Feed aggregator

Republicans redrew Congressional district lines to try to tilt the midterms in their favor. But now they are facing expensive and competitive races they had hoped to outmaneuver.

(Image credit: Anna Moneymaker)

Hurricane forecasters are increasingly using artificial intelligence to make predictions.

(Image credit: NOAA)

A federal judge struck down a Trump administration ban on issuing immigrant visas to people from 75 countries, but immigrants continue to be stuck in their countries. Attorneys say the federal government is slow-walking the processing of visas on purpose.

(Image credit: Gloria Hoffman)

Republicans' gerrymandering efforts have led to expensive and competitive races, Brazil's President Lula elected for fourth term, protests sweep parts of Europe.

When I last looked at Movavi Video Editor, I was quite impressed by its capabilities - it's one of the best video editing software for beginners in my experience.

But time waits for no computer program, and as version 27 has recently been released, I thought it was time to check how it has improved.

Movavi Video Editor 27: Pricing & plans

• Subscription is fairly priced
• Perpetual license is way more expensive for Americans
• Free trial available

You can grab Movavi Video Editor 27 from the official site by clicking here.

Let’s face it: everything’s getting more expensive. Whether it’s food, petrol, or subscriptions, the price keeps going ever higher, so it was with trepidation that I looked at Movavi’s current pricing structure.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom: Movavi have actually lowered their prices. Should you decide to pay monthly for your video editor, you’ll need to fork out $20, €19 or £18, but the big incentive is to pay yearly, as it’s only $55, €44, or £41, which is a little over 2 months’ worth.

It’s not as cheap as free of course (like DaVinci Resolve), but it’s a heck of a lot cheaper than Adobe Premiere Pro (which would set you back $276 each year).

If you’d rather pay once and actually own the software you’re downloading, a perpetual licence is also available for £150, €90 or £90 (the massive discrepancy between currencies is… puzzling).

And perhaps best of all, the software is multi-platform, allowing you to work with it, whether you use a PC or a Mac.

If you’re not sure about investing in this application, there’s a free trial you can access. A watermark will be added to any output, and your projects are limited to 60 seconds in length. Still, it should be enough to give you an idea of what you can do with Movavi Video Editor.

• Score: 4/5

Movavi Video Editor 27: Getting started

(Image credit: Future)

• The software still doesn’t know which language your OS is set to
• So it defaults to Japanese

Last time I checked out Movavi, back when it was on version 25, I made a point of stating that unusually, the first time you launch the software, you’re not greeted with an interface in your own native tongue, or at the very least in English.

Instead, all the menus are in Japanese. That’s not an issue if you know that language, but if you’re more familiar with those that use the Latin alphabet, you’re faced with an unexpected challenge.

Thankfully, if you grab a screenshot of the interface and submit it to Google Translate, the solution will become more obvious, and changing the default language then becomes a trivial matter. But it’s disappointing to see that after all this time, Movavi still treats this as a feature, not a bug.

Software should be able to detect the OS’s chosen language and default to that when you launch it. I’m surprised Movavi still insists on making life difficult for many of its customers.

• Score: 2.5/5

Movavi Video Editor 27: Editing

(Image credit: Future)

• Excellent video editor with a wealth of useful, powerful, and well implemented tools
• Shame so many of them are locked behind subscription plans

Initial frustrations aside, when it comes to video editing - what the software is designed for - Movavi Video Editor does a sterling job. It starts with mousing over an imported clip in the media section. Doing that allows you to preview the clip as you move the cursor over it, enabling you to set in and out points with ease.

You can work with multiple layers of course, although there is a base layer beneath which you can’t add other clips, which can be a little annoying if you like to create complex projects and move clips around a lot.

There are Titles, Transitions, Effects, and Elements aplenty, all organised by category with a handy search field available, although many of those are restricted behind a paywall. These are identified by a little ‘crown’ logo, top right of their thumbnails.

You can still use them in your project, but you’ll be informed upon export that you need to purchase a subscription to be able to share any video with them in it, for either €36 a month, or €110 a year, which, I’m sure you can tell, is much more expensive than the actual program itself. This can be annoying but it’s entirely possible to restrict yourself to non-premium assets by setting the filter for each section to ‘free’.

The Tools section houses important features, such as image stabilisation, background removal, green green work, and an AI-based subtitle feature which worked incredibly well when I tried it out. Thankfully, everything stored in that section is part of the software’s base cost.

But all of this was already part of Movavi Video Editor. The big innovation that’s being introduced in version 27, is Templates.

• Score: 4/5

Movavi Video Editor 27: Templates

(Image credit: Future)

• Templates offers a great and versatile way to spice up your project
• Can be used wholesale or just choosing just the parts you’re interested in

The concept of Templates is pretty clever: editing can be hard and time consuming, and if you just want to put something out there but lack the skills or experience, it can really be a chore. So Movavi have created a large collection of ready-made templates which you can add to your project. One template could be your entire video, or alternatively, be part of a larger one. It’s also entirely possible to add multiple templates to the same project.

These are organised into 12 categories, from Beauty and Fashion, to Gaming, to Marketing and Promo, and more. And it probably won’t surprise you to know that nearly all these templates include some premium features of some kind, although each category has at least one free option for you to choose.

Dragging a template to a project expands it into various sections, each of which lets you know how many placeholders within it need to be replaced. Some sections don’t give you the option to replace theirs which is odd, but it’s a simple matter of deleting them entirely and adding one of your own clips in their place.

As for actually replacing those placeholders, it wasn’t as intuitive as I had expected, but once you’re aware of the concept, the process is quite simple: click on the ‘clips to replace’ text on the section’s representation in your timeline, to reveal the placeholder’s large thumbnail above it.

Clicking on that thumbnail opens a window containing all the media you imported into this project. Select the one you want, choose the part of it you’d like to use, and click on ‘Apply’. Repeat that for every placeholder.

Need more customisation? Double-click on a Template’s Section to reveal its ‘Clip Settings’. In addition to offering you another way to replace those placeholder clips, you also have other options, such as customising the text fields, or checking the applied effects, for instance.

These templates also come with a soundtrack which you’re free to use or discard, just like you can reorder or delete the sections it came with, which actually allows you to mix and match parts of different templates to create your own unique project in minutes rather than hours.

I found it a great fun way to quickly build something original.

• Score: 4.5/5

Should I buy Movavi Video Editor 27?

(Image credit: Future)

Buy it if...

You’re into video editing and are looking for an affordable application that will let you do just that, and you appreciate the addition of versatile and customisable templates to speed up your work.

Don't buy it if...

You don’t spend enough time editing video to warrant paying for such software, so you’d rather find something that’s free, even if it means having fewer tools at your disposal.

FutureFutureFutureFutureFutureFutureHow I tested Movavi Video Editor 27

Movavi Video Editor is multi-platform, being compatible with Windows and Macs alike, which is a great thing (sorry Linux users). I always like to test such software primarily with the underdog (or I prefer just Macs… you decide).

In this instance, I put it through its paces on a recent laptop sporting Apple Silicon, as based on my previous exploration of this software when it was at version 25, I had concluded it needed a ‘decently powerful machine’ to run effectively.

The software ran incredibly smoothly and was very responsive. I particularly liked the way it looks but, to be honest, that could be due to the fact the interface, and even the way the clips are presented in the timeline, resembles Final Cut Pro, one of my preferred video editing platforms.

For more creative apps, we've tested and reviewed the best video editing software, the best free video editing software, and the best video editing apps for mobile devices.

Brazil's 80-year-old left-wing leader President Lula defeats Flávio Bolsonaro in a bitterly contested runoff.

(Image credit: Natacha Pisarenko)

• The iFixit teardown of the new iPhone Duo from Apple is here
• iFixit says Apple has "done well" with the repairability of its foldable
• However, there are still some potential weaknesses in the design

The teardown and repair experts over at iFixit have put the new Apple iPhone Duo through their rigorous examination process, and there are positives and negatives to take. A repairability score of 5 out of 10 is the best iFixit has ever given to a foldable phone, but there are pain points, and areas of potential weakness.

