Danh mục: Tin trong ngày

Handling a construction project is complex, especially for project managers who have to juggle everything including materials, employees, client expectations and project deadlines. Construction project managers need an efficient way to manage their resources and coordinate all of the tasks associated with their projects. For many teams, the best way to consolidate all of their project plans and increase visibility into individual tasks is to invest in project management software.

Construction project management software helps contractors and subcontractors streamline the process of completing projects on time and within budget. It provides a centralized platform to keep track of tasks, communicate with project teams and stakeholders, store documents and files, and generate reports. The software also offers collaboration capabilities that keep stakeholders connected throughout the project life cycle.

In this product guide, we’ve evaluated seven of the best construction project management software solutions, taking a closer look at their features, costs, pros and cons, to help you determine the best option for your needs and budget.

Jump to:

Top construction project management software comparison

When choosing the best construction management software for your business, you need to consider pricing as well as features. This table shows which construction software includes which features to help you make your decision.

Key features of construction management software

Software for construction project management needs to combine general purpose project management features with construction-specific capabilities. Here are eight features that you should look out for when comparing software for construction management:

Time tracking and scheduling

The best construction project management software should let you schedule workers for shifts and track billable hours worked, all within the tool itself. Some may also offer integrations with popular time tracking and scheduling software in case you already have a solution in place.

Estimate and bid management

Your team will likely be submitting bids on multiple projects at once, as well as receiving estimates from subcontractors. These are sometimes called RFIs, a.k.a. requests for information. Construction project management software will allow you to track these bids and their associated costs to reduce the chance of miscalculations and ensure that you’re staying on top of deadlines.

Accounting and financial management

Once the project actually gets going, you will also need to track inventory costs, invoice the client and make sure the project is staying within budget. The best construction management software will let you do all that and more with sophisticated accounting and financial management tools. It should also integrate with popular accounting software, such as Quickbooks.

Field management

Keeping track of all your workers across various job sites is one of the most important features in construction-specific software. This involves booking service appointments, coordinating dispatch and setting estimated completion dates. If you are considering a more general purpose project management software, make sure that it will provide the field management capabilities that you need for your construction projects.

Mobile and tablet apps

On the topic of field management, most people aren’t logging into their laptops in the middle of a job site. That’s why you will want to seek out a software that offers well-developed mobile and tablet apps so your managers and employees can use them while on location.

Client and contractor access

At some point during the project, clients and/or contractors are going to need to access the software — but you might not want them to see every single nitty gritty detail. Being able to set permissions for different users is a helpful feature for construction project management software to have. Some platforms even offer a dedicated client portal, so they get their own login experience.

Communication tools

To keep everything streamlined in one tool, look for construction management software that integrates chat and communication tools directly within the interface. Ideally, it should also integrate with popular email clients like Outlook and Gmail so that your email communications will be centralized in the same place.

Document management

If your construction management software offers document management capabilities, you’ll never need to hunt down an updated contract or the latest certificates and licenses. All of these documents will be right in the tool’s database, easily accessible via search so you can find it in a snap.

How do I choose the best construction management software for my business?

When selecting a construction project management software solution, consider your needs, goals and budget. You want a tool that will meet your requirements and make the management process more efficient, all while staying within budget and providing visibility at all stages of the construction project life cycle.

Consider the following tips while evaluating prospective construction project management software options:

Determine your project scope

Determining your project scope means deciding how many people need to be involved, how many tasks need to be completed and how much of the work can be done in-house. Knowing these details will help you narrow down the type of construction project management software that best fits your needs.

Research various solutions and compare features

Look for tools that offer the features you need for a reasonable price. Pay attention to whether the software has comprehensive task tracking and management capabilities as well as project cost estimation and time tracking functions.

Consider user experience

How user-friendly is the software you’re evaluating? Does it have an intuitive design with a straightforward interface? Will team members require extensive training to be able to use the software? The easier it is to use, the more likely your team will be to adopt the tool and use it correctly to increase project productivity.

Look for relevant integrations

Ensure the software you choose integrates with other tools your business uses most often, such as accounting, payroll and scheduling systems. Finding these integration opportunities now will save you time and effort when transferring data between different applications.

Methodology

To determine the best construction project management software for 2023, we evaluated over 20 solutions from leading providers. We compared the features, capabilities and pricing of each product and then narrowed down our list to the top seven solutions. Our evaluation criteria for construction project management included the following:

• Usability: We assessed how user-friendly each construction project management solution is. This included assessing how easy it is to set up and manage projects, assign tasks, view project reports and collaborate with team members.
• Functionality: We reviewed the features offered by each solution, including project planning and scheduling, resource management, project tracking, collaboration tools and reporting capabilities.
• Customer support: We evaluated each platform’s customer support system and how helpful they are in resolving issues. We also reviewed data from third-party review websites and business rating platforms such as the Better Business Bureau.
• Costs: Our review considered solutions that are best for budget-conscious companies as well as solutions for companies that are ready to invest more money for more features. We looked at what kind of payment plans and pricing options were available for each solution.
• Security: We looked at the security measures taken by each system, searching for each platform’s encryption, authentication and data storage capabilities.
• Analytics: We examined what analytics and insights each construction project management solution provides for metrics like resource allocation, task duration and project milestones.
• Customizability: Good construction project management software should be flexible enough for customization according to different business needs and processes. We examined each solution’s customizability options, such as the ability to create custom fields or integrate with third-party tools for smoother project workflows.
• Reporting and collaboration: To ensure teams stay on track, effective reporting and collaboration features are necessary. The best construction project management software solutions listed here were evaluated based on their abilities to provide useful insights while allowing teams to work together efficiently across departments and locations.
• Scalability and integration: We reviewed each solution’s ability to integrate seamlessly with other programs and platforms. In addition, we assessed each platform’s scalability — whether it can scale up or down based on changing company needs.

With these criteria in mind, we determined the seven best construction project management software solutions of 2023. Each tool has its own strengths and weaknesses, but all offer quality services for managing the ins and outs of construction projects.

Our GPU benchmarks hierarchy ranks all the current and previous generation graphics cards by performance, and Tom’s Hardware exhaustively benchmarks current and previous generation GPUs, including all of the best graphics cards. Whether it’s playing games, running artificial intelligence workloads like Stable Diffusion, or doing professional video editing, your graphics card typically plays the biggest role in determining performance — even the best CPUs for Gaming take a secondary role. Current GPU prices are slowly trending down as well, though the new cards are all holding relatively steady.

We’re nearly finished retesting all of the ray-tracing capable GPUs on a slightly revamped test suite, using a Core i9-13900K instead of a Core i9-12900K. For now, we have the same test suite we used in 2022. Our latest additions to the hierarchy are Nvidia’s RTX 4070 and RTX 4060 Ti, and AMD’s Radeon RX 7600. We’ve also retested a bunch of cards to clear up some lingering oddities from earlier testing.

Our full GPU hierarchy using traditional rendering (aka, rasterization) comes first, and below that we have our ray tracing GPU benchmarks hierarchy. Those of course require a ray tracing capable GPU so only AMD’s RX 7000/6000-series, Intel’s Arc, and Nvidia’s RTX cards are present. The results are all without enabling DLSS, FSR, or XeSS on the various cards, mind you.

Nvidia’s Ada Lovelace architecture powers its latest generation RTX 40-series, with new features like DLSS 3 Frame Generation. AMD’s RDNA 3 architecture powers the RX 7000-series, with only two desktop cards presently released. Meanwhile, Intel’s Arc Alchemist architecture brings a third player into the dedicated GPU party, even if it’s more of a competitor for the previous generation midrange offerings.

On page two, you’ll find our 2020–2021 benchmark suite, which has all of the previous generation GPUs running our older test suite running on a Core i9-9900K testbed. It’s no longer being actively updated. We also have the legacy GPU hierarchy (without benchmarks, sorted by theoretical performance) for reference purposes.

The following tables sort everything solely by our performance-based GPU gaming benchmarks, at 1080p “ultra” for the main suite and at 1080p “medium” for the DXR suite. Factors including price, graphics card power consumption, overall efficiency, and features aren’t factored into the rankings here. The current 2022/2023 results use an Alder Lake Core i9-12900K testbed. Now let’s hit the benchmarks and tables.

GPU Benchmarks Ranking 2023

For our latest benchmarks, we’ve tested (nearly) all GPUs released in the past seven years (plus a few extras) at 1080p medium and 1080p ultra, and sort the table by the 1080p ultra results. Where it makes sense, we also test at 1440p ultra and 4K ultra. All of the scores are scaled relative to the top-ranking 1080p ultra card, which in our new suite is the RTX 4090 (especially at 4K and 1440p).

You can also see the above summary chart showing the relative performance of the cards we’ve tested across the past several generations of hardware at 1080p ultra — swipe through the above gallery if you want to see the 1080p medium, 1440p and 4K ultra images. There are a few missing options (e.g., the GT 1030, RX 550, and several Titan cards), but otherwise it’s basically complete. We do have data in the table below for some of the other (older) GPUs.

The eight games we’re using for our standard GPU benchmarks hierarchy are Borderlands 3 (DX12), Far Cry 6 (DX12), Flight Simulator (DX11 AMD/DX12 Intel/Nvidia), Forza Horizon 5 (DX12), Horizon Zero Dawn (DX12), Red Dead Redemption 2 (Vulkan), Total War Warhammer 3 (DX11), and Watch Dogs Legion (DX12). The fps score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of the eight games. Note that the specifications column links directly to our original review for the various GPUs.

GPU Rasterization Hierarchy, Key Takeaways

• Nvidia RTX 4090 ranks first but costs 60% more than 2nd place AMD RX 7900 XTX.
• RTX 4090 can encounter CPU bottlenecks at 1440p and 1080p.
• New cards typically match previous gen GPUs that are one or two model tiers “higher” (e.g. RTX 4070 Ti vs. RTX 3090 Ti, or RX 6600 XT vs. RX 5700 XT).
• RTX 4060 Ti ranks as the most efficient GPU, followed by the RTX 4070, RX 6600, RTX 4070 Ti, RX 6800, and RTX 4080.
• The best GPU value in FPS per dollar is Intel’s Arc A750, as it now costs just $199. It’s followed by RX 6600, RX 6600 XT, RX 6750 XT, RX 6650 XT, and RX 6700 XT. The best value RTX card from Nvidia is the RTX 4060 Ti at number 10.

*: GPU couldn’t run all tests, so the overall score is slightly skewed at 1080p ultra.

While the RTX 4090 does technically take first place at 1080p ultra, it’s the 1440p and especially 4K numbers that impress. It’s only 3% faster than the next closest RX 7900 XTX at 1080p ultra, but that increases to 8% at 1440p and then 23% at 4K. Against the RTX 3090 Ti, it’s also a major upgrade: 14% faster at 1080p, 27% faster at 1440p, and 51% faster at 4K.

(Note that the above fps numbers incorporate both the average and minimum fps into a single score — with the average given more weight than the 1% low fps.)

Again, keep in mind that we’re not including any ray tracing or DLSS results in the above table, as we intend to use the same test suite with the same settings on all current and previous generation graphics cards. Since only RTX cards support DLSS (and RTX 40-series if you want DLSS 3), that would drastically limit which cards we could directly compare. You can see DLSS 2/3 and FSR 2 upscaling results in our RTX 4070 review if you want to check out the various upscaling modes might help.

Of course the RTX 4090 comes at a steep price, though it’s not that much worse than the previous generation RTX 3090. In fact, we’d say it’s a lot better, as the 3090 was only a minor improvement in performance compared to the 3080 at the time of launch, but with more than double the VRAM. Nvidia pulled out all the stops with the 4090, increasing the core counts, clock speeds, and power limits to push it beyond all contenders.

Stepping down from the RTX 4090, the RTX 4080 and RX 7900 XTX trade blows at higher resolutions, while CPU bottlenecks come into play at 1080p. We’ll be switching to an i9-13900K in the near future, and you can see early results in our latest GeForce RTX 4070, GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, and Radeon RX 7900 XTX and 7900 XT reviews.

Speaking of the RTX 4070 Ti, it ended up falling below the RX 7900 XT by 8–10 percent on average in our rasterization benchmarks. It will turn the tables in ray tracing, but if you don’t care about RT, you can certainly make the argument that the 7900 XT represents a better value — again, discounting DLSS as well.

