Posted on

Quick Look: MOONDROP Quark2 Type-C In-Ear Monitors

Introduction

MOONDROP Logo

Despite higher priced headphones and earphones getting more attention from people, simply because they tend to be out of our reach and thus usually only interactable via reviews, there is no doubt that the budget-friendly in-ear monitors market has never been more competitive than it is now. In fact, we are at the point where you can get a nicely tuned set for $20 or less now, leaving no excuse for brands that try to charge a lot for terribly tuned IEMs. So far, 2024 has seen some compelling releases in this segment, with more to follow in the new year to offer different takes on tuning so you can now try out products, see what tuning works best for you, and then go from there for more expensive offerings if you so wish. Today we look at MOONDROP’s latest affordable IEMs entry, and thanks to SHENZHENAUDIO for providing a review sample to TechPowerUp!

MOONDROP is not new to the ~$20 price range, and I’d argue it was the original Chu which started this race 2.5 years ago. The CHU has since been supplanted by the CHU 2 that brought back the detachable cable, while there was yet another, even less expensive line forming with the MOONDROP Quarks, the Quarks DSP, and now the Quark2—don’t ask me why it’s not Quarks 2. This set costs less than $20, has an integrated DAC with Type-C connector allowing you to connect directly to your phone or laptop without needing an external source, an in-line microphone with volume and media playback controls, and adopts a bullet-style form factor with small shells that insert into the ear canal for good isolation while still being comfortable. Surely this promises to be a product that will interest many of our readers? Let’s put the MOONDROP Quark2 to the test in our review today which begins with a look at the product specifications in the table below.

MOONDROP Quark2 In-Ear Monitors
Shell:Plastic/polycarbonate shells
Cable:(Probably) copper conductor with in-line microphone and controls
Driver Units:7.8 mm LCP dome + flexible suspension diaphragm dynamic driver
Frequency Response:20 Hz-20 kHz
Impedance:Not provided
Sensitivity:Not provided
Cable Length:4 ft/1.2 m
Warranty:One year

Packaging and Accessories

Packaging is on the simpler side for the MOONDROP Quark2, which isn’t surprising given the more value-oriented offering it aims to be. Forget the artwork MOONDROP is known for, we don’t even get a decorative banderole on the small cardboard box. The brand and product names are on the front, with a sticker that has the product specs on it helping seal the box. I still appreciate that MOONDROP managed to include a factory frequency response curve here though. Open the box to see the IEMs pointing inward through a cardboard sheet, with the cable looping through a cutout into the layer beneath. There we see some paperwork in the form of a quick start guide going over the usage and maintenance of these IEMs, in addition to a warranty/QC card and, of course, some female artwork because it’s MOONDROP. The Quark2 comes with no carry case or soft pouch, although we do get some silicone ear tips in sizes S/M/L. These are generic single-flange tips that are certainly worth trying out, although you may wish to consider aftermarket tips if you do not get a decent fit and/or seal with them.

Closer Look

The MOONDROP Quark2 has a permanently attached cable similar to the Quarks DSP we saw before, with a Type-C digital connector headed to the source. There is a DAC underneath the branded plastic housing to convert the digital audio signal to analog in addition to adding in any EQ filters that MOONDROP may deem fit—the Quark2 is also a DSP set, for those wondering. There is very little information otherwise provided about the cable, so I can only speculate that underneath the basic silicone sleeving is a pure copper conductor. We then see a branded gray circular splitter without any cable cinch, and then comes a bonus feature in the form on an in-line microphone with tactile volume/media playback/call controls on the split wire headed to the right channel itself. Both channels terminate on the underside of the IEM shells where L/R markings help indicate the left and right channels, respectively.