We've embedded the teardown video below, and you can read more at the iFixit blog, but the highlights are an outer screen and a couple of battery cell units that are relatively easy to remove. The outer trim of the foldable came away intact too, which the iFixit team notes wasn't the case with the Galaxy Z Fold 8.

Applying dust that glows under ultraviolet light, the teardown showed some of it reaching the hinge mechanism. While the hinge didn't gather as much dust as the Pixel 11 Pro Fold or the Galaxy Z Fold 8, enough got into the hinge for it to start crunching (it's worth noticing the iPhone Duo let in dust in the JerryRigEverything durability test too).

Apple has given the iPhone Duo an IP68 rating for protection against dust and water, but in terms of dust at least, you really can't take any chances with this foldable. "We hoped Apple would solve this problem, but sadly it seems like the Duo's got the same dirt-phobia as its folding cousins," writes the iFixit team.

Cracked screens and hidden hinges

iFixit also comes up with an explanation for the cracked screen problem being reported by some iPhone Duo owners. Apparently, it could be down to stress caused by the main display crease putting pressure on the central support bar for the hinge – though further investigations will be needed to know for sure.

Another party of the teardown takes a close look at the gears, springs, and metal joints that Apple has constructed the iPhone Duo's hinge out of, and there's a detailed description of how Apple has applied a "very good disguise" for the crease on the main display, through the arrangement of pixels and the screen's matte nano-texture finish.

If an iPhone Duo repair is required, it's the main, inner screen and the hinge that are going to be the biggest problem, according to iFixit: because of the complicated way that's been assembled and put together, it "takes a lot of work", a lot of time, and a lot of money if you need to get these parts of the iPhone Duo looking like new again.

"For a first attempt, Apple has done well," concludes the iFixit team when summarizing the teardown and durability test. "The easy battery removal alone is something we'd like to see on every foldable. But you'd better baby that screen, Duo owners. And maybe quit carrying around that pocket sand."

• Kyiv firm CODE380 has built D·Vision SDR, a drone detector that turns intercepted Russian drone signals into live video
• It uses software-defined radio to scan 500 to 8,700 MHz, which the team says leaves no blind spots
• The device has been combat-tested with Ukrainian troops and gets software updates about twice a month

A Ukrainian engineering team has built a drone detector that does more than warn soldiers that a Russian drone is close.

It can lock onto the drone's own video link and show an operator, in real time, exactly what the aircraft is filming.

The device, called D·Vision SDR, was first reported by the Ukrainian tech outlet DOU and detailed by UNITED24 Media two days later. CODE380, a Kyiv-based communications equipment company, made the device, which relies on software-defined radio rather than the fixed analog receivers most front-line detectors still use. That choice is the defining factor: it lets the box turn an intercepted signal into a picture.

A software-defined radio takes the lead

Most front-line detectors use analog receivers tuned to the bands drones rely on for video and control. D·Vision SDR takes a different route. Software-defined radio digitizes a slice of the radio spectrum and processes it in software, so a single platform can be retuned and re-taught through code instead of swapped out for new hardware.

According to DOU, the detector sweeps frequencies from 500 to 8,700 MHz, hunting for the signatures that give a drone away. The developers say it covers that whole range with no blind spots and offers more sensitivity than competing detectors.

The real advantage of this approach is that when Russian drones shift frequencies, the fix is a software update, not a redesigned receiver. That flexibility is why counter-drone engineers have leaned on SDR for years. A 2022 survey in the journal Sensors framed radio-frequency detection built on SDR platforms as one of the more adaptable ways to spot small drones, precisely because the signal processing can be rewritten as the threat changes.

The developer, CODE380, is new on paper and seasoned in practice. UNITED24 Media reports that the Kyiv firm was founded only about three months ago, while work on the detector itself began roughly a year and a half earlier.

The detector has already been through field testing with Ukrainian military personnel during combat missions, according to DOU. Feedback from those trials fed back into the design, and the team keeps shipping software updates roughly twice a month.

That cadence matters more than it sounds. Drone control schemes, frequencies, and telemetry in Ukraine change near-weekly, so a detector that can't update quickly falls behind fast.

A software-first device can absorb those changes between firmware pushes rather than at the pace of a hardware refresh, which is the difference between a tool that stays useful for months and one that is obsolete by the next offensive.

Turning a drone's signal into watchable video is not a gimmick. It answers a specific problem that has grown worse over the past year: Russian drones increasingly carry cameras and are flown by people, not just preset to a target.

When a detector can decode that video, the people on the ground get the same view the enemy operator has. They can see what the drone is looking at, judge whether they are the target, and decide whether to scatter, take cover, switch on a jammer, or hold still. In a war where spotting the drone in time has become the hard half of survival, that is a meaningful edge.

D·Vision SDR is not alone, and intercepting enemy video is becoming a Ukrainian specialty. Babai's Vydun 7.5 can tap into Russian drone feeds and track UAVs several kilometers out.

The drones that hear before they strike

D·Vision SDR was not the only new way to sense the enemy that Ukrainian engineers put forward that week. The same day UNITED24 Media covered the detector, it also reported that drone maker Ptashka Drones had fitted its fiber-optic FPV drones with microphones, letting them pick out Russian soldiers and vehicles by sound from tens of meters away.

The point is passive awareness. A drone can sit in an ambush position and listen rather than give itself away by moving or sweeping a camera. By the manufacturer's figures, the microphones catch loud conversation at 20 to 30 meters, light vehicles at 50 to 100 meters, and heavy vehicles out to 200 meters. A crew can work out what is coming by ear, then decide whether it is worth the shot.

Ukrainian crews call these "zhdun" (waiter) drones: aircraft that land near an expected Russian route and wait until a target comes into range. On announcing the modification, Ptashka Drones wrote on its Telegram channel that "it is important not only to see well, but also to hear." The microphones also serve as early warning: an operator can hear an approaching Russian attack drone and move to a new hiding spot before it strikes.

The open question is the same for both approaches: how long any given advantage lasts. Russian drones change their radio behavior constantly, Russian tactics shift with them, and a device that looks a step ahead today can be a step behind within weeks.

A detector rebuilt in software every two weeks, and a drone that gains a whole new sense for the price of a microphone, are both bets on staying adaptable rather than staying still. In this war, that has usually been the safer bet, but only the next few months of fighting will show whether it holds.

Pennsylvania is the worst hit state, with at least 1,338 cases of measles confirmed in 44 counties so far this year, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Health.

(Image credit: Matt Rourke)

Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: 30-second review

This review covers the four-bay ‘Creator NAS’ as Beelink calls it, which is available in two SKUs and uses the Intel Core i5-13500H mobile processor. But Beelink has five ‘Home NAS’ options below that one, using the Intel J5005, N95, N150 and Core 304 processors. And another two higher-end options with AMD Ryzen AI 350 and AI 470 class processors.

The four-bay enclosure is a compact all-metal unibody, measuring 165 x 121 x 185mm and weighing 2.4kg without drives. Beelink says it is 50 per cent smaller in volume than a conventional design, and compared to anything by Synology or QNAP, it’s certainly much smaller.

Inside, an internal blower on the motherboard module pulls cool air in and pushes it out to keep everything cool, and the milled aluminium construction also helps radiate heat. Silicone mounts sit either side of each drive and between the case and the motherboard tray, reducing vibration and noise

The review unit, with its Intel Core i5 13500H, has 12 cores, 16 threads and a 45W TDP. It comes with 32GB of DDR4, a 500GB system SSD and four M.2 slots. Beelink pitches it at creative professionals, and this is a great spec for those who need large amounts of fast storage for video editing or maintaining photo collections.

Earlier Beelink NAS used the FygoOS operating system, and it’s also in this NAS. It is flexible and well-featured, and it makes the ME Pro feel like a platform rather than an appliance. The evolution of this aspect is impressive, and FygoOS delivers many of the higher-end features that some NAS products lack.