Outside of the latest releases from AMD and Nvidia, the RX 6000- and RTX 30-series chips still perform reasonably well and in some cases represent a better ‘deal’ — even though the hardware can be over two years old now. Intel’s Arc GPUs also fall into this category and are something of a wild card.

We’ve been testing and retesting GPUs periodically, and the Arc chips had some erratic behavior that we eventually sorted out (it was caused by Windows VBS getting turned on). Compared to our launch reviews, performance hasn’t changed much, outside of DirectX 9 games. There are a few other fluctuations, mostly from game updates rather than drivers, but Bright Memory Infinite Benchmark finally got fixed with the latest Intel drivers. Overall, the A770 8GB ends up landing just a bit ahead of the A750, at a slightly higher street price. Also note that the 8GB A770 comes with a factory overclock, which is why it sometimes outperforms the 16GB model.

Turning to the previous generation GPUs, the RTX 20-series and GTX 16-series chips end up scattered throughout the results, along with the RX 5000-series. The general rule of thumb is that you get one or two “model upgrades” with the newer architectures, so for example the RTX 2080 Super comes in just below the RTX 3060 Ti, while the RX 5700 XT lands a few percent behind the RX 6600 XT.

Go back far enough and you can see how modern games at ultra settings severely punish cards that don’t have more than 4GB VRAM. We’ve been saying for a few years now that 4GB was just scraping by, and these days we’d avoid buying anything with less than 8GB of VRAM — 12GB or more is desirable for a mainstream or high-end GPU. The GTX 1060 3GB, GTX 1050, and GTX 780 actually failed to run some of our tests, which skews their results a bit, even though they do better at 1080p medium.

Now let’s switch over to the ray tracing hierarchy.

Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks Ranking 2023

Enabling ray tracing, particularly with demanding games like those we’re using in our DXR test suite, can cause framerates to drop off a cliff. We’re testing with “medium” and “ultra” ray tracing settings. Medium means using medium graphics settings but turning on ray tracing effects (set to “medium” if that’s an option; otherwise, “on”), while ultra turns on all of the RT options at more or less maximum quality.

Because ray tracing is so much more demanding, we’re sorting these results by the 1080p medium scores. That’s also because the RX 6500 XT and RX 6400 along with the Arc A380 basically can’t handle ray tracing even at these settings, and testing at anything more than 1080p medium would be fruitless. We’ve finished testing all the current ray tracing capable GPUs, though there will undoubtedly be more cards in the future.

The five ray tracing games we’re using are Bright Memory Infinite, Control Ultimate Edition, Cyberpunk 2077, Metro Exodus Enhanced, and Minecraft — all of these use the DirectX 12 / DX12 Ultimate API. (Note that we have had to drop Fortnite from our latest reviews, as the new version broke our benchmarks and changed the available settings. Thanks, Epic!) The fps score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of the five games, and the percentage is scaled relative to the fastest GPU in the list, which again is the GeForce RTX 4090.

GPU Ray Tracing Hierarchy, Key Takeaways

• Nvidia absolutely dominates in ray tracing performance, with the RTX 4090 nearly doubling AMD’s best AMD RX 7900 XTX in sixth place. Intel’s Arc A770 lands at number 27.
• DLSS 2 upscaling with quality mode is supported in most ray tracing games and can boost performance an additional 30~50 percent (depending on the game, resolution, and settings used). FSR 2 can provide a similar uplift but it’s only in about a third as many games right now. XeSS support is even less common.
• You’ll need an RTX 4070 or RTX 3080 or faster GPU to handle 1080p with maxed out settings at 60 fps or more, which means Performance mode upscaling can make 4K viable.
• RTX 4060 Ti again ranks as the most efficient GPU, followed by RTX 4070, RTX 3060 Ti, RTX 4070 Ti, RTX 3070, and RTX 3060.
• The best overall ray tracing “value” in FPS per dollar currently goes to the Arc A750, followed by RTX 3060 Ti, RTX 4070, RTX 3060, and Arc A770 8GB. AMD’s best DXR value is the RX 6600 in ninth, though the RX 6700 10GB in tenth is a better choice considering the DXR performance of the 6600.

If you felt the RTX 4090 performance was impressive at 4K in our standard test suite, just take a look at the results with ray tracing. Nvidia put even more ray tracing enhancements into the Ada Lovelace architecture, and those start to show up here. There are still further potential performance improvements for ray tracing with SER, OMM, and DMM — not to mention DLSS3, though that ends up being a bit of a mixed bag, since the generated frames don’t include new user input and add latency.

If you want a real kick in the pants, we ran many of the faster ray tracing GPUs through Cyberpunk 2077‘s new RT Overdrive mode, which implements full “path tracing” (full ray tracing, without any rasterization). That provides a glimpse of how future games could behave, and why upscaling and AI techniques like Frame Generation are here to stay.

Even at 1080p medium, a relatively tame setting for DXR (DirectX Raytracing), the RTX 4090 roars past all contenders and leads the previous generation RTX 3090 Ti by 41%. At 1080p ultra, the lead grows to 53%, and it’s nearly 64% at 1440p. Nvidia made claims before the RTX 4090 launch that it was “2x to 4x faster than the RTX 3090 Ti” — factoring in DLSS 3’s Frame Generation technology — but even without DLSS 3, the 4090 is 72% faster than the 3090 Ti at 4K.

AMD continues to relegate DXR and ray tracing to secondary status, focusing more on improving rasterization performance — and on reducing manufacturing costs through the use of chiplets on the new RDNA 3 GPUs. As such, the ray tracing performance from AMD isn’t particularly impressive. The new RX 7900 XTX basically matches Nvidia’s previous generation RTX 3080 TI, which puts it just a bit behind the RTX 3090 — and Nvidia’s 4070 Ti outpaces it by 7–9 percent on average across our test suite. The step down RX 7900 XT meanwhile lands around the level of the new RTX 4070.

Intel’s Arc A7-series parts again show some strange behavior, with performance either besting the RTX 3060 in some cases, or trailing the RTX 3050 in others. Minecraft performance has been at least partially fixed now, though further driver tuning should still be coming.

You can also see what DLSS Quality mode did for performance in DXR games on the RTX 4090 in our review, but the short summary is that it boosted performance by 78% at 4K ultra. DLSS 3 meanwhile improved framerates another 30% to 100% in our preview testing, though we recommend exercising caution when looking at performance with Frame Generation enabled. It can boost frame rates in benchmarks, but when actually playing games it often doesn’t feel much faster than without the feature. Overall, with DLSS2, the 4090 in our ray tracing test suite is nearly four times as fast as AMD’s RX 7900 XTX. Ouch.

AMD’s FSR 2.0 would prove beneficial here, if AMD can get widespread adoption, but it still trails DLSS. Right now, only one of the games in our DXR suite (Cyberpunk 2077) has FSR2 support, while three more from our rasterization suite support FSR2. By comparison, all of the DXR games we’re testing support DLSS2, plus another five from our rasterization suite — and three of the games even support DLSS3.

Without FSR2, AMD’s fastest GPUs can only clear 60 fps at 1080p ultra, while remaining decently playable at 1440p with 40–50 fps on average. But native 4K DXR remains out of reach for just about every GPU, with only the 3090 Ti, 4080, and 4090 breaking the 30 fps mark on the composite score — and a couple of games still come up short on the 4080 and 3090 Ti.

The midrange GPUs like the RTX 3070 and RX 6700 XT basically manage 1080p ultra and not much more, while the bottom tier of DXR-capable GPUs barely manage 1080p medium — and the RX 6500 XT can’t even do that, with single digit framerates in most of our test suite, and one game that wouldn’t even work at our chosen “medium” settings. (Control requires at least 6GB VRAM to let you enabled ray tracing.)

Intel’s Arc A380 ends up just ahead of the RX 6500 XT in ray tracing performance, which is interesting considering it only has 8 RTUs going up against AMD’s 16 Ray Accelerators. Intel posted a deep dive into its ray tracing hardware, and Arc sounds reasonably impressive, except for the fact that the number of RTUs in the A380 severely limits performance. The top-end A770 still only has 32 RTUs, which proves sufficient for it to pull ahead (barely) of the RTX 3060 in DXR testing, but it can’t go much further than that. Arc A770 also ends up ahead of AMD’s RX 6800 in DXR performance, showing just how poor AMD’s RDNA 2 hardware is when it comes to ray tracing.

It’s also interesting to look at the generational performance of Nvidia’s RTX cards. The slowest 20-series GPU, the RTX 2060, still outperforms the new RTX 3050 by a bit, but the fastest RTX 2080 Ti comes in a bit behind the RTX 3070. Where the 2080 Ti basically doubled the performance of the 2060, the 3090 delivers about triple the performance of the 3050. Hopefully a future RTX 4050 will deliver similar gains as the 4090, at a far more affordable price point.

Test System and How We Test for GPU Benchmarks

We’ve used two different PCs for our testing. The latest 2022/2023 configuration uses an Alder Lake CPU and platform (with Raptor Lake results coming soon), while our previous testbed uses Coffee Lake and Z390. Here are the details of the two PCs.

Tom’s Hardware 2022–2023 GPU Testbed

Intel Core i9-12900K
MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4
Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL16
Crucial P5 Plus 2TB
Cooler Master MWE 1250 V2 Gold
Cooler Master PL360 Flux
Cooler Master HAF500
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit

Tom’s Hardware 2020–2021 GPU Testbed

Intel Core i9-9900K
Corsair H150i Pro RGB
MSI MEG Z390 Ace
Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3200
XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB
Windows 10 Pro (21H1)

For each graphics card, we follow the same testing procedure. We run one pass of each benchmark to “warm up” the GPU after launching the game, then run at least two passes at each setting/resolution combination. If the two runs are basically identical (within 0.5% or less difference), we use the faster of the two runs. If there’s more than a small difference, we run the test at least twice more to determine what “normal” performance is supposed to be.

We also look at all the data and check for anomalies, so for example RTX 3070 Ti, RTX 3070, and RTX 3060 Ti all generally going to perform within a narrow range — 3070 Ti is about 5% faster than 3070, which is about 5% faster than 3060 Ti. If we see games where there are clear outliers (i.e. performance is more than 10% higher for the cards just mentioned), we’ll go back and retest whatever cards are showing the anomaly and figure out what the “correct” result would be.

Due to the length of time required for testing each GPU, updated drivers and game patches inevitably will come out that can impact performance. We periodically retest a few sample cards to verify our results are still valid, and if not, we go through and retest the affected game(s) and GPU(s). We may also add games to our test suite over the coming year, if one comes out that is popular and conducive to testing — see our what makes a good game benchmark for our selection criteria.

GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts

The above tables provide a summary of performance, but for those that want to see the individual game charts, for both the standard and ray tracing test suites, we’ve got those as well. These charts were up-to-date as of December 13, 2022, with testing conducted using the latest Nvidia and AMD drivers in most cases, though some of the cards were tested with slightly older drivers. We’ve added more cards since then, with newer drivers, and retested the Intel Arc GPUs.

Note that we’re only including the current and previous generations of hardware in these charts, as otherwise things get too cramped — and you can argue that with 29 cards in the 1080p charts, we’re already well past that point. (Hint: Click the enlarge icon if you’re on PC.)

These charts are up to date as of June 7, 2023.

GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — 1080p Medium

GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — 1080p Ultra

GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — 1440p Ultra

GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — 4K Ultra

Power, Clocks, Temperatures, and Fan Speeds

While our GPU benchmarks hierarchy sorts things solely by performance, for those interested in power and other aspects of the GPUs, here are the appropriate charts.

If you’re looking for the legacy GPU hierarchy, head over to page two! We moved it to a separate page to help improve load times in our CMS as well as for the main website. And if you’re looking to comment on the GPU benchmarks hierarchy, head over to our forums and join the discussion!

Choosing a Graphics Card

Which graphics card do you need? To help you decide, we created this GPU benchmarks hierarchy consisting of dozens of GPUs from the past four generations of hardware. Not surprisingly, the fastest cards use either Nvidia’s Ampere architecture or AMD’s Big Navi. AMD’s latest graphics cards perform well without ray tracing, but tend to fall behind once RT gets enabled — even more so if you enable DLSS, which you should. GPU prices are finally hitting reasonable levels, however, making it a better time to upgrade.