The MOONDROP Quark2 reminds me a lot of the Quarks DSP in that both are tiny IEMs compared to the average set sold today. The newer Quark2 even looks similar, except for the back where there seems to be an injection molded plastic casing housing the driver and the rest of the shell. This becomes the de facto faceplate thus, down to the many holes cut in it. The circular form factor also allows for a similarly shaped dynamic driver to be placed inside, although we then see a clear section made of polycarbonate and the actual driver through it. The front section has damping materials to act as an acoustic filter to tame the treble response of the set, and this is also the IEM nozzle, with a 6.15 mm diameter at the very end, and 5.6 mm before. There is a metal mesh placed towards the end to prevent contaminants from entering the acoustic chamber. These are clearly bullet-style IEMs which fit straight into the ear canal rather than having the cable go over and around the ears, thus the lack of a cable cinch isn’t as big a deal as the lack of a shirt clip to minimize microphonics from the IEM and microphone cable in use. Installing the provided ear tips is simple enough given the hard stop provided where the nozzle meets the wider part of the shells, as seen above. Using the Quark2 is as simple as plugging the Type-C connector into the equivalent port on a compatible phone or computer. My phone immediately recognized the set as earphones ready to go, and we can also see how the IEMs with the cable work cohesively in this gray color scheme. MOONDROP also confirms the DAC used here is a new chip, which bodes well compared to the issues faced by the DUSK. It’s capable of decoding up to PCM 32-bit/384 kHz playback, which is plenty for anyone using this set with a phone or laptop.

Fit and Audio Performance

Seen above is the right side of the MOONDROP Quark2 installed in an anthropomorphic pinna that does well in showing my own experience with these. I have average-sized ears, and found the provided size M silicone tips to work best. Given the Quark2 is a straight-insertion set of in-ear monitors, it would be a fair assumption that it will fit just about anyone, as long as the 6.15 mm nozzle width at the very end is not a dealbreaker. The smaller size and bullet-shaped shells directly enter the ear canal and the cable falls straight down meaning you have more leeway in positioning the IEMs in your ears than with the more common approach of the cable going around the back of the ear and being a support point at the top. The Quark2 is held in place just by the fit achieved in your ears then, which makes having a good seal all the more critical. These weigh ~4.5 g per side to where I had zero physical fatigue even for longer periods of use. I still recommend finding a cable clip to secure the cable to your shirt, if only to help with keeping the in-line microphone fixed in place when you want to use it while also reducing any potential cable microphonics.

The MOONDROP Quark2 uses a single dynamic driver per side to no surprise, knowing these are budget IEMs. The compact shells mean a micro driver is used, with a 7.8 mm liquid crystalline polymer (LCP) dome + flexible suspension diaphragm and neodymium N52 magnets driving it back and forth. The diaphragm is associated with a copper-clad aluminium wire (CCAW) voice coil. The acoustic chamber has a special cavity design meant to make the most of the driver assembly that feeds straight into the ear canals, after having gone through the acoustic filter in the closed front cavity anyway. All this comes together to make for a set of IEMs that MOONDROP does not even provide the impedance and sensitivity values for, albeit it’s a non-factor here given the integrated DAC/amp in the cable that powers the drivers in addition to doing some onboard DSP work too. The in-line microphone is also automatically recognized, so you actually end up with a headset and not just headphones with the Quark2.

Testing was done similar to all other IEMs including the MOONDROP x Crinacle DUSK. Seen above is the measured frequency response for both channels of the Quark2 plotted against my personal IEM target, which can be inspected further here if interested. I have also added in the average response against the Harman 2019v2 in-ear target given this seems to be clearly what MOONDROP was aiming for with the Quark2. I’ll also mention that the channel balance on my sample is excellent by all metrics irrespective of pricing, let alone for a more affordable set such as this one.

