Pro, both using a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architecture. Only a subset of each model's parameters activates per token, which keeps inference costs low without shrinking the model's overall knowledge base.

V4 Pro has 1.6 trillion total parameters but only 49 billion active at inference. V4 Flash runs 284 billion total with 13 billion active, making it significantly faster and cheaper without sacrificing much on everyday tasks.

Developers, researchers, and cost-conscious businesses are the natural audience. The free chat tier suits individuals and small teams exploring the tool, while the API's aggressive pricing makes it attractive for anyone building AI-powered applications at scale.

DeepSeek: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

DeepSeek V4 Flash (284B total / 13B active params) and V4 Pro (1.6T total / 49B active params), both MoE-based

Best for

Coding assistance, mathematical reasoning, document analysis, budget API use

Distinguishing functions

1M token context, thinking/non-thinking modes, prompt caching, open weights (MIT)

UI features

Web chat and iOS/Android apps with web search toggle, file upload (PDF, DOCX, TXT), Expert Mode and Instant Mode

Subscription costs

Free (chat app, unlimited queries); no paid chat subscription tiers

API pricing

Pay-per-token; new accounts receive 5M free tokens valid 30 days; V4 Flash at $0.14 / $0.28 per 1M tokens (input/output); V4 Pro at $1.74 / $3.48 standard, with promotional discounts available

Buy it if…

You need a cheap, capable coding or reasoning API. V4 Flash at $0.14 per million input tokens is among the most affordable frontier-adjacent APIs available, and its benchmark results on coding and math hold up well against more expensive competitors.
You want open weights for self-hosted deployment. Both V4 models are released under MIT license on Hugging Face, giving teams the option to run the model on their own infrastructure and eliminate per-token costs entirely for high-volume workloads.
You're doing non-sensitive exploratory work. For individual researchers, students, or developers prototyping non-confidential projects, the free chat app offers web search, file uploads, and a 1M token context window at zero cost.

Don't buy it if…

Your work involves confidential or regulated data. All user data is stored on servers in mainland China, subject to Chinese law, which permits government access without user consent. Multiple governments have banned DeepSeek from official devices for exactly this reason.
You need consistent responses on sensitive topics. DeepSeek avoids certain politically sensitive subjects, particularly around Chinese domestic affairs. That content filtering can produce evasive or incomplete outputs on topics that other platforms handle straightforwardly.
You're in a GDPR-regulated region. Italy's data protection authority blocked DeepSeek outright in January 2025 after the company provided what regulators called a "completely insufficient" response to data practice inquiries.

My time with DeepSeek

I tested DeepSeek's chat app and API across a range of tasks: code generation, document summarization, long-form reasoning, and general Q&A. On raw capability, the V4 models impressed me. Code outputs were clean and well-structured, long document summaries were accurate, and the one-million-token context window handled full-length PDF ingestion without complaint.

The thinking mode, accessible via Expert Mode in the chat UI, added visible chain-of-thought reasoning that proved useful for multi-step problems rather than theatrical.

What gave me pause was everything outside the model itself. Certain politically sensitive prompts returned conspicuously vague or deflective answers — the kind of behavior that wouldn't be acceptable in a professional context where consistent and complete information matters. I also found that the chat interface lacks the memory and personalization features you'd find in ChatGPT or Claude.

Value for money on the API side is difficult to argue with. A production app with well-structured prompts benefits substantially from the caching discount: cached input tokens cost just $0.014 per million for V4 Flash, a 90% reduction. For high-volume, low-sensitivity workloads, that arithmetic is compelling.

DeepSeek: Features

DeepSeek's core chat feature set covers the bases you'd expect: text generation, code writing and debugging, document summarization, mathematical reasoning, and web search. The web search integration is a manual toggle rather than always-on, which keeps responses faster by default but requires you to switch it on when real-time information matters. File uploads support PDF, DOCX, and TXT formats, with the model able to summarize and answer questions based on the uploaded content.

The standout capability is the 1M token context window introduced with V4, up from 128K in the previous generation. That's a meaningful jump for anyone analyzing long contracts, codebases, or research documents in a single session. Most competitors at comparable price points max out at 128K to 200K tokens.

V4 Flash covers both thinking and non-thinking modes, so you don't need to switch between separate models depending on task complexity. Non-thinking handles fast general responses; thinking adds structured multi-step reasoning for harder problems. That flexibility matters more than it sounds when you're toggling between casual tasks and complex analysis in the same workflow.

Where DeepSeek falls short is multimodal support. The platform does not currently support image generation or image understanding in the web app, putting it behind ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini on that front. Agentic capabilities are available in the V4 Preview but remain early-stage compared to dedicated agentic platforms.

DeepSeek: User experience

The chat interface at chat.deepseek.com is straightforward and fast to get started with. Signing up requires only an email address from a global provider like Gmail or Yahoo, and the default experience drops you straight into a conversation window. The distinction between Expert Mode (thinking-enabled, slower) and Instant Mode (faster, non-thinking) is surfaced clearly at the top of the interface, and mobile apps on iOS and Android mirror the web experience with file upload and web search included.

The learning curve is shallow for casual use. Switching between thinking and non-thinking modes takes one click, and the file upload workflow is drag-and-drop simple.

The API experience is less forgiving for first-time integrators. Unlike the chat app, the API is stateless, meaning every call must include the full conversation history in the messages array. DeepSeek's documentation covers this clearly, but it catches developers accustomed to managed conversation state elsewhere off guard.

DeepSeek: Customer support

Support options for free chat users are limited to a Discord community server and an email channel for API service inquiries (api-service@deepseek.com). Community responses on Discord can be prompt, but they depend on other users rather than official staff. There is no live chat or phone support.

API customers have slightly more recourse through direct email support, though response times vary. The official documentation at api-docs.deepseek.com is thorough and well-organized, covering model details, pricing, rate limits, and code examples in both Python and curl. For developers comfortable with self-service documentation, it's adequate.

(Image credit: DeepSeek)DeepSeek: Pricing

Chat app is free with no query limits. The web and mobile apps give you unlimited access to V4 Flash and V4 Pro at no cost, including web search, file uploads, and the full context window.
New API accounts receive 5M free tokens, valid for 30 days, giving developers a zero-cost window to prototype and test.
API billing is pay-as-you-go. V4 Flash costs $0.14 per million input tokens and $0.28 per million output tokens. V4 Pro runs $1.74 and $3.48 respectively at standard rates, with promotional discounts periodically dropping those to $0.435 and $0.87. Cached input tokens cost one-tenth of the standard input rate on both models.

The free chat tier is generous by any measure. Unlimited queries with a 1M context window puts it ahead of most free-tier competitors in raw access terms, and there's no paid chat subscription to worry about. Power users who need more control either stick with the free app or pay per token via the API.

On the API side, DeepSeek makes a strong case for developers managing costs at scale. Off-peak pricing discounts of up to 75% are available during 16:30–00:30 UTC, giving teams with flexible scheduling another cost lever. For production apps with well-structured prompts sharing a common system context, effective input costs can drop well below $0.02 per million tokens with caching applied.

DeepSeek: alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT (OpenAI): The most capable all-around AI platform, with image understanding, voice, and memory. API pricing is higher, but US-based data residency and enterprise data agreements make it a safer choice for sensitive business workloads.
Claude (Anthropic): Particularly strong for long-form writing and document analysis, with comparable context windows and clearer data handling policies. Claude Pro starts at $20/month for individual users.
Gemini (Google): Tightly integrated with Google Workspace and built for multimodal work across text, image, and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash offers competitive API pricing with no Chinese data jurisdiction concerns.

How I tested DeepSeek

Used the free web app for code generation, document summarization, mathematical reasoning, multi-turn Q&A, and file analysis, covering both Instant Mode and Expert Mode across each task type.
Ran API calls across varying prompt sizes to verify context window behavior, caching discounts, and response consistency, following DeepSeek's own temperature guidance for different task types.
Cross-referenced DeepSeek's official privacy policy, third-party security research from NowSecure and SecurityScorecard, and regulatory actions from Italy, Australia, South Korea, and US government bodies to build a complete picture of the data risk profile.

Beyond hands-on testing, I reviewed DeepSeek's official API documentation, the V4 technical report published on Hugging Face, and benchmark data from the April 2026 release. Pricing figures were sourced directly from the official DeepSeek API documentation and corroborated against third-party tracking services.

Categories: Reviews

Don't bother buying the Switch 2's official N64 controller — get 8BitDo's brilliant take on it instead

Sun, 07/12/2026 - 10:00

8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller: Two-minute review

The 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller was primarily created for the Analogue 3D—a third-party console that emulates N64 hardware and requires real cartridges. However, it's also compatible with Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, and PC (as well as Android devices).

Now, I don't own an Analogue 3D personally (limited stock and an even more limited wallet have seen to that), but I do have a Switch 2, and the 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller shines just as brightly on Nintendo's current-gen machine. I've been playing Nintendo Switch Online's roster of N64 titles with it and found it to be a fantastic (and not to mention, cheaper) alternative to the official Switch Nintendo 64 controller.

The 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller comes in a wide variety of colorways, most of which are available to buy at the brand's Amazon store page. The standard black and white variants can be bought for $39.99 / £34.99 (around AU$60). Meanwhile, the version that bears the N64 controller's iconic color scheme (alongside several translucent models) is a touch pricier in the US at $44.99 / £34.99 (around AU$65).

I was sent the 'Grey' model for this review, and it perfectly mimics the look and feel of the original N64 controller. The grey finish of the shell and the colored Start, A, B, and C-buttons are all accurately rendered.

The major difference is that the 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller opts for a more contemporary layout, sporting two controller grips as opposed to the original N64 controller's odd but strangely comfortable trident-esque design.

(Image credit: Future)

There are pros and cons to this approach. The 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller's more modern flourishes do make it comfortable to hold. Additions like a Hall effect thumbstick also make for a pad that's built to last. Basically, the thing won't fall apart after a few heated sessions of Mario Party. Though the stick retains that rugged, contoured design of the original, meaning your hand won't be any better off if you stick to the 'palm method' of getting high scores in certain minigames.

Where this modern design falters slightly, though, is in the triggers and shoulder buttons. While they feel perfectly fine, the default layout in some games might feel off if you're used to the original N64 controller. That's because, with Nintendo Switch Online, the 'ZR' button is reserved for the quick menu. This relegates the left trigger as the dedicated 'Z' button by default.

That kind of was the case with the original N64 pad, too, where the Z button sat at the center-rear for your left index finger to rest on. It can just make things feel occasionally awkward on the 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller.

Take Star Fox 64, for example. Because the right trigger is reserved for the quick menu, it means the left trigger and right bumper are used to barrel roll by default. In GoldenEye 007, meanwhile, the left trigger fires your weapon, while the left bumper activates manual aiming. As a result, you might find you have to dive into the quick menu and adjust control schemes on a per-game basis, which can be a bit frustrating.

Thankfully, that's the only major issue I have with the 8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller, and it's one that wasn't hugely difficult to get used to. I did find myself bringing up the quick menu by accident, annoyingly often, though.

At least battery life is solid, at around 15-20 hours on a full charge. That's about standard for the brand's controllers like the 8BitDo Ultimate 2 and 8BitDo Pro 3. Not class-leading by any means, but certainly gets the job done.

8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller: Specifications

8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller

Price

$44.99 / £34.99 (around AU$65)

Weight

7.93oz / 225g

Dimensions

5.6 x 4.1 x 2.4in / 141 x 104 x 61mm

Compatibility

Analogue 3D, Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, Android

Connection type

Bluetooth 5.0, Bluetooth LE, USB-C

Battery life

15-20 hours

(Image credit: Future)8BitDo 64 Bluetooth Controller: Scorecard

Marshall’s new big and bullish home speaker is just as much of a delight on the eyes as it is on the ears, and it blew me away with its rumbling bass and amp-inspired aesthetic

Sun, 07/12/2026 - 07:00

Marshall Stanmore IV review

If you want to invite a speaker that looks as good as it sounds into your living room, then the new Marshall Stanmore IV could be a great pick for you. It aims to deliver everything its predecessor did, but better, with a broader soundstage, enhanced bass, and superior controls.

And as someone who owns (and loves) the previous model in this line, best believe I was expecting big things from the Stanmore IV. Luckily, it delivered, offering up impressive sound, a solid set of features, and an eye-catching design. But is it worth its relatively premium price tag? Here’s what I think after many hours of testing.

But before we decide whether the Marshall Stanmore IV can sit alongside the very best Bluetooth speakers, let’s take a look under the hood. This thing essentially uses the same setup as its sibling, the Marshall Acton IV, but crucially with a larger woofer. That means you’re getting a single 5-inch sub with 60W of amplification alongside two 0.75-inch tweeters with 25W of amplification. The result? Big, commanding, and engrossing sound.

I started by firing up Are You Gonna Go My Way by Lenny Kravitz, and the Stanmore IV handled it masterfully. Wailing electric guitars had excellent tonal accuracy and cut through with clarity; vocals also sounded driven and emotive.

Moving over to a deeper track, like Vision of Love by Lewis Taylor, and the Stanmore IV continued to impress. Deep bass pumping through the track hit with tremendous impact while remaining regimented and clean. But thumping low-end never came at the expense of sounds elsewhere in the frequency range. High-pitched drums sounded expressive and vibrant, while vocals in the mid-range were granted plenty of room to play in. Bass can even reach down to 38Hz, meaning you get brilliant, low extension — even sub-bass comes through with vigor and confidence.

LDAC is also on board now for higher-res Bluetooth listening, which helped to illuminate breathy vocal details in Black Eye by Allie X. And even though I’d argue the speaker has a more energetic sound signature, with a lot of focus on the hard-hitting low end, it still supplies a detailed, nuanced listen.

One of the limitations of the Stanmore IV’s little sibling, the Acton IV was its stereo playback. Although it whipped up a decent impression of stereo sound, its small size made it a little difficult to create the most meaningful sense of separation. But the larger, wider build of the Stanmore IV takes things up a notch, and in Jimi Hendrix's Foxey Lady I picked up on a stronger sense of separation, with lead guitar brilliantly placed on the right.

And, more generally speaking, the Stanmore IV whips up a broad, engrossing soundstage. Marshall has improved the tweeters and waveguides on this model to help disperse sound more evenly and provide room-filling sound. However the extra width has been achieved, it certainly gets the nod from me.

Marshall’s Dynamic Loudness tech also ensured that tracks maintained admirable clarity, even at higher volumes. Of course, you can still expect a bit of compression at 100%, say, but I was impressed with the speaker’s control in the upper echelons of loudness. The Stanmore IV is even better in this regard than the smaller Acton IV — perhaps thanks to its larger woofer and larger cabinet size.

Overall, the Stanmore IV provides powerful, driven, and exciting sound, with commendable depth and expression. It's bullish and confident, but still takes time to smell the flowers — and its wider soundstage and refined bass even helps it surpass its already impressive predecessor.

(Image credit: Future)

But now it’s time to move on from sound and look at a few of the features you can enjoy on the Stanmore IV. If you’ve already seen my Marshall Acton IV review, then you’ll get the gist of what’s on board. The Stanmore IV uses the newer Marshall app, enabling you to save three EQ calibrations (using a five-band equalizer), and you can use the M button to cycle between these if you like. The app also opens up placement compensation, enabling you to optimize the speaker’s audio output depending on its positioning, and there’s an option to change the brightness of the LED indicators.

Like the Stanmore III, there’s also RCA and 3.5mm connectivity, allowing you to hook up a turntable, or connect the speaker up to an AUX cable.

Something I wish the Stanmore IV did have is Wi-Fi connectivity. Not only does Wi-Fi provide the highest quality wireless listening experience, but it also prevents pesky sounds from your device — like phone calls and notifications — blasting from the speaker. What’s more, this is a home speaker, so it could easily have a stable connection to your home network at all times.

Marshall has multi-room covered with Auracast tech, which enables a bunch of its speakers to pair together, but I would’ve loved to have seen Wi-Fi onboard for the most seamless, quality-focused listening experience.

Another thing the Stanmore IV leaves out is voice assistant capabilities. Unlike models such as the Sonos Era 100 or Bose Lifestyle Ultra, there’s no smart voice control onboard. Although this is a function that I personally don’t tend to use on speakers, I know that some may wish for it on a model designed primarily for home use.

But something that’s sure to be a hit with most is the Stanmore IV’s design. This thing is an absolute beauty, and although it looks very similar to its predecessor, I’d argue that there’s no need to fix something that’s not broken. The new Stanmore stuns with a gorgeous faux leather exterior, beautiful speaker grille, and luxurious golden detailing. It looks like a true statement piece, and an item that will complement any living space (while still producing excellent audio).

As was the case on the Acton IV, buttons and control knobs are also perfectly responsive and pleasing to use, and there are also onboard EQ controls for altering bass and treble levels if you want to make some changes in a pinch.