Of course it’s not just about playing games. Many applications use the GPU for other work, and we covered some professional GPU benchmarks in our RTX 3090 Ti review. But a good graphics card for gaming will typically do equally well in complex GPU computational workloads. Buy one of the top cards and you can run games at high resolutions and frame rates with the effects turned all the way up, and you’ll be able to do content creation work equally well. Drop down to the middle and lower portions of the list and you’ll need to start dialing down the settings to get acceptable performance in regular game play and GPU benchmarks.

It’s not just about high-end GPUs either, of course. We tested Intel’s Xe Graphics DG1, which basically competes with integrated graphics solutions. The results weren’t pretty, and we didn’t even try running any of those at settings beyond 1080p medium. Still, you can see where those GPUs land at the very bottom of the 2020-2021 GPU benchmarks list. Thankfully, Intel’s Arc Alchemist, aka DG2, appears to be cut from entirely different cloth… well, mostly.

If your main goal is gaming, you can’t forget about the CPU. Getting the best possible gaming GPU won’t help you much if your CPU is underpowered and/or out of date. So be sure to check out the Best CPUs for gaming page, as well as our CPU Benchmarks Hierarchy to make sure you have the right CPU for the level of gaming you’re looking to achieve.

Interested in diving into 3D printing as a hobby or using it to start a small business, but don’t want to invest thousands of dollars right off the bat? Purchasing a budget 3D printer is a good way to get started or, if you’re an experienced maker, to build out your farm. 

The good news is that you won’t lack for choices. There are dozens of capable budget 3D printers that sell for less than $300 and even some that go for below $200. The bad news is that, with a huge variety of makes and models, it can be difficult to find the right one.

At Tom’s Hardware, we test dozens of consumer / prosumer-level 3D printers each year, measuring their speed, output quality, features and ease-of-use. To help you choose, we’ve listed the best budget 3D printers on the market right now, along with the pros and cons of each.

Check out our Shopping Tips section below and go through a short checklist of things to keep in mind before making your purchases. If you have room in your budget for more premium options, check out our list of Best 3D Printers overall for more recommendations.

Best Budget 3D Printers

Best Budget FDM 3D Printer

The Anycubic Kobra Neo is the best low-cost FDM 3D printer in the market today. It’s an ideal 3D printer for budget-conscious beginners or could be used as a reliable backup machine for long-time makers who needs more than one machine for their multiple projects. This printer is very similar to the company’s flagship Kobra in design and is also packed with great features that we really like such as automatic bed leveling, a direct drive extruder and a heated double sided PEI build platform.

The Neo is very easy-to-use as it is shipped 90 percent assembled so you can get your print projects started right away. It has a solid 220 x 220 x 250 mm build volume and a PEI flex plate that makes it easy to take your prints out without the need for scraping and damaging your plate in the process. In our testing, the Neo did an incredible job printing a very detailed dragon bust (Fotis Mint’s Red Dragon Bust) which came out with minimal stringing and showed off precise details of the model we chose. 

Unlike the Kobra, this machine does not have touch screen for your setting configurations. But we felt that the knob controlled 2.4-inch color screen worked just fine to navigate the menus. Currently retailing at $169, the Neo comes at an affordable price range and has everything a new maker needs to start their 3D printing journey.

More: Anycubic Kobra Neo Review

Best Value FDM 3D Printer

The Anycubic Kobra Go is very similar to the Neo in terms of its design. It has identical build volume, interface and even hardware. However, what distinguishes the Go from the Neo is that it is shipped as a do-it-yourself kit instead of a ready out-of-the-box package. The kit would require you to assemble the printer yourself. If you don’t mind spending an extra 40 minutes on setup and are up to the challenge to building your own printer, then the Kobra Go is just the machine for you.

Though seemingly light on premium features, the Go does include automatic bed leveling and PEI flexible build plate which are two of the most useful functionalities we look for in a 3D printer that makes it easy to use. In terms of output, the Kobra Go does well with detailed prints when you slow it down and use good filament. (Check out our Best Filaments for 3D Printing for suggestions.) In our test, we printed Clockspring’s Illusionist Vase at a .16 mm layer height with 65mm/s speed which resulted in a perfectly smooth print.

Additionally, the Anycubic Kobra Go supports more file formats and more filament types than the Neo so the Go gives you more options to play with. Retailing at $179, it offers so much value for your investment.  

More: Anycubic Kobra Go Review

Best Budget FDM for Beginners

The Creality Ender 2 Pro is a solid choice as a starter machine for new makers. It is easy to assemble and operate, designed for portability and outputs great quality prints. The machine weighs under 10 pounds and has a top mounted handle for easy transport. It can easily fit small workspaces or stored away when not in use. 

Compared to most printers, the Ender 2 Pro does have a smaller build volume of 165 x 165 x 180mm. Despite its size, the Ender 2 Pro is a reliable performer which includes an interruption recovery feature, so you won’t lose your work if something happens in the middle of your print.

In our tests, the Ender 2 Pro delivered detailed print quality. (Check out our Best Filaments for 3D Printing for suggestions.) Our prints of 3D Benchy and a crystal dragon came out looking fabulous with all the fine detailing we were looking for. 

Assembling the Ender 2 Pro took no time at all. Out of the box, it is shipped 90% pre-assembled so you only need to screw in a few bolts and the machine is ready for use. And with its silent stepper drivers and quiet cooling fans, you can enjoy printing in peace for once. It also comes with a flexible textured bed that holds models tight while printing and molds peel right off once you are done. 

Additionally, the Ender 2 Pro can be upgraded with 3rd party hotends and premium bed plates making this a machine that can advance with you as you hone your 3D printing skills yourself. It currently retails for $179 but is often on sale for much less.

More: Creality Ender 2 Pro Review

Best Budget Resin 3D Printer

With its excellent 4K+ prints, easy set-up and large build volume, the Anycubic Photon M3 easily takes the crown as the best entry-level resin 3D printer we have reviewed.

What sets the Photon M3 apart from its competitors is its wide 163 x 102 x 180 mm build plate, which allows it to produce larger models in very fine detail. In our testing, we printed Louise Driggers’s Unicorn of Darkness and came out with impressive results. The 180mm tall model took over ten hours to finish, but the detailing on the unicorn’s horn and ornate mane was so clear and sharp.

The M3 includes an etched build plate that holds models very well during printing and lets you remove them easily when done. It also comes with handy safety features such as a pour spout for the metal vat and a screen protector for the LED glass to keep the machine safe from accidental dripping. 

Originally sold at $300, it is now available for $70 less than MSRP. This makes it an even more attractive and affordable choice as budget high resolution resin 3D printer.

More: Anycubic Photon M3 Review

Best Value Resin 3D Printer

If you are looking for a quality high resolution resin 3D printer at a reasonable price-range, then you should include the Elegoo Mars 2 Pro in your short list. This machine comes with premium features such as integrated air filtration, 2K mono LCD resolution and solid metal construction, but without the premium price tag.

The Mars 2 Pro has a spring-loaded self leveling build platform that simplifies the set up configuration and makes it easy to calibrate. We also appreciate the built-in air filter which is a big plus for anyone sensitive to the smell of resin during the print process. (However, to minimize any danger of inhaling fumes, you still need to use the Mars 2 Pro in a well-ventilated room.)

In one of our tests, we used Printed Obsession’s Doom Guy model with the Elegoo Standard Photopolymer Clear Green resin and it printed perfectly on our first try. The print time took over eight and a half hours but was well worth it as the 2K resolution masking LCD picked up all the fine details of the 3D model.

For fast high-res resin 3D printing at an affordable price, the Elegoo Mar 2 Pro earns our best value recommendation.

More: Elegoo Mars 2 Pro 3D Printer Review

Best Budget Resin for Beginners

The Anycubic Photon Mono 2 gets our nod as the best start-up printer for anyone who wants to get into resin 3D printing without breaking the bank. Designed specifically for first time resin users, this printer comes mostly assembled for easy setup, user friendly and includes an anti-scratch film screen protection.

It is light-weight and small for easy storage when not in use. But despite its compact size, the Photon Mono 2 features a bigger build volume than its Photon Mono cousins. We were able to fit six presupported minuatures on the build plate at once during our tests.

The Photon Mono 2 is a great printer for miniature models and small builds. It also comes with its own custom slicer, the Photon Workshop V3. Priced at $209, this machine is a solid and affordable option if you are looking to get started with resin 3D printing.  

More: Anycubic Photon Mono 2 Review

Shopping for a Budget 3D Printer: Top Tips

Here are a few important points you should keep in mind when considering buying budget 3D printers.

✅ Cost? How much can you afford to spend? If your budget is really tight, you can grab a model that’s less than $200 but a sub-$300 budget will get you farther. 

✅ FDM or Resin? The two main types of 3D printer are FDM, which involves spools of filament that are extruded onto the build plate or resin (aka SLA), which uses light to shape liquid resin. FDM printers are easier-to-use and don’t have the safety concerns that come with handling noxious chemicals. If you can handle them properly, Resin printers give you a bit more detail, particularly for miniatures. Given the ease of use, though, we think FDM are best for most people. 

✅ Features: Look for auto bed leveling, easy setup and a good UI. On FDM printers, getting a PEI build plate or direct drive design are real pluses. For resin, look for a high output resolution (2K or 4K).

MORE: Best 3D Printers

MORE: Best Resin 3D Printers

MORE: Best Filaments for 3D Printing

MORE: How to Buy the Right 3D Printer

Although curved monitors are commonplace today, this wasn’t always the case. There used to be a time when non-CRT desktop monitors were all flat, which remains the case today with most laptop displays. However, as people spent more time in front of a monitor during the day, engineers looked for ways to help alleviate eye strain, which became more apparent as display sizes increased.

Curved monitors are designed to more closely match the field of view humans see with their eyes. With larger and wider displays, images further out towards the right or left edges tend to look distorted in your peripheral vision. However, a curved monitor that gently wraps around your periphery allows the image to more closely align with your field of view, which should, in theory, reduce eye strain.

Some common curvature ratings include 1,000R, 1800R, and 2500R. So, what do these numbers mean? The lower the number, the tighter the display curvature appears to the user. For example, 1800R refers to a radius of 1,800 millimeters. So, if you line up enough monitors from end-to-end, the circle they create would have a diameter of 3,600 mm.

While most monitors come with a fixed curvature, some products on the market allow you to adjust this setting. For example, the Corsair Xeneon Flex 45WQHD240 allows the user to manually adjust the curvature from completely flat to a very tight 800R, which translates to a radius of 800 mm. At 800R, the 45-inch Flex provides an optimal viewing experience at just three to four feet. 

Quick List

Best Curved Gaming Monitors You Can Buy Today

Best Overall Curved Gaming Monitor

It’s hard to be all things to all people, but the Samsung Odyssey Neo G8 tries its best. It uses a 32-inch VA panel that combines Mini LED lighting (1,196 dimming zones) and a Quantum Dot film to deliver greater contrast than what’s available on traditional VA monitors (25,000:1 in our testing compared to 3,000:1 typically found in VA panels).

Samsung also infused the Odyssey Neo G8 with a tight 1000R curve and a fast 240Hz refresh, which is a rarity at this 4K (3840 x 2160) resolution. Whether looking at SDR or HDR content, the Odyssey Neo G8 impresses with accurate color, and overall gaming performance is excellent.

While we would have liked a bit more color volume from the Odyssey Neo G8, it provides a lot of bang for the buck at its $1,499 MSRP. However, the monitor is often on sale, taking its price below $1,200.

Read: Samsung Odyssey Neo G8 Review 

Best Bendable Curved Gaming Monitor

Corsair’s 45-inch Xeneon Flex is a premium monitor at a premium price. But its price tag is justified by its unique, bendable OLED panel that allows you to choose between a flat panel or an 800R (maximum) curve. You manually bend the screen using two handles extending from the chassis sides.

The Xeneon Flex exhibits good contrast and color accuracy. You also get a fast, 240 Hz refresh rate and low input lag. Adaptive Sync is standard, with support for AMD FreeSync Premium and Nvidia G-Sync. The wide-screen format with a 3440 x 1440 resolution should appeal to gamers and productivity workers alike.

There’s no such thing as a perfect product, and the Xeneon Flex suffers a couple of dings due to its relatively low pixel density courtesy of the 45-inch panel and slight misses with HDR color. However, the $1,999 MSRP will likely be the biggest hurdle for many gamers (although we’ve seen its street price dip below $1,700 recently).