However, there is one caveat. This is a Kickstarter launch product; therefore, a pledge is not a purchase, and delivery dates can slip. Buyers need to weigh that, but so far I’m impressed with this NAS on several critical levels. And if the Kickstarter goes well and this hardware ends up in the retail channel, it might be included in our best NAS devices.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: Price and availability

• How much does it cost? From $819
• When is it out? On Kickstarter soon
• Where can you get it? Only on Kickstarter initially

The ME Pro range is listed as coming soon on Kickstarter. Beelink is offering a Super Early Bird discount of 30 per cent. Prices are in US dollars, and drives are not included.

The 13500H four-bay costs $819 at Super Early Bird and $1,169 at list. All four-bay prices are below, Super Early Bird first, then list.

Beelink ME Pro Kickstarter pricing

Model

Super Early Bird

List price

J5005

$369

$529

N95

$489

$699

N150

$539

$769

Core 3 304

$769

$1,099

Core i5 13500H

$819

$1,169

Ryzen AI 7 H 350

$1,049

$1,499

Ryzen AI 9 HX 470

$1,379

$1,969

A $10 VIP deposit before launch unlocks a free four-bay upgrade. And if you back the two-bay tier machine, you will receive the four-bay model at the same price.

Given what some of these designs include in processing power and memory, these are mostly excellent deals. Specifically, $819 for the Creator NAS seems like exceptional value.

• Value: 4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: SpecsME Pro Creator Edition Specifications

Item

Spec

CPU:

Intel Core i5 13500H (12 cores, 16 threads)

GPU:

Intel Iris Xe (80 EU)

RAM:

32GB DDR4 expandable to 96GB

System Storage:

512GB internal SSD

SATA Storage:

4x 2.5 or 3.5 inch drives (HDD or SSD)

M.2 Storage:

2x M.2 NVMe Gen4 x4, 2x M.2 NVMe Gen3 x2 (one used for OS)

RAID:

Basic, Linear, RAID 0, 1, 5, 6 and 10

Ports:

3x USB 3.2 Gen 2, 1x Thunderbolt 4, 1x 3.5mm Audio jack

Networking:

1x 10GbE LAN, 1x 2.5GbE

Outputs:

1x HDMI port, up to 4K resolution

OS:

FygoOS

Internal File Systems:

BTRFS, EXT4, ZFS

External File Systems:

EXT4, NTFS, FAT32, HFS+, ExFAT

Maximum Capacity:

4x 30TB HDD + 4x 4TB M.2 NVMe, plus external storage on USB or Thunderbolt

Max TDP:

45W

Dimensions:

165 x 121 x 185 (mm)

Beelink ME Pro Series overview

Model

Cores and threads

Max TDP

AI TOPS

Memory

M.2 slots

System drive

Max storage

Pentium Silver J5005

4C / 4T

10W

NO NPU

8GB DDR4

2

128GB SSD

128TB

Intel N95

4C / 4T

25W

NO NPU

12GB LPDDR5

3

128GB SSD

132TB

Intel N150

4C / 4T

25W

NO NPU

16GB LPDDR5

3

128GB SSD

132TB

Intel Core 3 304

5C / 5T

35W

24 TOPS

16GB DDR5

1

512GB UFS 3.1

124TB

Intel Core i5 13500H

12C / 16T

45W

NO NPU

32GB DDR4

4

500GB SSD

136TB

AMD Ryzen AI 7 H 350

8C / 16T

45W

50 TOPS

32GB DDR5

3

500GB SSD

132TB

AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470

12C / 24T

45W

86 TOPS

32GB DDR5

3

500GB SSD

132TB

Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: Design

• Drawer concept
• Easy access to some upgrades
• Lots of screws

The drawer-style design is a neat idea: it uses almost the same mechanism as the drives, but replicated on the motherboard, which slides out for maintenance and upgrades.

That should make a processor upgrade a far simpler job than in a normal NAS. Beelink has also hinted at AMD and ARM boards in the same chassis. If you own a four-bay, you could buy a different two-bay and swap the platforms, in theory.

The unibody metal case is milled from solid aluminium and makes for a small footprint for a four-bay NAS. It’s also quiet enough that this could sit on a desktop.

Cooling relies on one internal blower rather than a bank of case fans, and when the motherboard module is removed, the dual-sided design is clearly influenced by Beelink’s mini PC designs.

Access to the two M.2 2280 Gen4 slots is super-simple, and they come with their own chunky heatsinks to help remove heat with the help of the fan assembly. There are two other M.2 slots (Gen 3 x2), one of these being occupied by the FygoOS installation, but getting those requires removing the fan.

Since the unused third slot doesn’t run at the same speed as the two easily accessible ones, it probably wouldn’t be a good plan to try to make a RAID array of the three, but that slot might be useful for a caching SSD.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

What I’m less impressed with is that the trays aren't tool-less for either 3.5- or 2.5-inch mechanisms. Each drive needs four screws, and once installed, two more hold it in place from the back of the tray.

The designers' issue here was that if they used a tool-less tray and a more elegant lock, then the NAS would be bigger, and the designers didn’t care for that. They also used four of these tiny screws to hold the motherboard tray in place, and these screws are easy to misplace.

One annoyance is that, to hold the thin steel air filter on the rear of the NAS, ten small magnets are glued into the chassis. They are placed within 4mm of where the screws hold the trays in, which inevitably means that when you go to screw them in, the magnets pull the screw off the screwdriver before you can thread it.

In short, the filter didn’t need that many magnets, and they didn’t need to be where the tray screws are.

The fine irony of all these screws is that the enclosure tolerances are so good that the screws holding the trays in and the motherboard are mostly pointless, certainly with the numbers used.

These points aside, the ME Pro is better built than most NAS enclosures, even if some compromises have been made to keep it so small.

• Design: 4 / 5

Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: Features

• Intel Core 5 13500H CPU
• Up to 96GB of memory
• AI capabilities are limited

As a laptop processor, the Core 5 13500H was a strong platform sporting 12 cores total (4 Performance-cores with Hyper-Threading and 8 Efficient-cores) and 16 threads. As is the way with Intel 13th Gen technology, the performance-cores boost at a higher level, up to 4.7 GHz; and the efficient-cores boost at lower levels, up to 3.5 GHz.

All cores share an 18 MB Intel Smart Cache, and the chip has a base power TDP of 45W.

Some laptop designs using this chip scaled power up to 115W, but from what I understand, the ME Pro has more than enough performance at its base wattage.

The review hardware came with two 16GB DDR4-3200 modules providing 32GB, but if you can find them, this system could take dual 48GB modules for 96GB in total. It’s a shame Beelink didn’t use LPDDR5 for faster performance and lower power consumption, but the cost was probably prohibitive when these decisions were made.

The GPU is an Intel Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units running up to 1.45 GHz, and it shares memory with the rest of the platform.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

The best aspect of this processor, aside from its high core count, is its PCIe lanes: 28 total. In this design, not all 28 lanes are created equal.

Eight primary lanes are Gen5, eight secondary lanes are Gen4, and all sixteen lanes are CPU-attached. The final twelve lanes route through the Platform Controller Hub (PCH) to handle slower or secondary peripherals (like Wi-Fi/Bluetooth, audio controllers, USB extensions, or secondary M.2 storage slots), and these are all Gen3.

That’s a terrific amount of bandwidth, and it enables dual M.2 Gen 4 x4, two more M.2 Gen3, a 10GbE LAN port and a 2.5GbE LAN port, a Thunderbolt 4 port, and three USB 3.2 Gen2 ports. That’s plenty for most people, as you can use the Thunderbolt port as a 40Gbps network connection if needed.

Overall, the architecture choices in this NAS are right for demanding workloads like video editing, photo manipulation, and software development, thanks to its hybrid core layout.

However, only the Ryzen AI models are sold specifically for local language models. The 13500H review unit is not one of them, and Beelink lists no AI performance figure for it. The AI 470 is quoted at up to 86 TOPS, with that number assembled from an NPU with 55 TOPS and a CPU and GPU combined for 32 TOPS.