So, now we come to the big question. Is the Marshall Stanmore IV worth the money? Well, it’s not the cheapest speaker around, with a price tag of $399.99 / £349.99 / AU$679, making it $100 / £90 / AU$180 more than the Acton IV. On the surface, that may seem like a significant jump for a speaker that’s almost identical — bar a larger cabinet and slightly larger woofer. But these seemingly small changes actually make a significant difference, in my view.

It maintains tighter control at the highest volumes, and also produces the seismic sound that Marshall has become associated with. And that’s not to do the Acton down — it’s just to say that I think you get your money’s worth when stepping up to the Stanmore. I’d also say that the Stanmore competes well against rivals in its price category, with a lower price tag yet more might than a rival like the Denon Home 400. I’d also argue it produces a more striking sound than a model like the Sonos Roam 2 — though you do miss out on Wi-Fi and a few smart features.

Overall, the Marshall Stanmore IV is a great speaker that produces energetic, impactful sound, alongside a stunning look and nifty companion app. Yes, I would’ve loved to have seen Wi-Fi on board, but with LDAC for higher-res Bluetooth streaming added into the mix, I’d still happily recommend this musical maestro from Marshall.

(Image credit: Future)Marshall Stanmore IV review: price & release date

$399.99 / £349.99 / AU$679
First released July 2026

The Marshall Stanmore IV was released in July 2026, around four years after its predecessor hit the shelves. This newer model launched alongside the Marshall Acton IV, which is — in essence — a smaller version of the Stanmore. This model comes in at $399.99 / £349.99 (AU$580).

Marshall Stanmore IV review: specs

Weight

8.8lbs / 4kg

Dimensions

13.8 x 8 x 7.3 inches / 350 x 203 x 185mm

Connectivity

Bluetooth 5.3, 3.5mm, RCA

Speaker drivers

1 x 5-inch 60W woofer / 2 x 0.75-inch 25W tweeters

Waterproofing

Not stated

(Image credit: Future)Should I buy the Marshall Stanmore IV?

Attribute

Notes

Score

Features

Multi-room with Auracast, new app works well, LDAC brought in, but lack of Wi-Fi is a shame.

4/5

Performance

Impactful yet detailed audio with tremendous depth, control, and power.

5/5

Design

Very similar to predecessor, but gorgeous amp-inspired aesthetic is massively appealing.

4.5/5

Value

It’s pricey, but stacks up well against competition.

4/5

Buy it if…

You’re focused on getting amazing sound quality
I have to say, the Stanmore IV surprised me by just how good it sounded — even though I already loved its predecessor. Bass is phenomenally powerful yet regimented, mids are driven yet layered, and treble is vibrant yet controlled. Throw in LDAC for higher-res listening and a decently wide soundstage, and you’ve got a great-sounding speaker.

You want a speaker that’s a statement piece
Although the Stanmore IV sounds great, it’s something else that truly helps it to stand out: its design. It maintains that gorgeous amp-inspired aesthetic that’s become synonymous with the Marshall brand, with enticing golden detailing, quality faux-leather casing, and the brand’s iconic logo front a center.

Don’t buy it if…

You’re looking for a portable speaker
When using the Stanmore IV, you’ll need to keep it hooked up to the mains. As a result, it’s better-suited to home use rather than being taken on the road. If you want a more portable option, I’d strongly recommend the Marshall Kilburn III, or awesome non-Marshall alternatives like the JBL Xtreme 5.

You want a smart speaker with Wi-Fi
The Stanmore IV is designed for the home, but it doesn’t have the smart features you’d expect from a rival like Sonos, say. For instance, it leaves out Wi-Fi connectivity (no AirPlay or Spotify connect), which is the most seamless and high-quality way to enjoy music wirelessly. It also leaves out voice assistant compatibility. If those features are important to you, I’d suggest checking out my alternatives below…

Marshall Stanmore IV review: also consider

Marshall Stanmore IV

Sonos Move 2

Klipsch The Three Plus

Price

$399.99 / £349.99 (AU$580)

$449 / £449 / AU$799

$399 / £379 / AU$529

Weight

8.8lbs / 4kg

6.6lbs / 3kg

10.6lbs / 4.8kg

Dimensions

13.8 x 8 x 7.3 inches / 350 x 203 x 185mm

6.3 x 9.5 x 5 inches / 160 x 241 x 127mm

7 x 14 x 8.4 inches / 178 x 355 x 213mm

Connectivity

Bluetooth 5.3, 3.5mm, RCA

Bluetooth 5.0, Wi-Fi, USB-C

Bluetooth 5.3, RCA, USB-C, digital optical

Speaker drivers

1 x 5-inch 60W woofer / 2 x 0.75-inch 25W tweeters

2 x angled tweeters, 1 x mid-woofer

2 x 57mm full-range drivers, 1 x 133mm subwoofer

Sonos Move 2
I’ve used the Sonos Move 2 plenty of times, and I absolutely love it. It plates up gorgeous, detailed audio, alongside seamless Wi-Fi streaming, multi-room capabilities, and convenient voice assistant functionality. It also has a 24-hour battery life, enabling you to take it on the go, and it looks incredibly stylish as well. You can’t ask for much more. Read our full Sonos Move 2 review.

Klipsch The Three Plus
Here’s another stylish speaker that seriously impressed us. Klipsch’s The Three Plus speaker offers assertive and intricate audio, fantastic build quality, and plenty of connectivity options. Read our full Klipsch The Three Plus review.

(Image credit: Future)How I tested the Marshall Stanmore IV

Spent days testing the speaker
Used at our dedicated music testing space at Future Labs
Mainly streamed music over Tidal

I tested the Marshall Stanmore IV over the course of a few days, during which time I listened to hours worth of music and exhausted every feature the speaker had to offer.

Most of the time, I used the Stanmore IV in our dedicated music testing room at Future Labs, where I mainly streamed tunes via Tidal on my Xiaomi 17. To begin with, I sifted through the tracks in our TechRadar reference playlist — which features songs from a wide variety of genres — but I also bumped a bunch of tunes from my personal library.

More generally, I’ve spent years testing audio gear here at TechRadar. I’ve reviewed everything from premium wireless headphones like the Sony WH-1000XM6 through to Dolby Atmos soundbars such as the JBL Bar 1300MK2. I’ve also tested more than 50 Bluetooth speakers, including lots of Marshall models, including the Marshall Middleton II and Acton IV.

Read TechRadar’s reviews guarantee
First reviewed: July 2026

Categories: Reviews

Austrian Audio’s new ‘semi-open-back’ wired headphones are named like some sort of hired assassin, but I tested them and if you want layered audio, they’re 'The Arranger' for you

Sat, 07/11/2026 - 07:00

Austrian Audio The Arranger: Two-minute review

The Arranger by Austrian Audio are an attempt to at least begin to fill the gap that exists between the company’s highest-end headphones and its wildly successful entry-level stuff. In case that isn’t a big enough ask by itself, Austrian Audio wants this new gap-filler to be just as convincing as a pro monitoring tool as they are a domestic pair of headphones.

So the brand has come up with a light, comfortable and slightly oddly colored pair of (semi) open-backed headphones that are easy to drive, fold smaller than the norm and are fitted with mildly exotic DLC-coated dynamic drivers that deliver a prodigious 5Hz - 30kHz frequency response. About the only misstep (apart from the finish) is the lack of a balanced cable option — or, more accurately, the lack of a no-cost balanced cable option.

When it comes to performance, though, complaints like this become irrelevant. Without sacrificing anything where detail retrieval, organization or soundstaging are concerned, Austrian Audio has served up a pair of energetic, entertaining and thoroughly engaging headphones that are just as happy to deliver the excitement of a recording as they are to peer deep into the mix and examine it on a microscopic level. As a combination of analysis and enjoyment, The Arranger are very hard to lay a glove on.

Which is not to say they have the field clear, of course. Similarly specified, similarly priced products from brands with similarly credible reputations are, naturally, available among the best wired headphones — and when you’re talking about companies like Beyerdynamic and Meze Audio, you know the alternatives to The Arranger are going to be compelling.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Price & release date

Released June 2026
Priced $1,299 / £899 / AU$1,899

The Arranger by Austrian Audio are on sale now, and in the United States they sell for $1,299 per pair. They’re £899 in the United Kingdom, and AU$1,899 in Australia. They're intended to fill a gap, but it means they come up against some pretty stiff competition, too.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Specs

Type

Wired, over-ear, semi-open back headphones

Drivers

44mm DLC-coated dynamic

Weight

320g (without cable)

Cable length

Impedence

25ohms

Sensitivity

110dB

Frequency response

5Hz - 30kHz frequency response

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Features

44mm DLC-coated dynamic drivers
3m cable with 3.5mm/6.3mm termination
25ohms impedance, 110dB sensitivity

Passive, hard-wired headphones are seldom groaning under the weight of all their features, and The Arranger are not in any way unusual. The feature-count is short but in this instance, at least, the few features here are all entirely fit for purpose.

The Austrian Audio are supplied with a 3m length of quite sturdily rubberized cable. It fits using the ‘click and turn’ method into the left ear cup, and at the other end there’s a 3.5mm termination that will happily accept the 6.3mm adapter that’s supplied. A 2m 4.4mm balanced cable and a 3m cable with an XLR termination are both available and, rather annoyingly, both will cost you additional money.

The information that travels along the cable is delivered to a couple of 44mm dynamic drivers. They have a diamond-like carbon coating on the diaphragm and also feature a proprietary ring magnet — the aim is superior impulse response, super-low distortion and significant bass extension. Austrian Audio suggests frequency response is 5Hz - 30kHz, which would seem to make ‘significant bass extension’ something of an understatement.

The Arranger are very forgiving headphones — impedance of 25ohms and 110dB sensitivity means they’re not even remotely difficult to drive. A dedicated headphone amp is always a good idea, of course, but even the 3.5mm socket on your laptop should have sufficient oomph to get the Austrian Audio up to speed.

Features score: 5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Sound quality

Significant low-frequency substance and variation
Open, organized and detailed sound
Tremendous powers of analysis

Austrian Audio, it turns out, was not just talking. The Arranger really do function almost as well as a pair of monitors as they do when asked to simply entertain. In either circumstance, this is a very accomplished pair of headphones.

The (almost) open-backed arrangement means the presentation is spacious and airy, and the soundstage the headphones present is quite expansive, but not at the cost of unity or singularity. Despite being able to open up a recording like Natural Magic’s Galaxy Builder to the point that its constituent parts are individualized and easy to inspect, there’s a togetherness to the way The Arranger present the recording that makes it sound like a performance rather than simply a collection of discrete occurrences.

It helps that frequency response is nice and even, from the deep and almost extravagantly varied low end to the bright, substantial top end. The midrange projects well without forcing the overall response into any kind of ‘V’ shape, and the lack of coloration to the tonality allows every point of the frequency range to sound natural and unforced. Detail levels are high at every stage, and the amount of insight the Austrian Audio have into even quite complex recordings is never less than fully impressive.

As well as body and insight at the bottom end, there’s also unarguable control. The Arranger take a lot of care in expressing the attack and decay of individual bass events, and consequently have no problem in describing rhythms with absolute conviction. This sense of confidence and positivity is, in fact, apparent throughout the frequency range.

As well as being alert to the finest, most transient details that both build a complete picture of a recording and allow an engineer to understand a recording on a sort of ‘building block’ level, The Arranger are more than willing to handle the broader dynamics of changes in volume, intensity and attack. The distance they’re able to put between the quietest and most contemplative passages in a recording and the final all-out crescendo is significant.

It’s by no means an easy trick to entertain with the vigorous and engaging nature of your sound while simultaneously serving as a forensic tool of insight and analysis — it’s so difficult, in fact, that most headphone manufacturers don’t even bother trying. But it’s a trick Austrian Audio manages to pull off with something very much like aplomb.

Sound quality score: 5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Design

(Semi-) open-backed configuration
320g without cable
Just one, rather single-minded, option for finish

In many meaningful ways, the design of The Arranger is wholly successful. This is, at 320g without the length of cable attached, a light and comfortable pair of headphones, and thanks to come judicious choices where hanger arrangement, clamping force and padding of the contact points are concerned, it’s a pair of headphones that stays comfortable for hours on end.

The inside of the headband and the ear cups are of medium-density memory foam with a faux-suede covering. It’s soft, and it resists returning your own body heat longer after some alternative designs have started to warm your ears. Some sturdy articulation in the yokes means not only will the ear cups fold flat, but the frame folds in on itself too. This makes The Arranger much more compact in transit, and a far better proposition where portability is concerned.

To my eyes, though, there’s something quite inelegant and rather rustic about the width of the headband and the point where the headband chunkily meets the ear cups. The one available finish — a combination of black, something that thinks it’s gold and something that is unarguably beige — doesn’t exactly shout ‘premium product!’ either. The slats on the ear cups that result in the Austrian Audio being a quasi-open-backed design are a little more successful but, again, the color isn’t helping the headphones look as expensive as they actually are.

There’s absolutely no arguing with the standard of build and finish on display here but, then again, this is no more than you’re entitled to expect when paying over $1,000 for some headphones. The problem for The Arranger, I think, is about perceived value — and it comes up slightly short.

Design score: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Value

Headphones for every occasion
Light, comfortable and easy to wear…
…although not quite as easy to look at

No, $1,299 / £899 / AU$1,899 is not an insignificant sum for a pair of headphones, even a pair from a company with the track record of Austrian Audio.

But when you consider their potency as a tool of analysis, factor in their energetic and enthusiastic attitude when you’re simply listening for pleasure, and then add in the build quality and the comfort that’s a by-product, they become pretty difficult to argue with on a value-for-money basis.

One or two options where finish is concerned wouldn’t go amiss, mind you — in fact, they might help The Arranger to become an even easier sell.

Value score: 4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Should I buy the Austrian Audio The Arranger?

Section

Notes

Score

Features

Entirely fit for purpose; 44mm DLC-coated dynamic drivers, with 25ohms impedance, 110dB sensitivity

5 / 5

Sound quality

Open, organized and detailed, with tremendous powers of analysis

5 / 5

Design

Ear cups fold flat for compact transit; very comfortable; but the finish is a little inelegant

4 / 5

Value

Value for the not insignificant money, but 4.4mm or XLR connection cable would be nice

4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Buy them if...

You listen for long periods
The light weight and all-around comfort of The Arranger make them the perfect headphones for longer listening sessions.

You need an all-rounder
The Arranger are just as happy to examine the minutiae of a mix as they are to entertain you with the whole-hearted approach to music.

You need a degree of portability
Thanks to a clever yoke arrangement and some reassuringly sturdy hinges, The Arranger fold far smaller than the majority of their price-comparable rivals.

Don't buy them if...

You feel you’ve spent enough
You’d have thought a balanced cable was a no-brainer for headphones costing this much money, but you’ll have to fork out for a 4.4mm or XLR connection here.

You’re after a premium look
Your money has almost all gone on the sound The Arranger make, which is fair enough, but some people will think $1,299 should buy a premium feel too.

You don’t get on with beige
It’s a strange choice of finish, no two ways about it — and it gets even stranger when you realize it’s your only option.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Austrian Audio The Arranger review: Also consider

Meze Audio Strada
These closed-back headphones sound admirably un-closed — if you have a larger-than-average head, and like the color green, then you can't go far wrong.
Read our Meze Audio Strada review for more

Grado Signature S750
Yes, you'll need deep pockets in you're going to go down this $1,695 / £1,695 (about AU$3,400) route, but the Grado will reward you in spades. The delightfully brutalist handmade open-back construction stands out, along with an exceptional soundstage and excellent clarity.
See our in-depth Grado Signature S750 review for more

How I tested the Austrian Audio The Arranger

Connected to a FiiO M15S DAP
Connected to a full-size system via Eversolo DAC-Z10 pre-amp
Using music from many formats and of many styles

The FiiO digital audio player features lots of hi-res FLAC and DSD files, and lots of different styles and genres of music within those digital files. The Eversolo DAC-Z10, meanwhile, is the preamplifier for an Arcan ST25 network streamer, a Technics SL-1300G turntable and a Rega Apollo CD player.

Which means that content from internet radio stations, vinyl and compact disc are all available too - which, by extension, means The Arranger by Austrian Audio got about as thorough a work-out as a pair of headphones at this sort of money demands.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)

First reviewed: July 2026
Read more about how we test

Categories: Reviews

Oukitel WP68 Air review: A rugged phone with good camera sensors, but limited performance and battery capacity

Sat, 07/11/2026 - 01:10

Oukitel WP68 Air: 30-second review

The Oukitel WP68 Air lands as the accessible end of the WP68 family. Where the WP68 Pro chases a slim, cyber-styled design, the Air keeps things simple and in some ways more elegant.

Oukitel pitches this as a phone for anyone who wants rugged durability without the price tag of a flagship, and to that end, a 6.88-inch HD+ screen and an 8000mAh battery to do the heavy lifting.