I am not the biggest fan of the Harman target for IEMs as I’ve mentioned several times before. In fact, I am quite tired of all the IEMs still being released that are tuned to match this target, again at various price points. Of course I understand that this is one of the most research-backed earphone targets based on user preferences across different backgrounds. It ultimately recognizes that the average consumer likes a fairly substantial bass and treble presence—usually matching each other, and this is why the V-shaped tuning is also popular with mainstream IEMs and headphones. While the Harman in-ear target helps keep the mids be cleaner compared to a more traditional V-shaped sound, I personally think it has too much bass and too much ear gain. There’s also the part where the mid-bass feels tucked in, allowing for some lost impact for the likes of bass guitars and drums. The Quark2 goes for a Harman-like tuning, but has a few tiny changes worth noting. The sub-bass is slightly lower, and the mid-bass tuck is less pronounced. Likewise, the ear gain is also less than a pure Harman-tuned set to where vocals don’t come off as shouty in the ears. The mids in general also feel more prominent, aiding instrument classes too. A deeper fit can affect how the mid-treble sounds to you (length modes), but overall I’m content with the treble extension and general lack of timbre issues. In this price range, tonality is by far the most important since you really can’t expect a lot of subjective goodness. The Quark2 isn’t going to win any detail retrieval or dynamic range awards, let alone precise imaging and a wide soundstage, perhaps. I will give it credit for being punchier than I thought it would be though, and of course the tuning will favor sub-bass impact too. More importantly, there was no background hiss I noticed with the Quarks DSP or even the DUSK, although some of this could just be the driver not resolving everything to the same extent the DUSK does. The in-line mic is okay in a pinch, but won’t replace even an inexpensive lapel mic, although it’s more about the convenience of having it on the same cable as the IEMs.

For context, I have the MOONDROP Quark2 compared here against some other affordable IEMs I’ve tested, including of course the previous entry in the lineup which was the Quarks DSP. There’s a lot in common here, yet the Quarks DSP can be more comfortable with its even smaller shells and nozzle. It goes for a bassier tuning, although comes off more distorted compared to the Quark2 that also manages to hit harder in the mid-bass. The Chu 2 costs slightly more and offers a detachable 2-pin cable, which also means you need your own source, and you lose out on the in-line mic w/controls. It’s warmer sounding than the Quark2 and has more treble presence too, which makes it feel more detailed to an extent. But there’s really very little else differentiating the Chu and Quark lines from MOONDROP now, so I don’t think we’ll see a Chu 3 at this rate. The TangZu Audio Wan’Er S.G comes in a variety of colors and finishes now and is my personal pick from a tuning point of view too. It also goes for a detachable cable, and sounds better to my ears with most vocals and instruments being reproduced more accurately. The Truthear HOLA was another option before it got discontinued, although there is the newer GATE which aims to pick up where the HOLA left, I’ll see if I have time to cover it separately. The Quark2 isn’t for everyone, yet it’s a good starting point for people to try out a more balanced tuning compared to V-shaped sets prevalent in this price range. The likes of KZ dominate the sub $20 market too, and they tend to overwhelm consumer choice by releasing dozens of IEMs that all seem and sound very similar. I can’t recommend KZ in general owing to the poor marketing and customer service I’ve seen from the brand multiple times. As it stands, the MOONDROP Quark2 costs $16.99 from authorized retailers including SHENZHENAUDIO, as of the time of this article. It’s not going to hurt most wallets and even a basic phone dongle sometimes costs more than that to where you do get a lot more bang for your buck here.

Posted on

Epomaker TH40 Wireless Mechanical Keyboard Review

Introduction

Epomaker Logo

I have reviewed over 350 keyboards to date, covering pretty much anything you can think of. Yet there happens to be one, just one, keyboard in the 40% form factor I have talked about before. That was nearly eight years ago, and for good reason—a 40% keyboard is scoffed at by so many people for various reasons. Some claim it’s poor value for money from a $/key metric, which is just funny to me. Others point out there are simply too few keys to use, which in turn necessitates the use of layers. Another subset of people talk about how smaller form factor keyboards have poor customization options, which again are almost a must-have to allow for the keyboard to be set up as your wish. I can count on the fingers of one hand how many 40% keyboards I’ve even seen in real life, and that includes the Vortex Core from 2017 as well as the subject of today’s review—the Epomaker TH40.

I’ll be honest, I wasn’t really inclined to review this initially for a combination of those reasons listed above. Yet Epomaker tells me the TH40 is wildly successful, being purchased a lot by those in the IT industry. I can see a smaller keyboard such as this being handy for programming maybe, although the lack of a dedicated console key is already making me question it. Regardless, there’s also the gaming community which is seeing this as a handy macro/game-pad, with wireless connectivity and the travel strap adding to the portability aspect. Then there’s the part where the TH40 comes in two colors and two switch options and, more importantly, is compatible with VIA, meaning you are not tied to any of the other software suites used by Epomaker’s keyboards which are… less than ideal. The key layout attracts attention too, with a key between L.Shift and Z and the split spacebar adding to the question on how easy is it to actually use this keyboard. We’ll cover all this, and more, in our review which begins with a look at the product specifications in the table below. Thanks to Epomaker for providing a review sample to TechPowerUp!