Therefore, if you intend to run AI models on the NAS, one of the AMD machines would be preferable to this system.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

• Features: 4 / 5

Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: Software

• FygoOS
• Docker and virtual machines
• Ollama options

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

FygoOS is the international face of a Chinese NAS solution that has surfaced in the past year. Its parent is fnOS, also called Feiniu Private Cloud. I believe a small team of NAS enthusiasts built it around Debian Linux, and it is closed source. During its public beta, it was offered as a free option for Chinese home users.

Reviews for this platform only began in early July 2026. Early adopters found a new NAS OS in version 1.2 and the FygoTV app in 0.9. The name hints at open source, but it is a proprietary system built partly on open source parts, with GPL source releases still in progress. It runs on x86 and ARM hardware and offers ZFS, Btrfs and ext4 storage. The changelog shows active development.

During my time with the ME Pro 4, it had several releases; I used version 1.2.0800, and FygoTV was 0.9.7-3.

FygoOS is the beating heart of the ME Pro, and it aims at beginners while leaving room for experts. Beelink says apps install with one click and update the same way. It lists official and community apps for media, backup, productivity and virtualisation.

For what appears to be a relatively new NAS OS, this all seems much more advanced than I’d normally expect, both in application selection and feature set.

As far as I’m aware, FygoOS is the only other hardware-included NAS OS with ZFS file system support other than QNAP QuTS hero. You can get this feature via Unraid, TrueNAS or OpenMediaVault, among other places, but you would be installing them onto this hardware to replace FygoOS.

Included in the selection of apps is a powerful photo and media search tool. It can use AI to rapidly find images using facial recognition and smart categorisation. The private cinema feature matches metadata automatically, and Beelink claims up to 99 per cent accuracy in identifying the content. It also syncs playback between devices and supports real-time hardware transcoding.

However, I was disappointed that, as nice as some of these tools are, Beelink missed a few tricks. One is the HDMI port, which is promoted as supporting up to 4K output. That might be true, but it can’t be driven by the Fygo TV app to play files directly onto a TV. That’s something you can do with a Ugreen or Asustor NAS, but not this.

But there are a few things it can do that are more exclusive. One of the more surprising features of this platform is the collaborative media workspace.

Teams can preview video, photos, audio, documents, fonts and 3D files without downloading them. AI search finds content by meaning, not just file names. You can send a review link, and reviewers add comments, annotations and timestamped notes. Sharing supports access controls, expiry dates, watermarks and branding.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

The only caveat is that the features are tiered, with the best ones requiring a subscription.

The personal tier is included in all ME Pro. The business tier comes with a 30-day free trial on the J5005, N95, N150 and 304 models. The 13500H and both Ryzen AI models get six months free. But, and this is a concern, Beelink has not said what the business tier costs afterwards. I’d hate to use this for six months, find it incredibly useful and then discover that the monthly cost is too high to make it practical.

Being an Intel-based platform, and not ARM, this NAS supports virtualisation and with 32GB of RAM it is relatively easy to have several VT instances running. And, it has Docker, expanding the amount of software that can run on this platform dramatically.

It was interesting to note that while the hardware used here, specifically the Core i5 13500H, doesn’t have an NPU, it is a reasonably powerful processor and it has Iris Xe graphics, which can be used to process AI LLMs.

The standard application set includes Ollama, and I was able to install it and use it to run a local model like Gemma. While it wasn’t the fastest response, it did work quite well, so using this machine for AI isn’t impossible.

Obviously, if you want to use the NAS as an AI assistant, the two models with AMD Ryzen AI processors are a better choice, but even without a dedicated NPU, this hardware can run some AI and support interactive chats without relying on the Cloud.

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)

• Software: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Mark Pickavance)Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: Performance

• Overkill for file serving
• 10GbE and 2.5GbE
• Lacks channel bonding

When I started testing this NAS, I soon realised the platform was largely twiddling its thumbs during large file transfers. Using the 2.5GbE LAN port, no SSD cache and four 4TB drives in a RAID 5 pack, the CPU barely hit 9% usage. And that was shipping a file from my desktop PC at around 290MB/s.

Using the 10GbE port increased transfer speeds to nearly 700MB/s, but only added a few percentage points of CPU overhead. With an SSD, this machine can get closer to 1000MB/s, either directly or by allocating the SSD for reading and writing cache.

Four 3.5-inch drives don’t have enough performance to fully saturate the 10GbE link without cache support, so adding an SSD is more of a necessity if you're involved in file serving.

Gen4 x4 M.2 slots are great for internal SSD performance, but there aren’t many practical ways to use that bandwidth from the outside other than the Thunderbolt 4 port.

But unfortunately, the Thunderbolt port on this NAS doesn’t yet support Host mode, even though it is listed as a feature that’s ‘under development’ on the official FygoOS roadmap.

Also, while the networking functions enable Multi-gateway mode, where the LAN ports route according to the shortest path to the target system, there is currently no link aggregation/channel bonding. I don’t think channel bonding a 10GbE and a 2.5GbE line together is a good idea anyway, but FygoOS currently doesn’t have the necessary interfaces for this.

Because FygoOS is built on a Linux base, users looking to combine multiple network interfaces typically have to configure network bonding manually via SSH or underlying Linux networking tools rather than a native settings panel.

On a more positive note, I used a cheap Ugreen USB-A to 2.5GbE LAN port (CM648), and that worked perfectly for what is an incredibly inexpensive option. I know that Ugreen makes a 5GbE version of this adapter, and I suspect that would also be useful in this context.

Ideally, this system would have dual 10GbE and SMB multi-channel mode, but in most other respects, this NAS is overpowered for most roles.

• Performance: 4 / 5

Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition: Final verdict

Buy it if you want a compact NAS that you can upgrade later and you like the idea of a modern, flexible OS. Beelink pitches the 13500H model to creative professionals, and it has the core count to back it up.

That said, the four-bay market is crowded. Alternatives include the Ugreen NASync DXP4800 Plus and Pro, the Synology DS925+ and the UniFi UNAS Pro 4. Breaking down the ups and downs of each design would take another article, but to cover the basics, none of them matches the ME Pro 4-Bay Creator Edition.

The Ugreen NAS units are cheaper, use DDR5 and include special features like SMB Multichannel and HDMI video playback, which makes them useful.

Synology’s DS925+ uses a much weaker AMD Ryzen V1500B quad-core CPU, only has dual 2.5GbE LAN ports, comes with 4GB of RAM expandable to 32GB, and has two M.2 slots that can only use Synology-branded storage. That machine supports ECC memory, but that and the DSM OS are the only real positives.

The UniFi UNAS Pro 4 is meant for racks, not shelves, and is an ARM SoC system that supports four HDDs, two M.2 NVMe SSDs, and 2x 10Gb SFP+ LAN ports.

It’s cheap, around $600, but the 8GB memory can’t be upgraded, and the ARM architecture doesn’t support Virtual Machines.

What I haven't considered are the Asustor Lockerstor 4 models, QNAP, and TerraMaster options, to name a few. But to generalise, most 4-bay NAS don’t compete on processing power, memory capacity, and build quality.

The fly in this ointment is that until this product exits the Kickstarter campaign and people have them longer term, will they be able to establish a reputation, good or bad.

I haven't had any issues with the machine Beelink sent, and with a few more updates to FygoOS, it could become a useful NAS to own.

But for those who have had bad Kickstarter experiences, wait if you need proven reliability. This is a new product on a crowdfunding platform, and the modular upgrade path is so far a promise. But as a first-generation device, the Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition is certainly heading in the right direction.

Should you buy a Beelink ME Pro Creator Edition?

