All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
The cellular iPad Mini is a top choice for road warriors, offering 5G capability along with WiFi 6 so you can stay connected wherever you are. Given the desirability of that feature, however, it's rather expensive at $649 and we've rarely seen it go on sale. Luckily, if you've been eyeing one, it's now available at Amazon for $600, or $49 off the regular price — the steepest discount we've seen so far.
The 2021 model has similar specs to the iPhone 13, with the same speedy A15 Bionic chip that delivers a big jump in performance over the fifth-gen model. It comes with a larger 8.3-inch display with higher 2,266 x 1,488 resolution and eliminates the physical home button, moving the Touch ID sensor to the power button. The volume buttons, meanwhile, are at the top to make room for Apple Pencil 2 that can be attached to the side magnetically.
Other features include USB-C charging and upgraded cameras with support from Apple's Center Stage feature, keeping you in the center of the frame during video calls. The main downsides are the lack of a headphone jack, limited 64GB of storage on the base model, and a higher price, particularly with the cellular model. Also keep in mind that the 5G doesn't support mmWave, so don't expect a big jump in wireless speeds compared to LTE.
If you're fine with the 5G limitations and 64GB storage, Amazon has at least taken the edge off the price. The $600 price for the 64GB cellular model is available on all four listed colors, but it's best to act soon before the sale ends.
Follow@EngadgetDealson Twitter for the latest tech deals and buying advice.
Pokémon Legends: Arceus is available right now on Nintendo Switch, and it turns out it's a whole lot of fun. Just like any other game in the series, Legends: Arceus has a number of special distributions for fans to enjoy, and this guide is here to help you keep track of each and every one of them.
Below you'll find a full list of all the Pokémon Legends: Arceus Mystery Gift codes currently available, plus instructions on how to input them and claim your rewards. A big thanks to Serebii.net who keeps a close eye on these things — follow them on Twitter for up-to-the-minute info on everything Pokémon-related.
Complete list of Active Pokémon Legends: Arceus Mystery Gift codes
Below is a full list of the Mystery Gift codes you can currently redeem in Pokémon Legends: Arceus, as well as any other active distributions.
We'll update this list when new codes appear.
Pokémon Legends: Arceus Mystery Gift code
Reward
Expiry Date
[No code required - choose 'Get via Internet']
Hisuian Zoroark - Baneful Mask
9th May, 2022
[No code required - choose 'Get via Internet']
Hisuian Growlithe Kimono Set
9th May, 2022
[Exclusive to those who bought the game via Nintendo eShop - a unique code will be given to you with your purchase]
Heavy Ball Set
9th May, 2022
[Exclusive to Amazon (US/Japan) - a unique code will be given to you with your purchase]
Garchomp Kimono Set
9th May, 2022
Complete list of Expired Pokémon Legends: Arceus Mystery Gift codes
Pokémon Legends: Arceus Mystery Gift code
Reward
Expiry Date
N/A
N/A
N/A
How to redeem Mystery Gift codes in Pokémon Legends: Arceus
Scroll across each tab by pressing the 'ZL/ZR' buttons until you reach the Mystery Gift screen
Select 'Mystery Gift', then 'Get with Code/Password' or 'Get via Internet'
Input your chosen code (if applicable) to claim your free gift
We'll keep this page up-to-date with all the latest Mystery Gift codes for Pokémon Legends: Arceus, so make sure to keep checking back or bookmark this page.
Looking for Mystery Gift codes for Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl, or Pokémon Sword and Shield, too? Look no further:
Updating Windows can be a frustrating process, but Microsoft has identified a key factor in why devices may struggle to achieve the state of "fully up-to-date."
In a post on the Microsoft Tech Community website, via BleepingComputer, David Guyer, Program Manager for Windows Updates in Endpoint Manager, explains how a device running Windows needs two periods of time connected to the internet (and Windows Update) to successfully update. The first period spans "two continuous connected hours" followed by "six total connected hours" after an update is released.
That total time of eight connected hours ensures any update Microsoft releases for its operating systems will be installed successfully. Guyer says the time a device is powered on and connected to Microsoft services such as Windows Update is referred to as "Update Connectivity" internally. The eight-hour period is therefore known as the "minimum Update Connectivity measurement."