Specifications

Epomaker TH40 Wireless Mechanical Keyboard
Layout:44-key, 40% form factor in a modified US ANSI layout
Material:ABS plastic case, PBT plastic keycaps, polycarbonate plate, foam sheets
Macro Support:Yes
Dimensions:258 (L) x 97 (W) x 35 (H) mm
Weight:500 g / 1.1 lbs
Wrist Rest:No
Anti-ghosting:Full N-Key rollover USB and 2.4 GHz, 6KRO with Bluetooth
Media Keys:Available as a layered function
Cable Length:6 ft / 1.8 m
Software:Yes
Switch Type:Epomaker Flamingo or Wisteria Linear mechanical switches
Lighting:RGB per-key lighting
Interface:USB, 2.4 GHz, Bluetooth 5.1
Warranty:One year
Posted on

Beelink GTi12 Ultra Mini-PC + EX Dock (Intel Core i9-12900H) Review

Beelink GTi12 Ultra Mini-PC + EX Dock (Intel Core i9-12900H) Review | TechPowerUp

Beelink GTi12 Ultra Mini-PC + EX Dock (Intel Core i9-12900H) Review 6

Packaging & Contents »

Introduction

Beelink Logo

A big thank you to Beelink for supplying the review sample.

Beelink is well on its way to being a mainstream option in the mini-PC market for PC enthusiasts. Formed in 2011, Beelink has managed to adapt to the needs of both small businesses and enterprises alongside regular consumers, delivering high-quality systems to fit numerous use cases. All of this has culminated in their continued growth, and should things continue as they are, brand awareness should remain on the rise.

In this mini-PC review you will get a chance to see something downright innovative thanks to Beelink. The GTi12 Ultra is one of their newer systems and comes equipped with an Intel Core i9-12900H, 32 GB of memory, and a 1 TB NVMe SSD, none of which is anything new. What is new is the built-in PCIe x16 slot (electrically x8) that works with their EX Dock which is also being tested in this review. This dock offers the ability to install an extra M.2 SSD or high performance Wi-Fi module along with a dedicated graphics card, giving this tiny system the ability to function like a proper high-end desktop without the massive footprint. While there are some limitations, this combo from Beelink is certainly interesting and I can’t wait to see what it can do, so let’s take a closer look before diving into the benchmarks.

Specifications
Model:Beelink GTi12 Ultra + EX Dock
Dimensions:System: 158 x 158 x 55.8 mm
Ex Dock: 225 x 179 x 64.7 mm
Processor:Intel Core i9-12900H
Integrated Graphics:Intel Iris Xe Graphics
Memory:Crucial 2x 16 GB DDR5 5600 MHz @ 4800 MHz
2x 260-pin DDR5 SODIMM slots (occupied)
Storage:Crucial P3 Plus 1 TB
2x M.2 2280 PCIe Gen 4 x4 (1x Occupied) System
1x M.2 2280 PCIe Gen 4 x1 (EX Dock shared) 1x M.2 2230 PCIe Gen 4 x1 (EX Dock shared with M.2 2280)
Optical Drive:None
Audio:Intel Alder Point HDMI Audio
Conexant CX20632
Built-in microphone
Built-in speakers
Connectivity:1x USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A 10 Gbps (Front)
4x USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A 10 Gbps (Rear)
1x USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C 10 Gbps (Front)
1x Thunderbolt 4 (Rear)
1x SD Card slot (Front)
1x HDMI 4K 60 Hz (Rear)
1x DisplayPort 1.4a 4K 144 Hz (Rear)
2x RJ45 (Rear)
1x 3.5 mm Audio (Front)
1x 3.5 mm Audio (Rear)
1x PCIe 4.0 X16 slot (@x8) via EX Dock
1x USB 2.0 via EX Dock
2x Wi-Fi antenna connectors via EX Dock
Communications:Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 2×2
Bluetooth 5.2
2x Intel I226V 2.5 GbE LAN
Cooling:Active cooling (heatsink/fan)
Operating System:OS tested: Windows 11 Pro
OS included: Windows 11 Pro
Warranty:1 year
MSRP:$918 MSRP