Value

The Kickstarter deals are excellent for NAS of this spec

4 / 5

Design

Innovative drawer design that allows for system swaps

4/ 5

Features

Powerful Intel CPU, up to 96GB of DDR4, Thunderbolt and three M.2 slots

4 / 5

Software

FygoOS is more sophisticated than expected

4 / 5

Performance

Two drives limits throughput without SSDs

4 / 5

Overall

A tiny powerful NAS that’s ideal for creatives, but it lacks the silicon for AI use

4 / 5

Buy it if...

You have a 10GbE network
With one 10GbE LAN and the 2.5GbE Port as a failover backup, you can distribute 1000MB/s of data over a network easily. And, using the USB or Thunderbolt port, you can get even more network bandwidth.

You need lots of RAM for VT
Being able to scale to 96GB of memory enables this NAS to handle jobs that would overrun other devices. It’s also DDR4, which might be cheaper to find than DDR5 at this time.

Don't buy it if...

You need AI LLMs
While this machine can run an LLM, the lack of an NPU in the processor holds it back, and you can’t add a powerful GPU, as it doesn’t have OCuLink. If you want AI on a NAS, other machines in this range are better suited.

You want Thunderbolt Host Mode
With this system having a Thunderbolt port, I was hoping it would have host mode, enabling a suitable laptop to link directly to the NAS with a 40Gbps link. However, that feature is still to be added to FygoOS, and until it is, that remains a pipe dream.

For more NAS solutions we've collated the best NAS hard drives around

Topping DX1 II: two-minute review

The world is not short of little DAC/headphone amps that want to bring a taste of authentic audio quality to your desktop experience — and here’s another one. The Topping DX1 II is a thorough update of a previous (and very competitive) in the Chinese brand's stable, and it makes a strong case for itself even before it’s started doing its thing.

The aluminum casework looks and feels good and the on-paper specification is difficult to lay a glove on. It includes — deep breath — a very hi-res ESS DAC, carefully considered digital and analog architecture, USB-C for both power and data, sufficient grunt to drive most headphones without difficulty, a fistful of input and output options (including balanced analog connectivity), and the facility for plenty of end-user input where sound is concerned. The standard of construction and finish is more than adequate. And a little remote control handset takes some of the pressure off an overworked physical control interface.

The difference the DX1 II can make to your audio experience when it sits between, say, your laptop and the headphones that are plugged into it is fairly profound. The Topping is by no means perfect — it doesn’t attack the top of the frequency range quite as willingly as it might, and it doesn’t have the heft to make big dynamic variations as apparent as they might be — but it’s a far more convincing and well-realized listen than your laptop alone has a hope of being. Soundstaging, rhythmic expression, detail levels and all-around musicality all enjoy a big uptick, and the way the DX1 II handles a tonal balance is one of the most uncomplicatedly enjoyable things about it.

The Topping DX1 II hasn’t closed the door on other desktop-friendly headphone amp/DAC units at similar money, but it’s certainly made sure it’s on the inside of the conversation for the best on the market.

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Topping DX1 II review: Price & release date

• Announced on May 18, 2026 (with availability from late June/July 2026)
• Priced $119 / £119 (around AU$169)

The Topping DX1 II is on sale now, and in the United States it costs $119. It’s £119 in the United Kingdom, while in Australia it goes for around AU$169.

So, it's a little pricier than the oh-so-portable iFi Go Link Max and the bigger, hip-flask-esque iFi Uno, say, but an awful lot cheaper than the also-new iFi iDSD GR2.

What exactly are you getting for your money if you go for the Topping? Read on.

Topping DX1 II review: Features

• ESS ES9039Q2M DAC
• Balanced and unbalanced outputs
• UAC 1.0 and UAC 2.0

There’s something quite admirable about the way Topping has specified the DX1 II — I’ve used bigger and more expensive DAC/headphone amps that don’t come close to the level of this little device.

It’s built around a very capable ESS ES90392QM DAC chipset and features dual-DAC architecture with a dedicated digital-to-analog converter for each channel, plus fully independent processing. Digital files of up to 32bit/384kHz and DSD256 are supported.

A 16-core XMOS XU-316 assists with signal processing — just as with the dual-DAC arrangement and the fully balanced analog stage, the idea is to keep noise and distortion to an absolute minimum.

Digital audio information can be delivered using either the digital optical input or the USB-C slot on the rear of the Topping. The USB-C input also provides power to the device. Outputs consist of an unbalanced 3.5mm headphone socket, a couple of balanced 4.4mm alternatives (one for headphones, the other for connecting the DX1 II to a system, a powered speaker or what-have-you) and a line-level analog output on stereo RCAs.

There’s an optical output in case the digital signal needs to be preserved, and a switch to toggle between UAC 1.0 and UAC 2.0 — the first setting allows the Topping to be compatible with, say, the Nintendo Switch and the Sony PlayStation 5.

Topping has made provision for an awful lot of end-user input into the way the DX1 II performs. Connect it to a computer and you can access both the ‘Home Web’ platform (from where stuff like gain can be adjusted and no fewer than eight distinct digital filters are available) and ‘Topping Tune’. This uses a simple drag-n-drop interface to allow the user to easily create and adjust PEQ settings — frequency, gain and bandwidth control across 10 bands (with independent left and right channel adjustment) can be tweaked and settings saved. It’s available across each of the DX1 II’s outputs.

• Features score: 5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Topping DX1 II review: Sound quality

• Impressively detailed, easy-going sound
• Pleasant tonal balance
• Could easily sound more dynamic

It’s possible to make quite significant changes to the ultimate sound of the DX1 II, of course — those digital filters have a slight effect, but go crazy with the PEQ and you can achieve some pretty obvious alternations. What you can’t do, though, is defeat the things the Topping does well or fully correct its shortcomings.

With a 24bit/48kHz FLAC file of The Record by Boygenius playing in the Tidal desktop app and incoming via USB-C, it doesn’t take long at all to appreciate the facility the DX1 II has with detail retrieval. It’s alert to even the most minor, most subtle occurrences in the recording, keeps an eye on the low-level dynamics of harmonic over- and undertones, and deals with transients confidently too. It gives these details good weighting, so the emphasis is always on the music and not solely on how deeply into it the Topping can peer.

The tonal balance it strikes is naturalistic and pleasant, and its over-all character is, in the most positive way, easy-going and quite laid-back. It can do ‘urgency’ if it absolutely has to, of course, but its fundamental attitude is one that’s not in any way fatiguing. At no point is the Topping likely to grab you by the lapels — it’s altogether too grown-up and, again in a positive way, polite for that sort of behavior.

Some of this comes about because of its relative lack of dynamic impetus. The headline dynamics of ‘quiet’ and ‘LOUD!’ in a 16bit/44.1kHz file of Life Metal by Sunn O))) are somewhat flattened by the slight shortage of headroom the DX1 II exhibits. The distance between these two positions is not as pronounced as it is when described by a DAC/headphone amp that breathes a little more deeply. Some of it is due to the Topping’s slight-but-definite tendency to roll off the highest frequencies. There’s acceptable extension into the top end, but not quite the attack or even assertiveness that makes treble sounds properly bite and shine.

Elsewhere, though, the DX1 II is on firmer ground. It has a good understanding of rhythm and tempo, and controls its low-frequency activity to the point that there’s a proper sensation of fluency to the way rhythms are expressed. It can open up a soundstage to the point that even quite complex recordings get a little elbow-room, and the stage is also controlled well. And it’s worth noting that, unlike a couple of nominal rivals, the DX1 II doesn’t alter its behavior depending on the volume you’re listening at — even when playing very quietly or really quite loud, its sonic stance remains consistent.

• Sound quality score: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Topping DX1 II review: Design

• 275g
• Aluminum chassis
• 32 x 100 x 100mm (HxWxD)

The DX1 II is usefully compact (just 32 x 100 x 100mm, HxWxD), so won’t hog space on your desktop or equipment rack. Built mostly from machined aluminum, it’s very well-made and finished — its edges are nicely rounded and it’s not remotely sharp at any of its corners.

At 275g, it’s unlikely to be towed around your desktop by heavy-cabled headphones, either. Only the fact that some of the socketry is quite close together on the rear panel (which is inevitable, really) precludes the use of chunkier, more premium cables and constitutes any kind of issue.