Although Guyer's post is clearly aimed at business users, ensuring Windows is always up-to-date is important for all users as it improves security and reliability. If your Windows device regularly says that updates need to be installed, or they take a long time to complete, it could be that your Update Connectivity measurement is below the required minimum. In that case, Microsoft encourages users to leave their devices powered on and connected to the internet for longer. Leaving it on overnight is suggested as a solution.
Recommended by Our Editors
Guyer repeatedly references Windows 10 with regards to the Update Connectivity measurement. Windows 11 updates are meant to be 40% smaller and more efficient, so it could turn out the Update Connectivity minimum will decrease when we reach a point where the majority of Windows users have upgraded to Microsoft's latest OS.
Get Our Best Stories!
Sign up for What's New Now to get our top stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
This newsletter may contain advertising, deals, or affiliate links. Subscribing to a newsletter indicates your consent to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe from the newsletters at any time.
Apple will now let developers distribute unlisted apps through the App Store that only users with a direct link can access (via MacRumors). While unlisted apps aren’t discoverable by the general public through search results, App Store categories, charts, or recommendations, they’re available to administrators via the Apple Business Manager or Apple School Manager.
Apple notes that unlisted apps are ideal for “limited audiences,” such as guests at a special event, members of an organization, research study participants, or a specific group of employees. To make an app unlisted and obtain a link, developers will first need to submit a request to Apple.
Apps that have only been approved for private download on the Apple Business Manager or Apple School Manager require developers to take some extra steps, however. Apple says developers will need to “create a new app record in App Store” upload the binary, and then “set the distribution method to Public.” Developers with apps that are already public can submit a request without additional steps.
Once Apple approves the request, the distribution method for the app will change to “Unlisted App,” and the same goes for any updated versions of that app. If the app is already available on the App Store, the link for the now-unlisted app will stay the same. It’s also important to note that unlisted apps “must be ready for final distribution” and Apple won’t approve any apps still in beta or a pre-release state.
A somewhat similar policy under the Developer Enterprise Program, which was originally put in place for developers to test and internally distribute apps before they’re officially reviewed by Apple, saw bad actors use the program to sidestep Apple’s rigorous safety requirements. This led to the shadowy presence of pirated games, gambling, and porn apps that could be easily sideloaded onto iPhones. It’s unclear how rigorous the review process will be for unlisted apps, but findings from Ars Technica suggest it will be reserved for apps with a limited audience only.
Article From & Read More ( iOS 15.4 Beta 1 Changes and Features! New emoji, Face ID, Universal Control, and more... - 9to5Mac )
https://ift.tt/8TgEJkqZA
Technology
The times they are a-changin' and in this instance, seemingly for the better.
Unlike past launches of Nintendo first-party properties at the flagship Nintendo NY store located in New York City’s fabled Rockefeller Center — which often saw hundreds of people queued up overnight to be the first to buy the Switch, or high profile Mario and Zelda on Day 1 — the debut of Game Freak's highly anticipated Pokémon Legends: Arceus was downright civilized.
Clearly, this was by design, with Nintendo NY laying the ground rules a week in advance and ensuring that lines were for ticket holders only and that they could only line up an hour ahead of their entry slot (10 am, and a second wave at 11 am).
Surely local law enforcement had some choice suggestions on how to handle big launches, since past scenarios often found fans bringing actual furniture (everything from lawn chairs to tents) in order to better survive the often freezing temperatures that accompanied these special events.
But so too did the game’s widespread availability likely soften the blow of this launch. Your intrepid photographer had already put 5 or so hours into the game, having played it since midnight EST the day of the launch when Arceus unlocked, with yet another boxed copy arriving early the same morning.
The fact that there isn’t an accompanying Arceus-themed Switch console on offer, a special edition of the game, an Amiibo, or any developers or voice talent on hand meant that there was little to queue up for, other than to say “I was there.”
Nintendo NY was, as it is known to do, giving out posters and some minor freebies, and also had an Arceus-themed ‘campsite’ inside the store for fans to take photos in and around. Otherwise, this was a generally tame and organized affair – far preferable, in fact, to the chaos and usual FOMO that afflicted past events.
Surprisingly, there was a complete lack of any Arceus-branded merch – shirts, Switch cases and the usual suspects were notably absent – which is unusual considering this is one of the most anticipated first-party game launches in some time and was mostly shrouded in mystery. Regardless, everyone seemed to leave the store a happy camper which, to be fair, is completely appropriate in this case.