‘).appendTo(‘body’); $(window).scroll(nextPageScrollHandler); } if (evt.touches.length==0) $(‘#keep-scrolling-buffer’).removeClass(‘show’); else { if ($(‘#keep-scrolling’).hasClass(‘show’)) $(‘#keep-scrolling-buffer’).addClass(‘show’); } }); }); ]]>

‘); $(‘.tpu-fancybox-wrap’).css(‘maxWidth’, maxWidth);*/ instance.$refs.stage.on(‘transitionend’, function() { updateButtonPos(instance); }); }, onUpdate: updateButtonPos, afterShow: function(instance, slide) { updateButtonPos(instance); instance.$refs.inner.find(‘.fancybox-tpu-nav’).show(); }, beforeClose: function(instance, slide) { instance.$refs.inner.find(‘.fancybox-tpu-nav’).hide(); }, afterClose: function(instance, slide) { $(‘.tpu-fancybox-wrap’).contents().unwrap(); $(‘body’).removeClass(‘tpu-fancybox-body-wrap’) }, baseTpl: ‘

‘, }); }); } loadjs.ready([‘jquery’, ‘fancybox’], function() { attachLightbox(function() { return $(‘.text a:has(>img)’).filter(function(i, el) { return $(this).attr(‘href’).match(/.(jpg|gif|png)(?=$|[?#])/) != null; }); }); }); loadjs.ready([‘jquery’], function() { $(‘.review’).on(‘click’, ‘.spoiler > a’, function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).next(‘div’).toggle(); }); $(‘.review’).on(‘click’, ‘.ispoiler’, function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).find(‘div’).css(‘filter’, ”); $(this).removeClass(‘ispoiler’); }); }); loadjs.ready([‘jquery’], function() { $(‘table.tputbl.sort-header’).find(‘th[scope=col]’).css(‘cursor’, ‘pointer’).on(‘click’, function(e) { var header=$(this) header.parents(‘table’).find(‘th[scope=col]’).removeClass(‘sort-active’); header.addClass(‘sort-active’); var idx=header.parents(‘tr’).find(‘th[scope=col]’).index(this); header.parents(‘table’).find(‘td, th[scope=row]’).filter(function() { return $(this).index() == idx; }).sortElementsTPU(function(a, b) { a=$(a).text(); b=$(b).text(); if (header.hasClass(‘sort-force-number’)) { a=parseInt(a, 10); b=parseInt(b, 10); } if (header.hasClass(‘sort-nan-is-zero’)) { if (isNaN(a)) a=0; if (isNaN(b)) b=0; } try { var result=a.localeCompare(b, undefined, { numeric: true, sensitivity: ‘base’ }); return result; } catch(e) { if (a>b) return 1; if (a

Posted on

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review

Introduction

Intel Logo

It’s finally here! The hotly anticipated Core Ultra 9 285K Arrow Lake-S desktop processor is in our hands, and we can’t wait to tell you all about it. The 285K is the flagship processor model from this generation, and logically succeeds the Core i9-14900K. It has all the cores this silicon has to offer—8P+16E, with all the on-chip technologies. It’s also fully unlocked and ready for you to take it on an overclocking adventure. The Arrow Lake architecture denotes many firsts for Intel in the desktop market. Notably, this is the company’s first desktop processor with a chiplet-based disaggregated design. The mobile segment got it with the Core Ultra Meteor Lake, and Intel has been making chiplet based Xeon Scalable server processors for a few years now. Intel is pricing the Core Ultra 9 285K at $589. Given its core-count and pricing, its apparent rivals from the AMD camp are the Ryzen 9 9950X Zen 5, and the Ryzen 9 7950X3D Zen 4.