 Read: Corsair Xeneon Flex 45WQHD240 Bendable OLED Review

Best Large-Format Curved Gaming Monitor

The Samsung 49-Inch Odyssey G9 is one of the most extreme monitors on this page (or any page). Not only is it a massive 49 inches diagonally, but it also carries a 1000R curve. From a 2 to 3-foot distance, this panel fills your view. It’s like having two 27-inch, 1440p monitors in one. You’ll need nearly four feet of desk width and 17 inches of depth to accommodate it, but if you do, you’ll enjoy a wraparound gaming environment without image distortion. 

Testing of the 49-Inch Odyssey G9 revealed excellent contrast (2,152.9:1 after calibration), which climbed to 58,881.7:1 when it came to HDR testing. This is a bright monitor with a sharp picture and accurate DCI-P3 and sRGB color. 

Read: Samsung 49-Inch Odyssey G9 Review

Best 34-inch Curved Gaming Monitor

Desktop-class OLEDs used to be a rarity in the gaming monitor segment. But over the years, prices have come down, and more entries have entered the fray, including Alienware’s jaw-dropping AW3423DFW.

This is a 34-inch ultra-wide monitor with a 1800R curve and a resolution of 3440 x 1440. However, the most important spec is its use of a Quantum Dot OLED (QD-OLED) panel, which offers an extremely wide color gamut and the blackest blacks you’ll find in a gaming monitor.

The QD-OLED panel of the AW3423DFW gives it unmatched contrast and excellent color saturation with no need for calibration out of the box. Throw in premium build quality – as we expect from Alienware – plus top-notch video processing and the AW3423DFW hits all the high notes without any demerits worth mentioning for enthusiast gamers.

If you can get past the $1,100 price of entry, the AW3423DFW would make a perfect companion for Nvidia’s newest high-end graphics cards, like the GeForce RTX 4090. 

Read: Alienware AW3423DW Gaming Monitor Review

Best Budget Curved Gaming Monitor

The Dell S2422HG might be small in stature at just 23.6 inches across, but it packs quite a punch at a very attractive, sub-$200 price.

The S2422HG has a 1920 x 1080 resolution and a relatively fast refresh rate at 165 MHz. Dell uses a 1500R VA panel, so you get excellent contrast at 3,000:1 (we measured better at 3,261.8:1) and a factory-rated brightness of 350 nits (although we only measured 324 nits). AMD FreeSync and Nvidia G-Sync compatibility is also included with this budget-oriented monitor.

Video processing for the S2422HG was good in our testing, and the low input lag was appreciated. However, we did have to knock the monitor for a few things it lacks, like an sRGB mode, integrated speakers, or any kind of USB hub functionality.

But with an MSRP of $199, the Dell S2422HG represents an excellent value in the curved gaming monitor space. In addition, we’ve seen the S2422HG fall to as low as $170 in recent months, which makes it an easy-to-recommend curved gaming monitor for those on a budget.

Read: Dell S2422HG Review 

Most Immersive Curved Gaming Monitor

The Philips Evnia 34M2C8600 aims to impress, starting with its gorgeous QD-OLED panel. This is a significant upgrade from the VA panel found on its “lesser” 34M2C7600 sibling. The basics don’t stray too far from many 34-inch widescreen monitors we’ve tested, with its 1800R curvature, WQHD (3440 x 1440) resolution and 175Hz refresh rate. Still, the QD-OLED panel delivers accurate colors (without the need for calibration out of the box), a wide color gamut and excellent overall image quality.

However, the ace up the 34M2C8600’s sleeve is the inclusion of Philips’ Ambiglow technology. Ambiglow provides bias lighting to project light on the wall behind the monitor. As we found in our testing, Ambiglow helps to increase the perception of improved contrast and sharpness of the image.

With a price tag of $1,299, the 34M2C8600 definitely isn’t aimed at the budget crowd, but its image quality, features, and uniqueness of Ambiglow make it an attractive option for gaming enthusiasts.

Read: Philips Evnia 34M2C8600 Review 

Benefits of Using a Curved Monitor

As we mentioned before, a gentle curve can help reduce eye strain with a larger screen. While this is, of course, beneficial to gamers who spend hours hunting down opponents in online frag fests, it’s equally appealing to office workers who spend their 9-to-5 staring at a screen, working on everything from documents to spreadsheets to photo editing.

Beyond that, thoguh, curved displays also provide a more immersive experience by wrapping the picture around your field of vision. Just imagine a racing simulator, like F1 2023, with three curved monitors arranged around you. The monitor to your immediate front would give you a clear view of the road ahead. Monitors to the right and left would provide for glanceable views of your periphery, allowing you to see vehicles trying to overtake you or the ability to see around an upcoming corner. And since the monitors are curved, there’s a gentle transition from panel to panel that cannot be achieved with flat panels.

Quick Shopping Tips

Here’s what you should consider when looking for the best curved gaming monitor.

✅ What size do you need? The smaller the display, the less need for a curved panel. You don’t typically start seeing curved monitors until you get to 24 inches and higher. From there, the options are practically limitless, with 32- and 34-inch curved monitors being among the most popular on the market. For those that want to go big or go home, 49-inch behemoths with an 800R curve are ready and waiting.

✅ What curvature best suits your needs? 1900R, 1800R, 800R, oh my! The key thing to keep in mind is that the lower the number, the more exaggerated the curve. Larger widescreen monitors (think 45 inches and greater) tend to adopt 1000R to 800R curves. As you step down to smaller monitors, the curves tend to see 1500R and 1800R more frequently – this isn’t an exact science but more of a general trend. For example, the 34-inch Alienware AW3423DW features a 1800R curve, while the 24-inch Dell S2722DGM features a more aggressive 1500R curve.

✅ VA, IPS or OLED? VA displays are most prevalent in the curved monitor space, and typically have great response times. IPS panels offer better color, but slower response times (and generally less contrast). OLED displays offer the best of both worlds along with infinite contrast, but they are the most expensive, by far.

✅ What refresh rate should you choose? First off, bigger is better. This number explains the number of times your monitor updates with new information per second — stated in hertz (Hz) — and, therefore, how many frames per second (fps) the monitor can display. Bigger numbers mean smoother images. Refresh rate is especially important for competitive gamers, so you’ll want to shoot for a monitor with at least 120 Hz (most gaming monitors offer at least 144 Hz), combined with the lowest response time you can find.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: How We Test PC Monitors

MORE: How to Buy a PC Monitor

MORE: How to Choose the Best HDR Monitor

Payroll software empowers business owners, HR departments and accounting teams to tackle employee pay in-house. The right software can streamline tedious tasks like tax filing, which in turn frees up time to spend on other aspects of business management.

Gusto is the best payroll software solution for many small businesses because of its thorough automation, comprehensive payroll tools and optional employee benefits with built-in administration. But if Gusto isn’t the best fit for you, we have seven other payroll solutions for you to consider. Below, we’ll weigh their features, strengths and weaknesses.

Jump to:

Top payroll software: Comparison table

Every payroll software on our list can be used to determine paycheck amounts, automate employee payments, generate payroll reports and calculate payroll taxes. All of our top payroll services also include unlimited payroll runs, meaning users can run payroll an unlimited number of times per month without incurring an extra fee.

The top payroll management systems differ in terms of starting price, app availability, third-party integrations (especially accounting software integration), time tracking and employee benefits administration.

Feature	Starting base price	Starting per-payee price	Free trial	General ledger integration	Learn more
Gusto	$40/mo.	$6/payee	No	Yes
ADP	Custom quote	Custom quote	Up to 3 mos.	Yes
Rippling	Custom quote	$8/payee	No	Yes
OnPay	$40/mo.	$6/payee	30 days	Yes
Papaya	N/A	$12/payee	Unlisted	Yes
Paychex	$39/mo.	$5/payee	No	Add’tl fee
SurePayroll	$19.99/mo.	$4/payee	Up to 6 mos.	Yes
QuickBooks Payroll	$45/mo.	$5/payee	30 days	Yes

Data accurate and verified as of 6/15/2023.

The year’s best payroll software

The best payroll software for most businesses isn’t necessarily the best payroll software for your business. As you weigh your options, consider what level of customer support you need, whether you need a scalable product and how many employees you hope to eventually add to your company.

Perhaps most importantly, make sure the payroll software you choose can support your business’s size. Several of the payroll software we review below is geared toward small and midsize businesses, though some (like ADP and Rippling) can support large enterprises as well. To learn more about payroll software specific to your business’s size, see the following reviews:

Key features of payroll software

Regardless of the software brand or type of payroll solution, all payroll software should calculate your employees’ paycheck amounts. Along with gross paycheck amounts, the software should also calculate deduction amounts for payroll taxes, healthcare premiums, retirement and other employee benefits, wage garnishments and optional deductions (like employee contributions to charitable funds).

From there, though, payroll software systems differ drastically in terms of their pricing and features. As you dive into the best payroll software companies listed above, consider which of the following features you need to effectively process payroll and how much you’re willing (and able) to pay for more expensive, comprehensive software.

Automatic payroll processing and tax remittance

Full-service payroll software, such as that offered by OnPay and QuickBooks Payroll, withholds payroll taxes on the employer’s behalf and remits those taxes to the IRS and other tax institutions on a regular basis. In contrast, self-service software will calculate tax amounts on your behalf but leaves the actual tax remittance up to you.

Self-service payroll software is cheaper than full-service software in terms of both per-payee pricing and monthly base costs. However, it saves businesses less time than full-service software, which often includes an autopilot feature for employers who want to run payroll without lifting a finger.

Payroll reporting

Most payroll software should include basic reporting features, starting with payroll reports that can be used to sync payroll expenses with your general ledger. Most should also include payroll tax withholding reports, employee paycheck reports, state unemployment tax reports and workers’ compensation insurance reporting.

More comprehensive software includes customizable reports with more in-depth analyses. For instance, payroll solutions like ADP and Paychex Flex include thorough human resource and benefits reports with impressive insights into payroll expenses and business growth.

Multiple pay methods

All payroll software should offer direct deposit as a primary employee pay option. However, the best payroll companies offer at least one other employee pay method, such as paper checks or app-based pay options like Gusto’s Wallet App or Square’s Cash App.

W-2 and 1099 form generation

At the end of each year, businesses must distribute tax form 1099 to contractors and W-2 to employees, plus file a copy of each tax form with the federal government. Nearly all payroll providers charge an additional fee to print and mail physical copies of each tax form, but most include electronic tax form access and distribution at no additional cost. (Paychex, which charges extra for W-2 and 1099 form preparation, is one notable exception.)

Compliance management

Payroll — especially payroll taxes — are heavily regulated by the federal government. Violations, accidental or not, can result in fines and more. As a result, the best payroll software includes thorough compliance management features that help you meet your legal obligations and avoid penalties for mistakes relating to tax law updates, wage garnishment orders and allocation rules.

Third-party integrations

Most payroll software integrates with third-party business apps like accounting software, HR products and time-tracking options. If you use cloud-based software to perform most business tasks, prioritize payroll software that automatically syncs with your favorite apps to keep all of them up to date on payroll expenses and employee data. Otherwise, you’ll spend more time entering data by hand.

How do I choose the best payroll software for my business?

1. Ask yourself key questions

To choose the right payroll software for your business, we recommend asking yourself several key questions that can guide your ultimate decision:

• How much can you afford to spend on payroll software each month? Make sure to consider both the base fee and per-employee fee.
• Do you primarily employ contractors, W-2 workers or a combination of both? Which types of employees do you anticipate having in the future?
• Which payroll features do you consider essential to your business’s operations? For instance, if you have hourly employees, payroll that syncs with time-and-attendance software is a must.
• How much support do you want (or need) as you set up your payroll software for the first time? Are you interested in white-glove setup with expert support, or do you feel confident setting up payroll software on your own?
• How large is your organization now, and how large do you plan for it to become?
• Which other software products do you currently use to keep your business up and running? How important is it to you to find software that syncs seamlessly with your existing apps and business processes?
• Do you really want to run payroll in house, or are you interested in a completely hands-off solution like a professional employer organization or outsourced accounting company?

2. Try the software yourself

While in-depth comparative reviews like ours can help you make informed decisions about which payroll software is right for you, the best way to find your ideal payroll software is to test it for yourself. Many payroll software providers offer a free trial (or free account setup), and those that don’t will usually offer free, customized demos that walk you through every aspect of the software.

3. Talk to an expert

If you’re a new business owner processing payroll for the first time, we strongly recommend speaking with an accountant to better understand your payroll responsibilities, including and especially your payroll tax obligations. An accountant can also point you toward the best payroll software from an accounting point of view, which could also impact your final software decision.