Article From & Read More ( Pokémon Legends: Arceus' NYC Launch Was Unusually Subdued, But That's Fine - Nintendo Life )
https://ift.tt/zgpDyoMWL
Technology
Ladies and gentlemen, the weekend deals! While some of us on the East Coast may be busy shoveling snow this Saturday morning, we hope many of you are having a restful weekend chock-full of deals and discounts.
Kicking things off on the deals front is Logitech’s StreamCam, which is currently on sale in its graphite colorway at Amazon for $108. That’s about $62 off the regular price of this excellent webcam, one we consider to be the best webcam you can buy in terms of image quality. The StreamCam is Logitech’s flagship 1080p camera and is able to achieve 60 frames per second, allowing for a smooth, crisp look. The Capture software can also keep you centered in the frame, much like the Center Stage feature found on Apple’s newer iPads, and the compact webcam can record in either landscape or portrait mode, a feature that makes editing clips for mobile that much easier. It doesn’t go on sale too frequently, however, and today’s price is only a few dollars shy of its all-time low.
The Beats Fit Pro are a new dark horse in the world of true wireless earbuds. While these days we often associate Apple-owned Beats with fitness-focused alternatives to the de facto standard AirPods line, the ANC-equipped Beats Fit Pro offer a comfy fit and outclass the pricier AirPods Pro in audio quality. Their only downsides are a clunkier case that does not offer wireless charging, and their tendency to not go on sale as much as the AirPods Pro. Well, that and the fact they still work a bit more seamlessly with iOS than Android.
The Roborock S6 MaxV is a robot vacuum and mop with a solid feature set that includes AI-based obstacle avoidance, up to 180 minutes of runtime, programmable no-go zones, and integration with Amazon’s Alexa. Roborock’s top-of-the-line model normally sells for $750, but it’s currently discounted to $460 at Amazon and Walmart (be sure to clip the on-page coupon on Amazon).
We have not tested this exact model, but our resident smart home reviewer Jennifer Pattison Tuohy recently found a lot to like in its flagship counterpart, the Roborock S7 Plus. The latter vacuum sells for $950, so the S6 MaxV promises many of the same features — suction capacity, lidar navigation, tank size, etc. — for almost half the price. The S6 lacks the auto-empty dock found on the S7 Plus, but if your home is littered with toys and other potential obstacles, the MaxV might be the better bet.
If you’re a PC gamer, the two biggest digital storefronts are both offering discounts worthy of your perusal right now. Both Epic Games and Steam are running Lunar New Year sales, offering various savings across a wide swath of titles. Steam’s sale runs until 1PM EST / 10AM PST on February 3rd, while Epic is extending its sale through February 9th.
The second-gen Google Pixel Stand is finally here, and our own Allison Johnson reviewed it and found it to be a fine charger if a bit pricey for what it offers. Thankfully, if you own an older Pixel 3, 4, or 5 that cannot take advantage of the new charger’s higher wattage output, you can currently get the first-gen model for $28.99 ($50 off) at Woot.
If you like the idea of wirelessly charging your phone (slowly) by resting it on an adorable Pikachu, this Pokémon-themed wireless charger by Madcow is $47.99 ($12 off) at GameStop. It may be a novelty, but it also charges three other devices via USB. Also, the cheeks light up! Come on, that’s adorable.
Apple’s second-gen AirPods are on sale at Amazon with the wired charging case $99.99, nearly matching their price to date. Although they’re now considered the entry-level model, they still offer great wireless performance, reliable battery life, and surprisingly detailed sound. Read our review.
If you're anything like us, you're currently addicted to Wordle — the online word game that sprung from nowhere around Christmas and which now has an estimated 1 million daily players.
It's a great game with a simple concept, few frills and one main point of difference from most similar puzzles: you can only play it once per day. That's one of its chief attractions, keeping anticipation high for the next installment and ensuring that productivity in the Tom's Guide office doesn't plummet to zero.
But if you want more than just your daily fix, you now have another option — in the form of Wordle Archive.
How to access Wordle Archive
(Image credit: Wordle Archive)
Wordle's success has inevitably led to a raft of clones seeking to make a quick buck off the back of a game that is free to play and has no ads. Wordle Archive is emphatically not one of those.
Instead, it's a fully playable archive of every Wordle puzzle so far, excluding the current day. And there are plenty of them — though Wordle may only have entered the public consciousness recently, it was thrust upon the world way back in May 2021, so at the time of this writing, there are 221 puzzles to complete.