• Design score: 4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Topping DX1 II review: Usability & setup

• LED display
• Remote control handset
• Overworked fascia control dial

The majority of the fascia is occupied by a relatively large and gratifyingly legible LED display — volume level, selected input and what-have-you is all revealed. There’s also a relatively large turn/press dial that covers a lot of the device's functions. In all honesty, the dial is not especially intuitive when you want to do anything beyond change input or adjust volume — so it’s just as well Topping provides a little remote control handset that makes getting at your EQs, and all the rest of it, quite a lot more straightforward.

Set-up is the work of a moment, of course. You’ll need to connect the USB-C slot to a source of power — maybe this is also your source of music, if it isn’t then your source will need to be connected to the optical input. Then you need to connect the DX1 II to its output device — headphones, probably, or maybe the stereo RCA outputs to an amplifier or powered speaker. And then you’re in business.

• Usability & setup score: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Topping DX1 II review: Value

• Small but feels premium
• Good standard of build
• Out-and-out sound quality not up there (but you won't feel short-changed)

It may only be tiny, but Topping has managed to make the DX1 II feel and, to a lesser extent, look like it deserves to cost three figures. The standard of build is well up to snuff, too — and when you take the thoroughgoing nature of its specification into account, too, the sensation of value for money is hard to argue with.

The value proposition isn’t quite so cut-and-dried when it comes to out-and-out sound quality - but even here the DX1 II does more than enough right to prevent you feeling short-changed.

• Value score: 4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Should I buy the Topping DX1 II?Buy it if…

You have a desktop audio system that just consists of a laptop and some headphones
Putting the DX1 II between the two will result in a significant uptick in audio quality.View Deal

You want to enhance your gaming experience
With UAC 1.0 selected, the signal from a console incoming and some appropriate headphones attached, gaming becomes a much more immersive experience.View Deal

You have some power-hungry headphones
The Topping’s balanced output is rated at 2 x 1000mW into 32 ohms, which is more than enough to deal even quite tricky headphones.View Deal

Don't buy it if…

You’re easily frustrated
The fascia controls are not what you’d call ‘intuitive’.View Deal

You enjoy the dynamic aspects of music reproduction
The DX1 II is unwilling or unable to put really convincing distance between dynamic extremes .View Deal

You’re especially attuned to high-frequency sound
You can fiddle with the PEQ and/or the filters all you like — the Topping is inclined to roll off the top end at least a little.View Deal

(Image credit: Future / Simon Lucas)Topping DX1 II review: Also consider

It’s more affordable than the DX1 II — and it looks and feels it, too — but the iFi Uno is a high-achieving little device that offers a direct, confident and information-rich sound no matter the source of music it’s connected to.

How I tested the Topping DX1 II

I used the Topping DX1 II with an Apple MacBook Pro — connecting to the USB-C slot allowed for data transfer and power supply at the same time, and gave access to numerous music streaming services.

I connected a pair of Sennheiser IE900 wired in-ear headphones to the unbalanced 3.5mm output, and also to the balanced 4.4mm output (the Sennheiser have a selection of cables with different terminations).

I also connected a Sony PlayStation 5 via the optical input and sent the DX1 II output signal to the preamp in my reference system via its RCA outputs.

• Read TechRadar's reviews guarantee
• First reviewed: October 2026

Attorney General Todd Blanche defended the Justice Department's suit over Alaska's Senate race in an interview on CNN.

(Image credit: Alex Brandon)

• King Art co-founder and Dawn of War 4 creative director Jan Theysen says the game's four faction campaigns were decided "super early" on
• Theysen says Warhammer in general "is fundamentally about the factions," and they wanted to make a cinematic experience
• He admits that the team's ideas "snowballed" until the campaigns also feature branching storylines and "70 missions"

Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War 4 is an ambitious real-time strategy game (RTS) featuring four campaigns and branching missions, because King Art was admittedly really enthusiastic about centering the factions in the story.

Speaking in an interview with TechRadar Gaming, where he'd also spoken about borrowing from the original Dawn of War's systems, King Art co-founder and Dawn of War 4 creative director Jan Theysen said that the decision to have four separate faction campaigns for the Space Marines, Orks, Necrons, and Adeptus Mechanicus was "the first thing we decided" because Dawn of War, and Warhammer in general, "is fundamentally about the factions" and "how weird and crazy and cool they are."

"You don't really learn too much or everything you want to learn about Necrons or AdMech if you play just the Space Marines and fight them in a handful of missions," Theysen explained. "And so we always said, 'Okay, no, no, if we have four factions, we definitely want one campaign for each of the factions.'"

The creative director said King Art also looked at what the "best" RTS campaigns were, such as Warcraft 3, and realized that it was "very important" to have a cinematic experience with cutscenes, heroes, and a story that is "more interesting."

Theysen went on to explain how the team's ideas kept evolving around the four faction campaigns; it also wanted branching stories and mutually exclusive missions. Eventually, Dawn of War 4's campaigns became something ambitious, featuring individual stories with their own progressions, and at least 70 missions.

He also confirmed that King Art spoke with Games Workshop about its four faction campaign ideas, which he reiterated was decided "super early," and collaborated with the lore.

"It snowballed basically," Theysen said. "I mean, we like art, and we like campaigns a lot, and so for us it was like a little bit like kids in a candy shop, right? And we said, basically, you know what, also, it would be nice if you could choose which hero to play. Then you have two different sides of the same story, or you can actually change how the story progresses, and in the end, we ended up with four really big campaigns and like 70 missions or something; it's insane.

"But, again, we like campaigns."

Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War 4 is slated to launch on PC on December 3.

Machado announced her arrival on social media, writing "I am here. With you."

(Image credit: Ariana Cubillos)

Israel is holding a general election this week after years of war. For many Israelis, shaken by the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks and years of war, it is the most consequential in decades.

(Image credit: Jack Guez)

Horror writer Stephen Graham Jones says horror's current moment is powered by more than just fear.

(Image credit: Alina Art)

It's been 18 years since Breaking Bad first graced our screens, and four since its final spin-off wrapped up, bringing to a conclusion the story of a drug empire and its characters.

Breaking Bad is cited as one of the best TV shows ever put to screen, and so is its spin-off Better Call Saul. Along with movie El Camino, they make up the Gilliverse, and I hope you've seen some of it or you wouldn't be reading this article.

But you're not here to read, you're here to answer. How well do you know the two shows, the movie, and everything else that makes up the Breaking Bad franchise? It's time to find out.

The following 30 questions will test your knowledge on the Gilliverse, looking at the franchise itself more so than the story, world and characters of the show. We'll start with 10 easier questions, before moving onto 10 medium ones and ending with 10 harder ones.

You'll need to be an expert in the show to get them all, so let's see if you are!

Keen to re-watch Breaking Bad? It's available on Netflix in most regions around the world:

Mini-LED vs OLED has been a battle in the TV world for a few years now. While mini-LED always provided more brightness and better bright room viewing and OLED delivered better black levels, thanks to its self-dimming pixels, that has changed in recent times, with both TV techs managing to cover more bases.

Both LG and TCL make some of the best TVs you can get, with the former delivering some of the best OLED TVs and the latter offering up some of the best mini-LED TVs. Both also deliver great value for the price you pay, especially TCL.

The LG B6 is one of the best OLEDs I’ve tested this year, offering great performance for a more affordable price. Now, the TCL C7L (this is the UK / AU model — the TCL QM7L is the US equivalent) has arrived in our testing lab so I thought I’d compare the C7L, the brand’s mid-range SQD mini-LED for 2026, against LG’s most entry-level OLED, as they’re available for similar prices.

Can the mini-LED hold its own against OLED? A quick note that we’re using the LG B6E, a cheaper B6 that performs the same other than missing some AI picture modes, and with a different back panel.