Our methodology

To review the best payroll software for businesses, we set up free accounts with payroll providers whenever possible to test the software for ourselves. When creating a free account wasn’t an option, we viewed demos and watched product reviews from customers detailing their experience with the software.

In all cases, we read product spec sheets, thoroughly reviewed each company’s website and reviewed verified user reviews on trustworthy third-party sites.

After conducting this initial research, we used a proprietary in-house algorithm to calculate star ratings for each brand, determine their use cases and rank each brand according to its score.

Frequently asked questions

What is payroll software?

Payroll software is a (typically cloud-based) tool businesses use to pay their employees. Payroll software calculates paycheck amounts for both hourly and salaried employees, including gross paycheck amounts, payroll tax amounts and other paycheck deductions.

Most payroll software automatically deposits employees’ net pay via direct deposit and includes features like payroll reports, optional HR features (like employee benefits administration) and time-tracking solutions for hourly employees who clock in and out.

How does payroll software simplify payroll processing?

Payroll software removes the need for business owners to calculate paycheck amounts by hand. It also simplifies record-keeping processes and helps businesses stay legally compliant with tax and labor laws.

Is payroll software good for small businesses or only for larger enterprises?

Payroll software is good for any business owner who wants to save time on processing payroll and reduce the possibility of making a critical error with an employee’s paycheck amount or payroll taxes. Businesses in any industry and of any size can benefit from streamlining their payroll processes with payroll software.

How much does payroll software cost?

Most payroll products charge a monthly base fee along with a per-employee fee, though some payroll providers like Gusto and Square Payroll waive their base fees for business owners that pay only contractors. Most entry-level software plans charge around $20 a month as a self-service base fee and up to $45 a month as a full-service base fee. Per-employee fees for entry-level plans can range from $4 per employee to $10 per employee.

There are also free payroll software options, like Payroll4Free, which offers free payroll for businesses with up to 25 employees. Alternatively, businesses can use spreadsheet software like Excel (which costs a monthly fee) or Google Sheets (which is free) to calculate payroll by hand.

However, these more affordable payroll-processing methods aren’t feasible for businesses with dozens of employees. They’re also less ideal for businesses that want to save time on payroll while reducing the possibility of human error.

Which payroll software is best?

Gusto is generally considered the best payroll software for most small and midsize businesses. It syncs with dozens of third-party products, includes both HR and payroll features and offers thorough automation for businesses that want to minimize the time they spend on payroll each month.

At the same time, Gusto isn’t the best payroll product for all businesses. As you try to decide which payroll software is right for you, consider factors like pricing, scalability, features, customer support and third-party integrations.

Looking for an alternative to Xero? Here’s our comprehensive list covering the top competitors to help you find the best fit for your business.

Xero is an accounting software solution aimed at small and mid-sized businesses, as well as professional accountants and bookkeepers. Featuring double-entry accounting, it’s designed to maximize ledger accuracy, error prevention and fraud protection. The tool boasts over 3.5 million users, but that doesn’t mean it’s a perfect fit for every use case.

In this article, we’ll take a closer look at several alternatives to Xero so you can choose the best software for your business.

Jump to:

Top Xero competitors and alternatives: Comparison table

No business lasts long without an accurate financial record and an effective system for managing cashflow. But there is more to accounting than just managing a spreadsheet, and different industries have different financial concerns. We’ve highlighted four major areas of functionality and identified which solutions fulfill these areas.

	Starting price for paid plans	Basic accounting functions	Time/project tracking functions	Logistics functions	HR functions
Xero	$13/mo.	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
QuickBooks	$30/mo.	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
FreshBooks	$17/mo.	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Sage Intacct	Call for quote	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Wave	$20/mo. + $6/employee	Yes	No	No	Yes
Zoho Books	$20/mo.	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
ZipBooks	$15/mo.	Yes	No	No	No
NetSuite	Call for quote	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Kashoo	$216/yr.	Yes	No	No	No

Top Xero competitors

Bigger isn’t always better and less isn’t always more. Some businesses only need basic accounting support while others need comprehensive software suites to manage processes at scale. The list of competitors below reflects those varied use cases and are identified by their target market applications.

Is Xero worth it?

Xero represents a middle ground between complex, expensive solutions and simple, affordable ones. With plans ranging from $13 per month to $70 per month, there are options to fit most small and midsize budgets while also offering room to grow. And, as a double-entry solution, it prioritizes accuracy and compliance.

Xero pricing

• Early: Costs $13 per month.
• Growing: Costs $37 per month.
• Established: Costs $70 per month.

If you haven’t gotten Xero yet and are thinking about it, you can get 50% off your first three months.

Xero pros

• Simple, affordable functionality for new businesses.
• Optional payroll add-on through Gusto for every tier.
• 24/7 online support.
• Easy implementation.
• Contractless subscriptions you can cancel anytime (with one month’s notice).

Xero cons

• Basic subscriptions limit users to just 20 invoices or quotes.
• Only top tier subscribers benefit from multiple currency support, project tracking and claiming expenses.
• Payroll add-on is an additional $40 per month.

Do you need an alternative to Xero?

Xero is a solid option for businesses as they start to get organized with their finances, but some users may find it restrictive feature-wise, especially compared to other options with similar price points. Ultimately, though, you have to decide if its features and functionality will adequately support your particular business.

Methodology

While writing this comparison article, we researched vendor websites and customer reviews on sites like Trustpilot and Gartner to fully understand the offerings and target use cases of each solution.

Motorola clearly read reviews of Samsung’s Z Flip series and took notes. The Moto Razr+, a foldable phone that’s like a standard 6.9-inch handset when open, offers a large 3.6-inch screen when closed. That addresses one of the most common complaints about the Galaxy Z Flip 4 — the size of its Cover Display. It’s a cramped 1.9-inch window with a limited selection of widgets that you can use. The Razr+, meanwhile, pretty much runs full Android with some tweaks. There’s something about using the outer display that feels almost pager-like and sent me into nostalgic delight. The Moto Razr+, which goes on sale today for $999, might appeal to both old souls and early adopters alike.

Design

Currently in its fourth generation (if you count the 5G model released in 2020 as a second-gen), the Razr+ has two notable differences from its predecessors. The first is the larger display. The second is something only people over 30 might notice: The Razr+ doesn’t have a chin cupping the bottom like on the iconic original Razr. I don’t mind it, but it does cost it some nostalgia points.

When folded, there is no gap between the two halves of the main screen. It’s a squat square, and its matte back reminds me of the case that my dad’s pager sat in. Sadly, only the Viva Magenta model comes with a vegan leather back, while the blue and black models use Corning Gorilla Glass Victus on the front and rear. Our review unit is black, and the matte finish lends a more premium feel and helps fight smudges.

The folded Razr+ is thinner than the Galaxy Z Flip 4 and fits comfortably in my palm, and it’s slightly larger than the Samsung phone when open. The Razr+ has a slightly less rigid hinge than the Flip 4, too. The Samsung phone can hold itself up at pretty much any position, but Moto’s hinge yields and opens all the way when you push it past 150 degrees.

Finally, at 188.5 grams (6.6 ounces), the Razr+ is lighter than the iPhone 14 Plus and the Galaxy S23 Plus, which both have slightly smaller screens. It’s just a tad heavier than the Z Flip 4, though. Both Motorola and Samsung’s devices are rated for water-resistance, with the Razr+ meeting IP52 standards while the Flip hit IPX8.

External display

Next to the Moto Razr+, using the Z Flip 4’s Cover Display feels unusable, especially when trying to frame a selfie. Not only is there barely enough space to contain everything, but it’s also hard to see. When shooting the video for this piece, our producer Joel Chokkattu struggled to get a usable shot of the camera preview on the Z Flip 4’s exterior display in sunlight.

Motorola’s larger pOLED panel also allows for a more full-fledged Android experience, while Samsung is a glorified notification widget. On the Moto, you can swipe down from top to see all your quick settings toggles and the brightness slider, swipe up slowly to show your open apps and switch between them, and swipe in from the side to go back. In comparison, the Z Flip 4 only lets you swipe sideways to rotate through widgets, and dragging down from top shows you just a single row of toggles.

 

Photo by Cherlynn Low / Cunghoctin

The main difference between Moto’s external display and the complete Android experience is the home screen. Motorola has designed it so that you can only have the clock widget, date, weather info and a row of six shortcut buttons. Tapping each of the latter takes you to the respective panel. You can also swipe sideways to see them sequentially, and you can arrange them in the order you prefer.

The widgets themselves are very similar to Samsung’s offerings. You’ll find an app launcher, dialer, calendar, games, media controls, steps tracker and the day’s headlines. On the Moto, the latter two are supplied by Google services like Fit and News. Because the Razr+ has more real estate, it can display more information or use a larger font. Both of these are an obvious improvement over Samsung’s teeny tiny panel, especially for those with bigger fingers, less dexterity or vision-related challenges.

The widgets aren’t the scene stealers here. For the most part, they’re simple – a calculator, media controls, et cetera. The Spotify playback widget doesn’t do more than let you pause, skip tracks, rewind and change playlists, which is frustrating. But even the fact that it offers that last option is already better than the Z Flip 4.

You can’t pick a specific song in a playlist, though. It’s a mild annoyance and not a dealbreaker, especially since there are two viable alternatives here. One: I can just open the phone and use the main Spotify app to go to a different playlist and pick a song. Two — and this is where the Razr+ truly shines — any Android app can run on the outside screen, as long as you’ve enabled it. This is a continuity feature so you can keep running whatever you’re doing on the main display on the outside panel after you close the phone.

To use Spotify (or any other app) on the small screen, I’d open it on the inside, shut the device, and continue outside. Even if I go on to do something else, I can find the app on the exterior display by swiping up from the bottom to see open apps.

You’d think that there would be issues with apps breaking and elements either not showing or being blocked by the two cameras on the bottom right of the screen. But Motorola has some workarounds. You can either have apps take up the whole screen and the sensors block parts of it. Or you can swipe up and select a layout that forces the content to sit within a rectangle above the cameras similar to how Android phones used to treat camera notches.

This should work with any app, but there are some scenarios where the experience is broken. When you’re navigating a drive with Google Maps and playing music at the same time, for example, you won’t be able to see the directions or your route. And, just because you can see your Instagram feed on the 3.6-inch panel, doesn’t mean you’ll want to.

Photo by Cherlynn Low / Cunghoctin

Even better, because the screen is so small (basically the size of the original iPhone), it’s easy to use with one hand. You can pull up a full QWERTY keyboard to reply to messages, and I was able to reach the letter Q or A with my thumb stretching across from the right.

Cameras

One other advantage of a larger external screen is how much more useful it is as a viewfinder. Both Samsung and Motorola let you use the outside display to preview what you’re shooting with the rear cameras, as well as show your subject what they look like. On the Z Flip 4, you can only see a portion of the scene and will have to guess where it will get cut off. With the Razr+, no guesswork is necessary – WYSIWYG.

Both phones offer similar gestures like holding up your palm to trigger a countdown till the photo is shot, so you can step away and take your picture when you’re ready and posed. You can also have the foldables bent at 90 degrees and placed on a surface with the inside screen facing out, and the layout will change so the top half is your viewfinder and the bottom shows controls.

Unfortunately, on the Z Flip 4 you have to choose between a bigger viewfinder with an inferior 10-megapixel camera or a smaller window and better cameras. On the Razr+, you can use the roomy outside screen and the exterior cameras instead of having to sacrifice quality or visibility while shooting.

Photo by Cherlynn Low / Cunghoctin

Moto opted for a 32 MP sensor inside, with a 12 MP main camera and 13 MP wide-angle system. Initially, I thought the Razr+ delivered decent shots. But after comparing them to samples from the Z Flip 4 and a Pixel 7 Pro, Motorola’s images are clearly washed out and less vivid. Samsung did a better job at exposure and retained the blue skies peeking through green leaves. In the same scene, the Razr+ blew out the sky. And when I snapped portraits of my friends’ adorable dogs, it struggled to get a clear shot due to slower focus and overall lag.

The Moto also struggled in low light and was susceptible to lens flares in my nighttime cityscapes and selfies. Though the Flip 4 fared slightly better, overall flip-style foldables lag flagship phones when it comes to camera performance.