Each one can be played in date order or you can select a number of your choosing, which is handy if you recently missed one or (more likely) didn't start playing until the rest of the world did at the start of this year.
And that's all there is to it. There are no fancy gimmicks or attempts to mess around with the formula, though you do get a dark mode and a color-blind mode. Like the original, it's also mercifully free of ads.
It's designed by Devang Thakkar, a doctoral student in Computational Biology and Bioinformatics at Duke University, and to him we give thanks: our Wordle obsession now has a new outlet.
If, however, you're looking for something a little (but not completely) different, you might find something suitable in our list of the best Wordle alternatives. Looking for something else to entertain you? Our guide for the new movies and shows to watch this weekend has options across all the major streaming services.
The Samsung Galaxy S22 series is just around the corner. We expect that it will arrive sometime next month, and an announcement event is possibly scheduled for February 9. Most details about all three phones have already leaked, and images of all three devices leaked yesterday. Now, though, all specifications for the three devices have also been leaked, revealing the inclusion of the Samsung Exynos 2200 in European devices — amongst other specs.
These specifications come courtesy of WinFuture, a publication with an excellent track record when it comes to leaks. All three devices launch with the Exynos 2200 in Europe and the Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 in the US. All three will also come preloaded with Android 12 based on Samsung One UI 4.1.
Samsung Galaxy S22 series complete specs (courtesy of WinFuture)
Accelerometer, Barometer, Ultrasonic in-display fingerprint sensor, Gyro sensor, Geomagnetic sensor, Hall sensor, Light sensor, Proximity sensor, UWB (UWB only in Plus and Ultra)
Battery
3700 mAh, fast charging, Qi charging
4500 mAh, fast charging, Qi charging
5000 mAh, fast charging, Qi charging
Connectivity
Bluetooth 5.2, USB Typ C 3.2 Gen 1, NFC, Wi-Fi 6 (WLAN AX)
Cellular
2G (GPRS/EDGE), 3G (UMTS), 4G (LTE), 5G
Colors
Phantom Black, White, Pink Gold, Green
Phantom Black, White, Burgundy, Green
Dimensions
146.0 x 70.6 x 7.6 mm
157.4 x 75.8 x 7.64 mm
163.3 x 77.9 x 8.9 mm
Weight
167 grams
195 grams
227 grams
Misc
Waterproof according to IP68, dual SIM (2x Nano + E-SIM), GPS, face recognition, Wireless PowerShare, DeX, child mode, data security: KNOX, ODE, EAS, MDM, VPN
Prices
8/128GB €849
8/256GB €899
8/128GB €1049
8/256GB €1099
8/128GB €1249
12/256GB €1349
12/512GB €1449
Samsung Galaxy S22
The Samsung Galaxy S22 is the regular variant of the three, packing basic flagship specifications. The 6.1-inch OLED panel has a refresh rate of 120Hz with a maximum brightness of 1500 nits. The touchscreen is covered by Gorilla Glass Victus, and it supports Wi-Fi 6 (WLAN-ax), Bluetooth 5.2, NFC, and 5G.
In terms of cameras, there’s a 50MP primary shooter, a 12MP ultra-wide sensor, and a 10MP telephoto sensor for 3x optical zoom. There’s a 3,700 mAh battery that can be charged wirelessly, and an ultra-sonic in-display fingerprint sensor. It weighs 167 grams and is IP68 rated. It will be released in Germany in Black, White, Green, and Pink at €849 (128 GB) and €899 (256 GB).
Samsung Galaxy S22 Plus
The Samsung Galaxy S22 Plus is a slightly beefier flagship smartphone in the trio. It has the same chipset, the same set of cameras, and the same storage and RAM options, but there are some important differences, too. It has a 6.6-inch full HD OLED display that goes up to 120Hz, with a maximum brightness of 1750 nits. The screen is also protected by Gorilla Glass Victus. It has the same IP68 water resistance rating, but weighs 196 grams and packs a 4,500 mAh battery.
As for pricing, the Samsung Galaxy S22+ will be available in Black, White, Greem, and Pink Gold at €1049 (128 GB) and €1099 (256 GB). Its primary upgrades over the regular S22 are the screen and the bigger battery, as much of the rest remains the same.