On paper, its specifications undercut most of the rugged pack. The 12GB of RAM and 512GB of storage look generous for the money, and the 64MP main camera promises more than a token effort in daylight. Android 16 also puts it ahead of several rivals still shipping on older builds.

This is a classic rugged phone able to withstand what the environment can throw at it, and the owner being clumsy, but it tries to have a foot also in the practical camp for those who need a daily driver.

The screen is 6.88 inches, making it easy to read, but the resolution isn't great, and the 450-nit brightness isn’t ideal for working in sunlight. Another limitation is that video capture is only 1440p, not 4K.

If you don’t do much photography, these aspects might not be an issue for you, but it's useful to be aware of these things before purchasing.

However, the biggest issue with the WP68 Air is that, compared to some previous Oukitel phones with better SoCs and cameras, its asking price doesn’t make it a bargain. And a few other annoyances stop this from joining our hallowed collection of best rugged phones.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Oukitel WP68 Air: price and availability

How much does it cost? $420/£270/€360
When is it out? Available now in some regions
Where can you get it? Direct from the maker

The asking price direct from Oukitel is $419.99, which doesn’t sound excessive for a phone with 12GB of RAM and 512GB of storage. For UK customers, that translates into £268.99, and for Europeans it's €359.99. But, at the time of writing, it's out of stock for the UK.

Also, this phone isn’t available on Amazon or AliExpress, as far as I can see.

But an even greater problem for the WP68 Air is that it's priced in some regions higher than the WP210, a phone from the same stable with better specifications.

On the German Oukitel outlet, the WP210 is priced at €319,99, a full forty euros less than the WP68 Air, a phone it crushes in every respect. On the UK site, the WP68 Air is £16 cheaper, but the more powerful SoC, better screen and cameras are easily worth the difference. And even with US pricing, the WP210 is only $30 more, and that’s still a better deal than the WP68 Air.

I’m sure there are equally competitive phones from other brands, but when a phone from the same brand undermines its own value, the WP68 Air is obviously in trouble.

There is a better phone for this money, or close, and it's also from Oukitel.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

Value score: 3.5/5

Oukitel WP68 Air: Specs

Item

Spec

CPU:

MediaTek Dimensity 7025 (Octa-core, up to 2.5GHz)

GPU:

IMG BXM-8-256 (PowerVR IMG GPU)

NPU:

MediaTek NPU 550

RAM:

12GB uMCP LPDDR5x+UFS3.1

Storage:

512GB

Screen:

6.8" IPS 450nit 120Hz

Resolution:

720 x 1640

SIM:

2x Nano SIM, or 1x Nano +TF

Weight:

314g or 328g with bumper

Dimensions:

178.4 x 83.2 x 11.9mm

Rugged Spec:

IP68 IP69K dust/water resistant (up to 1.5m for 30 min), MIL-STD-810H Certification

Rear cameras:

64MP, 8MP and 2MP

Front camera:

32MP

Networking:

WiFi 5, Bluetooth 5.2

OS:

Android 16

Battery:

8,000 mAh battery (Max 45 charge wired)

Colours:

Orange, Black, Green

Oukitel WP68 Air: Design

Conservative design
Standard button layout
No wireless charging

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

From the official images, the WP68 Air follows the familiar rugged phone formula. A reinforced frame surrounds the display, with a textured rear panel and a camera module set into a raised block on the back. It is offered in three colourways: orange, black and green.

I’m really pleased that rugged phone makers aren’t making devices that look like props from a cancelled-after-one-season sci-fi show, and for the most part, the WP68 Air looks like a large ordinary phone.

What dictates the size of this design is the headline 6.88-inch panel at HD+ resolution. That’s plenty of glass for the price, though HD+ on a screen this size will look softer than the FHD+ panels found on some competitors' phones.

The layout is strictly by-the-numbers, with the power button and volume controls on the right, the custom button and SIM tray on the left. That’s what most people expect from an Android phone these days, and unless makers have a good reason to do something different, it seems the sensible choice

While I’m not 100% certain of this, without dismantling the phone, I’m confident that the primary camera sensor is on the centerline of the phone, with the nightvision sensor to the left and the IR lights and flash to the right.

With the camera cluster all in a horizontal line, it would have been easy to see damage to the sensor projections if Oukitel had not foreseen the issue. Counterbalancing the projections along the top, the WP68 Air has a ‘heel’ at the bottom that lets the phone lie almost flat on a table.

I assumed, then I saw this arrangement, that it was done to leave the majority of the back flat for wireless charging, but this phone doesn’t have this feature, so it’s purely aesthetic.

Not sure why so many rugged phone makers don’t like wireless charging, but apparently, they don’t.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

Another feature Oukitel added to this phone was a hard plastic bumper, and this is the second phone I’ve seen with one recently. Not only are these difficult to remove, but by their nature, any impact on them will be transmitted to the phone, not dissipated like they are by soft TPU-made bumpers.

For those thinking, why would you remove it? The answer is the SIM tray, which can’t be accessed with the bumper in place.

Getting it off is a challenge, due to the lack of flexibility, and I would expect some people will invariably break theirs in their attempt. I’m not a fan of this trend.

In many ways, this phone feels like a toned-down version of the WP66. While the WP66 was a heavier, thicker design, the WP68 Air is slimmer, has a larger display, a smaller battery, and a more modest primary camera sensor.

That makes the Air more ergonomic, but it reduces runtime and lowers screen resolution, even though it’s physically larger.

From a potential customer's viewpoint, the WP69 Air is aimed at someone who wants a rugged phone as a daily driver, not a special piece of hardware for working outdoors.

Design score: 4/5

Oukitel WP68 Air: Hardware

MediaTek Dimensity 7025
512GB of storage
8000 mAh battery

I’ve given my assessment of the Dimensity 7025 too many times, since it’s a remarkably popular choice for phone makers.

Looking back at my records, I saw this SoC in the Oukitel WP300, WP66, WP61 Plus, WP60 and WP55 Pro, and also the RugOne Xever 7 Pro.

The problem with the Dimensity 7025 is that it’s not a current-generation chip, as it's based on 6nm technology first deployed in 2022 in the Dimensity 930.

Currently, MediaTek has 4nm and 3nm SoCs, and shortly, it will be moving to 2nm, which puts the Dimensity 7025 in perspective.

Where this is most evident in this design is the integrated PowerVR IMG BXM-8-256 GPU, a component that can’t handle all the functions of OpenGL or Vulkan, making this phone unsuitable for hardcore gamers and VR users.

What makes that GPU look slightly better to the user is the curiously low resolution of the display, being just 720 x 1640. That’s a much smaller display in pixel terms than most phones with 6.6-inch or larger displays will need to drive.

However, even with this slight advantage, the IMG BXM-8-256 is the Achilles heel of this SoC.

Where Oukitel spent the money it saved on the SoC was in the RAM and storage, which seems to contradict the current trend to reduce those to save money.

12GB of RAM is a useful amount, easily enough to ignore Oukitel trying to oversell it as 36GB using storage-mapped memory. And 512GB is also a decent amount of storage, making this phone good for 4K video capture, where file sizes can grow.

The storage capacity is also useful, because the SIM tray is dual SIM only if you don’t use a MicroSD card, which might negate that extra storage for those who need a work and home phone number.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

The final jigsaw piece in the hardware of the WP68 Air is the battery, which, at 8000 mAh, is modest by rugged-phone standards. It’s more than an ordinary phone, but less than many rugged phones that often start at 10000 mAh and go up to 20000 mAh in some models.

Is it enough? That depends entirely on how you intend to use the WP68 Air, because it doesn’t sound ideal for a camping adventure away from civilisation for a week.

Due to the smaller battery capacity, this phone's marketing materials don’t mention reverse charging, as it doesn’t support that technology.

The flip side of the smaller battery is that the phone's overall weight is much closer to that of a standard smartphone, and it charges reasonably quickly with the provided 45W charger.

What gives me pause for thought is how this phone compares with the WP210 that Oukitel still sells. It weighs about the same, has 10% more battery, the same memory and storage, but a much more powerful SoC, an AMOLED screen, 108MP camera and reverse charging.

And, you get all that for $30 more from Oukitel. Based on the WP210, I’m not sure where those who set the price of the WP68 Air came from, but it’s a mismatch even compared to other Oukitel products.

Hardware score: 3.5/5

Oukitel WP68 Air: Cameras

64MP, 8MP and 2MP on the rear
32MP on the front
Four cameras in total

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

The Oukitel WP68 Air Ultra has four cameras:

Rear camera: 64MP OmniVision OV64B, 8MP Hynix Hi-846 nightvision , 2MP GalaxyCore GC02M1 macro
Front camera: 32MP Sony IMX616

Oukitel WP68 Air Camera samplesMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark PickavanceMark Pickavance

The best bit of the photo capture part of this phone is undoubtedly the 64MP OmniVision OV64B, since its pixel-binning solution for still images works remarkably well.

However, its limitation is that there are only two digital zoom levels selectable on the phone app, 1.0x and 2.0x, but 0.5x increments are possible, going all the way up to 10.0x. At least the camera doesn’t expect you to move around to create framing, if you are aware of what pinching the screen does in picture mode. It also has autofocus, which works well.

The 8MP Hynix Hi-846 Night-Vision sensor is one that’s new to this reviewer, and the results seem decent. And, it can zoom in 1.0x increments from 1.0x to 4.0x. The only limitation of this device is how far the IR illumination goes from the phone in darkness, which isn’t much more than four or five metres.

Easily the worst option is the 2MP Macro, partly because the resolution is poor, but also because it has a fixed focus lens that’s set at about 4cm. Getting that to convert into a focus-accurate image is extremely difficult, and I’d suggest using the standard lens in 64MP mode and cropping the image for better results.

As I’ve commented before, the 32MP Sony IMX616 is overkill for a selfie camera role, but it does what you expect, and the quality of the capture is good.

The big disappointment of this camera arrangement is that the highest resolution video it will capture is 1440p, or 2560 x 1400 at 30 fps. The OmniVision OV64B is rated for 4K at up to 60 fps or 4K at 30 fps with Electronic Image Stabilisation (EIS). So this limitation is entirely down to the Dimensity 7025, which does not support 4K video processing, only 1440p at 30fps. On this basis, it makes little sense that Oukitel use the OmniVision OV64B over a 32MP or even 16MP sensor.

And, if you hadn’t already guessed, this phone doesn’t support Widevine L1 encryption, so most big-name streaming services will only offer you 480p video. But since the screen is only 720 pixels high in landscape, it would only support 720p if it did have L1.

In short, the sensors are decent other than the Macro, but the SoC doesn’t allow them to be fully exploited.

Camera score: 3.5/5

Oukitel WP68 Air: Performance

6nm SoC
Mid-tier performance

Phone

Oukitel WP68 Air

Oukitel WP210

SoC

MediaTek Dimensity 7025

Mediatek Dimensity 8200

GPU

IMG BXM-8-256

Mali-G610 MC6

NPU

N/A

MediaTek NPU 580

Memory

12GB/512GB

Weight

314g

311g

Battery

8000

8800

Geekbench

Single

915

1246

Multi

2173

3968

OpenCL

156

4310

Vulkan

137

4736

PCMark

3.0 Score

12111

13970

Battery

19h 58m (19%)

22h 44m (19%)

Charge 30

Passmark

Score

5200

16455

CPU

4241

8490

3DMark

Slingshot OGL

3663

Maxed Out

Slingshot Ex. OGL

2582

Maxed Out

Slingshot Ex. Vulkan

2368

Maxed Out

Wildlife

1373

6023

Nomad Lite

125

625

Having another brand create a similar device that's better is one thing, but having the same brand steal the limelight seems unfortunate.

Due to their similarities in the market that they were both designed to succeed, I’ve matched the WP68 Air against its WP210 brother, and this picture isn’t pretty.

Performance-wise, the Dimensity 8200 eats the 7024 for breakfast. But then, since it’s a 4nm chip, and not a 6nm one, that’s to be expected.

But where the WP68 Air truly gets kicked to the kerb is when the tests involve graphics, since the Mali-G610 MC6 is superior in every respect to the IMG BXM-8-256.

The IMG chip can’t run some of the tests properly due to support issues with both OpenGL and Vulkan, which is why the GeekBench graphics scores are so abysmal.

Of all the tests, the only ones where the WP68 Air holds its own are in the PCMark Score and battery tests. Not sure why PCMark thinks it's nearly as good, but based on the battery capacity, it performs almost exactly the same as the WP210 when adjusted.

Though I have to wonder if the Dimensity 8200 did much more work in its 22 hours and 44 minutes than the 7025 managed over 19 hours and 58 minutes.

But the bottom line is that the WP210 is lighter, has more battery capacity, and lasts longer. The WP68 Air does charge a little faster, but with less battery to fill, that’s to be expected.

Overall, the WP68 is a shadow of the WP210, a phone that costs only a little more.

Performance score: 3/5

(Image credit: Oukitel)Oukitel WP68 Air: Final verdict

With the price of everything that uses memory and flash storage increasing, for a casual observer, the $420 asking price for the WP68 Air seems reasonable. It’s a lightweight, rugged design that would be fine as a daily driver for many. The cameras are fine, and the amount of RAM and storage keeps it moving along quite smoothly.

However, there are a number of alternatives on the market, at least one of which is made by Oukitel itself, that seem to offer better performance and greater potential for around the same price.

I’ve concluded that Oukitel launches too many phones, and that makes the chance of them missing the obvious overlaps in their own range significantly more likely.

Unfortunately, there isn’t much about the WP68 Air that the WP210 didn’t do significantly better, so I’d recommend you get one of those instead.

Should I buy a Oukitel WP68 Air?Oukitel WP66 Score Card

Attributes

Notes

Rating

Value

Not unreasonably priced, but equally not great value.

3.5/5

Design

A clean design where everything is where you would expect

4/5

Hardware

Lots of memory and storage, but the SoC is showing its age

3.5/5

Camera

Decent sensors, but only 2K video capture

3.5/5

Performance

Outclassed by newer Dimensity SoCs

3/5

Overall

A nice phone, but not as good as a previous design

3.5/5

Buy it if...

You need a phone for outdoors
The water and dust resistance on the Oukitel WP68 AIr is enough to handle submersion and drops. And, it's not too large to fit in a pocket, or too heavy to carry. Compared with some rugged designs, this one is decidedly practical.

You carry lots of data or apps
With 512GB of storage and 12GB of RAM, this phone is ideal for those who like to carry data and install numerous apps. And, if you give up a SIM card slot, you can add a MicroSD card for even more space.

Don't buy it if...

You need the best video
The sensors on this phone aren't bad, but they're not exploited fully by the phone. With a 64MP sensor, video capture is capped at only 2K resolution. If you record video, you will want a design that can capture 4K.

You use demanding apps
Hardcore gamers and VR users will find the GPU in the WP68 Air is underpowered. There isn’t any way to fix this with 2022 SoC technology under the skin. Other Oukitel phones have better GPUs, and don't cost much more.

Also Consider

Oukitel WP210
A similar design with a better SoC, larger battery and 108MP camera. This device outclasses the WP68 Air in almost every way, and it doesn't cost much more to own.

Read my full Oukitel WP210 reviewView Deal

RugOne Xever 7 Pro
A RugOne design with swappable battery technology, but smaller batteries. The one critical advantage of this design is its thermal imaging camera. However, it costs more than the WP68 Air because of that feature.

Read my RugOne Xever 7 Pro review

For more ruggedized devices, we've reviewed the best rugged tablets, the best rugged laptops, and the best rugged hard drives

Categories: Reviews

I tested PSB's new stereo speaker system and the punchy sound and compact styling are a delight, but don't bother if you listen to a lot of vinyl

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 13:00

PSB iQ2: Two-minute review

‘Larger’ is not the same as ‘large’, and so while the PSB iQ2 is the larger of the two models in the newly refreshed iQ range, it’s still a very compact little pair of speakers. ‘Compact’ in this instance, though, in no way implies a shortage of features or a restriction on performance

The standard of build and finish is good, the looks clean and understated no matter which of the seven different finishes you choose. The iQ2 has everything you could realistically hope for in a wireless speaker system costing this sort of money. It has — deep breath — wired and wireless connectivity (including a moving magnet phono stage for use with a turntable, and a HDMI eARC socket for connection to a TV), one of the best user interfaces around in the shape of BluOS, a total of 270 watts of power, frequency response that belies the physical size of the speakers, and authentically high-resolution playback. That's a lot.

Though you don’t get everything you could realistically hope for where sound quality is concerned, the PSB nevertheless has plenty to recommend it. Through every input except its phono stage, it’s a lively, engaging and informative listen, can deal confidently with rhythms and tempos, has a fair amount of well-controlled punch, and doesn’t overlook the finer details when it comes to unpicking a recording.

