At a glanceExpert`s Rating ProsThin and light for an 18-inch laptopVibrant 18-inch Mini-LED displayExcellent sound systemWired connectivity includes Thunderbolt 4, 2.5Gbps EthernetConsDesign, fit-and-finish needs workCPU, GPU performance doesn’t match competitorsBattery life is short, though better than some alternativesLow value for moneyOur VerdictMSI’s Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V has a beautiful display and lots of connectivity, but high pricing paired with mediocre performance (for its size, at least) leaves it behind the pack. Big laptops are back in style, and the largest have glorious 18-inch, 16:10 aspect ratio displays that feel barely smaller than a typical desktop monitor. The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio is one such laptop, and it attempts to stand out by shaving a few pounds and reducing its profile to under an inch thick. These efforts do result in a lighter, more portable 18-inch powerhouse, but the laptop’s design, build quality, and overall performance fail to justify its high price. Further reading: Best laptops for video editing 2024: Work faster with these expert picks MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Specs and features The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V boosts hardware typical of a top-tier laptop including an Nvidia RTX 4090 GPU, a 4K display, 64GB of RAM, and a 2TB solid state drive. It also has excellent network connectivity with support for 2.5Gbps Ethernet and Wi-Fi 7. CPU: Intel Core Ultra 9 185H Memory: 64GB LPDDR5 Graphics/GPU: Nvidia RTX 4090 with up to 150 watt TGP NPU: Intel AI Boost Display: 3840×2400 16:10 aspect ratio Mini-LED IPS 120Hz  Storage: 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe M.2 solid state storage Webcam: 1080p 30fps camera with HDR and IR 3D camera for Windows Hello Connectivity: 1x Thunderbolt 4, 1x USB-C 3.2 Gen 2, 2x USB-A 3.2 Gen 2, SDcard reader, x HDMI 2.1, 1x 2.5Gbps Ethernet (RJ45) Networking: Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 5.4 Biometrics: Windows Hello facial recognition, fingerprint reader  Battery capacity: 99 watt-hours Dimensions: 15.74 x 11.4 x 0.94 inches Weight: 6.37 pounds MSRP: $4,199.99 However, one specification stands out as a potential issue: the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H processor. Most larger laptops sold above $4,000 have an Intel Core i9-14900HX, which offers more processor cores and can draw more power.  The model I received to review has an MSRP of roughly $4,200, which is extremely expensive. MSI offers a less expensive model with an RTX 4080, 32GB of RAM, and 1TB solid state drive for $3,300. The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio is passable, but the alternatives deliver far more value for your money. MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Design and build quality IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith A laptop as expensive as the MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio sets a high standard for itself. Not only must the hardware be top-notch, but the exterior must appear attractive and luxurious. Unfortunately, the Stealth 18 AI Studio fails to meet this standard. MSI’s Stealth lineup tries to offer professionals and gamers a slimmer, lighter alternative to workstation and gaming laptops. To achieve this, MSI opts for a magnesium-aluminum alloy chassis, which keeps the laptop’s weight under 6.4 pounds. But while magnesium-aluminum delivers durability and low weight, it’s not rigid and feels like plastic when touched. As a result, the Stealth 18 AI Studio would seem mediocre even with a $2,000 price tag. At $4,200—not far off a Razer Blade 18—it’s hard to understand what MSI was thinking. Build quality did not impress. Handling the Stealth caused a variety of creaks, groans, and snaps as various panels flexed and shifted. The most unfortunate of these repeatedly occurred when I removed my right hand from the palm rest. Apparently, the weight of my hand was enough to slightly deform the panel, causing it to snap back into place when I lifted my hand.  That’s disappointing for a laptop that costs north of $4,000. But the laptop’s problems begin even before you touch it. Compared to alternatives like the Razer Blade 18 or Dell XPS 16, the Stealth looks generic and unappealing. A couple of RGB-LED accents are its only attempt to add flair, and they don’t do enough to make the laptop stand out. It’s a shame, because it’s not as if MSI can’t execute on design. The MSI Titan 18 HX, which I reviewed earlier in 2024, is a gorgeous laptop that looks distinct and feels sturdy. Unfortunately, MSI’s effort to make the Stealth thinner and lighter results in a compromised design. MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Keyboard, trackpad IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio’s keyboard is better than its overall design, but it’s still mediocre for the price.  Upon opening the laptop, you’ll find a spacious keyboard with a number pad. Nearly all keys are full-sized, including the numpad keys, which is unusual even for an 18-inch laptop. Only a few keys, like the right-side shift key, are noticeably reduced in size. The keyboard is immediately comfortable and intuitive to type on. Key feel is acceptable. Each key has respectable travel and bottoms out with a definitive action. However, there’s nothing about the experience that’s worthy of the laptop’s high price tag. It’s not a mechanical keyboard and lacks unique knobs, dials, or macro keys. It does have customizable RGB backlighting, but that feature is common among laptops that cost a couple of thousand dollars less.  