Brightness

The TCL C7L (left) has a clear brightness advantage over the LG B6E (right) (Image credit: Future)

Flagship and mid-range OLED TVs have seen a brightness boost over the years, with one example being the near 1,000-nit peak HDR brightness increase between the LG G4 (1,489 nits) from 2024, and its 2026 successor the LG G6 (2,475 nits). It’s taken until this year for entry-level OLED to get a brightness boost: and it’s not as significant as that.

The LG B6E measured 808 nits HDR peak brightness (10% window pattern) in Filmmaker Mode in my tests: a nice boost over the B5’s 668 nits. However, this 808 nits pales in comparison to the 2,083 nits peak HDR brightness achieved by the C7L in its Filmmaker Mode. Mini-LED has always been the brighter tech, but do these results reflect real-life?

In practically every scene I tested, the answer was a resounding yes. With both TVs set to Dolby Vision Filmmaker, in a scene where Lawrence and his guide are by a well in the desert in Lawrence of Arabia, the white sands and blue skies were much more impactful on the C7L, showing off the brightness advantage. The B6E did a good job with the picture, but next to the C7L it looked dim in comparison. Switching to the B6E’s Cinema Home mode did give it a boost in brightness, but still the C7L’s picture dazzled in comparison.

This was also apparent in HDR highlights in other movies. In Speed Racer, the brilliant white of the Mach 5 was much punchier on the C7L than the B6E, though the gap in luminance wasn’t quite as obvious as it had been in Lawrence of Arabia.

For bright-room viewing, neither TV was perfect, with both showing mirror-like reflections. The C7L did a better job in brighter conditions, thanks to that added brightness — it's the clear winner for pure brightness, and for visibility in strongly lit rooms

Contrast and dark scenes

The LG B6E OLED (right) is better for black tones and dark room viewing compared to the TCL C7L (left), shown here during Project Hail Mary. A quick note: the C7L's backlight blooming does not appear this aggressive in-person (Image credit: Amazon / Future )

OLED’s advantage when it comes to darker, more contrast-y scenes is its self-dimming pixels. As it doesn’t rely on a backlight and it can turn off individual pixels, this produces much deeper black tones that most mini-LEDs can achieve, and with precise borders between light and dark. However, more mini-LED TVs are demonstrating better backlight control and more impressive black tones.

In my time testing the C7L, I’ve been impressed with its black levels: especially for a mid-range mini-LED. Yes, there’s still some blooming going on, but it’s greatly reduced from the previous generations of TCL’s TVs I’ve tested before — not that long ago, this would've been premium performance. Still, when it comes to black handling, OLED is king.

Watching any space scenes from Project Hail Mary, the B6E clearly produces richer, deeper black tones that are consistently strong throughout. The C7L, while rendering strong black tones of its own, don’t quite have the same consistency, as some shots of the stars in space demonstrate blooming, a common occurrence with backlit TVs.

Both TVs deliver very good contrast, but the B6E (right) has a more satisfying picture for darker movies like The Batman (Image credit: Warner Bros / Future )

When it comes to contrast and shadows however, there’s a bit of give-and-take. Watching The Batman, with its array of contrast-rich scenes, the B6E clearly produces a more balanced image thanks to its deeper dark tones and well-handled bright tones. The TCL’s picture however is more impactful thanks to those punchier highlights. As Bruce works at his desk in the Batcave, the dark crevices and wood of the desk blend well with the lamps and monitors on both TVs.

In fact, some black tones can actually look crushed on the B6E, leading to a loss of shadow detail, such as the wall at the rear of a subway platform in The Batman. The same surface is much more legible on the C7L. Switching from Filmmaker to Cinema Home on the B6E does rectify this, without compromising significantly on dark tones.

The Batman has proven to be a challenge for backlit TVs in my time testing, due to its low brightness. While The C7L did a great job overall, occasional blooming would appear behind bright objects, which was more noticeable when viewed in dimmed conditions. For dark scenes and dark rooms, the B6E proved to be the better choice.

Color

Both TVs have great colors, but I personally preferred the B6E's (right) richer color profile (Image credit: Nintendo / Universal Pictures / Future )

Color is probably the most contentious subject when it comes to mini-LED vs OLED, as both tech can deliver great colors in their own way, and I found this to be true putting these two TVs side-by-side.

Watching The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, both TVs deliver vibrant, bold colors that accurately delivered the pop you’d want from this movie. The C7L’s colors were punchier overall, thanks to that higher brightness, but the B6E’s colors looked richer, with more depth. This was obvious whenever the Lumas were on screen, where they had more of a 3D-look on the B6E, but were much brighter on the C7L. Mario and Luigi’s overalls showed that both TVs delivered great colors, but the B6E’s looked that bit more 3D and solid.

Switching to Speed Racer, both TVs again captured the cartoon-ish, candy-colored aesthetic of the movie well. The C7L had the more shimmering colors, but the B6E’s were more true-to-life, as shown by the grass in Trixie’s flashback early in the movie. I also found that different colors looked better on different TVs, with reds and greens standing out more on the B6E, but yellow and orange looked better on the C7L.

The Batman was the most obvious demonstration of the B6E's (right) sometimes questionable color temperature and green tint (Image credit: Warner Bros / Future )

One advantage that the C7L did have was in its color temperature accuracy. The B6E demonstrated a green tint in comparison, which can be an issue for some OLEDs. In isolated viewing this isn't so obvious, but next to the C7L, it was noticeable. In the subway scene in The Batman, the surroundings had a green hue to them on the B6E visible above, but the C7L’s cooler color temperature helped render more accurate gray tones.

This scene was the most obvious case of the B6E’s green tint I found during my testing, and it wasn’t legible in other movies such as Project Hail Mary and Speed Racer.

In terms of which TV delivers the better color, they both have their strengths and both have great color reproduction overall, but if I had to pick one, it would be the B6E purely because I prefer the richer color profile. But the C7L’s colors were very good.

The best buy

Both TVs are great and have their own advantages: it really comes down to budget (Image credit: Warner Bros / Future )

When it comes to value for money, both these TVs tick plenty of boxes. Both TVs have a feature set up there with the best gaming TVs, with 4K 120Hz, variable refresh rate, auto low latency mode and Dolby Vision gaming supported, although the B6E has four HDMI 2.1 ports to the C7L’s two — but they both have razor-sharp performance.

Picture quality comes down to preference, and both deliver adequate built-in sound, though both could benefit from one of the best soundbars.

When it comes to price, it's close in most places. For the 55-inch models I tested, you’ll be looking to pay $799 for both in the US, with the QM7L going for $100 cheaper in the larger 65-inch size. In the UK and Australia, the C7L is better value, with the 55-inch costing £899 / AU$1,495 while the 55-inch B6E costs roughly £1,099 in the UK (though it has dropped to £999 before) and the standard B6 costs £1,199 / AU$2,495.

Honestly, you can’t really go wrong with either TV. The TCL is the much better pick for bright rooms, while the B6E is the better choice for darker, cinematic viewing and I really am torn on which is the better pick, as this was such a close contest.

Purely from a price standpoint, the TCL is the winner (especially when you go beyond 65 inches — mini-LED's price advantage grows as sizes do), and is the more practical choice for a bright room.

But if you can get the B6E for a good price and you'll watch in a room with controlled lighting, then the better contrast and color depth make it my pick.

Thinking of buying a new TV?

Try our TV size and model finder! You tell it how far you sit from your TV, we'll tell you what size to buy based on viewing angle advice from image quality experts, and we'll recommend our three top TVs at that size for different prices.

Canon recently unveiled its new Dual Pixel 3D, or DP3D for short — an image generation technology making use of Canon’s proprietary Dual Pixel AF technology. The new technology piggybacks off Canon’s proprietary Dual Pixel AF technology found in many of its EOS mirrorless cameras, which splits each pixel on the camera sensor into two separate light-sensitive photodiodes.

This tech has delivered reliable and snappy autofocus in recent years — if the two images on each photodiode line up perfectly, the image is in focus, if they don’t line up then the camera knows which direction to move the autofocus motor to rapidly lock on.