It can sound a little cramped via Bluetooth, sure, and its phono stage is dull when every other input sounds energetic. But as long as you’re not expecting small cabinets with small drivers to deliver hangar-filling sound you'll get from the best stereo speakers on the market there’s plenty to enjoy here.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)PSB iQ2 review: Price & release date

$1,399 / £1,199 / $2,299 (approx.)
Released in June 2026

The PSB iQ2 active wireless stereo speaker system is on sale now. In the United States it sells for $1,399 — unless you like the walnut veneer finish, in which case it'll set you back $1,499. The equivalent in the United Kingdom is £1,199 / £1,299. The pricing is yet to be confirmed for Australia, but you’re probably looking at AU$2299 / AU$2499 or thereabouts.

There is neither the time nor the space to reel off all the very many excellent products that PSB is going up against at this price.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)PSB iQ2 review: Features

19mm aluminum dome tweeter, 100mm mid/bass driver
24bit/192kHz DAC
Wireless and wired inputs

It’s compact, yes, but PSB's iQ2 has found enough space to ensure it's equipped to justify the asking price. No aspect of its specification is underpowered.

Getting your audio information on board in the first place can be done in a number of different ways. All physical inputs are on the rear panel of the ‘primary’ speaker. It has sockets for HDMI eARC, digital optical, USB-C, USB-A and a moving magnet phono stage on RCAs for use with a turntable (this input is switchable to line level in the control app). There’s also a pre-out for connecting to a subwoofer.

The wireless stuff is covered off by Bluetooth with aptX Adaptive codec compatibility. The iQ2 is compatible with the BluOS eco-system, which means wireless access to every worthwhile music streaming service, internet radio and any content you may have stored on a device connected to the local network.

Once it’s on board, the digital stuff is handled by a 24bit/192kHz digital-to-analog converter before it’s handed over for amplification — the analog stuff, of course, is passed straight through. There are 270 watts of TI Burr Brown-derived Class D amplification to power the driver array — 45 watts for each 19mm aluminum dome tweeter, and 90 watts for each 100mm mid/bass drivers. The latter, mildly unusually, are positioned above the former. This is an arrangement that, suggests PSB, is good for a frequency response of 64Hz - 20kHz.

Features score: 5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)PSB iQ2 review: Sound quality

Lively and informative sound
Well-organized soundstage but not the largest
Sounds dull via its phono stage

There are caveats here, and they concern the out-and-out scale of sound the PSB is capable of generating (or not), and the efficacy of its phono stage. But it’s probably best to start with the things the iQ2 gets — there are more than one or two.

With a Tidal-derived stream of Geese’s Getting Killed playing as a 24bit/44.1kHz FLAC file, the iQ2 is an energetic, engaging listen with a stack of pertinent observation to make where tone, timbre and basic detail retrieval are concerned. It maintains a nicely even-handed tonality, neither adding to nor subtracting from the organic heat of the recording. At every turn, it is attentive to even the finer details of texture and harmonic variation.

It sounds very much like it extends further down the frequency range than PSB is claiming, and when it’s down there it punches with well-controlled determination (as well as no little variation) and has no problems expressing rhythms believably as a result.

Frequency response is equally well judged, so when the system modulates from low end to midrange there’s no apparent step change. Then, once it's there, the iQ2 invests voices with plenty of character and emotional attitude, as well as revealing the finer details of technique. Move up again into the highest frequencies and, though the PSB is not the most substantial where treble sounds are concerned, it manages to describe shine and bite without becoming hard or glassy. The DSP-assisted crossover occurs at around the 3Khz mark, but it’s basically imperceptible.

There’s a fair amount of dynamic headroom available, so as well as having the grunt to play good and loud, the iQ2 breathes deeply enough to put worthwhile distance between the quieter moments of a recording and the points of greatest intensity and attack. And it can manage these transitions without audible stress or compression, which is not something you can automatically say about some of its nominal rivals.

The soundstage it creates is well defined and properly organized, so even complex recordings are laid out coherently. It’s not the most expansive soundstage you ever encountered, though. These are small-ish cabinets featuring small-ish drivers, and quite obviously there’s a limit to the scale of sound you’re entitled to expect. Got a great big room you want to fill with sound? You’ll be needing bigger speakers than these.

And it’s definitely worth noting that the above applies to most, but not all, of the iQ2’s inputs. It can, inevitably, sound a little squashed when streaming via Bluetooth — this is hardly unheard of, even in systems costing plenty more than this. Yet the integrated phono stage is an authentic disappointment. It gives away the bulk of the vibrant, energetic attitude the system displays through all of its other inputs and replaces it with an altogether more pedestrian, vanilla alternative. No turntable = no problem, of course, but if you have a record player you’d like to use, try and hear the PSB’s phono stage before you commit to spending any money…

Sound quality score: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)PSB iQ2 review: Design

246 x 145 x 192mm (HxWxD)
Choice of seven finishes
Rear-firing bass reflex port

If a significant part of the appeal of systems like this is their relatively discreet nature, then PSB is onto a winner with the iQ2. Even by prevailing standards it’s notably compact at 246 x 145 x 192mm, and as long as you give each cabinet’s rear-facing bass port a little breathing space then it’s very adaptable and flexible when it comes to positioning.

As is generally the case with PSB, the standard of build and finish that’s on display here is more than acceptable. The cabinet edges are crisp and clean, and the combination of MDF and aluminum used in the construction allows the speaker to be fairly light (7.4kg per pair) but notably robust. The main sleeve is of MDF, the rear panel is of aluminum, and the front baffle (which is separated from the main body by a slim slice of brightwork) is MDF on aluminum.

There are seven available finishes, which means there really ought to be something to suit your interior design choices, but I can’t help thinking I got the short straw with my review sample's ‘sandstone’ beige. It’s a rather insipid and non-committal color. I haven't seen them but I’d suggest that any of the black, white, ‘boreal’ green, ‘granite’ gray, ‘ember’ red or (cost option) walnut veneer alternatives are likely to be preferable.

For me, anyway, the fact the iQ2 is supplied with four little magnetically attached grilles that cover only the drivers rather than the entirety of the front baffle is probably a good thing. Unless you’re actually trying to disguise the colour of the speakers in the first place…

Design score: 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)PSB iQ2 review: Usability & setup

BluOS control app
A few physical controls
Easy to create a multi-channel or multi-room system

The primary speaker, the one with all the physical and wireless connectivity, also features a few capacitive (and illuminated) touch controls on its top panel. They’re useful if you happen to be passing, but of much more wide-ranging use is the BluOS control app.

BluOS is an increasingly popular control and management interface, one that’s been adopted by quite a number of manufacturers, and it’s easy to see why. It’s a clean, clear and stable interface, logical in navigation and extensive in its functionality.

Everything you need, from initial set-up — telling the primary speaker if it’s the left or right channel, for instance — and EQ control to establishing a multi-channel or multi-room system using any BluOS-compatible product, can be taken care of from here. Integrating your favorite music streaming service(s), accessing internet radio, checking for updates, so on and so forth — they're all here.

A great operating system is not, in and of itself, a reason to buy a wireless speaker system but it certainly makes it easier when you’re making your mind up.

Usability & setup score: 5 / 5

(Image credit: Future)PSB iQ2 review: Value

Great specification
Very acceptable build and finish
Energetic sound

Just because you don’t get a whole lot in physical terms, doesn’t mean the PSB iQ2 doesn’t represent very decent value for money.

The specification is good, the operating system is better still, the standard of build and finish is very acceptable indeed — and best of all, the sound is energetic and engaging through all but one of the input options.

If you want nicely poised and enjoyable sound from a system that won’t dominate your room, there’s authentic value to be had here.

Value score: 4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Should I buy PSB iQ2?PSB iQ2 scorecard

Attribute

Notes

Score

Features

No aspect is underpowered; 19mm aluminum dome tweeter, 100mm mid/bass driver, 24bit/192kHz DAC

5 / 5

Sound quality

Lively, informative and well organized; but sounds dull via phono stage

4 / 5

Design

Choice of seven finishes; crisp and clean edges; notably robust

5 / 5

Setup & usability

Excellent BluOS control app; easy to create a multi-channel or multi-room system

5 / 5

Value

Authentic value to be had, with good specification and even better control app; phono stage just a little lacking

4.5 / 5

Buy them if…

You want a comprehensive little speaker system
PSB has managed to cram a lot into what are very compact speaker cabinets.

You have interior decor that requires complementing
My review sample looks a bit weird, but the other six finishes are very nice.

You’re considering multi-room and/or multi-channel listening
BluOS is supported by a lot of brands and they can all join in with your system.

Don’t buy them if…

You have a big space you want to fill with sound
Here’s where I say something profound about the laws of physics…

You want to use vinyl as a primary source
The phono stage is the least effective of the iQ2’s inputs.

You haven’t shopped around
In isolation the PSB is a great little system, but in practice it has some stiff competition.

PSB iQ2 review: Also consider

KEF LSX II
The KEF LSX II is a little larger than the PSB iQ2, and it sounds it — and it’s arguably a more complete, better-balanced listen, too. The industrial design is, to my eyes at least, also more interesting. But while its control app is perfectly adequate, it’s not a patch on the BluOS app the iQ2 is running…

How I tested the PSB iQ2

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)

I put the iQ2 on some Soundstyle speaker stands for the majority of this test — from there they were attached to a turntable and a CD player (via the phono input and the digital optical input respectively), as well as streaming via Bluetooth and from Tidal using the BluOS app.

I also tried them on a shelf for a while, and listened purely wirelessly, but because my shelves are positioned in the traditional way, it was quite difficult to get the rear bass reflex ports far enough away from a rear surface…

Read TechRadar's Reviews Guarantee
First reviewed: July 2026

Categories: Reviews

Mistral Vibe review

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 09:55

Mistral Vibe is one of the more interesting AI platforms to come out of Europe. The product, formerly called Le Chat, was rebranded by Paris-based Mistral AI in May 2026 to mark its shift from a conversational assistant to a full agentic platform covering chat, work automation, and cloud-based coding. It's a meaningful change, not just a naming exercise.

Two new operating modes, Work and Code, are the engine behind that ambition. Work Mode runs multi-step tasks across connected business tools. Code Mode handles remote coding sessions inside isolated sandboxes and delivers work through to a pull request. Together they put Vibe in more direct competition with ChatGPT and Claude than its Le Chat days suggested.

At TechRadar Pro, we've been reviewing business software since 2012 and our AI coverage has become some of our most-read work. That includes our AI tool roundup, our 2026 vibe coding buying guide, and deep dives on platforms like OpenClaw or Moltbook.

What is Mistral Vibe?

Mistral Vibe is a chat, work automation, and coding platform developed by Mistral AI. It's available via web browser and mobile apps on iOS and Android, and runs on Mistral's own model family, from the lightweight Small 3.1 to the flagship Large 3 and the reasoning-focused Magistral line.

The platform launched in February 2024 as Le Chat, originally a general-purpose assistant. Over the following two years, Mistral layered in web search, voice mode via its Voxtral audio model, a Canvas document editor, image generation through Black Forest Labs Flux Ultra, persistent memory, and project folders.

The May 2026 rebrand signals that Mistral sees Vibe as an enterprise-grade product. Work Mode and Code Mode are aimed at professionals who need an AI that can execute multi-step tasks across connected tools, not just hold a conversation.

Mistral Vibe: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

Mistral Large 3, Medium 3.5, Small 3.1; Magistral for reasoning; Codestral and Devstral for code tasks.

Best for

Daily productivity, agentic work tasks, cloud coding, privacy-sensitive workflows.

Distinguishing functions

Work Mode, Code Mode, No Telemetry Mode, Canvas editor, Deep Research, voice mode, MCP support.

UI features

Web app and iOS/Android apps; unified interface for chat, canvas, and code views.

Subscription costs

Free; Pro at $14.99/month; Team at $24.99/user/month ($19.99 on annual billing); Enterprise (custom).

API pricing

Pay-per-token with no monthly minimums. Large 3 at $2/$6 per million tokens; Small 3.1 at $0.20/$0.60; Ministral 8B at $0.10/$0.10.

Buy it if…

You handle sensitive client or business data. No Telemetry Mode gives Pro subscribers a contractual guarantee that nothing they type is used to train Mistral's models. That level of assurance at $14.99 per month is unusual among major AI chat platforms.
You want agentic features without enterprise pricing. Work Mode handles multi-step tasks across Gmail, Slack, Notion, and other connected tools. Code Mode manages full coding sessions through to a pull request. Both are available on the Pro plan.
You're a developer watching API costs. Mistral Large 3 at $6 per million output tokens significantly undercuts GPT-5.4 ($15/M) and Claude Sonnet ($15/M) at the flagship tier, and the API bills only for tokens used.

Don't buy it if…

The free plan is your entry point for serious evaluation. At around 25 messages per day with no canvas and no remote coding access, the free tier doesn't give you a fair picture of what the platform can do.
Your team is embedded in Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace. Vibe connects to business apps via MCP, but native integration with the major office suites is not as developed as what you'd get from Copilot or Gemini for Workspace.
You're assessing the Team plan for a small group. The jump from Pro ($14.99) to Team ($24.99/user/month) is steep, and the main additions (admin controls and more storage) may not justify the cost for teams of fewer than ten people.

My time with Mistral Vibe

I tested Vibe across its Pro plan over several weeks, using it for research tasks, document drafting, and code work. The chat interface is clean and approachable. Anyone familiar with ChatGPT or Claude will navigate it without confusion. What caught me off guard was how efficiently Work Mode handled complex, multi-step research requests, pulling from connected sources and drafting a structured Canvas output in a single run.

Code Mode held up well for the tasks I threw at it. I ran a session to scaffold a simple API integration, and the agent handled writing, testing, and preparing a draft PR inside the sandboxed environment. I stepped in twice to give it additional direction, but that's consistent with what you'd expect from any AI coding agent at this stage.

The No Telemetry Mode stood out as a differentiator. Enabling it took seconds and gave me real confidence when working with business-related documents. That kind of data control is typically reserved for enterprise tiers at other major platforms, so finding it on a $14.99 plan is a real differentiator.

Mistral Vibe: Features

Vibe's feature set has grown considerably since the Le Chat launch in 2024. Alongside standard chat, the platform now covers web search, image generation, voice input, a Canvas document editor, Deep Research, memory, and project organization tools. Pro subscribers get access to Work Mode and Code Mode, which is where the real differentiation lies.

Work Mode is the headline addition from 2026. It turns Vibe into an execution agent that can read emails and calendars, draft documents in Canvas, run recurring scheduled tasks, and push outputs to Notion, SharePoint, or Slack. Every step is visible in the interface. The platform asks for explicit approval before any action that modifies data or sends a message.

Code Mode targets developers specifically. It connects to GitHub, GitLab, Jira, and Linear, running sessions in an isolated sandbox. A /teleport command lets you move a session between the Vibe web app and a local terminal without losing context. Parallel sessions are supported on Pro and above, which is useful for running background jobs while staying in another workflow.

Memory, currently in beta, lets Vibe store your preferences and recurring context across conversations. You can view, edit, or delete these entries at any time, and turning the feature off is a single toggle in confidentiality settings. Image generation via Black Forest Labs Flux Ultra is solid for a chat platform.

The main gap in the feature set is transparency around usage limits. The free tier runs at lower quotas than Pro across searches, image generations, and messages, but Mistral doesn't publish the exact numbers on its pricing page. That makes the free-to-Pro comparison harder to assess than it should be.

Overall, Vibe covers more professional use cases than most platforms at this price point. The area where competitors like Copilot and Gemini maintain a clear lead is native productivity suite integration, which Mistral has not yet matched.

Mistral Vibe: User experience

The layout is straightforward: a left sidebar for conversation history and project folders, a central chat window, and model or tool selectors accessible from the input bar. Switching between chat, Work Mode, and Code Mode happens within the same interface rather than routing you to a separate product URL.

The mobile apps mirror the web experience closely. Search, canvas, image generation, and voice input all carry over, which isn't a given with AI chat platforms on mobile. Onboarding is minimal, which suits experienced AI users but may leave newcomers without much guidance on how to get started with the more complex agentic features.

Mistral Vibe: Customer support

Free and Pro users access support through the help center widget on the Mistral site. Response times are not published, and there's no live chat or phone support at these tiers. The help documentation covers the most common issues in reasonable depth, but for billing questions or edge-case technical problems, you're relying on ticket-based email support.

Enterprise customers get a dedicated support workflow with priority routing. Requests go through the same widget but are flagged and handled separately based on account type. For teams in finance, healthcare, or other regulated sectors where response time matters, that distinction is a real consideration when deciding between Team and Enterprise.

(Image credit: Mistral AI)Mistral Vibe: Pricing

Free plan: Around 25 messages per day with limited web searches, reduced image generation, no canvas creation, and no remote coding.
Pro at $14.99/month: No Telemetry Mode, full canvas access, Work and Code Mode, 5x more web searches, more image generations, and pay-as-you-go Vibe coding beyond included limits.
Team at $24.99/user/month (or $19.99 on annual billing): Shared workspaces, admin controls, domain verification, data export, and higher storage limits.