The touchpad continues the trend of adequate features that don’t live up to the price. It’s smooth and responsive, but it measures about five and a quarter inches wide by three and a half inches deep, which isn’t large for an 18-inch laptop. Many competitors like the Razer Blade 18, Dell XPS 16, and Apple’s MacBook Pro 16, offer much larger touchpads. The touchpad also doesn’t support haptics, which is a common feature at this price point, though also missing from competitors like the Razer Blade 18. MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Display, audio IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith One feature that does feel worthy of the MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio’s high price is the display. The Stealth has an 18-inch, 16:10 aspect ratio display with a resolution of 3840×2400. It also has a Mini-LED backlight, a technology also found on laptops like the Apple MacBook Pro 16 and Lenovo Yoga Pro 9i, promises excellent color performance and high brightness alongside contrast that rivals, if not equals, OLED. MSI’s display delivers on that promise. It’s exceptionally bright when turned up to full brightness and offers a great experience in HDR content. The panel also has a matte finish instead of a glossy one, so it better handles glare from windows or lamps positioned behind you. Color performance is excellent too, with spot-on color accuracy and a wide color gamut suitable for creative work. This helps the display look vibrant and saturated in your favorite movies or games. Contrast can match OLED to provide a great sense of immersion and depth, but with a caveat. Mini-LED displays break up the backlight into LED lighting zones, which turn on and off individually, much like the pixels on an OLED display. Because of this, the display can achieve a perfect minimum brightness of zero nits. However, the backlight zones are much larger than individual pixels, which can cause a problem known as blooming when a bright object is shown on a dark background or vice versa. For example, if you’re watching a dark scene in a movie with subtitles on, you may notice a glow or halo around the subtitles.  The Stealth’s speakers are another highlight. MSI pairs upwards-firing speakers with internal woofers to deliver balanced, voluminous sound that doesn’t change depending on the surface the laptop is set on. Audio quality is good enough that many less critical listeners will see no need to connect external speakers, and the laptop can fill a small room with music during your 9-to-5.  MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Webcam, microphone, biometrics The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio ships with a typical 1080p webcam capable of capturing video at up to 30 frames per second. Most modern laptops sold above $1,000 ship with a similar webcam, so the Stealth has no advantage here. Still, it’s a respectable camera with decent sharpness and color reproduction. The same can be said of the microphone array, which captures clear, crisp audio with minimal background noise. MSI doesn’t skip the biometrics. It supports Windows Hello with both a fingerprint reader and facial recognition. The fingerprint reader is not in the power button, as is true of many laptops, but instead beside the touchpad. I prefer this, since it means there’s no chance of accidentally putting the laptop to sleep while trying to log in.  MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Connectivity IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith MSI distributes ports across three sides of the Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V. The right flank houses the Thunderbolt 4 and USB-C port, while the left flank has two USB-A ports. Around back is HDMI 2.1, 2.5Gbps Ethernet, and a rectangular port for the 280 watt power adapter. An SD card reader and 3.5mm combo audio jack round out the options. This is a solid range of connectivity, though it may depend on your perspective. If you’re considering the Stealth 18 AI Studio against thin and light performance laptops, like a Razer Blade or Dell XPS, the Stealth’s connectivity is great. But if you’re considering gaming laptops, like a Gigabyte Aorus or Acer Predator Helios Neo, the Stealth’s ports are par for the course.  Wireless connectivity is strong, as well, with support for Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4. These are the latest versions of each wireless standard, so the laptop’s wireless connectivity is as future-proof as any laptop sold in 2024 can be. MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Performance The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V’s pricing is most obviously justified by the hardware. It packs an Intel Core Ultra 9 185H processor, Nvidia RTX 4090, 64GB of LPDDR5 memory, and a 2TB PCIe 4.0 solid state drive. This is powerful hardware, but the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is an unusual choice for a laptop in this size and price category: many opt instead for the Intel Core i9-14900HX. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith PCMark 10, a benchmark meant to represent a wide variety of common productivity tasks, puts the MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V off to a bad start. Although its score of 6,536 isn’t bad, it’s not up to the standard set by competitive laptops, some of which can exceed a score of 8,000 in this benchmark.  IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith Next up is Cinebench R20, a short-duration, heavily multithreaded benchmark. It once again placed the MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V behind the competition with a reasonable but unimpressive score of 6,897. The reasons for this aren’t too hard to guess. The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H has a respectable 16 cores, but that’s far less than the Intel Core i9-14900HX, which has a total of 24 cores. The Core i9-14900HX can consume more power, too, further boosting performance. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith The Stealth again falls behind in Handbrake, a heavily multi-threaded, long duration benchmark which encodes a two hour long, 1080p movie from MP4 to MKV. However, the Stealth notches a win over the Asus ProArt P16, which had an AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370. That isn’t a major surprise, as we’ve noticed Intel processors tend to outperform AMD processors in these benchmark.  Clearly, the Stealth’s decision to use the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H has consequences. That doesn’t come as a shock, because the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H occupies a lower tier in Intel’s product performance stack than does the Intel Core i9-14900HX. With fewer cores and a lower design power, the Core Ultra 9 185H isn’t designed to keep up with its more power-hungry sibling. However, this is yet another area where the Stealth doesn’t live up to its price. The GPU could be a different story. The Stealth we tested had an Nvidia RTX 4090 with a maximum graphics power of 150 watts. That could, in theory, give the Stealth enough graphics grunt to wrangle with the competition. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith Unfortunately, 3DMark Time Spy puts that theory to the test and finds the Stealth wanting. While a 3DMark Time Spy score of 15,737 is strong, it’s not able to compete with many other laptops that equip Nvidia RTX 4090 graphics.  IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith Shadow of the Tomb Raider, though now an older game, remains representative of games from the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One console generation. Unsurprisingly, the Stealth handled this game with ease and achieved a frame rate average above 150 frames per second. But, once again, the Stealth’s performance falls behind other laptops with Nvidia RTX 4090 graphics. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith Metro Exodus is more of a cross-gen title, though in this benchmark we run it without ray tracing on. Even so, the game’s Extreme preset is incredibly demanding, and so the mighty RTX 4090 turns in a mere 70 frames per second. Enjoyable, to be sure, but once again behind similar laptops.  I wrapped up testing with Cyberpunk 2077, which remains among the most visually attractive and feature-rich PC games available. The Stealth averaged 96 frames per second at 1080p resolution and the Ultra preset with all forms of resolution scaling and frame generation turned off. That’s great, but the Razer Blade 16 with RTX 4090 was a bit quicker with an average of 100 frames per second. For an even more demanding test I switched to Cyberpunk 2077’s Ray-traced Overdrive preset. Here the Stealth averaged just 32 frames per second. That’s actually a good result for the game at this preset on laptop hardware, but the Razer Blade 16 was again quicker, as it averaged 38 frames per second. All of the results above were reached with the Stealth in Balanced profile (this is true, also, for the competitive laptops we tested), which is the default. I also tested the laptop in the Extreme Performance preset, which boosted performance by five to 10 percent. That might be important in some tasks, but in general, the Extreme Performance profile did not change the narrative on the Stealth’s performance.  Fan noise was at times an issue. I noticed that the laptop has a tendency to cycle between two fan speeds when at idle or in less demanding apps, which was annoying. In more demanding apps, and especially with Extreme Performance mode on, the laptop’s fans became a constant companion. That’s also true of the Stealth’s competitors, but it’s worth keeping in mind if you think silence is golden. Oh, and what about AI? Despite its name, the MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V doesn’t offer any unique AI features, and it lacks a high-performance NPU like that found on more recent AMD Ryzen AI and Qualcomm Snapdragon X chips.  MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Battery life The MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V is listed with a 99.9 watt-hour battery. Windows, however, reported the watt-hours at roughly 97 watt hours. It’s a large battery, but the Stealth ultimately fails to improve on the awful battery life that large, powerful Windows laptops are known for. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith Our standard battery test, which loops a 4K file of the short film Tears of Steel, sucked the Stealth dry in about five hours. That is better than some alternatives, like the Razer Blade 16 and Alienware m18 R2, but it’s still not a great result. With that said, I’ll give the Stealth this much: its battery life is at least usable. I took the Stealth on a couple two-hour long trips to the coffee shop and found that, while writing and browsing the web, the battery would last just as long as the video test suggests, which meant I still had well over half a full charge left by the time I wrapped up my work.  MSI Stealth 18 AI Studio: Conclusion MSI’s Stealth 18 AI Studio A1V has its virtues. It’s a large laptop with a big, vibrant Mini-LED display, decent keyboard, and lots of connectivity. The Stealth is also thinner and lighter than most 18-inch laptops. However, the Stealth’s retail price of $4,200 feels excessive. It’s more expensive than a similarly equipped Alienware m18 R2, and only a couple hundred less than a similar Razer Blade 18. Both alternatives are far more attractive and beat the Stealth in performance. That leaves MSI’s 18-incher in a tough spot. It’s passable, but the alternatives deliver far more value for your money. Read...