Canon's proprietary Dual Pixel AF technology means each pixel is made up of two photodiodes - the technology is now being used to create 3D photos and video (Image credit: Canon)

The new Dual Pixel 3D feature can be used to create immersive three-dimensional images via Canon’s new Dual Pixel 3D Converter app which was released in October.

While launched in tandem with the hotly-anticipated Canon EOS R8 Mark II on September 16 — a full-frame which makes use of the new feature — it’s good news for owners like myself of any Canon EOS mirrorless camera with Dual Pixel AF, stretching back to older generation models such as the EOS R5 and EOS R6 Mark II, which will be able to benefit without a firmware update (although updating the firmware is always a good idea to stay up date with the latest features and bug fixes).

I downloaded the Canon Dual Pixel 3D Converter app to put it through its paces — here’s everything you need to know to get started…

How to take photos for Canon DP3D

To begin, you’ll need a Canon EOS camera with Dual Pixel AF. It’s safe to say if you own one of Canon’s interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras in recent years, then your camera will likely feature Dual Pixel AF and be able to make use of this new tech.

This is great news for users of older Canon mirrorless cameras like myself as my older EOS R5 and previous generation Canon EOS R6 Mark II will still be able to make full use of this brand-new technology.

Your camera will, however, also need to be paired with one of the compatible Canon RF lenses. The list goes beyond specialist Canon RF 5.2mm F2.8L Dual Fisheye or RF-S 3.9mm F3.5 Dual Fisheye, but it is a little limited and also won't currently work with older EF or EF-S glass. We published a full list of compatible Canon cameras and lenses that you can use to enjoy this new technology when it was first announced.

Most modern Canon cameras, such as the EOS R6 Mark II pictured, will be able to produce the Dual Pixel RAW files needed to create the 3D results in DP3D (Image credit: Future)

Canon says, “Specific shooting conditions and techniques are necessary to generate accurate depth information to eliminate blind spots, allow for the required depth of field, subject and background separation, subject depth and surface texture.”

In my experience the software works best when your subject is taken on a clean background (no bokeh) and without too many blind spots which make it harder for the software to create its 3D effect.

You also want an object that’s relatively flat with not too much depth; little bumps are fine such as small pieces of fruit on a tart, but large peaks in depth will cause more significant issues and make the effect much more noticeable and fake-looking.

Two of the compatible lenses Canon lists are the Canon RF 100mm f2.8L Macro IS USM and Canon RF 35mm f1.8 IS Macro STM, both of which are macro lenses. Yet, when I shot with both of these I later got an alert in DP3D warning me for shooting too close to my subject! The result still turned out fine, though.

(Image credit: Canon)

To use the new software you’ll need to make sure you’re shooting not only in the RAW format, but Canon's Dual Pixel RAW (see above). This setting was found in the very first camera menu on my Canon EOS R6 Mark II.

Note that shooting Dual Pixel RAW will produce files roughly twice the size, take longer to write to your memory card, and can't be taken when using the electronic shutter.

Alongside 3D, Dual Pixel RAW can be useful for correcting minor parallax error, shifting bokeh or focus and reducing flare, but if you don't intend to utilize these capabilities within Canon's DPP, I would suggest turning it off when you don't need it to avoid compromizing the camera's performance.

Make sure your subject and focal point are in focus and that your shutter speed is fast enough to shoot handheld – if you’re in doubt shoot on a tripod. You’ll also want to make sure your exposure is correct so that the image isn’t too bright or dark. Canon recommends you don’t close the aperture down past f/5.6 and also keep the camera's sensitivity under ISO 1600 – a warning sign will be displayed on your image when you import it into DP3D otherwise and you won’t get optimal 3D results.

Installing the Canon DP3D app on Windows 11

With the image taken it’s time to open up the new Canon Dual Pixel 3D Converter app, which is currently only available for Windows PC running the latest Windows 11 operating system. Read our guide on How to plan a smooth Windows 10 to Windows 11 migration.

Canon also added “The application will initially be available free of charge”, though specifications and terms of use may change in the future – in other words, it’s initially free but you might need to pay to use it in the future.

(Image credit: Dan Mold)

When you're up and running with Windows 11 you’ll be able to run the installation wizard which can be downloaded from Canon’s site. Make sure that once downloaded you extract the ZIP file and then double-click the DP3dInstaller-W1.0.0.13.exe file from the unzipped folder to begin the installation.

Dan MoldDan Mold

Now you’ll need to choose which area you live in - you have the options: USA, Canada, Latin America, Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia and Oceania. In the following screen you can choose the country you live in and also select your language. Once you’ve ticked the box to accept the license agreement you can hit next which takes you to the final setup screen, click Install here.

It’s also worth noting at the bottom of the same Canon site, you can download five sample images made up of a mix of food and flowers which you can play around with if you are yet to shoot with Dual Pixel RAW enabled, or perhaps you don’t own a Canon EOS mirrorless camera and what to see what all the fuss is about. Note, the sample files are downloaded as a DP3D _Sample.zip file and you’ll need to extract these files by right-clicking on the folder and choosing Extract before you can use these images in DP3D.

Creating 3D images in the DP3D app

The DP3D app allows users to fine-tune the degree of depth, making a more pronounced 3D effect or a more subtle ‘flat’ appearance. The technology also makes it easy to isolate your subject and remove or replace the background before outputting a 3D model or stereoscopic photo.

(Image credit: Dan Mold)

Dual Pixel RAW files and supported Canon EOS R8 Mark II JPEGs contain depth information derived from the slightly different views captured by the two photodiodes on each pixel. Using proprietary algorithms, Canon converts this phase-difference information into 3D shape data, which is combined with high-quality image data captured by selected EOS cameras as surface textures to create realistic and detailed 3D models.

Once you’ve loaded up DP3D you’ll need to click the folder icon at the top of the main window and then navigate to the folder where you’ve saved your Dual Pixel RAW files.

(Image credit: Dan Mold)

You have two main options – either create a 3D model which you can edit further in a 3D editor such as Blender, or you can create a Preview which creates a very short video with limited options, essentially doing a basic pan from left to right to show off the 3D depth effect. You also have options here to change the background, add a foreground and frame. You can also choose the quality of the video when you click Export Preview. Here you can also set the quality to High, Medium or Low quality (18, 8 or 4 Mbps), choose your own filename and where you want to save the video.

However, I found those options rather limiting within DP3D so I would instead click Export 3D Model where you’ll have the choice between OBJ and GLB files to edit further in your 3D editor of choice. You can also use Windows 3D viewer and even Preview on Mac to play around with these 3D files and explore the different angles produced by DP3D.

(Image credit: Dan Mold)

With the 3D file created you can use a program such as Windows 3D Viewer or Blender, which is free to download. In a program such as either of these options you’ll have way more options than DP3D for changing the angle, rotation and lighting, which is great for exporting still images. For videos, you’ll also be able to change the direction and duration of pans so you can get it looking perfect for what you need.

Conclusion

After playing around with DP3D for some time and with various pictures and subject matter, I think it’s fun and interesting that Canon has released it for free - after all, additional functionality to the cameras which we already own is certainly welcome.

However, the results have limited uses and more often than not look quite poor. Are there situations where somebody might need to get a little 3D animation from a 2D image? Sure — marketeers looking to animate food or product shots for videos and reels seems like a perfectly adequate use for Canon's new DP3D tech.

While it’s admirable that Canon is trying to squeeze the most out of the pixels taken in-camera, this is one of those situations where I sadly think AI can probably do it better.

Canon is trying to stretch and manipulate the pixels already there, whereas AI can create brand new pixels and frames based on what it thinks should be there, and that’s likely to create smoother results with fewer artefacts. For still images, the Rotate Object feature found in Photoshop Beta is likely to produce better results and is glimpse of what lies ahead in our editing futures.

Ninja releases kitchen appliances so often that it’s hard to keep up. Here’s whether or not the new MultiPot XL is a true kitchen essential.