The free plan gives you a taste of chat quality and basic search, but the restrictions mean you won't get a representative experience. Pro at $14.99 is, by most comparisons, the cheapest premium AI chat subscription from any major provider. The No Telemetry Mode and agentic modes are hard to find elsewhere at this cost.

The Team plan's value depends on your use case. For small teams, the mainly administrative additions over Pro may not justify the per-user cost. Enterprise pricing is negotiated directly with Mistral and covers SAML SSO, on-premise deployment, custom model training, and dedicated support. The API runs on a fully separate billing track with no monthly minimums, making it accessible for developers at any scale.

Mistral Vibe alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT (OpenAI): The most established option for general productivity, with deeper Microsoft 365 integration and a broader ecosystem of plugins. It costs more at comparable tiers but suits teams already embedded in the Microsoft environment.
Claude (Anthropic): A strong choice for long-document analysis and nuanced writing. Pricing is competitive and reasoning quality is high, though data privacy controls at the consumer tier are less explicit than Vibe's No Telemetry Mode.
Gemini for Google Workspace: The best fit for teams already using Google's suite. Native Calendar, Docs, and Gmail integration outpaces what Mistral currently offers for Google-centric workflows.

How I tested Mistral Vibe

Ran prompts across standard chat, Web Search, and Deep Research modes to evaluate response accuracy, source quality, and multi-step research handling across a range of topics and document types.
Tested agentic task execution through Work Mode, including document drafting via Canvas and recurring task scheduling, and ran coding sessions through Code Mode against a GitHub-connected project to assess end-to-end agent performance.
Verified plan details and API rates against Mistral's official pricing page, cross-referenced them with third-party pricing analyses where official documentation was vague, and assessed support options through the Mistral Help Center.

I tested Mistral Vibe on its Pro plan over several weeks using a mix of daily productivity tasks and structured feature evaluations. Pricing data was verified against the official mistral.ai pricing page, with third-party sources used for cross-reference on API rates and plan limits where Mistral's documentation was unclear. Support quality was assessed through available help center documentation and publicly reported user experiences.

Categories: Reviews

Kimi AI review

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 09:52

Kimi is the AI assistant developed by Moonshot AI, a Beijing-based company that built its reputation on long-context processing long before that became standard. The platform runs on Kimi K2.6, an open-weight Mixture-of-Experts model released in April 2026, and it has made real inroads among developers looking for frontier-quality AI at a lower cost than OpenAI or Anthropic.

Two things set Kimi apart. Its API pricing sits around $0.55 per million input tokens against GPT-5.4's much higher rates, and its Agent Swarm architecture can coordinate up to 300 parallel sub-agents for large-scale automated workflows. The platform also covers the full office productivity stack with Slides, Docs, Sheets, and a website builder under one subscription.

We've been reviewing B2B software at Techradar Pro since 2012. You can also check out our other generative AI coverage, including our best AI tools roundup and our 2026 vibe coding buying guide.

What is Kimi?

Kimi is an AI chat assistant and agent platform from Moonshot AI. It launched in October 2023 with a focus on long-context processing, and its first version handled 128,000 tokens of context, which was exceptional at the time. The platform has since grown into a broader productivity suite covering deep research, document creation, coding, and multi-step agentic automation.

The underlying K2.6 model uses a 1-trillion-parameter Mixture-of-Experts architecture with around 32 billion parameters activated per token, keeping inference costs low while maintaining strong benchmark performance. It supports a 256K–262K token context window and processes text, images, code, and video natively.

Kimi targets developers, researchers, and teams running demanding workloads. Casual users get good value from the free tier, but the platform's design clearly aims at power users who need more than a chatbot.

Kimi: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

Kimi K2.6 — 1T-parameter MoE, 32B active params, 256K–262K context, native multimodal

Best for

Deep research, long-document analysis, agentic coding, full-stack web generation

Distinguishing functions

Agent Swarm (300 sub-agents), Kimi Code, Deep Research, Claw Groups, WebBridge

UI features

Four response modes: Instant, Thinking, Agent, Agent Swarm; available on web, iOS, Android

Subscription costs

Adagio (Free), Moderato ($19/mo), Allegretto ($39/mo), Allegro ($99/mo), Vivace ($199/mo)

API pricing

Around $0.55/M input tokens and $2.65/M output tokens; OpenAI-compatible; context caching cuts input costs by up to 75%

Buy it if…

You need a capable coding assistant at a lower price point. Kimi Code, available from the Moderato tier upward, pairs K2.6 with terminal and VS Code integration and holds up well on multi-file refactors.
Your work involves very long documents. The 262K-token context window lets you work through large contracts, codebases, or research papers in a single session without manually chunking content.
You're building agent-driven automation. Agent Swarm on the Allegretto plan can coordinate up to 300 parallel sub-agents across 4,000 coordinated steps, a serious option for teams with research or data processing pipelines.

Don't buy it if…

You need live customer support. Kimi's support is self-serve through a help center and community channels, with no live chat or phone line.
Data residency is non-negotiable. Moonshot AI is a Chinese company. Teams in regulated industries or with strict EU/US data sovereignty requirements should verify Kimi's data policies before committing.
Agent Swarm is your main draw but you want entry-level pricing. Full agentic features only unlock at $39/month and above, while the free tier limits you to one concurrent task.

My time with Kimi

My first session was document-heavy. I dropped two long PDFs into the same conversation and asked Kimi to cross-reference specific sections. The results were accurate and well-organized, and the platform held up when I pushed with follow-up questions. That long-context handling is one of Kimi's strongest suits, accessible even on the free tier.

I also tested Kimi Code on a Python refactoring task. The output was clean, and when I asked it to explain architectural decisions, the reasoning held up. It's not quite at the same level as Claude Code for structured explanations, but the price difference makes the trade-off easy to accept for many workflows.

Agent Swarm on the Allegretto plan handled a competitive research task reasonably well, but the orchestration was not always transparent. A few sub-tasks returned incomplete results without flagging them as such, so I had to verify outputs manually. The platform has improved since K2.5, where tool call failures reportedly ran around 12%, but production users should still build in a review step.

Kimi: Features

Kimi's four response modes cover most use cases without requiring much configuration. Instant works for quick answers, Thinking for step-by-step reasoning, Agent for research and creation tasks, and Agent Swarm for parallel execution at scale.

Deep Research runs multi-step research workflows autonomously, pulling from web sources and producing structured reports. The output quality is good enough for first drafts, and the process shows which sources were used. Kimi Code supports multi-file editing and autonomous bug-fixing; Moonshot's documentation references coding sessions running continuously for over 13 hours on complex tasks.

The productivity suite covers Slides, Docs, Sheets, and Websites, giving Kimi a broader surface area than most chat platforms. The Websites tool generates full-stack sites from a single description, including frontend, backend, and database layers. These tools aren't the most polished in their respective categories, but having them integrated into one platform adds real convenience for teams with varied workflows.

Kimi: User experience

The main Kimi interface is clean and web-first. The four response modes are clearly labeled, and mode-switching during a conversation is straightforward. A memory system carries context across sessions when you want it to. Mobile apps on iOS and Android work well for basic tasks, though agent workflows are better suited to desktop.

There's no structured onboarding tutorial, so new users will spend time with the help center. It covers everything from getting started through API usage across roughly 12 categories. Community channels on Discord and Reddit are active enough that you'll usually find someone who's hit the same issue.

Kimi: Customer support

Support is self-serve. The help center at kimi.com/help covers memberships, billing, API usage, and troubleshooting in detail. Discord and Reddit communities fill in the gaps for newer features.

What's missing is human support. There's no live chat, no prominently listed support email for general users, and no phone line. For a platform targeting developers running production workflows, that's a gap worth knowing about before you sign up. Enterprise arrangements may exist but aren't clearly documented publicly.

(Image credit: Kimi.com)Kimi: Pricing

Free (Adagio): Basic K2.6 access, limited agent usage, one concurrent task, no Agent Swarm, no Kimi Code quota.
Moderato ($19/month): K2.6, Deep Research, Kimi Code, Slides, Websites.
Allegretto ($39/month): Adds Agent Swarm and a higher professional data quota.
Allegro ($99/month) and Vivace ($199/month): High-volume tiers; Vivace includes 30x Kimi Code usage and 240 swarm uses per month.

The free tier has no hard daily message limit as of mid-2026, which compares well to ChatGPT's free plan. For developers, API pricing is where Kimi's value is sharpest: around $0.55 per million input tokens and $2.65 per million output tokens, with an OpenAI-compatible endpoint. Context caching cuts input costs by up to 75% for applications sending repeated prompts, making it one of the more cost-efficient frontier options for teams building at scale.

Kimi alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT (OpenAI): The most widely used AI assistant, with a mature plugin ecosystem. Its $20/month Plus tier is roughly equivalent to Kimi's Moderato plan, but API costs are significantly higher for developers building at scale.
Claude (Anthropic): Claude Pro at $20/month is a strong choice for document-heavy workflows and structured outputs. Claude Code is well-regarded for teams that prioritize explainability in AI-generated code.
Gemini Advanced (Google): A natural fit for teams already in the Google Workspace ecosystem, with strong document workflow integration through Drive.

How I tested Kimi

Ran multi-document research tasks and stress-tested the context window with long technical files to evaluate accuracy across extended sessions.
Tested the VS Code extension and CLI agent on Python and JavaScript tasks, including multi-file refactors and debugging workflows.
Ran research and synthesis tasks using Agent and Agent Swarm modes on the Allegretto plan, checking output accuracy and how the platform handled incomplete results.

Kimi is available at kimi.com on a freemium model, with paid plans starting at $19/month. API access is available separately through Moonshot AI's open platform.

Categories: Reviews

HIX.ai review

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 09:47

HIX.ai started as an AI writing assistant and has since expanded into something considerably more ambitious. The platform now markets itself as an "ultimate AI agent workspace," bundling tools for content writing, deep research, image and video generation, slides creation, coding, and multi-model chat under a single interface. It's a notable evolution, even if the transition has introduced some rough edges.

What sets HIX.ai apart from simpler AI chat tools is the sheer breadth of models on offer. Users can switch between GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.5 Flash, DeepSeek-V4, and others from within the same session. For teams or individuals who want to compare outputs or pick the right model for a specific task, that flexibility has real practical value.

We've been reviewing business software at TechRadar Pro since 2012 and AI platforms have become one of our most-covered categories. In recent months, we've also published our best AI tools roundup and deep-dives into platforms like OpenClaw and Moltbook. HIX.ai falls squarely in our coverage area.

What is HIX.ai?

HIX.ai is a web-based AI platform that consolidates multiple AI capabilities into one workspace. Its agents cover text generation, long-form article writing, email composition, image creation, video production, presentation slides, deep research, and coding assistance. You access everything through a shared interface rather than juggling separate subscriptions for each function.

The platform targets a wide audience: content marketers who need to produce copy at scale, students looking for a homework or essay tool, small business owners who want a single AI tool to handle email, social posts, and research, and knowledge workers who want to stay inside one tab instead of bouncing between apps.

HIX.ai also offers a browser extension that works across Gmail, Google Docs, LinkedIn, Twitter, and most major web platforms. A desktop app is available alongside the main web interface, making it one of the more cross-platform options in this category.

HIX.ai: At a glance

Attribute

Notes

Underlying model(s)

Multiple, including GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.5 Flash, and DeepSeek-V4 variants

Best for

Content creators, students, marketers, small businesses, researchers

Distinguishing functions

Multi-agent coordination, deep research reports, AI video/image/slides, browser extension

UI features

Web app, desktop app, Chrome/Edge/Firefox browser extension with sidebar

Subscription costs

Free (20 credits/month), paid plans from approximately $13/month billed annually

API pricing

No public API available

Buy it if…

You want one platform for everything. HIX.ai removes the need for separate subscriptions for writing, image generation, and research. That consolidation saves both time and money for users currently paying for multiple tools.
You want model choice without switching apps. The ability to call GPT-5.5, Claude, Gemini, and DeepSeek from a single interface is a real convenience, especially when different tasks call for different models.

Don't buy it if…

Billing transparency matters to you. Multiple users across review platforms have reported being charged for annual plans they believed were monthly. HIX.ai's refund window is three days, which leaves little room for course correction.
You need predictable usage. Credits don't roll over between billing cycles, and the "Unlimited" label on paid plans applies only to standard credits. Advanced features are still capped, which surprises users expecting truly open access.

My time with HIX.ai

I spent several sessions testing HIX.ai across its main agent categories. The multi-model chat interface impressed most immediately: switching from Gemini 3.5 Flash to Claude Opus 4.8 mid-conversation takes a few clicks, and responses feel snappy enough for practical work. The deep research agent was particularly useful, pulling together sourced summaries on a complex topic faster than a manual web search.

The browser extension held up well in Gmail and Google Docs. Highlighting a paragraph and getting a rewrite option surfacing instantly, without opening a new tab, is the kind of friction reduction that matters when you're working fast. The image generation tools produced serviceable results, though I found the credit consumption less predictable than I'd have liked.

Where the experience wobbles is in understanding what you're paying for. The credit system splits between standard and advanced buckets, and it isn't always clear which agent or model draws from which pool. New users should read the plan details carefully before committing to a billing cycle.

HIX.ai: Features

HIX.ai's feature roster is unusually wide. The platform covers AI chat across multiple frontier models, a long-form article writer, email and social copy tools, a paraphrasing and summarization engine, image generation via Midjourney, Flux, and GPT Image 2, video generation via Seedance 2.0, Veo 3.1, Sora 2, and others, a slides agent, and a deep research tool that produces structured reports with real-time internet access.

The deep research agent is one of the more differentiated offerings. Rather than a standard web search, it compiles structured, sourced reports on a given topic, making it useful for due diligence, competitive analysis, or academic research. Real-time internet access is included on paid plans, which keeps output current rather than frozen at a training cutoff.

On the writing side, the 120+ AI writing templates cover a broad range of formats, from ad copy to blog outlines to product descriptions. The long-form article writer handles structure and headings reasonably well, and the AI Writer agent supports markdown and rich text outputs, which makes it easier to paste results into a CMS or document editor.

The platform's weakest spot by reputation is HIX Bypass, its AI humanizer tool. Multiple independent reviews and user reports flag inconsistent results against modern AI detectors, particularly after Turnitin's 2025 updates. HIX.ai positions this as a key feature, but anyone relying on it for academic or professional compliance should test it carefully before committing.

The multi-agent coordination feature, available across all tiers, lets different agents pass context between tasks. In practice, a research output can feed directly into a writing task without manual copy-paste, which speeds up structured workflows considerably.

The video and image agents round out a platform that few competitors match in raw breadth. Whether that breadth delivers depth at every point is a fair question; some agents feel more developed than others. But for users who want to consolidate tools, the coverage is hard to beat.

HIX.ai: User experience

The interface is clean and navigation between agents is straightforward. The sidebar layout keeps the main workspace uncluttered, and the model switcher is tucked sensibly into the chat header rather than buried in settings. For new users, the onboarding path is light: a working chat session is within reach in under a minute.

The browser extension is where the experience stands out. HIX.ai has put real thought into how it surfaces inside other platforms: the quick-action bar appears when you highlight text, and the full sidebar opens on demand. For anyone doing a lot of writing inside web apps, this integration removes the switching cost that blunts many AI tools, and the learning curve for core features is minimal.

HIX.ai: Customer support

Support is available via email across all plans, with priority support reserved for paid subscribers. The HIX.AI Community forum is open to all tiers and covers common issues and feature requests. Response times on the email channel have drawn complaints in user reviews, with some reporting delays of multiple days for billing queries specifically.

The three-day refund window is short by industry standards. Platforms like ChatGPT Plus and Jasper offer more flexible cancellation terms. Given the annual billing complaints that appear consistently in user feedback, the lack of a longer trial-to-refund period is a genuine sticking point for new subscribers.

(Image credit: HIX.ai)HIX.ai: Pricing

Free plan: $0/month with 20 credits, enough to test core features but limited for sustained work.
HIX AI Max: Billed annually; includes unlimited standard chat models, advanced models, video, image, and all agent features including deep research, AI slides, and priority support.
HIX AI Pro: Billed annually at a higher tier, with different credit allocations across advanced features.

The free plan offers real access to the platform with no credit card required, though 20 credits runs out quickly once you start testing agents. Paid plans are priced on a credit system that splits standard and advanced usage into separate buckets. SoftwareSuggest, which updated its pricing data in April 2026, lists the starting price at $13/month on annual billing, with higher tiers scaling up from there.

HIX.ai's various product verticals (AI Writer, HIX Bypass, the browser extension, EssayGPT) each carry separate subscription structures for legacy users, adding complexity to an already layered pricing model. The newer unified workspace tiers (Free, Max, and Pro) simplify this somewhat, but the credit system still rewards careful reading before you subscribe. Annual billing delivers the best per-month rate, though it comes with the billing caveats noted above, and there is no public API for developers.