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra
The Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra is the best Samsung phone yet, and it seems to have everything in Samsung’s arsenal thrown into it. Not only does it seem to carry the torch of the Note series thanks to its included (and dockable) stylus, but it also has some of the craziest specifications ever in a smartphone.
First and foremost, the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra has a 6.8-inch QHD+ OLED panel with a refresh rate of 120Hz. It’s coated in Gorilla Glass Victus with a brightness of 1750 nits. It can also be bought with up to 12GB of RAM. This device has a quad-camera arrangement on the back, packing a primary sensor that comes in at 108MP, an ultra-wide at 12MP, and two 10MP lenses for 3x and 10x optical zoom. The front-facing camera comes in at 40MP. Furthermore, the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra has a 5000 mAh battery, an in-display ultra-sonic fingerprint sensor, and an S Pen.
The Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra will be available in Black, White, Green, and Burgundy at €1249 (8/128 GB), €1349 (12/256 GB), and €1449 (12/512 GB).
Article From & Read More ( Everything about the Samsung Galaxy S22, S22 Plus, and S22 Ultra has just leaked - XDA Developers )
https://ift.tt/3Hgwrn6
Technology
You won't have to run an unpolished beta to try Android apps on Windows 11. Microsoft's Panos Panay has teased the release of a Windows 11 public preview in February that will bring Android apps to the Microsoft Store. The company didn't say how many apps would be available in this test, but they'll be titles you would find in the Amazon Appstore.
The preview should still be helpful if you're content to stick to Windows apps. You can expect taskbar upgrades that include call mute controls, simpler window sharing and weather. Microsoft has redesigned the Media Player and Notepad apps, too.
You may want to hurry if you're still uncertain about upgrading to the new OS, though. Microsoft has warned the free Windows 11 upgrade rollout is "entering its final phase" sooner than the originally planned mid-2022 target. While that hints uptake has been strong, it also suggests you might have to pay for the upgrade if you don't decide relatively soon.
Android app support was one of the headlining features for Windows 11 at its reveal event, but is only reaching mainstream users several months after the new Windows version's launch. Nonetheless, it might be an important addition for both Microsoft and users. This will help if you'd like to use common Android apps on your PC, of course, but it could also spark interest in both touchscreen Windows 11 PCs and the Microsoft Store.
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Today we’re checking out Nvidia’s GeForce RTX 3050, a new budget GPU addition to the RTX 30 series. Even though this release adds a new low-end Ampere offering to the lineup, it’s based on the same GA106 silicon used by the RTX 3060.
The RTX 3050 drops the MSRP from $330 to $250, so you can expect a significant part of the die to be disabled. Case in point, the core configuration has been reduced from 3584 cores to just 2560, a near 30% reduction, but interestingly the same 48 ROPs remain. Although the core boost frequency remains the same at 1,777 MHz, the memory speed has been slightly reduced from 15 Gbps to 14 Gbps. Couple that with the smaller 128-bit wide memory bus and we end up with a 38% drop in bandwidth.
An advantage of this however is a 24% drop in power use to just 130 watts, meaning a basic 550-watt power supply will be more than sufficient to power an RTX 3050 gaming system.
Now, when compared to the Radeon RX 6500 XT, the MSRP of the RTX 3050 is 25% higher at $250, but of course, we expect that it will retail for more than that which we'll discuss in more details in our conclusion. So although the RTX 3050 will be more costly, it is also a significantly better product on paper than the budget Radeon, packing 8GB of VRAM, PCIe x8 bandwidth, four display outputs, AV1 decoding, and an actual hardware encoding engine. All the stuff you’d just expect on a modern graphics card, but don’t get with the 6500 XT.
Although Nvidia has cut the PCIe bandwidth in half, which we never like to see on GPUs priced over $200, with 8GB of VRAM and x8 bandwidth, the PCIe 3.0 performance will be the same as 4.0 in today’s games, meaning the RTX 3050 won't be crippled on PCIe 3.0 systems like the 6500 XT was.
With that out of the way, let’s talk test system specs and then jump into the benchmark results.
For testing we're using our Ryzen 9 5950X GPU test system. Since we’re testing GPU performance and wish to avoid introducing a CPU bottleneck which would skew the data, a high-end CPU works well for this purpose.