As a regular phone: Main screen, performance and battery life

Unlike most high-end Android phones released this year, the Moto Razr+ uses a year-old Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 chip, which is the same processor inside the Z Flip 4. It’s worth pointing out at this point that the Flip 4 is also nearly a year old and presumably about to be replaced by a newer model. So if having the absolute latest specs matters to you, you shouldn’t even be considering the Razr+.

Photo by Cherlynn Low / Cunghoctin

If you’re not picky about the exact generation of processor in your phone, you’ll likely be satisfied with the Moto’s performance. I played endless rounds of Solitaire, messaged friends, set up custom gestures, changed wallpapers and it never flinched. The few hiccups I did encounter, like not being able to hit the X button at the outermost corners of an ad in a game, had more to do with specific apps and bad design than horsepower.

Thanks to its 165Hz refresh rate and 1080p resolution, the Razr+’s main OLED display is a solid canvas for activities like scrolling through Instagram and Reddit. Pictures and Stories I looked at were vibrant, and yes, there is still a bit of a crease where the screen folds, but it’s negligible. It doesn’t get in the way of actually interacting with apps or websites, and I mostly forgot it was even there.

When I needed to unlock the Razr+, it was as easy as using the fingerprint sensor embedded in the power button. Motorola also continues to offer nifty features that have been in its phones since the Moto X, like twisting your wrist or doing a chopping action while holding the handset to launch the camera or flashlight. It was also surprisingly easy to install the company’s Ready For app to use the Razr+ on my PC. While I was initially put off by the amount of Moto-branded software, thankfully most of it was useful and didn’t feel like bloatware.

Though the company promises three years of OS upgrades and four years of bi-monthly security patch updates, historically it . And that’s less than the four years of OS updates and five years for security releases that Samsung offers. That, together with Samsung’s experience in foldables, gives me slightly more confidence in its devices’ longevity.

Photo by Cherlynn Low / Cunghoctin

Moto managed to squeeze a 3,800mAh battery in the Razr+, which is slightly higher than the Flip 4’s 3,700 mAh setup. I haven’t had the time to run our video rundown battery test, which I want to do on both the 6.9-inch and 3.6-inch panels. But I’ve been able to play about five to eight hours of nonstop Solitaire on the internal screen so far before needing to plug the Razr+ in. It’s also worth noting that since the exterior display is so much more useful, you can do more on the phone without having to tap the larger, more energy-intensive screen during the day. That way, the Moto actually manages to last longer than most phones.

Wrap-up

I am in love with that front screen — how it works, how easy it is to use with one hand, and how much more power efficient it is. It’s almost like I want a small phone again. But the main thing preventing me from switching to the Moto Razr+ is camera performance. This isn’t a problem unique to Motorola — any flip-style foldable today suffers from this.

Anyone thinking of getting the Razr+ should also wait. Samsung has announced that its next Galaxy Unpacked will be taking place in Korea in late July, and it’s widely expected to launch new foldables then. If you can hold off, it’s worth seeing what the next Z Flip will offer before spending your money.

Photo by Cherlynn Low / Cunghoctin

I also want to point out that long-term durability remains a concern for any device with a flexible screen. Two of my colleagues have used a Z Flip 4 for a year and they’ve reported seeing cracks and bubbles in their displays and/or screen protectors. While the Razr+ uses a different panel from Samsung, there is still a possibility it won’t stand up to the wear and tear of daily use.

I can’t tell you how well the Moto Razr+ will hold up over time. But I can say that, for the first time in the US, there is serious competition for Samsung’s Z Flip 4. It’s time to call it: Flip Boi Summer is here and I’m excited for it.

Chúng tôi vẫn đang theo dõi thông báo chính thức của AMD về bộ tăng tốc trung tâm dữ liệu AI của họ, MI300X. Đó chắc chắn là một lực lượng xử lý cần được tính đến – một lực lượng mà AMD nhắm đến sử dụng như một chiếc dùi cui để cố gắng đánh bật Nvidia khỏi vị trí kẻ thống trị trong thế giới tăng tốc AI. Nhưng việc tăng hiệu suất đôi khi chuyển thành mức tiêu thụ năng lượng cao hơn, mặc dù mỗi kiến ​​trúc mới thường cải thiện hiệu quả sử dụng năng lượng (tiêu thụ ít năng lượng cho cùng một đơn vị công việc). Và dựa trên OAM của AMD (Mô-đun tăng tốc OCP) – MI300X – chắc chắn là một thiết bị ngốn điện: ở mức 750 W, nó thực sự là sản phẩm có TDP được đánh giá cao nhất từng có trong hệ số hình thức của nó. Tuy nhiên, đừng lo lắng: các thông số kỹ thuật cho các giải pháp OAM lên tới 1000 W công suất có thể phân phối, do đó, vẫn còn chỗ để mở rộng hiệu suất hơn nữa.

Mặc dù 750 W là lượng điện năng khổng lồ được tiêu thụ bởi bất kỳ phần cứng PC riêng lẻ nào (ít nhất là từ quan điểm của một cá nhân), chúng tôi phải lưu ý rằng những watt đó đang cung cấp năng lượng cho phần cứng nhanh hơn và chuyên dụng hơn nhiều so với ngay cả những card đồ họa mạnh nhất của AMD. Đối với công suất đó, AMD đang cung cấp thứ mà họ tuyên bố là bộ tăng tốc hiệu quả nhất cho khối lượng công việc liên quan đến AI (cả trong AI tổng quát và Mô hình ngôn ngữ lớn [LLM] xử lý).

Xem xét cách AMD quản lý để nhồi nhét 12 chiplet được xây dựng trên hai quy trình chế tạo (8x 5nm [GPU] và 4 nút 6nm [I/O die] với tổng số 153 tỷ bóng bán dẫn, tuyên bố đó có thể có một số hậu thuẫn. Tất nhiên, cũng có vấn đề là AMD đã quản lý để chạy mô hình LLM 40 tỷ tham số (Falcon 40-B) trên một MI300X duy nhất. Giờ đây, điều đó thật ấn tượng, đặc biệt khi xem xét mục tiêu của AMD là MI300X có thể mở rộng tới tám bộ gia tốc trong một gói duy nhất.

Như chúng ta thấy từ bảng trên, sự tập trung của AMD vào việc tăng hiệu quả sử dụng năng lượng đã không đủ để bù đắp các yêu cầu tính toán ngày càng tăng đối với các kịch bản Điện toán hiệu năng cao (HPC), hiện bao gồm việc xử lý các mô hình LLM dường như đang phát triển trái và phải . Các yêu cầu về hiệu suất tăng lên có nghĩa là ngay cả với các công nghệ, kỹ thuật tiết kiệm năng lượng mới nhất của AMD và công nghệ chế tạo mới nhất của TSMC, vẫn cần phải tăng đường bao công suất lên 190 W.

Tuy nhiên, mức tăng TDP 190 W đó (mức tiêu thụ điện năng cao hơn khoảng 33%) tương đương với khoảng ba lần số bóng bán dẫn được cấp nguồn so với MI250X – một biểu hiện ấn tượng về mức tăng hiệu suất, ngay cả khi không tính đến khả năng hỗ trợ cải tiến của MI300X cho các thuật toán thưa thớt (cực kỳ quan trọng để xử lý LLM và AI). Điều đó không nói lên bất cứ điều gì về sự khác biệt giữa bộ tăng tốc tính toán của AMD và GPU chơi game hàng đầu của công ty, RX 7900 XTX tương đối nhỏ bé.

Một người dùng Reddit báo cáo rằng bộ nguồn BeQuiet Dark Power 13 1000W của họ đã không chịu nổi thảm họa nóng chảy 12VHPWR giống như một số chiếc RTX 4090. Người dùng đã tiết lộ hình ảnh của bộ nguồn được hỗ trợ 16 chân, cho thấy một đầu nối bị nung chảy hoàn toàn ở phía bộ nguồn. Điều này cho thấy khả năng vẫn còn những vấn đề nghiêm trọng về độ tin cậy cần được giải quyết bằng đầu nối mới.

Đầu nối 16 chân nóng chảy không phải là điều gì mới mẻ, đặc biệt là trên các card đồ họa ngốn nhiều điện hơn như RTX 4090. Tuy nhiên, việc nhìn thấy đầu nối nóng chảy trên bộ nguồn là điều gần như chưa từng xảy ra. Điều này đặc biệt đúng khi không có bộ điều hợp nào được sử dụng, vì Dark Power 13 có hỗ trợ riêng cho cáp 16 chân.

Cáp RTX 4090 12vhpwr bị cháy ở phía PSU? từ r/4090Burning

Các hình ảnh cho thấy hàng chân dưới cùng của chính đầu nối (ngay bên cạnh bốn chân ‘có ý nghĩa’) đã bị phá hủy hoàn toàn trong quá trình nóng chảy khiến chúng hầu như không thể nhận ra so với hàng chân không bị tổn thương phía trên. Tương tự như vậy, đầu nối nguồn 16 chân bên trong PSU cũng có dấu hiệu hư hỏng tương tự, làm lộ phần nhựa nóng chảy dọc theo hàng cổng dưới cùng.

Tuy nhiên, đây là một trường hợp đầu nối nguồn 16 chân bị cháy ở đầu nguồn và bạn nên cẩn thận. Nếu không có nhiều báo cáo, thì không thể nhận ra mức độ phổ biến của vấn đề hoặc liệu đây có phải là sự cố xảy ra một lần hay không.

Tuy nhiên, lặp lại một loạt các báo cáo tan chảy RTX 4090 đã xuất hiện trong năm qua. Mặc dù các báo cáo này không bao gồm hư hỏng ở đầu nguồn điện, nhưng về mặt kỹ thuật, có thể xảy ra hư hỏng giống nhau ở cả hai đầu vì đầu nối GPU và đầu nối nguồn điện giống nhau. Nếu báo cáo này là hợp pháp, nó có thể là khởi đầu của một làn sóng thảm họa 16 chân mới khi ngày càng có nhiều người tiếp tục sử dụng bộ nguồn Gen 3.

Phần cứng của Tom đã liên hệ với cả Be Silent! và Nvidia. Nhà sản xuất PSU đã không phản hồi kịp thời cho việc xuất bản, trong khi người phát ngôn của Nvidia cho biết chúng tôi có thể không nhận được phản hồi trong vài ngày do công ty đóng cửa.

Sự cố này không thể xảy ra vào thời điểm tồi tệ hơn khi vẫn có nhiều báo cáo về đầu nối 16 chân của RTX 4090 bị nóng chảy. Nvidia tuyên bố rằng tất cả các sự cố ở đầu nối 16 chân đều liên quan đến lỗi người dùng, với đầu nối không được đặt đúng vị trí. Nhưng thật khó để tin rằng tất cả các lỗi đều do lỗi của người dùng vì một số báo cáo mới nhất này đến từ những người tự nhận là nhà xây dựng hệ thống kỳ cựu.

Hy vọng rằng sự cố cấp nguồn này với đầu nối nguồn 16 chân không xảy ra với nhiều người dùng hơn. Nhưng nếu đúng như vậy, đây có thể trở thành một vấn đề thậm chí còn nghiêm trọng hơn đối với ngành công nghiệp cung cấp điện và card đồ họa.

Apple đã công bố Mac Pro mới được trang bị bộ vi xử lý M2 Ultra tại WWDC23. Nó đã ra mắt tại các cửa hàng trong tuần này và đã có một lỗi trong tự nhiên. Trong một tài liệu hỗ trợ, Apple đã tiết lộ một lỗi phần mềm với Mac Pro khiến các ổ đĩa SATA bên trong sẽ bị ngắt kết nối khi máy tính chuyển sang chế độ ngủ. Apple đang trong quá trình sửa lỗi, nhưng nó sẽ không đến cho đến bản cập nhật macOS tiếp theo.