HIX.ai: alternatives you should consider

ChatGPT Plus ($20/month): Similar multi-model access via GPT-5 and o3, with simpler pricing and a stronger track record on billing transparency.
Jasper ($39/month billed annually): Focused on marketing and long-form content. Less breadth than HIX.ai but stronger output consistency on brand voice tasks.
Perplexity Pro ($20/month): If deep research is your primary use case, Perplexity's research-first approach and real-time citations are hard to beat at this price point.

How I tested HIX.ai

Ran multi-agent workflows across the chat, deep research, and writing agents to evaluate inter-agent handoffs and model-switching convenience.
Tested the browser extension inside Gmail and Google Docs on multiple sessions, focusing on responsiveness and quality of inline suggestions.
Evaluated output quality across standard chat, long-form article generation, and the image creation tools using consistent prompts to benchmark against competitor platforms.

I spent approximately two weekdays with HIX.ai across different workloads, including research tasks, marketing copy drafts, and content editing sessions. Pricing information was cross-referenced against the official HIX.ai pricing page and third-party review sources updated in 2026. Feature details were drawn from the platform's live interface and official documentation.

Categories: Reviews

Proton VPN Free review: a great choice for day-to-day, but with some unfortunate limitations

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 08:51

Proton VPN Free is undoubtedly among the best free VPNs available. Offering a broad spectrum of compatibility across devices, impressive speeds, and unlimited bandwidth, it would be easy for anyone looking for a free VPN to get started using Proton VPN Free.

That said, its apps aren't the simplest, you're limited to only one connected device at a time, and you can't choose which of its 10 available locations you connect to. Plus, our testing found some concerning throttling indicators which could make Proton VPN Free one to avoid should you be looking for a free streaming VPN or torrenting VPN.

Features

Proton VPN Free does exactly what a VPN needs to do and little else. Included in the free plan is your VPN connection, a kill switch, all of Proton VPN's protocols, and the ability to customise your app icon, in case you find yourself in a region with VPN restrictions.

Following recent updates, the app now offers 10 free servers and the company are developing a new, in-house VPN architecture that could lead to significant improvements in the future.

In our testing, we found no reason to be concerned about the kill switch. It was easy enough to set up, though it does require the VPN to be set as an 'always-on VPN' on Android devices.

Upgrading to a paid Proton VPN plan unlocks a plethora of further capabilities for the VPN.

For starters, NetShield, Proton VPN's ad, tracker, and malware blocking software. You can also access Proton VPN's Secure Core server network, which is its equivalent of multi-hop, use Proton for P2P downloading and file sharing, gain one-click access to Tor, split-tunnel your VPN traffic, and unlock Proton VPN's full suite of customization options.

These customisation options range from custom DNS to LAN connections, and even specific NAT types, plus you can set up specific profiles with tailored settings. Something to note is that while Proton VPN Free does allow you to create these fully customized profiles, you can only use them once you upgrade to a paid plan.

Features score: 4/10

Server Network

Proton VPN Free highlights one of the often overlooked benefits of paid VPNs, the ability to choose the server location you need, rather than simply being provided with one.

Proton VPN Free offers 10 server locations: the Netherlands, Romania, Singapore, Mexico, Japan, Norway, Switzerland, United States, Poland and Canada.

However, you do not get to choose which of these servers you connect to; instead, you are auto-connected to the fastest server available to you, which, more often than not, is the closest.

While not a big concern, should you plan to use Proton VPN Free just to secure your online traffic, it does limit Proton VPN Free's capabilities as a streaming VPN. Plus, you're likely guaranteed to have speed limitations if you're not close to any of the servers.

Choosing Proton VPN's paid version drastically increases the offering. Upping the countries available to a whopping 148, and, more importantly, you gain the ability to choose the exact location you want to connect to.

Server network score: 5/10

Apps

Despite being free, Proton VPN Free offers a good selection of apps. Free plan users can access Proton VPN on Windows, macOS, Android, iOS, Linux, Chrome, Firefox, and Chromebooks.

The biggest omission from this list that you'd be able to access should you choose Proton VPN's paid plan is Apple TV. While all other expected streaming devices work with the free plan, Apple TV users will be prompted to upgrade rather than be able to use the free service.

Proton VPN recently underwent a refresh of many of its apps, leading to a new, sleek design across platforms such as Windows, iOS, and Android. (Image credit: Future)

Generally, however, the spread of compatibility available is impressive. What's more, each of Proton VPN Free's apps closely resembles each other, and features that might be hidden on smaller screen devices, such as mobiles, are easily accessible should you be looking to use Proton VPN free on your tablet or computer.

Apps score: 8/10

Ease of use

Proton VPN across both its paid and free plans is not the simplest VPN to look at, though this doesn't make it trouble to use, even if beginners might need a touch more time.

What must be said, though, is that while Proton VPN Free isn't the simplest to look at, it is arguably the best free VPN to look at for sheer aesthetics. Its dark purple theme, partnered with a simple enough map interface, makes for extremely pleasant viewing, even if all you can do with the free plan is click the connect button before you set about your browsing elsewhere.

FutureFuture

Setting up Proton VPN Free is appreciably simple. Most notably, you're not instantly pushed to make a paid plan account from the outset, unlike many free VPNs. Instead, should you need to sign up, you simply create your account by clicking the button on the login menu, and after going through the steps and signing in, you're greeted with the usual home screen, and a bar telling you what you're missing out on by not having the paid plan. No hidden free plan signup, no trial you need to navigate, just quick access to the free service, and easy ways to upgrade should you choose to.

Once in, there are only two buttons you need to worry about: connect, which you're greeted with on the main screen, and your kill switch. As mentioned already, given the lack of server choice, the connect button does everything for you once clicked, connecting you to the fastest server in a matter of seconds. Your kill switch can be found quickly via the settings tab on mobile phones and tablets, or via the kill switch icon on computers.

Ease of use score: 8/10

Speed and performance

Proton VPN Free is, without doubt, one of the quickest free VPNs available. In terms of speeds, Proton VPN free achieved a maximum of 1009 Mbps, which is by no means slow. These kinds of speeds would comfortably allow you to stream, game, or browse without any major issues.

That said, testing on an Android device saw our speeds when connected to the VPN halve when compared to what we saw without a VPN connection using either WiFi or a mobile data connection.

A bigger concern we found was evidence of substantial speed throttling after a certain amount of data was used. In testing, after using 3-4GB of data, we saw our speeds drop to only around 5 Mbps, which, while fine for browsing or emails, would leave you struggling should you wish to stream or download on your VPN connection.

Given the lack of server choice, it's unlikely you'd choose Proton VPN Free for streaming anyway, but this should definitely come into consideration. Should you be looking for a fast and simple solution to day-to-day internet needs, Proton VPN Free is a seriously strong option.

Speed and performance score: 7/10

Unblocking

Testing Proton VPN's ability to unblock content isn't a simple feat because, as we've mentioned, you don't get to choose the location you connect to.

This means seeing the full scope of Proton VPN Free's capabilities isn't possible from one testing location. What we can say is that we were flawlessly able to access Dutch streaming services, including Disney+, Netflix, and Prime Video.

When we managed to connect to Canada, we could unblock Netflix but failed to unblock Prime Video and Disney+.

Although we cannot guarantee the same levels of success in other regions, our testing of Proton VPN's paid plan suggests you should have similar success. This is because the paid plan was able to comfortably unblock most of the streaming services we tested in all 149 regions, including Netflix, Disney+, BBC iPlayer, 10Play, 9Now, and more.

It did struggle with Prime Video more regularly, though this is something we've seen across many VPNs in our latest round of testing.

Unblocking score: 5/10

Privacy and security

Despite not being able to access Proton's full suite of security features with Proton VPN Free, you have no reason to feel as though your data is at any risk, thanks to how the service has been set up.

First and foremost, Proton VPN is constantly proving that it not only doesn't store your data, but also that it has no vulnerabilities that may put your online privacy at risk. An independent audit by Securitum across August and September 2025 marked the 4th consecutive year in which Proton has proven its claims, and while, at the time of writing, we've yet to see an audit in 2025, we expect this to continue.

When using Proton VPN Free, you can use any of its various secure VPN protocols, including OpenVPN, WireGuard, and its proprietary Stealth protocol. Both WireGuard and OpenVPN have long been common in the VPN industry, and both have been proven countless times to be secure and reliable protocols.

WireGuard uses its traditional ChaCha20 encryption with Proton VPN, while Proton VPN's OpenVPN deployment uses AES-256, another impressively secure encryption method.

In January 2026, Proton announced it was removing support for OpenVPN configuration files that were downloaded before September 2023. Users of the official app are unaffected. However, people running manual setups on routers, Linux terminals, or third-party clients must refresh their credentials.

Stealth, Proton VPN's proprietary protocol, is an obfuscated version of WireGuard that runs over TLS. This makes your browsing data look like normal encrypted browsing data to anyone who might analyze your traffic to spot VPN usage. For most, this is a bonus that won't be entirely necessary, but should you be tackling enterprise rule-based firewalls or DPI-based firewalls, this protocol may prove to have better luck.

Key things missing from Proton VPN Free include Proton VPN's equivalent of multihop, called Secure Core, as well as its NetShield ad, malware, and tracking blocker, and any kind of split tunneling.

While missing out on split-tunneling and multihop is unfortunate, we'd usually recommend running an external ad and malware blocker alongside a VPN anyway, so NetShield doesn't prove as big a loss.

Privacy and security score: 8/10

Track record

Given Proton's wide suite of security tools and privacy-first claims, it attracts a great deal of attention and scrutiny online. Luckily, for the most part, it has proven to be flawless. An instance in 2019 where Proton Mail was forced to log a climate activist's IP after a law enforcement request proves to be the only mark on an otherwise problem-free record across its product range.

Swiss law works differently for VPN providers. VPN providers cannot be compelled to carry out bulk surveillance by either Swiss or foreign law enforcement. This makes Proton VPN much less vulnerable to requests that might put privacy at risk. At an individual account level, Proton VPN does need to comply with legally valid cases brought by the Swiss court, even if made by foreign entities. However, Switzerland has no ties to the EU, US, or NATO intelligence sharing pacts, and often doesn't recognize requests from countries with a poor judicial reputation.

Switzerland's privacy laws have been under review during the past 12 months, raising concerns that privacy protections may be undermined should certain provisions come into force. However, companies – including Proton – have pushed back on the proposals and, at the time of writing, no significant changes have been introduced.

Track record score: 9/10

Customer Support

Proton VPN's customer support options are more limited than most, especially on its free plan.

Should you encounter any issues while using the free plan, you can either use its support site to browse articles that may help you fix your issue, or you can use a contact email address to get some form of support from a human, depending on your issue.

In practice, Proton VPN's support articles are impressively helpful, and there's more than enough of them to cover most issues you face, and while it can be slow to contact a human via email, it's at least a viable alternative should you run into any issues not covered.

The biggest omission for Proton VPN Free customers is no live support functionalities. Even paid Proton VPN customers aren't quite able to access 24/7 support, but the lack of any kind of live chat does mean beginners could be left in the cold if struggling to find the support they need early on in their time using a VPN.

Customer support score: 7/10

Pricing and plans

Proton VPN Free does lack a fair amount compared to what a paid Proton VPN plan can offer, but that doesn't mean it isn't a supremely capable free VPN, depending on your needs.

By choosing to upgrade to Proton VPN's paid option, you can access:

19,000+ servers across 149 countries – plus the ability to choose which server you connect to!
Servers capable of speeds up to 10 Gbps with VPN Accelerator
Netshield ad, malware, and tracker blocking
Secure Core (multihop) connections
P2P downloading and file sharing
10 simultaneous connections
The Tor network within your regular browser
Split tunneling
VPN Profiles
Advanced VPN customisation settings

Given Proton VPN starts from $3.59 per month, that is a lot to include in that cost. While it's not as cheap as Surfshark or NordVPN, its paid plan also proved to be capable of speeds which matched the very fastest VPNs throughout, and it also proved flawless at unblocking streaming services.

So, while Proton VPN Free is a great free VPN choice to secure your day-to-day online activities, upgrading to a paid plan could prove to be extremely beneficial depending on what you want to achieve with your VPN.

Pricing and plans score: 9/10

Should you use Proton VPN Free?

If you are looking for a free VPN to protect you while you’re out and about, working overseas, or on holiday, and you’re worried about privacy when you’re connected to public Wi-Fi or someone else’s network, Proton VPN Free is without doubt a good choice for you.

While it doesn’t have much in the way of extra features, you can install it on your device, connect to the VPN, and then pretty much forget all about it. With speeds that will comfortably handle most tasks, an easy-enough interface, and a simple setup process, it's a breeze to get connected in a matter of minutes without being pressed into upgrading to its paid option.

Overall score: 70/100

Alternatives

NordVPN – from $3.49 per month
The best VPN overall
NordVPN ranks as our best VPN overall, making it a superb alternative to any VPN, especially a free one such as Proton VPN Free. Comparing NordVPN to Proton VPN's paid plan, you get more countries, even if only one, equally impressive speeds, clocking in over 1200 Mbps, and a whole host of features, including Threat Protection Pro and Meshnet, all for a price cheaper than Proton VPN. View Deal

Surfshark – from $2.49 per month
The best cheap VPN (and also the fastest)
Surfshark is the best cheap VPN out there, at only $1.99 per month for two years. Add to that impressive features such as Alternative ID, Surfshark Search, and Antivirus, and you can find yourself a complete security package for a matter of dollars with little difficulty.View Deal

ExpressVPN - from $2.49 per month
A beginner-friendly VPN package
ExpressVPN is without doubt one of the most secure VPN providers. It’s a more expensive VPN than almost any other VPN provider, but in return, you access a high-speed server network that spans 113 countries. Plus, it offers one of the easiest interfaces we've tested, across almost any device you can think of, even if you only get 10-14 simultaneous connections to use at once.View Deal

We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example:1. Accessing a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service).2. Protecting your online security and strengthening your online privacy when abroad.We do not support or condone the illegal or malicious use of VPN services. Consuming pirated content that is paid-for is neither endorsed nor approved by Future Publishing.

Categories: Reviews

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: A solid running watch with no surprises

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 05:48

Garmin Forerunner 170: One minute review

The Garmin Forerunner 170 and 170 Music sit nicely between the cheaper Garmin Forerunner 70 and more expensive 570 and 970 duo, the latter of which features on our best Garmin watches guide. As such, both Music and non-Music versions are a bit of a halfway house; not quite cheap enough to be picked up on a whim by budget-conscious consumers, nor expensive enough to be stuffed with top-quality premium features.

However, it is stuffed with plenty of robust fitness features that will suit any active exerciser, especially runners. Sebastian Sawe, who who broke the world record by running a marathon under two hours in London, was toting a Garmin Forerunner 55 — Garmin’s cheapest, most stripped-back running watch.

What you’re paying for here is the Garmin Forerunner 70 — an excellent smartwatch on the cheaper end, and the successor to the popular Garmin Forerunner 55 — with additional smartwatch features attached. These include Garmin Pay, a virtual wallet which lets you pay with cards held on-watch, and the Smart Notifications feature, which allows you to view and manage alerts from a paired smartphone. The Forerunner 170 Music adds an extra 4GB of music storage.

If you’re largely uninterested in these features and you just want an excellent training tool, I’d get the Garmin Forerunner 70 instead, as it’s the best value of the three newcomers overall. But the Garmin Forerunner 170 Music does allow you to hit that Saturday morning parkrun, pay for your coffee, and jog home with headphones in — all without using your phone at all. It’s incredibly convenient, but not a package everyone will need or want.

Still, during my testing I found the watch good to use, comfortable to sleep in, and accurate against testing units like my Polar H10 heart rate monitor. Our writer Michael Sawh found the same with the Garmin Forerunner 70. You can read my full thoughts on the 170 Music below, but whichever watch you choose, you’ll be in good hands.

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Specifications

Garmin Forerunner 70

Garmin Forerunner 170

Garmin Forerunner 170 Music

Price

$249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399

$299 / £259.99 / AU$479

$349.99 / £299.99 / AU$549

Dimensions

42.6 x 42.6 x 11.9mm

Weight

40g

41g

Case/bezel

Fiber-reinforced polymer

Display

AMOLED 390 x 390px

GPS

GPS, Galileo, GLONASS, Beidou, QZSS, SatIQ

L1 GPS, GNSS, Galileo, and BeiDou

GPS, Glonass, Beidou, Galileo

Battery life

Up to 13 days, all-systems GNSS mode: Up to 16 hours

Up to 10 days, all-systems GNSS mode: Up to 14 hours

Up to 10 days, all-systems GNSS mode: Up to 14 hours (6.5 with music)

Connection

Bluetooth, ANT+

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Price and availability

Garmin Forerunner 170: $299 / £259.99 / AU$479
Garmin Forerunner 170 Music: $349.99 / £299.99 / AU$549
Garmin Forerunner 70: $249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399

The Garmin Forerunner 170 without music storage costs $299 / £259.99 / AU$479.