The Core Ultra 9 285K comes with a maxed out 8P+16E core-configuration. Intel has updated both core types with Arrow Lake. These amount to eight Lion Cove P-cores, with a nominal generational IPC increase, and 16 of the swanky new Skymont E-cores. Skymont was the star of the show with Lunar Lake, as Intel achieved a nearly 50% IPC leap over the Crestmont low-power island E-cores powering the previous generation Meteor Lake. With Arrow Lake, these Skymont cores achieve a 32% IPC jump over the Gracemont E-cores from Raptor Lake. Besides the increased IPC, these E-cores even run at higher clock speeds than Gracemont, which means multithreaded productivity workloads are in for a treat. The 285K is technically a 24-core/24-thread processor. The Lion Cove P-cores ditch SMT. So any gen-on-gen multithreaded performance improvements over the i9-14900K rest squarely on stronger cores and new technology, despite a decrease in total thread count.

We’ve extensively detailed the Arrow Lake microarchitecture in our architecture preview article, which went live a couple of weeks ago. As we mentioned, this is Intel’s first desktop processor that’s based on chiplets. The guiding philosophy is that rather than building one large monolithic silicon on the latest foundry node (expensive, compounded by lower yields per wafer), Intel identifies specific IP blocks that benefit the most from a switch to the latest foundry node—in this case, the CPU complex—and build a chiplet with it that’s smaller (higher yields per wafer thanks to smaller dies). The Compute tile houses the CPU cores, and is built on the TSMC N3B (3 nm) node, which is more advanced than the TSMC N4P (4 nm) node that AMD builds its Zen 5 CCDs on. With this, Intel is taking back foundry technology leadership from AMD after a long span of five years. The iGPU is built on a separate chiplet that uses the still fairly advanced 5 nm TSMC N5 node, while the rest of the processor with the various I/O controllers, and an integrated NPU, are built on TSMC 6 nm—same node as the cIOD on Ryzens.

This is Intel’s first desktop processor with an NPU, but it isn’t the latest NPU 4 from Intel that you find on Core Ultra 200V Lunar Lake mobile processors, but rather the older NPU 3 unit from Core Ultra 100 series Meteor Lake, which can only do 13 TOPS. It hence misses out on Microsoft Copilot+ native acceleration, but don’t fret—there’s still a lot you can do with 13 TOPS, Windows 11 can put the NPU to good use in its many in-built apps and utilities, and so can Microsoft Teams. Intel has given Arrow Lake-S a fairly powerful iGPU based on the Xe-LPG graphics architecture, and an updated media engine that can accelerate AV1 and HEVC encoding. There are a few changes to the I/O. For starters, DDR4 support is removed, as the memory controllers are re-engineered. The number of PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU are increased to 20, so you can use a Gen 5 NVMe SSD without subtracting PCIe lanes from the x16 PEG slot. There’s also integrated Thunderbolt 4.

Each of the eight Lion Cove P-cores on the 285K comes with a 3.70 GHz base frequency, and the P-cores boost up to 5.70 GHz. The classic Turbo Boost algorithm boosts P-cores up to 5.50 GHz. Turbo Boost Max 3.0 pushes a couple of cores up a notch to 5.60 GHz, and from there, provided your cooling solution is up to the task, Thermal Velocity Boost enables 5.70 GHz. The 16 E-cores, divided into four clusters, tick at 3.20 GHz with an impressive 4.60 GHz boost frequency. Each P-core comes with a dedicated 3 MB L2 cache, while each E-core cluster shares a 4 MB L2 cache among four E-cores. The P-cores and E-core clusters share a 36 MB L3 cache.