The lower South Island could expect more heavy rain on Sunday. Read...

MetService has issued watches for the lower North Island and parts of the South Island. Read...

The Kapiti Coast District Council is warning residents to be prepared to move, as another rain band descends on the area. Read...

Most PC gamers know that a laptop with a discrete GPU from AMD or (most likely) Nvidia is a must-have for playing modern PC games on a portable machine. Yet, despite that, many people find themselves forced to accept an integrated graphics processor (IGP) bundled as part of an Intel, AMD, or Qualcomm Snapdragon processor. GPUs are expensive, tend to run hot, and require a lot of juice, and these problems can make a laptop with a GPU undesirable or unaffordable. So, if you want to game on a laptop with integrated graphics, which should type you buy? To find out we tested five laptops toe-to-toe in eight benchmarks, six of which are popular real-world games you’ve heard of and might even play eagerly. The results show why you need to choose an IGP carefully: it can mean the difference between playing your favorite PC game at a smooth, fluid 60 FPS, or suffering through an unplayable sideshow. The laptops we tested, and how we tested them We tested five laptops, all with different integrated graphics solutions. They include: Microsoft Surface Laptop 13 7th-gen with Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite and Qualcomm Adreno integrated graphics Dell Inspiron 14 Plus with Intel Core Series 7 155H and Intel Arc integrated graphics (with eight Intel Xe cores) Acer Swift Edge 16 with AMD Ryzen 7 8840U and AMD Radeon 780M integrated graphics (RDNA 3, 12 compute units) Asus Zenbook S 16 with AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 and AMD Radeon 880M integrated graphics (RDNA 3.5, 12 compute units) Asus ProArt P16 with AMD Ryzen AI 9 370HX and AMD Radeon 890M integrated graphics (RDNA 3.5, 16 compute units) We selected these laptops because we feel they are popular, mainstream models representative of common configurations. With that said, it’s important to note performance can vary between laptops with the same IGP, depending on the particulars of how a laptop is configured by its manufacturer. Our laptop reviews can provide insight into how laptops other than those tested here perform.  All tests we conducted on external power with the default performance profile and fan mode.  The Asus ProArt P16 also has an Nvidia discrete GPU. It was disabled for our tests.  Finally, keep in mind that very few games available on Windows have an Arm version available, including the games we used for testing. Because of this, the Qualcomm chip (which uses the Arm instruction set) ran games developed for x86 processors through Microsoft’s PRISM emulation. The only exception to this is 3DMark Night Raid, which does offer an Arm-native version. PC game developers currently make little effort to develop games for Windows on Arm, and this is unlikely to change until Steam, GOG, and The Epic Games Store add support for Arm-native PC games. The games  We tested integrated laptops with two synthetic benchmarks from popular benchmarking tool 3DMark alongside a roster of popular PC games. The games were selected to represent a variety of genres that stress a laptop in different ways. We also wanted to test games you’re likely to play, so we stuck to games that are currently popular on Steam. 3DMark Time Spy and Night Raid 3DMark Night Raid and Time Spy are wonderful synthetic benchmarks from UL Solutions. Night Raid is a less demanding benchmark, but notable because it has an Arm native version available on Windows. Time Spy is a more demanding benchmark, though several times removed from the most demanding benchmarks available in 3DMark, and does not have an Arm native version. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith These results immediately suggest we’ve got a close competition on our hands. The 3DMark Time Spy results are a near thing, and the Night Raid results are even more competitive. On the whole, though, it’s a fight between Intel Arc and AMD Radeon 890M for the top slot. While Arc was quickest in Time Spy, the Radeon 890M took a substantial win in Night Raid. I also want to call out the Qualcomm Adreno’s Night Raid score of 26,553, which is the second-best result from this pack. That indicates Adreno can deliver competitive performance when running an Arm native app. Unfortunately, this is the only Arm native test we ran. Adreno of course performs more poorly under emulation, as shown by the Adreno’s score of just 1,909 in Time Spy. Sid Meier’s Civilization VI Civilization VI is an older game, but it remains extremely popular. It’s also a good fit for integrated graphics, as the game’s visuals don’t overtax integrated GPUs and don’t demand a lot of video memory. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith Because of that, every integrated GPU except for Qualcomm’s Adreno was able to exceed 60 frames per second, and most were able to deliver that level of performance consistently.  AMD’s Radeon integrated graphics sprint away from Intel Arc, however. The Radeon 780M’s lead over Intel Arc is small, but the newer Radeon 880M springs ahead to a result just shy of 90 frames per second. AMD’s top-of-the-line Radeon 890M is quicker still and manages to exceed an average of 120 frames per second. These improvements are meaningful. They could allow smoother gameplay on high-refresh displays or, alternatively, provide headroom to turn up a few detail settings. DOTA 2 Valve’s DOTA 2 definitely fits in the ranks of “biggest games no one seems to talk about any more,” but make no mistake: it’s still massive, with hundreds of thousands of simultaneous players every day. It’s also light on hardware, which perhaps contributes to its ongoing popularity. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith AMD Radeon and Intel Arc deliver even performance here. While the Radeon 880M and 890M score a win over Intel Arc, it’s not a major victory. And that win is somewhat counterbalanced by AMD Radeon 780M falling behind Arc. Importantly, all of these options prove capable of playing the game well in excess of 60 frames per second. Qualcomm Adreno unfortunately falls behind once again. DOTA 2 is playable, which is impressive given the game is running through emulation, but it’s roughly half as quick as the AMD Radeon and Intel Arc options.  Final Fantasy XIV Square Enix’s popular MMORPG Final Fantasy XIV received a graphics update in a patch related to the new expansion, Dawntrail. The update doesn’t drastically increase its hardware requirements, but it’s significant enough to once again make Final Fantasy XIV a challenge to run on integrated graphics at the High (Laptop) setting. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith The field is surprisingly even here. The AMD Radeon 890M, 880M, and Intel Arc solutions all deliver playable performance, although the minimum framerates dip into the mid-20s. In my opinion, players looking to dive into the more difficult content, like raids, would want to change to the Low detail preset for smoother gameplay. AMD’s Radeon 780M falls a bit behind, however. Qualcomm Adreno is behind the pack, but this is in some ways a good result. Again, the game is running under emulation here, and despite the almost painfully low minimum framerate I would call it “barely playable.” However, Adreno is noticeably behind the competition, and I wouldn’t recommend it for this game. Total War: Warhammer III Total War: Warhammer III is a grand strategy game like Civilization VI, but it’s newer and rather demanding on laptop hardware even with graphics detail kept to the Low preset. The game proves too much for some integrated graphics solutions. IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith The Qualcomm Adreno and AMD Radeon 780M fail to deliver a playable experience in this game, as both deliver roughly 24 frames per second. I suppose that might be tolerable in a strategy title like Warhammer III, but the choppiness is pronounced. Intel Arc was only marginally better; though it hit 30 frames per second on average, the minimum framerate was a disappointing 19 frames per second.However, the AMD Radeon 880M and 890M solutions score wins, as both exceed 30 frames per second on average and deliver an adequate minimum framerate. It’s not the best experience, to be sure, but it’ll do.  The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition is an interesting title. Though over 10 years old, the game’s beautiful visuals can still challenge integrated graphics at 1080p and the game’s High detail preset (Ultra is still generally too much for IGPs).  IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith This game is a win for Intel Arc, which manages to slightly defeat even the AMD Radeon 890M. It’s also a big loss for Qualcomm Adreno, which suffers from rather serious framerate drops. The same is true of the AMD Radeon 780M, at least in the Acer Swift Edge 16, though the issue is less severe.  Cyberpunk 2077 Cyberpunk 2077 is now several years old, but it remains among the most demanding games for modern PCs and, despite a rocky launch, has enjoyed a resurgence in popularity thanks to numerous patches and a successful expansion.  IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith IDG / Matthew Smith This game does us a favor and delivers a nice, readable graph. Qualcomm’s Adreno is obviously at the rear of the pack, as the game’s average of nearly 21 frames per second is nowhere near playable. Intel Arc and AMD Radeon 780M trade blows north of 30 frames per second, but Arc takes the win between them. AMD’s Radeon 880M roars in and provides a major improvement over the 780M. While the latter is just sorta-kinda playable with these settings, the 880M requires no caveats. AMD’s Radeon 890M, meanwhile, blows away the pack with an excellent average in excess of 60 frames per second. That’s not just playable. It’s truly enjoyable. And it’s the 890M’s most significant performance victory among all the benchmarks and games tested.  Conclusion: AMD and Intel fight toe-to-toe while Qualcomm struggles under emulation The results present a few takeaways anyone shopping for a laptop with integrated graphics should know before making a purchase. It’s clear that AMD’s Radeon 890M is the victor, as it delivers a significant performance increase over the Radeon 880M and the best Intel Arc solutions. In some games, such as Cyberpunk 2077 and Civilization VI, the performance increase was large enough to deliver a boost to fluidity that’s immediately noticeable outside of a benchmark. It’s just a shame the Radeon 890M is only found in the AMD Ryzen AI 9 370HX and AMD Ryzen AI 9 375HX. I expect many laptops with these chips will also have a more performant discrete GPU, which makes the IGP’s performance less relevant. With that said, the Ryzen AI 9 370HX and 375HX could become popular options for mini-desktops. The less powerful, but more common, AMD Radeon 880M is another great solution, but Intel Arc is nearly as good. AMD and Intel fought to an exact tie in these tests: each won four out of the eight tests we ran. If you’re looking for a tie-breaker, I would point out that two of Arc’s four wins were in 3DMark synthetic tests, which arguably hold a bit less weight than real-world game tests. Shoppers should also keep in mind that not all versions of Intel Arc are the same, and some less powerful Intel Core Ultra processors have fewer cores or lower graphics core clock speeds. However, Intel strikes back with availability, at least for now: the Radeon 880M is available only on AMD’s Ryzen AI 9 365 in a handful of machines, while Intel Arc graphics is available in hundreds of mid-range laptops. It’s clear Qualcomm’s Adreno is in a tough spot, as nearly all Windows games lack an Arm native version and must run under emulation, which saps performance. Adreno has a lot of potential, and I’m actually a bit surprised by how well it does in some games. Performance in Final Fantasy XIV and Total War: Warhammer III, for example, was not that far off the AMD Radeon 780M. But whatever the reasons, the reality is Adreno can’t match AMD Radeon and Intel Arc in real-world scenarios. That won’t change until PC game developers decide to support Windows on Arm. On the whole, integrated graphics performance is in a good spot in 2024. A capable IGP, like the AMD Radeon 880M or Intel Arc with eight Xe cores, can play many modern games at 1080p resolution, 30 to 60 frames per second, and low to high detail. Even games like Cyberpunk are playable (if not fluid) thanks to upscaling technologies like AMD’s FSR and Intel’s XeSS.  There’s still reason to be wary, however. Some IGPs available in modern laptops, including older generations of AMD Radeon integrated graphics and Qualcomm’s Adreno, are unlikely to provide a good experience. Fortunately, the most recent AMD Radeon and Intel Arc IGPs aren’t difficult to find and available at affordable prices: the Dell Inspiron 14 Plus with Intel Arc is just $1,000 with 32GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD, and Asus’ Vivobook S delivers the Radeon 880M for $1,200 alongside 24GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD. Read...

About 60 homes are still without power, in a day that has seen parts of the lower North Island inundated with water. Read...

High tide is yet to come on the Kapiti Coast, with an incident management team stood up to monitor heavy rain and flooding. Read...

An orange heavy rain warning in place for the lower North Island, as the capital is hit by torrential rain and slips close roads in the South Island. Read...

Up to 200mm of rain is expected in some places, and weather warnings have been issued. Read...

Altissime are stopping off on their way to The Big Sing Lower North Island Cadenza. Read...