The Garmin Forerunner 170 Music, the upgrade with 4GB internal memory for music storage, costs $349.99 / £299.99 / AU$549. The Forerunner 70, which doesn’t have the 170’s smartwatch features such as Garmin Pay and Smart Notifications, is cheaper at $249.99 / £219.99 / AU$399.

We’re zeroing in on the Garmin Forerunner 170 today, and I think the watch is generally good value for money compared to some of the seriously expensive premium Garmins in the lineup, but perhaps not compared to the 70, which is $100 / £80 / AU$150 cheaper for a very similar watch. If you don’t want Garmin Pay or notifications, you’re better off saving your cash and getting the 70.

None of the Garmins have a particularly wide feature set compared to watches from Apple and Samsung at a similar price point, but their batteries last far longer — up to 10 days for the 170 — and their workout credentials are fantastic. This ensures you can get multiple battery-sucking GPS workouts in each week while still retaining enough smartwatch functionality to matter, all without needing a charge for ages. Each Garmin watch is durable too.

I’d say it’s generally a good value prospect, even if it does edge into the expensive end with the 170 Music.

Score: 4/5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Design

(Image credit: Future)

Iterates on existing Forerunner design
Surprisingly dull AMOLED screen
Elevate V4 heart rate sensor

The Garmin Forerunner 170 looks very much like every other Forerunner, but if this is your first Garmin that won’t mean much. It’s got a five-button configuration — up, down, light, start, stop or select, and back (or lap). You can use these, a touchscreen, or a combination of the two to navigate the watch, which is ideal if you’re wearing gloves.

It comes in a single size, with a 42.6mm screen, and its packing an AMOLED display rather than the duller digital-watch-style memory-in-pixel screen of older watches, but it’s not particularly bright even at full power. It comes with a silicon two-tone strap, and on the back it has one of Garmin’s older heart rate sensors, the Elevate V4. More expensive watches get the more accurate V5, but the V4 has been included here presumably to keep the cost down.

It’s very light, with a listed weight of 41g, and feels like less than that in the hand. A light watch is great for running and collecting wellness info as it’s easy to wear, and this checks the boxes.

Those familiar with Garmin products will be happy to know no liberties have been taken with the design of Garmin’s established software, either on-watch or in the Garmin Connect app. I think it’s the perfect mix of stripped-down and information-heavy, although there are a lot of menus to lose yourself in. The buttons make it fairly intuitive to navigate around for old hands. It’s a tried and tested design, that doesn’t break the mold in any significant way.

Design score: 4/5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Features

(Image credit: Future)

Advanced running dynamics
Limited smart notifications functionality
170 Music offers mp3 and streaming downloads

Plenty of running features abound here. As the name suggests, Garmin’s included its advanced running dynamics tools such as running power (a measure of your total running effort using motion data as well as heart rate), along with advanced statistics such as stride and cadence data after your run. During workouts, you can set up routes in Garmin Connect with virtual pacers to keep you on time.

You also get the usual health stuff, such as heart rate and sleep score, 80 workout modes (although not all have dedicated metrics or GPS enabled) and reports in the morning and evening that provide information about your training along with the weather and a motivational quote. The Garmin Forerunner 170 gets Smart Notifications, which allow you to answer some tests with simple replies and the Garmin Pay functionality which acts as a virtual wallet like Apple Pay.

The 170 Music’s 4GB of storage allows you to upload tunes directly onto the watch, including by saving playlists from the likes of Spotify. Even without the dedicated Music model, you can listen on apps like Spotify, Deezer, YouTube Music and so on through your phone, and control music on the watch there. The Garmin Connect IQ store has dedicated widgets for these services, along with thousands of other apps from a mixture of big-name brands and enthusiastic amateurs.

Otherwise, what’s missing? I wasn’t expecting full-color maps at this price, just the breadcrumb navigation and route direction common on most Garmin watches without maps, so I don’t feel like the feature is missing, as such.

However, to justify the price increase from the 70 to the 170 Music, I think it needs more hardware features. A microphone like the Garmin Forerunner 570, and the ability to take calls on watch and use Garmin’s simple voice assistant, would better separate it. As is, most people who want dedicated smartwatch features will just get one of the best Apple Watches or best Samsung watches instead.

Features score: 4/5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Performance

(Image credit: Future)

Accurate against a heart rate monitor
GPS works well against an Apple Watch Ultra 3
Comfortable and easy to wear day-to-day

I checked the Garmin’s heart rate accuracy against an electrical chest-mounted Polar H10 heart rate monitor — the gold standard of heart rate accuracy — during a 25-minute treadmill test, and was very pleased to report that despite the older sensor, both average and maximum heart rate were within 1-4bpm of the heart rate monitor; a very acceptable margin for error and not a statistically significant one.

GPS was accurate compared to my Apple Watch Ultra 3, and battery life was representative of its claims, with total drain taking just over a week with multiple GPS workouts completed. I feel as though the ‘up to 10 days’ listed battery life is reflective of reality.

Being lighter and smaller than many Garmins I’ve tested, it’s comfortable to wear every day and fine to sleep in.

Performance score: 4.5 / 5

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: Scorecard

(Image credit: Future)

Toshiba N300 4TB NAS HDD review: Can the extra cost over its rivals be justified by its performance?

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 05:30

While there are a few other brands, the hard drive market is essentially a three-horse race between WD, Seagate and Toshiba.

Having looked at WD and Seagate NAS HDDs recently, it seemed appropriate to look at what Toshiba offers that’s different to the other two.

Toshiba Electronics Europe launched the N300 NAS drive series in January 2017. By that point, Western Digital and Seagate had been in the dedicated NAS drive market for years. WD Red has been on sale since 2012, and Seagate IronWolf launched in 2016. Toshiba was late to this party, and that certainly coloured its product range from the outset.

The N300 launched at 4TB, 6TB, and 8TB, all carrying a 128MB data buffer and a 7200 RPM spindle. That last detail is the key one. Toshiba did not try to match WD and Seagate on their terms; instead, it went faster.

The N300 range runs at 7200 RPM on every capacity variant, from the smallest to the largest. That decision produces a drive with meaningfully higher sequential throughput. The N300 achieves up to 298 MB/s sustained transfer speed. The WD Red Plus manages around 180-190 MB/s. The IronWolf reaches 202 MB/s. The N300 leaves both behind in raw sequential performance.

And, this newer HDWG740EZSTC model covered here offers 512MB of cache, where older revisions had 128MB or 256MB.

However, there are tradeoffs here. On the hardware side, the additional rotational speed makes the N300 noisier, it generates more heat, and uses more power. That makes it less suitable for a NAS that’s sitting on the desktop, and more acceptable if you have a server room. And, the other awkward aspect of the N300 is that Toshiba has jacked the price up of this drive to around 50% more than what WD and Seagate are asking for the same capacity from some sources.

There are a few deals to be had on the N300, but it does make you wonder whether it's competing with the WD Red Plus and Seagate IronWolf, or the Red Pro and IronWolf Pro?

If only Toshiba would price the N300 more appropriately, it might become one of the best NAS drive options.

Toshiba N300 4TB: Price

Without doubt, the worst possible place to buy the N300 4TB drive is from Amazon.com and the Toshiba Store on that retailer.

The current asking price there is around $330, which is utterly outrageous. To put that into perspective, in January 2026, the price was $215.62, and in August 2025, it was $154.99. Therefore, it has seen a 212% price increase in just nine months. Given that I wouldn’t believe there is much interest in 4TB drives for Datacentres, this is purely corporate greed in action.

But what’s even more curious is that even in the US, you can get this drive for cheaper, since B&H Photo sells it for $244.99, and Newegg wants $299.

Outside of the US borders, the prices are still elevated but not as excessively. From Amazon.co.uk, the 4TB capacity is priced around the £200 mark, and across Europe on Amazon, it's €237.86, if they have stock.

For comparison, American customers on Amazon.com can pay $194.99 for the 4TB WD Plus drive, and the 4TB Seagate IronWolf is only $189.

In short, wherever you buy the N300, it's seen a much larger price increase than its competitors, and this is true across all regions.

One important difference to note is that the N300 is available in a much larger range of sizes than Red Plus and IronWolf. The smallest N300 is 4TB, and it is available in 6TB, 8TB, 10TB, 12TB, 14TB, 16TB, 17TB, 20TB and 22TB.

The Red Plus only goes from 1TB up to 12TB, and the IronWolf goes from 1TB to 16TB, with some truly odd sizes such as 7TB in between the usual capacity increases.

However, you look at the N300 pricing, this is an expensive drive that tries to go between the Red Plus/IronWolf and the Red Pro/IronWolf Pro product ranges.

What makes this more complicated is that while officially IronWolf Pro drives are made in 4TB capacities, I could only find 12TB and larger. But the 4TB WD Red Pro can be found for $249.99 on Amazon, which is cheaper than the N300 for the same capacity.

What’s genuinely confusing about the N300 range is that if you go looking for drives of a particular capacity, you might find that drive with three different part numbers, one being the retail number, others being OEM, and I managed with some sizes to find ones with 128MB, 512MB and 1024MB caches. Obviously, the larger caches are better, especially on bigger capacity drives.

As an example of how messed up Toshiba is on Amazon.com, clicking “Visit the Toshiba Store” sometimes takes you to Toshiba kitchen products.

These prices need to be more consistent and gouge less.

(Image credit: Toshiba)Toshiba N300 4TB: Design

Since its launch, Toshiba has developed several proprietary technologies for the N300 and has kept them consistent across the product line.

These include Stable Platter Technology, which uses a tied spindle motor to secure the drive shaft at both ends. This reduces system-induced vibration and is directly comparable with WD's 3D Active Balance Plus approach. Both address the same problem, where in a multi-drive enclosure, vibration from one drive affects the others.

Also special to the N300 is Dynamic Cache Technology, a self-contained algorithm with on-board buffer management that optimises cache allocation between read and write operations in real time. From the outset, the N300 has typically had more cache than its competition, so managing the use of that is important for performance.

One of the hidden issues with faster-rotating drives is wear, and on the N300, this is addressed in a few interesting ways, one being Ramp Load Technology. This parks the read and write heads on a ramp outside the platter surface when the drive is idle. It reduces head wear during power cycles and protects the media surface.

Error recovery control has also been present since the original launch, limiting recovery time to avoid RAID array ejections in the same way that WD's TLER does.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

All these features I’ve mentioned arrived with the first N300 drives, but since then, the N300 has undergone some subtle changes, one of which is the introduction of NASLink Technology.

This fine-tunes drive behaviour for rapid data access and includes firmware-level optimisation for RAID performance through improved disk coordination. The more drives you have in an array, the more important it is that they’re all moving to a common beat, and Toshiba has baked that into the N300 via firmware updates.

Having larger arrays improves performance, but it introduces vibrations that can migrate from one drive to those either side of it. To combat this, the N300 also carries three built-in rotational vibration sensors. These detect and compensate for the knock-on vibration effects that become a serious problem once a NAS enclosure has more than four drives installed.

Overall, while Toshiba hasn’t come up with anything like Seagate IronWolf Health Management. In other respects, this is probably the most sophisticated drive serving the home and small-business NAS market.

However, when Toshiba only offers a three-year warranty and 180TB/year workload, it doesn't seem much like it's that special.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Toshiba N300 4TB: Performance

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

Since Toshiba only provided two of these drives, there seemed little point in trying to work out what array advantages running the N300 offered. Therefore, I went with the same PC analysis that I used on the WD Red Plus and IronWolf drives

Here are my results:

Drives

Toshiba N300

WD Red Plus

IronWolf

Part No.

HDWG740

WD40EFPX

ST4000VN006

Capacity

4TB

Cache

512MB

256MB

Rotational Speed

RPM

7200

5400

AJA

Read

MB/s

282

187

190

Write

MB/s

283

179

185

ATTO

Read

MB/s

291.57

206.24

192.35

Write

MB/s

294.25

197.35

191.76

CrystalDiskMark Default

Read

MB/s

299.18

201.23

200.77

Write

MB/s

300.50

208.26

199.33

CrystalDiskMark RealWorld

Read

MB/s

286.95

212.46

200.22

Write

MB/s

290.01

204.42

199.11

PCMark

Score

651

801

677

Bandwidth

MB/s

99.87

124.49

103.69

MS Winsat

Random 16 Read

MB/s

2.37

1.71

1.6

Sequential 64.0 Read

MB/s

218.38

168.53

158.16

Sequential 64.0 Write

MB/s

289.31

204.65

190.5

Read Time with Sequential Writes

4.810

1.385

1.946

Latency: 95th Percentile

31.620

12.685

34.685

Latency: Maximum

75.357

64.723

62.341

Average Read Time with Random Writes

12.021

5.267

9.898

Aside from PCMark10, all other tests show that the N300 is a country mile faster than either of the alternative NAS drives with the same capacity. I can put those results down to the increased rotational speed and also the 512MB cache on the N300.

One extra test I did perform on a NAS was to take a single drive on a Ugreen NASync DXP4800 Plus NAS, connect to it over a 2.5GbE LAN link, and bench test it from my PC.

I achieved read and write speeds over 285MB/s, which is the practical limit of 2.5GbE LAN ports. That with a single N300 drive, you can saturate a 2.5GbE Link is impressive, and it implies that with four drives in a RAID 5 configuration, you should be able to saturate a 10GbE LAN port. To do that on both WD and Seagate would involve moving up to their Red Pro or IronWolf Pro range.

Based on these numbers alone, the N300 might be worth what Toshiba is asking for it, depending on how your NAS is configured and if raw speed is important to that system.

However, I should also point out that the power consumption on the N300 is dramatically more than on the Seagate and WD drives. The current 4TB N300 draws 7.43W typical under active operating load, where the Red Plus only consumes 4.7W and the IronWolf 4.8W.

And, the N300 will be converting most of that power into heat, regrettably. If you already have a machine room where the cooling isn't coping, then maybe using these drives might not be the best plan.

Toshiba N300 4TB: Final verdict

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

If this drive were cheaper and Toshiba had technology like the IronWolf Health Management scheme, there would be little debate about this being one of the best options.

However, there are a few things about NAS and RAID arrays that make this choice slightly more complicated.

For starters, the majority of NAS are bottlenecked by their LAN connections, so if you only have a NAS with a 1GbE or 2.5GbE LAN port, then you won’t see the improved performance of the N300 over the WD Red Plus or IronWolf. If you do have a 10GbE LAN port, it will be saturated with four drives; extra drives won’t make any difference unless you have multiple LAN ports and bandwidth aggregation.

What you do get with the N300 is internal NAS performance, which, if you are running AI on your NAS, might be a factor. However, most people using their NAS that way use NVMe drives for caching, allowing them to get higher performance from 5400RPM drives. Rebuilds will be quicker, but the value of that comes down to whether the NAS is a point-of-service or other mission-critical function, and it assumes that a drive (or drives) dies in the first place to trigger the rebuild.

The fly in this ointment is the price, because for a four bay NAS, that’s a jump from roughly $800 in storage to $1200, and for that increase, you might consider Pro-level media.

Interestingly, currently the WD Red Pro 4TB is $250, offers 7200RPM spindle speeds, for less than the 4TB N300 on Amazon.com. And deals on IronWolf Pro models undercut Toshiba's pricing at that retailer.

In the UK, the IronWolf Pro 4TB is only £169.99, the WD Red Pro is £234.75, making the £195.15 N300 4TB a better deal than the WD, but much worse than the Seagate drive.

That’s the biggest issue here, because Toshiba aimed this product to hit the open ground between the entry-level NAS drives and the Pro series mechanisms, and now adjusted the price to compete with the premium layer. These Pro drives have 300TB/yr workload ratings and a 5-year warranty, whereas the N300 only has 180TB/yr and a 3-year warranty.

Based on these Toshiba defined ratings, it can't compete on reliability.

While I expect that if I tested the N300 against the Pro hardware, it would do well, since both of the competing brands typically only include 256MB of cache, not 512MB. But those who buy those mechanisms are looking for longevity above all else.

Overall, I liked the N300, as it takes less time to get operational on a NAS and in small arrays, the performance is excellent. But I can’t get on board with Toshiba’s pricing, which seems excessively high in some regions and lacks any consistency.

For more storage solutions, we've reviewed the best NAS devices.

Categories: Reviews

The Westies arrives on MGM+ this weekend — you won't remember watching it in three months time, but this Irish mobster true story is fun while it lasts

Fri, 07/10/2026 - 02:01

If I'm going to watch yet another movie or TV show about a mafia-style gang in New York — because why bother in the wake of The Godfather and The Sopranos, right? — I want to come away from it having learned something new.