Also, all benchmark data for this review is fresh. We've spent the last few weeks updating our mid-range GPU results for the 6500 XT and RTX 3050 reviews, and much of the testing has been done using dialed down quality settings at 1080p and 1440p, appropriate for these segment of GPUs.
Benchmarks
Starting with Assassin's Creed Valhalla, using the medium quality preset at 1080p, we find that the RTX 3050 is good for 79 fps on average, so here it’s basically a GTX 1660 Super. That made it 18% faster than the 6500 XT using PCIe 4.0, and 30% faster when compared to the PCIe 3.0 configuration. It was also only 8% slower than the RTX 2060, a decent result overall.
The 1440p data is much more favorable for the RTX 3050, when compared to AMD’s recently released 6500 XT. The 3050 is again mimicking the performance of the GTX 1660 Super, meaning it was 38% faster than the 6500 XT, or 45% faster when limiting the Radeon GPU to PCIe 3.0.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider was tested using the highest quality preset as it’s an old game now and our measuring stick for this testing, the 4GB 5500 XT was good for over 60 fps on average, so that seemed reasonable.
The RTX 3050 blasted past that result with 87 fps on average, edging it slightly ahead of the GTX 1660 Super this time. That made it 34% faster than the 6500 XT or 85% faster when limiting the 6500 XT to PCIe 3.0. A super easy win here for Nvidia.
The situation worsens for the 6500 XT at 1440p once again. Now even with PCIe 4.0 we can’t even achieve a 40 fps average, meanwhile the RTX 3050 fell just shy of 60 fps and was seen matching the 1660 Super.
The Watch Dogs: Legion results are quite good for the 6500 XT when using the medium quality preset. Here the RTX 3050 was good for 88 fps and that only made it 17% faster than the 6500 XT, or 28% faster when compared to the PCIe 3.0 configuration, which remains a big win.
When compared to the 1660 Super, it was 5% faster and 15% slower than the 5600 XT and RTX 2060, so a little behind when compared to those older models.
The RTX 3050 does race away with it at 1440p, averaging over 60 fps to make it 28% faster than the 6500 XT or 36% faster than the PCIe 3.0 configuration. It was also 10% faster than the GTX 1660 Super, but 14-15% slower than the RTX 2060 and 5600 XT.
For testing Rainbow Six Siege we’re using the ultra quality preset with the HD texture pack enabled. As before, we used the 5500 XT to establish the test settings, and this GPU was good for well over 100 fps at all times averaging 147 fps.
The RTX 3050 had no issue crushing that result with 225 fps on average, making it just 11% slower than the RTX 2060 and 14% faster than the GTX 1660 Super. Unbelievably, it was 92% faster than the 6500 XT, and let’s not even bother with the PCIe 3.0 result for that GPU.
Moving to 1440p sees the RTX 3050 beat the 6500 XT by an embarrassing 110% margin, as it slotted in between the GTX 1660 Super and RTX 2060. Heck, it was only 10% behind the RX 6600.
The RTX 3050 was 52% faster than the 6500 XT at 1080p using the second highest quality preset with 141 fps on average. PCIe 3.0 completely crippled the 6500 XT and now the RTX 3050 is seen to be 114% faster, and I should note I got the exact same result using PCIe 3.0 with the RTX 3050.
Moving to 1440p increases the margin in favor of the 3050, which is now 66% faster than the 6500 XT when using PCI 4.0 and 128% faster than the PCIe 3.0 configuration. We’re also looking at slightly better performance than the GTX 1660 Super.
Next we have Horizon Zero Dawn where the 6500 XT using PCIe 4.0 did well relative to most other games with 72 fps on average. The RTX 3050 was 14% faster, though with both using PCIe 3.0 the GeForce GPU would be a massive 55% faster.
Now the RTX 3050 is 24% faster than the 6500 XT at 1440p. It was also a few frames faster than the 1660 Super and trailed the RTX 2060 by 15%.
Moving on to Far Cry 6, we find an average of 96 fps using the GeForce RTX 3050 at 1080p with the medium quality preset. As we’ve seen multiple times already, it’s basically delivering 1660 Super performance, though it wasn’t a great deal slower than the 2060 in this one, at least when looking at the average frame rate.
The 6500 XT turns in one of its better figures in Far Cry 6 and as a result the 3050 was just 14% faster, though the issue for the 6500 XT is PCIe 3.0 and when compared to that configuration the 3050 was 37% faster.