Mac Pro 2023 bắt đầu với 1TB dung lượng lưu trữ thể rắn trên mẫu cơ bản giá 6.999 USD. Tuy nhiên, họ có thể chỉ định máy có dung lượng lên tới 2TB, 4TB hoặc 8TB để trả thêm phí khi mua Mac Pro từ trang web của Apple hoặc họ có thể mua bộ nâng cấp trực tiếp từ Apple. Tuy nhiên, chúng không hề rẻ. Các bộ 2TB, 4TB và 8TB được bán lẻ với giá lần lượt là 1.000 đô la, 1.600 đô la và 2.800 đô la. Đây không phải là ổ SSD bán sẵn (chúng thực sự hoạt động giống NAND hơn và kết nối với bộ điều khiển trên M2 Ultra) và có thể đắt tiền. May mắn thay, thiết bị cung cấp hai cổng SATA III tiêu chuẩn, mở ra cơ hội cho các tùy chọn lưu trữ thứ cấp chính thống. Bộ lưu trữ nội bộ Promise Pegasus J2i 8TB, được bán với giá 400 đô la, cho phép người tiêu dùng sử dụng ổ cứng SATA hoặc SSD thông thường thân thiện với ngân sách hơn. Đó chính xác là nơi Apple tìm thấy lỗi khó chịu.

Khi chủ sở hữu đánh thức Mac Pro khỏi chế độ ngủ, họ có thể được chào đón bởi cửa sổ “đĩa không được đẩy ra đúng cách” như thể ổ đĩa SATA được đẩy ra giống như ổ đĩa flash. Lý do của lời nhắc là một số kiểu ổ cứng sẽ tự động ngắt kết nối khỏi thiết bị khi Mac Pro chuyển sang chế độ ngủ. Tuy nhiên, Apple không cung cấp danh sách các kiểu ổ đĩa bị ảnh hưởng, chỉ liệt kê rằng nó xảy ra với “một số kiểu ổ đĩa SATA bên trong”. Sự cố có thể xảy ra cho dù Mac Pro tự động chuyển sang chế độ ngủ hay khi người tiêu dùng đặt thiết bị ở chế độ ngủ theo cách thủ công.

Giải pháp tạm thời hiện tại của Apple là người dùng khởi động lại hệ thống của họ khi sự cố xảy ra. Người dùng Mac Pro cũng nên tắt chế độ ngủ. Tùy chọn này có tên là “Ngăn chế độ ngủ tự động khi màn hình tắt” và nằm trong phần nâng cao của tùy chọn Hiển thị trong Cài đặt Hệ thống. Nói cách khác, tốt hơn hết là bạn không nên đi ngủ hoặc tắt hoàn toàn máy Mac của mình để ngăn chặn sự cố.

May mắn thay, nó không phải là một vấn đề phần cứng. Vấn đề nằm ở cấp độ phần mềm mà Apple có thể giảm thiểu thông qua bản cập nhật macOS. Apple sẽ đưa bản sửa lỗi vào bản cập nhật macOS tiếp theo cho Ventura (có thể là macOS 13.4.1) nhưng không cung cấp ETA cụ thể. Cho đến lúc đó, chủ sở hữu Mac Pro có thể muốn tránh chế độ ngủ nếu họ đã tích hợp ổ đĩa cứng vào hệ thống.

Vấn đề này đặc biệt thú vị vì Mac Pro mới là lần đầu tiên Apple cho phép người dùng thêm dung lượng lưu trữ bên trong một hệ thống kể từ khi Apple silicon phát hành cho Mac. (Tính năng này không khả dụng trong MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, iMac, Mac Mini hoặc Mac Studio).

Nếu bạn đang tìm kiếm một ưu đãi CPU tuyệt vời để kết hợp với một máy tính chơi game giá rẻ hoặc máy tính năng suất thì hãy xem xét ưu đãi tuyệt vời này cho bộ xử lý Intel Core i5-13500 chỉ với 209 đô la – trở lại mức giá thấp nhất từ ​​​​trước đến nay. Với i5-13500, bạn sẽ nhận được 14 lõi và đồ họa UHD tích hợp với giá gần 200 đô la.

Ở mức giá thấp nhất mà tôi từng thấy màn hình này, Dell có màn hình chơi game G2723H của họ được bán với giá $149. Bạn nhận được rất nhiều tính năng với mức giá thấp này, bao gồm tốc độ làm mới 280Hz siêu nhanh, tấm nền IPS chất lượng và kích thước 27 inch. Thật khó để tìm thấy màn hình 1080p với các thông số kỹ thuật này với mức giá thấp này.

Một mã khuyến mại nhỏ tại Newegg cho thấy WD Black SN850X 2TB giảm xuống chỉ còn 135 đô la. Gần đây, chúng tôi đã thấy chi phí của ổ SSD giảm liên tục và tôi rất vui mừng khi các ổ đĩa dung lượng lớn hơn đang trở nên hợp túi tiền hơn – đặc biệt là với kích thước tệp ngày càng tăng của các trò chơi lớn mới nhất. Đây là một trong những ổ SSD tốt nhất trên thị trường với tốc độ đọc/ghi ấn tượng 7300/6600 MB/s.

Xem thêm các Ưu đãi thực sự của ngày hôm nay ở cuối trang.

TL;DR — Ưu đãi tốt nhất hôm nay

Giao dịch tốt nhất hiện nay một cách chi tiết

Tìm kiếm nhiều giao dịch?

Hôm nay, Intel đã thông báo rằng công nghệ làm mát ngâm cải tiến của họ đã có được khách hàng lớn đầu tiên – Bộ Năng lượng Hoa Kỳ (DOE). Công nghệ làm mát của Intel sẽ được phát triển và triển khai với sự hỗ trợ của khoản tài trợ 1,71 triệu USD trong vòng ba năm. Công nghệ đặc biệt này, dự kiến ​​sẽ được sử dụng trong các trung tâm dữ liệu của DOE, đã được phác thảo vào tháng 4, bao gồm các công nghệ mới có khả năng làm mát bộ vi xử lý lên đến 2.000 W. Intel là một trong 15 tổ chức được bộ năng lượng giao nhiệm vụ tạo ra hệ thống làm mát giải pháp cho các trung tâm dữ liệu sắp tới.

Khoản tài trợ khổng lồ đến từ chương trình COOLERCHIPS – Hoạt động làm mát được tối ưu hóa để đạt được bước nhảy vọt về năng lượng, độ tin cậy và hiệu suất cao carbon cho các hệ thống xử lý thông tin. Chương trình này được hỗ trợ bởi Cơ quan Năng lượng Dự án Nghiên cứu Tiên tiến của DOE (ARPA-E). Rõ ràng, mục tiêu là “cho phép tiếp tục Định luật Moore”, bằng cách cho phép Intel đưa nhiều lõi xử lý hơn vào bộ xử lý hiệu suất cao nhất của mình, với sự đảm bảo rằng sẽ có bộ làm mát có khả năng xử lý chip 2.000 W. Đối với ngữ cảnh, bộ xử lý trung tâm dữ liệu mạnh nhất hiện nay đang nhanh chóng đạt tới 1.000 W.

Intel đang hợp tác với nhiều nhà nghiên cứu hàn lâm và công nghiệp để tạo ra giải pháp làm mát ngâm hai pha. Thuộc loại hai pha có nghĩa là, cũng như các thiết bị điện tử được làm mát bằng cách ngâm trong chất lỏng, hoạt động làm mát được tăng cường nhờ chất làm mát trải qua quá trình thay đổi pha. Từ mô tả của Intel, chúng tôi hiểu rằng hệ thống ngâm của nó được kết hợp với buồng hơi (vị trí thay đổi pha). Ngoài ra, các bộ tản nhiệt trong các buồng thay đổi pha sử dụng một loại thiết kế giống như san hô để tạo ra dòng chất lỏng hiệu quả, được tăng cường bởi các lớp phủ tăng cường độ sôi cải tiến. Cách mà thiết kế tản nhiệt giống như san hô sẽ được tạo ra và in 3D một cách tổng quát khiến chúng ta nhớ đến các giải pháp công nghệ làm mát do Diabatix và Amnovis giới thiệu, nhưng thông cáo báo chí của Intel không nêu tên cụ thể bất kỳ đối tác nào trong ngành. Đối với các lớp phủ buồng, họ có thể sử dụng các lớp phủ nano, có thể là graphene, cho các đặc tính “tăng cường khả năng sôi” được quảng cáo.

Cùng với việc cho phép các chip tiếp cận hoặc vượt quá 2.000 W TDP, công nghệ làm mát ngâm mới của Intel được cho là hiệu quả hơn bất kỳ công nghệ làm mát hiện có nào. Điều này rất quan trọng, vì Intel tuyên bố rằng việc làm mát hiện chiếm tới 40% tổng mức sử dụng năng lượng của trung tâm dữ liệu. Intel cho biết các nhóm hỗ trợ trong dự án này nhằm mục đích cải thiện hệ thống hai giai đoạn đang được phát triển. Mục tiêu đầy tham vọng của nó là cải thiện khả năng 0,025 độ C/watt của hệ thống hiện tại lên 2,5 lần trở lên.

Các chuyên gia an ninh mạng tại CyberCX có trụ sở tại New Zealand đã trình bày chi tiết và trình bày một cách đơn giản đến mức đáng báo động để truy cập liên tục vào các máy tính xách tay cũ bị khóa BIOS. Trong bài đăng trên blog được liên kết và video demo, một giám đốc điều hành của công ty đã trình bày chi tiết cách rút ngắn một số chân chip EEPROM bằng tuốc nơ vít đơn giản để truy cập BIOS được mở khóa hoàn toàn. Sau đó, tất cả những gì cần làm là lướt nhanh xung quanh màn hình cài đặt BIOS để vô hiệu hóa hoàn toàn mọi mật khẩu BIOS.

Trước khi chúng ta đi xa hơn, cần lưu ý rằng trình diễn bỏ qua mật khẩu BIOS của CyberCX đã được thực hiện trên một số máy tính xách tay Lenovo đã ngừng hoạt động. Blog cho thấy rằng việc bỏ qua có thể tái tạo dễ dàng là khả thi trên Lenovo ThinkPad L440 (ra mắt vào quý 4 năm 2013) và Lenovo ThinkPad X230 (ra mắt vào quý 3 năm 2000). Các mẫu và nhãn hiệu máy tính xách tay và máy tính để bàn khác có chip EEPROM riêng nơi lưu trữ mật khẩu cũng có thể dễ bị tấn công tương tự.

Một số bạn sẽ biết rằng có khá nhiều máy tính xách tay đã qua sử dụng tốt được bán để thay thế vì chúng thực tế đã bị vô hiệu hóa việc sử dụng lại do khóa BIOS tại chỗ. Các chủ sở hữu hoặc tổ chức cá nhân có thể đã sơ suất ghi lại các mật khẩu này, quên chúng hoặc bất cứ điều gì – nhưng các hệ thống, thường bị tước bỏ ổ cứng và / hoặc SSD, không có giá trị trên thị trường đã qua sử dụng như chúng có thể. CyberCX đã cân nhắc về thiết bị CNTT cũ đã bị khóa bằng mật khẩu của mình và băn khoăn về việc cố gắng lấy lại quyền truy cập đầy đủ vào phần cứng để sử dụng nó làm máy dự phòng hoặc máy thử nghiệm.

Từ việc đọc các bài báo nghiên cứu và tài liệu khác nhau, CyberCX biết rằng họ cần tuân theo quy trình sau trên máy tính xách tay Lenovo bị khóa BIOS:

• Xác định đúng chip EEPROM.
• Xác định vị trí các chân SCL và SDA.
• Rút ngắn chân SCL và SDA vào đúng thời điểm.

Việc kiểm tra các chip có khả năng tìm kiếm trên bo mạch chính và tra cứu số sê-ri cuối cùng dẫn đến việc có thể nhắm mục tiêu đúng EEPROM. Trong trường hợp của ThinkPad L440, con chip này được đánh dấu là L08-1 X (điều này có thể không phải lúc nào cũng đúng).

Một video được nhúng trong bài đăng trên blog của CyberCX cho thấy việc ‘hack’ này dễ thực hiện như thế nào. Việc rút ngắn các chân chip L08-1 X yêu cầu một việc đơn giản như một đầu tuốc nơ vít được giữ giữa hai trong số các chân chip. Sau đó, khi bạn vào BIOS, bạn sẽ thấy rằng tất cả các tùy chọn cấu hình đều mở để thay đổi. Người ta nói rằng cần có một số thời điểm, nhưng thời gian không quá chặt chẽ, vì vậy có một số vĩ độ. Bạn có thể xem video để biết một chút về ‘kỹ thuật’.

CyberCX bao gồm một số phân tích khá sâu về cách hoạt động của hack BIOS và giải thích rằng bạn không thể rút ngắn chip EEPROM ngay lập tức khi bật máy (do đó cần phải tính thời gian).