Core Ultra 9 285K Market Segment Analysis
 PriceCores /
Threads
Base
Clock
Max.
Boost
L3
Cache
TDPArchitectureProcessSocket
Intel Core i5
Core i5-12400F$1106 / 122.5 GHz4.4 GHz18 MB65 WAlder Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i5-13400F$1706+4 / 162.5 / 1.8 GHz4.6 / 3.3 GHz20 MB65 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i5-12600K$1706+4 / 163.7 / 2.8 GHz4.9 / 3.6 GHz20 MB125 WAlder Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i5-13600K$2256+8 / 203.5 / 2.6 GHz5.1 / 3.9 GHz24 MB125 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i5-14600K$2606+8 / 203.5 / 2.6 GHz5.3 / 4.0 GHz24 MB125 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Intel Core Ultra 5
Core Ultra 5 245K$3106+8 / 144.2 / 3.6 GHz5.2 / 4.6 GHz24 MB159 WArrow Lake3 nmLGA 1851
AMD Ryzen 5
Ryzen 5 8500G$1506 / 123.5 GHz5.0 GHz16 MB65 WPhoenix 24 nmAM5
Ryzen 5 5600X$1356 / 123.7 GHz4.6 GHz32 MB65 WZen 37 nmAM4
Ryzen 5 7600$1856 / 123.8 GHz5.1 GHz32 MB65 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 5 7600X$2106 / 124.7 GHz5.3 GHz32 MB105 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 5 9600X$2506 / 123.9 GHz5.4 GHz32 MB65 WZen 54 nmAM5
Intel Core i7
Core i7-12700K$2108+4 / 203.6 / 2.7 GHz5.0 / 3.8 GHz25 MB125 WAlder Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i7-13700K$2808+8 / 243.4 / 2.5 GHz5.4 / 4.2 GHz30 MB125 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i7-14700K$3558+12 / 283.4 / 2.5 GHz5.6 / 4.3 GHz33 MB125 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Intel Core Ultra 7
Core Ultra 7 265K$3958+12 / 203.9 / 3.3 GHz5.5 / 4.6 GHz30 MB250 WArrow Lake3 nmLGA 1851
AMD Ryzen 7
Ryzen 7 5700G$1658 / 163.8 GHz4.6 GHz16 MB65 WZen 3 + Vega7 nmAM4
Ryzen 7 5700X$1608 / 163.4 GHz4.6 GHz32 MB65 WZen 37 nmAM4
Ryzen 7 7700$2808 / 163.8 GHz5.3 GHz32 MB65 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 7 7700X$2758 / 164.5 GHz5.4 GHz32 MB105 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 7 9700X$3308 / 163.8 GHz5.5 GHz32 MB65 WZen 54 nmAM5
Ryzen 7 5800X$1658 / 163.8 GHz4.7 GHz32 MB105 WZen 37 nmAM4
Ryzen 7 5800X3D$3408 / 163.4 GHz4.5 GHz96 MB105 WZen 37 nmAM4
Ryzen 7 7800X3D$3708 / 164.2 GHz5.0 GHz96 MB120 WZen 45 nmAM5
Intel Core i9
Core i9-12900K$2808+8 / 243.2 / 2.4 GHz5.2 / 3.9 GHz30 MB125 WAlder Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i9-13900K$4158+16 / 323.0 / 2.2 GHz5.8 / 4.3 GHz36 MB125 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Core i9-14900K$4458+16 / 323.2 / 2.4 GHz6.0 / 4.4 GHz36 MB125 WRaptor Lake10 nmLGA 1700
Intel Core Ultra 9
Core Ultra 9 285K$5908+16 / 243.7 / 3.2 GHz5.7 / 4.6 GHz36 MB250 WArrow Lake3 nmLGA 1851
AMD Ryzen 9
Ryzen 9 5900X$26512 / 243.7 GHz4.8 GHz64 MB105 WZen 37 nmAM4
Ryzen 9 7900$37012 / 243.7 GHz5.4 GHz64 MB65 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 9 7900X$40012 / 244.7 GHz5.6 GHz64 MB170 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 9 7900X3D$58012 / 244.4 GHz5.6 GHz128 MB120 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 9 9900X$43012 / 244.4 GHz5.6 GHz64 MB120 WZen 54 nmAM5
Ryzen 9 5950X$34516 / 323.4 GHz4.9 GHz64 MB105 WZen 37 nmAM4
Ryzen 9 7950X$51016 / 324.5 GHz5.7 GHz64 MB170 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 9 7950X3D$55016 / 324.2 GHz5.7 GHz128 MB120 WZen 45 nmAM5
Ryzen 9 9950X$60016 / 324.3 GHz5.7 GHz64 MB170 WZen 54 nmAM5
Posted on

Turtle Beach Burst II Air Review

Being the successor to the ROCCAT Burst Pro Air, the ambidextrous Burst II Air is much lighter at just 46 g, despite having a solid shell. PixArt’s PAW3395 sensor sees use, along with Titan optical switches for the main buttons, and up to 120 hours of battery life are cited when using Bluetooth.