New MGM+ crime drama The Westies achieved this at conception, because I didn't know the first thing about the real-life Irish-American crime family of the same name. In fact, I didn't even know that they existed. But sure enough, they were known for racketeering, drug trafficking, and contract killing in Hell's Kitchen from 1960s-1980s.

I know what you're thinking: isn't Hell's Kitchen exactly where the Italian-American mob operated from in New York City. You'd be right in thinking that, and it's one of the main sources of dramatic tension across the show's eight-episode run.

Add in the fact that an FBI team has been tasked with tracking down our fictional version, led by family patriarch Eamonn Sweeney (J.K. Simmons), and you've got a proper old-school cat-and-mouse chase.

Interestingly, the biggest pro and con of The Westies is almost the same thing. While you're streaming it, you're engrossed — the storytelling itself is solid, dependable and superficially fun. But from the moment you switch it off, it will be completely erased from your mind.

Fans complained The Westies would be too tame just from the trailer — and I think they were right

After the above trailer for The Westies was released, I couldn't help but notice that the overwhelming fan response was to criticize scenes for being "too tame" compared to what mob behavior would have been like at the time.

Now that I've watched the entire season, I have to agree. Even if you don't know the story of the Westies, you're tuning into a gangster crime show expecting a severe level of violence — or even just an overarching sense of nasty brutality.

Of course, blood, guts and gore don't make a story any better objectively, but come on... we're trying to have some fun here. On top of that, it's difficult to invest in something new if you feel as though it is holding back, especially if it's aiming for a second season and beyond.

Still, the core storytelling is both engaging and well constructed. As Eamonn Sweeney's cronies face off against the local Italian-Americans, you're as engrossed in the inevitably fatal outcome as much as you are the complicated family dynamics.

The cast is stronger than its story

(Image credit: MGM+)

Bosch star Titus Welliver plays our ragged FBI lead Glenn Keenan, with an 80s "pornstache" so commanding that it might as well have had its own acting credit. When you can get past the facial accessories, you know you're in good hands... once Harry Bosch, always Harry Bosch, if you get what I mean.

If anything, I wish we had more of Simmons himself on screen. Sweeney isn't exactly the Don Corleone type, but it feels as though Simmons has somehow been a mobster boss in a former life. If you're selling him as number one on the call sheet, let's see that translated in each episode, please.

Really, I'm looking for holes when there aren't any — or at least I'm ripping tiny damaged flecks in the story's fabric into gaping tears. Because we've been so spoiled by shows such as Peaky Blinders and MobLand in recent years, we have to hold everything that comes after to an incredibly high standard.

Truthfully, The Westies just doesn't meet it. Not because there's anything wrong per se, but because the competition is so tough. It's kind of like studying really hard for an exam knowing you're going to get creamed by the kids who are naturally better at the same subject. Thems the breaks, so just enjoy the ride while it lasts.

Categories: Reviews

Decodo proxy service review

Thu, 07/09/2026 - 13:44

A year and a half after its rebranding, Decodo (formerly Smartproxy) ranks near the very top in our books thanks to its automation-friendly workflows and more than 125 million IPs across 195 locations.

With the public data access platform (as Decodo labels itself), users gain access to residential (dynamic and static), data center, and mobile proxies to level up their browsing security. There’s also a handy Site Unblocker feature that facilitates bypassing CAPTCHA and IP bans, and enables entry to restricted sites.

Besides the ethically sourced proxy pool, Decodo offers APIs for scraping, providing users with a wide array of options to automate the extraction of publicly available information from websites. These include several types of APIs for different levels of expertise and various objectives.

Plans and pricing

Decodo’s pricing is based on how many IPs you require, the volume of traffic, the type of IPs, and the volume of requests. At first glance, the pricing structure is complex, though the gist of it is that it scales directly with your data consumption. So, the more bandwidth or IPs you buy, the cheaper your rate becomes.

Decodo promotes its residential IPs starting from $2 per GB per month under enterprise pricing (excludes individuals and small businesses). However, you need to take the 1000 GB plan, which means you’ll be charged $2000 per month plus VAT (all the prices are VAT-less).

For $150 per month, you get 50 GB ($3 per GB) of traffic for residential IPs; $275 monthly equals 100 GB ($2.75 per GB), while you’d need to set aside $11.25 each month if you want 3 GB ($3.75 per GB) of traffic for the lowest plan.

Static residential proxies, priced by the number of IPs, monthly traffic, or the number of dedicated IPs required, start from $0.27 monthly per IP (that’s if you require 8,000 IPs and 50 GB of traffic). Furthermore, 500 IPs cost $165 monthly ($0.33 per IP), but 10 IPs cost $4.7 (that’s $0.47 per IP). In other words, the greater the number of IPs, the lower the unit cost of each IP.

The pricing for mobile proxies begins at $4.50 per IP with the 500 GB plan, and the price goes up per IP with the lower traffic requirement. Similar to static proxies, datacenter plans are also offered on a GB, IP, and dedicated IP basis. They start at $3,800 for the 10,000 GB plan, or $0.026 per IP if you go with the 4,000 IP option.

If you decide to go with the pay-as-you-go option for residential proxies, it’s priced by 1 GB, each costing $4. For mobile proxies, the price is $8 per 1 GB, while the static dedicated ISP and datacenter proxies don’t have the pay-as-you-go option available.

There’s a 14-day money-back guarantee if you’re not entirely satisfied with the service, although it’s not offered for every pricing plan. That said, you can first take it out for a spin during the rather short three-day free trial with 100MB of traffic before making a final decision.

All things considered, Decodo runs a pricing model that favors bulk users over individual ones and small businesses. So, if you run a large organization that needs many IPs and gigabytes, you’ll find the platform cost-effective due to the significant discounts. Otherwise, it might be expensive.

Features

Of course, registration is the first step, which you can complete with an email address, a Google account, or a GitHub account. Your account dashboard conveniently has all features located on the left, which you can easily sift through. Whether you need residential proxies, ISP proxies, or scraping, you can select the option on the left menu.

Decodo's dashboard (Image credit: Decodo )

Once you settle on a plan, you can add users either as proxy users or team members. And with administrative privileges, Decodo provides you with full control over the IP resources you’ll allocate to each proxy user. For example, you can give a user 1 GB of data and another 10 GB. Each user from your organization has unique credentials to access Decodo.

You can create and customize proxy connections from your dashboard. Your first order of business will be to choose a sticky or rotating proxy. Sticky proxies change at set intervals (up to 24 hours), while rotating proxies change with every connection request. Then, you can choose an IP from a specific country/city or a random one as your proxy. With these options set, you can start utilizing Decodo’s online protection.

Let’s dive deeper into the features of this app:

Residential proxies

Residential proxies route your web requests through real home internet connections rather than anonymous server hubs. This setup is ideal for evading localized geo-blocks or checking out regional search results.

Decodo heavily emphasizes that its proxy fleet is entirely "ethically sourced," meaning home users explicitly consent and are compensated for sharing their bandwidth. You can target traffic across 195+ global locations, with the largest concentration of active nodes located in India, the US, Germany, and the UK.

Our testing confirmed that their residential pool boasts exceptional connection uptime and swift, hitch-free speeds.

Static residential (ISP) proxies

Combining the speed of a datacenter proxy with the legitimacy of a home connection, static residential proxies solve the issue of long web automation sequences or managing multiple social media accounts. Whereas standard rotating IPs would get you flagged, Decodo's ISP proxies from premium internet service providers like AT&T, Verizon, Orange, and Tele2 lower block rates via permanent IPs.

They deliver an impressive 99.99% uptime, latency reaction times under 0.2 seconds, and full HTTP(S) / SOCKS5 protocol integration. Decodo offers them as shared ISP proxies for flexible scaling and dedicated ISP proxies for an exclusive single-user IP per project.

Mobile proxies

To mimic smartphone traffic, Decodo gives you access to a dedicated (and ethically sourced) mobile proxy pool of over 10 million real 4G/5G mobile carrier IPs covering 160+ locations and 700+ network providers. The bulk of this mobile network is concentrated across the United States (3.9 million IPs), Germany (1.2 million), the UK (940,000), and India (720,000).

Mobile proxies are highly resilient against blocks because web platforms are naturally hesitant to ban cellular IPs, which frequently rotate among hundreds of real users. Decodo boasts a 99.75% success rate with its mobile proxies, which makes them a key asset for mobile application testing, localized ad verification, bypassing content geo-restrictions, and heavy web scraping.

Datacenter proxies

When sheer speed and high-bandwidth processing matter more than stealth, Decodo's datacenter proxies are a good bet. These are offered as shared versions (aimed at projects with tight budgets for data collection) and dedicated versions (exclusive IPs for consistent identity), and count half a million IPs with a <0.3s response time and 99.94% success rate.

While Decodo’s shared datacenter servers span a wide array of global regions, its 100% dedicated datacenter servers remain strictly limited to US locations. For those engaging in data-driven scaling, the platform supplies real-time stats to keep track of your effort.

Site Unblocker

Described by Decodo as a proxy-like solution, Site Unblocker is an advanced web extraction tool built to act as an all-in-one scraper. Instead of writing complex custom scripts to manage connection retries or bypass security walls, the Site Unblocker automates the hard work.

It uses browser fingerprinting to forge unique browser identities for each request and handles dynamic JavaScript rendering without requiring resource-heavy headless browsers. The tool also features automated IP rotation to make sure you bypass target anti-bot blocks.

Scraping

Arguably, the biggest advantage of having Decodo in your software lineup is its automation-oriented approach. The service provides APIs and scraping templates that let you automate website data collection instead of doing it manually by yourself for every site.

This includes search engine results pages (SERPs) like Google (fully updated to cleanly parse the latest AI Overviews layouts), eCommerce websites, and social media. As of late, you can also effortlessly extract real-time responses from public AI tools, as well as YouTube video transcripts and channel metadata.

All of the above fall under the umbrella of Web Scraping API. It automatically handles all the infrastructure knicks and knacks, from IP switching to CAPTCHA bypassing, courtesy of machine-learning fingerprint rotation. It uses a flexible credit system to keep costs optimized, as developers can configure request complexity on the fly. That way, teams only pay for advanced residential pools and scraping power when targeting a highly locked-down website.

Beyond traditional HTML and JSON payloads, the API delivers diverse data outputs like screenshots, tables, CSVs, XHR, and clean Markdown tailored specifically for AI integrations.

Decodo's dashboard (Image credit: Decodo )

When it comes to social media scraping, users can choose between real-time synchronous queries or asynchronous callbacks, paying exclusively for successful results via automated retries. The API does a commendable job of transforming dynamic social streams into cleanly parsed, structured JSON or HTML payloads.

For instance, you’ll be able to track the engagement rates of influencers working with your brand, monitor your competitors’ follower numbers, or discover trending content in real time or at a specific time. The YouTube scraping engine allows efficient extraction of raw video transcripts, backend schema metadata, and engagement metrics without getting throttled.

Those eyeing eCommerce scraping will get the option to extract product data from over 50 major marketplaces, including Amazon, Walmart, and eBay. Doing so allows businesses to securely pull real-time data on pricing, full product listings, images, and customer reviews.

Developers can instantly deploy over 100 ready-made scraping templates to monitor dynamic pricing shifts, track localized stock levels, detect counterfeit items, or aggregate clean AI training datasets. Scraping tasks can be scheduled in advance, and you’ll receive an email notification once they’re done.

Decodo's dashboard (Image credit: Decodo )

Last but not least, the SERP scraping API provides an automated pipeline designed specifically to extract structured data from major search engines like Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Baidu. This allows businesses to scrape localized search engine results pages down to the city or zip-code level with 100% successful data delivery guaranteed through automated retries.

AI workflows

Decodo recently introduced a free, prompt-based AI Parser alongside a rapid Fast Search API. The system uses simple, natural language prompts to instantly translate unstructured web data into clean JSON or LLM-friendly markdown. This native formatting greatly contributes to development speed, as it strips out layout noise and drastically lowers token consumption when feeding live web data directly into an AI context window.

The ultimate evolution here is Decodo’s transition into an autonomous data-enablement platform natively integrated with AI ecosystems like LangChain, n8n, and the Model Context Protocol (MCP). For example, by supporting an MCP server, Decodo enables AI agents running inside environments like Claude or ChatGPT to autonomously navigate the web, switch proxy nodes, and handle scraping blocks completely on their own via natural language commands

(Image credit: Decodo)Ease of Use

Decodo’s user interface is easy to navigate. On the desktop, all features are arranged on the left side, and you can easily access your desired feature with a single click. With a white background, black text, and colorful buttons, the whole setup is pleasing to the eye.

Along with the website interface, Decodo offers a Proxy Checker that lets you test up to 10,000 proxies after uploading them with one click.

There are also browser extensions for Google Chrome and Firefox, which give you access to features like one-click IP rotation, customizable session length, and seamless switching between proxies. Additionally, they include WebRTC Leak Prevent to stop WebRTC from bypassing your proxy, masking both your real IP address and location.

Like the main Decodo interface, the extensions are easy to navigate.

Decodo's dashboard (Image credit: Decodo )

Decodo makes it easy to integrate its proxies with various third-party tools, such as eCommerce purchase bots, scraping software, SEO tools, and external proxy managers like MuLogin and AdsPower. The backend is all covered, so you just need to carry out a few steps to kickstart the integration from the intuitive dashboard.

Customer Support

Excellent customer support is one of Decodo’s strengths. This support begins with extensive technical documentation for its features. You can find tutorials and user guides concerning all features, with detailed screenshots illustrating the instructions. You can learn everything about the app in the Help Center, from a basic introduction until you reach more complex aspects.

Decodo has a YouTube channel with video tutorials about its features. This channel allows users to learn about the platform more interactively and has dozens of illustrative and engaging videos.

Decodo's dashboard (Image credit: Decodo )

Of course, customer support can’t be left to the customer alone. If you need help, Decodo's support team is available via live chat. You can contact the support team 24/7 and get speedy answers, although the response time varies depending on your time zone. You can also reach Decodo’s support team via email (for non-urgent inquiries) and expect a response within 24 to 48 hours.

Other complementary support resources include Decodo’s GitHub repository with code samples and a Discord channel where you can connect with other users and share solutions to common issues. Decodo also holds frequent webinars to help users learn the ins and outs of this platform and general trends in the proxy software market.

The Competition

There’s no shortage of competition in the proxy software sector. Decodo has robust competitors like IPRoyal, OxyLabs, and WebShare. It outshines many competitors by providing a broader range of global IP addresses and complementary features like the AI workflows and scraping APIs. However, our main issue is with Decodo’s pricing– it’s significantly more expensive than many rivals, especially for low-volume users.

If you’re a bulk user needing hundreds of proxy IPs, Decodo is an ideal tool. However, it’s too costly for individuals or small enterprises needing a few dozen IPs at most.

Final verdict

There are solid reasons why Decodo gets tagged as one of the better proxy networks in the game. It’s fast and reliable, offers a rather sizable IP pool, and the dashboard is clean enough that you won't pull your hair out setting it up. Plus, the company throws in a ton of great built-in tools to help you smash through aggressive anti-bot blocks and handle heavy scraping workflows.

The only real catch is Decodo’s focus on bigger dev teams and enterprise-level scaling. In case you're running a small operation or just tinkering with a solo project, some of the price tags will likely make you flinch.

We've also highlighted the best proxy and best VPN

Categories: Reviews

Main menu

Error message

Technology

Navigation

News

Reviews

New forum topics

HuggingChat AI review

The Dimplex Rechargeable Cordless Desk Fan is a good go-anywhere fan, but you might want to play some music to drown out its drone

I watched the highly anticipated Evil Dead Burn but the horror movie relies too heavily on gore and neglects the lore

Express AI review

Lumo AI review

Duck.ai by DuckDuckGo review

DeepSeek AI review

Don't bother buying the Switch 2's official N64 controller — get 8BitDo's brilliant take on it instead

Marshall’s new big and bullish home speaker is just as much of a delight on the eyes as it is on the ears, and it blew me away with its rumbling bass and amp-inspired aesthetic

Austrian Audio’s new ‘semi-open-back’ wired headphones are named like some sort of hired assassin, but I tested them and if you want layered audio, they’re 'The Arranger' for you

Oukitel WP68 Air review: A rugged phone with good camera sensors, but limited performance and battery capacity

I tested PSB's new stereo speaker system and the punchy sound and compact styling are a delight, but don't bother if you listen to a lot of vinyl

Mistral Vibe review

Kimi AI review

HIX.ai review

Proton VPN Free review: a great choice for day-to-day, but with some unfortunate limitations

Garmin Forerunner 170 review: A solid running watch with no surprises

Toshiba N300 4TB NAS HDD review: Can the extra cost over its rivals be justified by its performance?

The Westies arrives on MGM+ this weekend — you won't remember watching it in three months time, but this Irish mobster true story is fun while it lasts

Decodo proxy service review

Pages

Main menu

Error message

Technology

You are here

Navigation

News

TechRadar Reviews

Reviews

New forum topics

Pages

Search form

User login