Một số độc giả có thể thắc mắc về máy tính xách tay của riêng họ hoặc máy bị khóa BIOS mà họ đã thấy trên eBay, v.v. CyberCX nói rằng một số máy hiện đại có các gói BIOS và EEPROM trong một Thiết bị gắn trên bề mặt (SMD) sẽ khó bị hack hơn theo cách này, đòi hỏi phải có một “cuộc tấn công ngoài chip”. Công ty an ninh mạng cũng nói rằng một số nhà sản xuất bo mạch chủ và hệ thống thực sự đã sử dụng một SMD tích hợp. Những người đặc biệt lo lắng về dữ liệu của họ, thay vì hệ thống của họ, nên triển khai “mã hóa toàn bộ ổ đĩa”. [to] ngăn kẻ tấn công lấy dữ liệu từ ổ đĩa của máy tính xách tay,” bộ phận bảo mật cho biết.

CyberCX gợi ý rằng nó sẽ tiếp tục nghiên cứu trên. Có lẽ nó sẽ xem xét khả năng đọc mật khẩu BIOS ở dạng văn bản gốc từ EEPROM hoặc kiểm tra khả năng hack tuốc nơ vít của nó trên nhiều máy hơn.

Hôm nay, Intel đã thông báo rằng họ đang đại tu thương hiệu CPU tiêu dùng của mình lần đầu tiên sau 15 năm, dẫn đến một sơ đồ đặt tên đơn giản hóa trông hơi giống với sơ đồ đặt tên Ryzen của AMD. Cách tiếp cận mới của Intel tập trung vào nhãn hiệu ‘Core’ và chia các chip thành các bậc ‘Core’ và ‘Core Ultra’. Nó cũng loại bỏ biểu tượng ‘i’ khỏi các mã định danh chip i3, i5, i7 và i9 và không còn đề cập đến các bộ xử lý của nó bằng biệt danh thế hệ, như ‘Thế hệ thứ 13’. Nó cũng bao gồm các huy hiệu mới, tất cả những huy hiệu này chúng tôi sẽ đề cập nhiều hơn bên dưới. Những thay đổi này bắt đầu với bộ xử lý Meteor Lake được tung ra thị trường vào cuối năm nay nhưng không áp dụng hồi tố cho các chip hiện có.

Thông báo của Intel được đưa ra sau khi sơ đồ đặt tên chip mới xuất hiện cách đây một tháng khi các bộ xử lý có huy hiệu ‘Ultra’ mới được liệt kê trong các điểm chuẩn của bộ xử lý trên cơ sở dữ liệu công cộng. Việc đổi thương hiệu mới nhất của Intel diễn ra sau những lần trang bị lại khác cho hình ảnh công khai của nó, chẳng hạn như thay đổi logo và tiếng leng keng mang tính biểu tượng của Intel, với phần sau nhận được nhiều phản hồi tiêu cực hơn. Intel gần đây cũng đã loại bỏ các nhãn hiệu khác của Intel, như nhãn hiệu Pentium và Celeron từng là những cái tên quen thuộc. Sự thay đổi đó cũng không được đón nhận nồng nhiệt.

Intel cho biết chip Meteor Lake là “điểm uốn cho thiết kế, sản xuất và kiến ​​trúc, đồng thời mang lại những tiến bộ đáng kể cho công ty và khách hàng của chúng tôi,” và rằng những thay đổi này là kết quả của yêu cầu đơn giản hóa thương hiệu của khách hàng.

Giờ đây, Intel sẽ chia các thế hệ chip tương lai của mình thành hai cấp: các mẫu chính ‘Core’ và chip cao cấp ‘Core Ultra’, với loại sau biểu thị cấp hiệu suất cao hơn. Intel cũng đã loại bỏ chỉ định thế hệ khỏi tên thương hiệu của mình, nhưng bạn vẫn có thể dễ dàng giải mã điều đó từ số sản phẩm. Ví dụ: ’13’ trong 13900K cho biết chip là kiểu máy Thế hệ thứ 13 và phần đó của sơ đồ đặt tên sẽ vẫn nhất quán với thế hệ sắp tới. Intel cũng có các huy hiệu mới, bạn có thể xem trong album trên.

Có lẽ thay đổi bề ngoài lớn nhất là quyết định bỏ chữ ‘i’ khỏi các dòng Core i3, i5, i7 và i9. Dưới đây là bản mô phỏng về cách thương hiệu cũ sẽ tìm kiếm các chip 14900K sắp tới và một vài ví dụ về giao diện của thương hiệu cũ trong thương hiệu mới chính thức cơ chế:

• CŨ: Bộ xử lý Intel Core i9-14900K thế hệ thứ 14
• MỚI: Bộ xử lý Intel Core Ultra 9 14900K
• MỚI: Bộ xử lý Intel Core 9 14900K
• AMD: Ryzen 9 7950X

Như bạn có thể thấy, Intel cũng bao gồm từ ‘bộ xử lý’ trong tên sản phẩm chính thức. Điều này về mặt kỹ thuật đã có mặt trong kế hoạch xây dựng thương hiệu hiện tại mặc dù hoàn toàn không có ai sử dụng nó trong mục đích sử dụng thông thường — ngay cả Intel cũng không. Tuy nhiên, giờ đây, một cách khó hiểu, Intel đã đưa từ này vào giữa bộ chỉ định họ (ví dụ: Core 9, Core Ultra 9) và số kiểu máy, thay vì ở cuối tên.

Chúng tôi đã hỏi nhóm thương hiệu của Intel về điều này và họ nói rằng họ ‘thích’ sử dụng thuật ngữ ‘bộ xử lý’ hơn, nhưng trọng tâm thực sự là thương hiệu ‘Core’ và ‘Core Ultra’. Cho rằng ngay cả bản thân Intel cũng chưa sử dụng bộ chỉ định ‘bộ xử lý’ hiện có, chúng tôi nghi ngờ rằng phần ‘bộ xử lý’ thừa mới của thương hiệu sẽ bắt kịp. Đây là một mô hình mô phỏng khác, nhưng lần này là cách xây dựng thương hiệu trong cách sử dụng phổ biến:

• CŨ: Core i9-14900K thế hệ thứ 14 của Intel
• MỚI: Intel Core Ultra 9 14900K
• MỚI: Intel Core 9 14900K
• AMD: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

Đừng nhầm lẫn, đây có thể là cách sử dụng phổ biến nhất mà bạn sẽ thấy trong các bài đánh giá và trong báo cáo chung. Như bạn có thể thấy, không có ‘bộ xử lý’ được thêm vào chuỗi thương hiệu, thương hiệu chip chính mới của Intel rất giống với thương hiệu Ryzen của AMD. Có, các bộ phận mang thương hiệu Core Ultra sẽ có thêm một chút ‘Ultra’ để phân biệt, nhưng sơ đồ mới mang lại cảm giác rất Ryzen-esque mà không có chữ ‘i’ trong Core i9. Thêm về điều đó dưới đây.

Intel vẫn chưa xác nhận, nhưng chúng tôi biết từ hàng núi bằng chứng bên ngoài rằng thế hệ chip tiếp theo của họ sẽ có hai đường bơi — bộ xử lý dựa trên Hồ sao băng, một thiết kế xếp chồng 3D hoàn toàn mới với vi kiến ​​trúc mới và Raptor Các mẫu Lake Refresh, sử dụng cùng một thiết kế và vi kiến ​​trúc như các bộ xử lý hiện đang được bán nhưng có thêm điều chỉnh để cải thiện hiệu suất.

Chúng tôi đã nói chuyện với nhóm xây dựng thương hiệu của Intel và hỏi liệu nhãn hiệu Core Ultra mới có áp dụng cho các mẫu Meteor Lake mới hơn hay không trong khi các mẫu làm mới sẽ thuộc nhãn hiệu Core tiêu chuẩn và/hoặc liệu bộ xử lý dòng K có thể ép xung có bị giới hạn ở nhãn hiệu Ultra hay không chỉ sản phẩm.

Intel đã không xác nhận rằng chỉ chip Meteor Lake mới được đánh dấu là Core Ultra nhưng đã nói rằng cấp đó ‘đại diện cho những cải tiến mới nhất’ và họ sẽ sớm chia sẻ thêm thông tin chi tiết. Điều đó có nghĩa là nó ít nhất là một giả định hợp lý. Tuy nhiên, các đại diện đã nói rằng khả năng ép xung (K-series) không phải là yêu cầu đối với một con chip được gắn nhãn là Core Ultra.

suy nghĩ

Chắc chắn là một quyết định táo bạo nhưng đáng nghi ngờ khi loại bỏ nhãn hiệu đã có từ khi Intel gần như độc quyền trên thị trường và là công ty dẫn đầu về hiệu suất không thể nghi ngờ trong hơn một thập kỷ. Nhận thức rằng Intel đang làm giảm sự công nhận thương hiệu khó khăn được xây dựng trong những năm đó rõ ràng là sẽ xuất hiện, bất kể các nghiên cứu thị trường mà Intel cho chúng ta biết họ đã sử dụng để đưa ra quyết định.

Sự thay đổi thương hiệu của Intel chắc chắn sẽ gây nhầm lẫn cho những người đã quen với cách đặt tên trong 15 năm qua, nhưng Intel cho chúng tôi biết sự thay đổi này được thiết kế để cải thiện khả năng nhận diện thương hiệu với các đối tượng phổ thông không am hiểu về công nghệ. Trên thực tế, Intel cảm thấy rằng thương hiệu ‘Lõi’ đã là cốt lõi của tài sản thương hiệu của mình, vì vậy họ cho rằng việc bỏ chữ ‘i’ sẽ làm tăng sự tập trung vào thương hiệu ‘Lõi’.

Ngày nay, Intel và AMD gần giống nhau hơn những gì chúng ta đã thấy trong thập kỷ qua. Bộ xử lý Ryzen của AMD đã tạm thời đưa công ty trở lại vị trí dẫn đầu không thể nghi ngờ, nhưng Raptor Lake thế hệ thứ 13 của Intel đã khôi phục vị trí dẫn đầu chung của Intel với sự kết hợp tốt nhất giữa hiệu suất và giá trị cho phần lớn thị trường máy tính để bàn. Đúng vậy, Ryzen 7000 của AMD vẫn dẫn đầu về tổng thể trò chơi với dòng sản phẩm X3D cao cấp, nhưng chúng mang một mức giá cao hơn khiến chúng trở thành những hệ thống cao cấp nhất, vì vậy chúng không dành cho hầu hết người dùng.

Điều đó làm cho thời điểm đổi thương hiệu của Intel trở nên khó hiểu hơn. Chắc chắn không có gì lạ khi một kẻ thua cuộc áp dụng kế hoạch xây dựng thương hiệu tương tự như người đương nhiệm, thường là tận dụng thương hiệu sản phẩm nổi tiếng hơn từ người chơi thống trị để phát triển thương hiệu của riêng họ – đó chính xác là những gì AMD đã làm khi ra mắt Zen-powered bộ xử lý với sơ đồ Ryzen 3, 5, 7 và 9 rất quen thuộc của Intel. Trên thực tế, AMD thậm chí còn áp dụng thương hiệu chipset bo mạch chủ rất giống với Intel.

Intel chắc chắn đã quay trở lại đà tăng trưởng trong thị trường máy tính để bàn, nhưng việc loại bỏ phần ‘i’ quen thuộc chắc chắn sẽ tạo ra nhiều lời chỉ trích. Mặc dù có thể không cố ý, nhưng một số người cũng sẽ khẳng định đây giống như kế hoạch xây dựng thương hiệu của AMD cho Ryzen. Tuy nhiên, như đã đề cập, AMD lần đầu tiên áp dụng sơ đồ xây dựng thương hiệu giống Intel, khiến Intel khó đơn giản hóa việc xây dựng thương hiệu của mình mà không kết thúc bằng một cách tiếp cận tương tự.

Intel cho biết họ chưa chia sẻ tất cả các chi tiết của kế hoạch xây dựng thương hiệu mới và các trang trình bày của họ cho thấy rằng họ vẫn đang trong quá trình ra quyết định về một số chi tiết. Điều đó có vẻ hơi đáng ngờ, do gần đến thời điểm ra mắt Hồ sao băng vào cuối năm nay – chắc chắn những quyết định này đã được đưa ra. Trong cả hai trường hợp, chúng ta sẽ tìm hiểu thêm về kế hoạch xây dựng thương hiệu khi Hồ sao băng ra mắt vào cuối năm nay.