The 6500 XT does crumble at 1440p, whereas the RTX 3050 remains strong, turning in over 60 fps on average to make it 42% faster.
In Doom Eternal, the RTX 3050 does extremely well matching the RTX 2060 with 178 fps on average. That meant it was 82% faster than the 6500 XT and 287% faster than the PCIe 3.0 configuration. That’s all we need to say about that.
1440p is an ugly affair for the 6500 XT and it’s disappointing to see that while the 4GB RX 570 can hit 60 fps and a very playable experience, the 6500 XT using PCIe 3.0 was reduced to 36 fps.
The RTX 3050 had no such issues though, pumping out a super impressive 130 fps while keeping 1% lows above 100 fps. It was also 13% faster than the RTX 2060 and just 11% slower than the RX 6600. A stellar result there.
Resident Evil Village isn’t a very demanding game, especially with the balanced quality preset, so it’s no surprise that at 1080p the RTX 3050 is comfortably pushing over 100 fps, averaging 114 fps. This is GTX 1660 Super-like performance and it meant the new budget GeForce was 52% faster than the 6500 XT, or 78% faster if we compare with the PCIe 3.0 configuration.
Next up we have Death Stranding, and this is another game that isn’t terribly demanding, despite looking quite nice. The GTX 3050 was good for 108 fps using the default quality preset at 1080p and that placed it directly between the 1660 Super and GTX 2060, a great result.
It was also 24% faster than the 6500 XT and dropping the Radeon graphics card down to PCIe 3.0 only extended the margin to 27%, so you could argue that this is a good result for the Radeon.
Even at 1440p the 6500 XT hangs in there averaging 64 fps against the RTX 3050's 79 fps, which made the GeForce GPU 23% faster and given the price difference, even at MSPR, that’s a decent result for AMD.
The RTX 3050 rendered 112 fps on average in Hitman 3 using the medium quality preset at 1080p and that placed it very close to the RTX 2060, while beating the GTX 1660 Super by a 23% margin. It was also 29% faster than the 6500 XT, or 42% faster when restricted to PCIe 3.0.
Even at 1440p, the RTX 3050 managed well over 60 fps and this made it 9% faster than the RTX 2060, and 35% faster than the 6500 XT, a great result given the current market.
Last up we have Cyberpunk 2077, and here the RTX 3050 managed to break the 60 fps barrier with the medium quality preset, averaging 66 fps which all things considered is quite a good result. Unfortunately, it was 18% slower than the RTX 2060, but it was also 40% faster than the 6500 XT, or 69% faster when using PCIe 3.0.
Those margins remained at 1440p. Here the RTX 3050 was 37% faster than the 6500 XT, or 58% faster when using PCIe 3.0. It only managed 41 fps on average, so for this game I’d say the RTX 3050 is better suited for 1080p gameplay.
Power Consumption
The GeForce RTX 3050 is very light on power, pushing total system usage to just 277 watts in our Doom benchmark. Considering the performance output, that makes it much more efficient than the 6500 XT, but even if we take a more favorable game such as Death Stranding or Hitman 3, the RTX 3050 still stacks up well as it only increased total system usage over the 6500 XT by 15%.
PCIe 3.0 vs. 4.0
Although we've mentioned that the RTX 3050 delivers the exact same level of performance using PCIe 3.0 or PCIe 4.0, here’s a quick sample of this. We tested all 12 games and found nothing outside the margin of error, though most results were exactly the same as shown below in Tomb Raider at 1440p.
Whereas the 6500 XT dropped performance by 13% with PCIe 3.0, we see no change for the RTX 3050. So gamers limited to a PCIe 3.0 platform (which as of writing is likely a majority), the RTX 3050 is going to be significantly faster.
12 Game Average
And here’s a look at the 12 game average data, which has been calculated using the geomean. The RTX 3050 averaged 108fps at 1080p, which made it just 5% slower than the GTX 1660 Super, 10% slower than the RTX 2060, and 23% slower than the Radeon RX 6600.
When compared to the 6500 XT, we’re looking at a 37% performance boost, or a massive 74% increase when compared to the PCIe 3.0 result.
As we often saw, the 1440p data is even more brutal for the 6500 XT. Here the RTX 3050 was 54% faster, or 85% faster when comparing PCIe 3.0 performance. The RTX 3050 also averaged 74 fps, meaning it was more often than not good for over 60 fps at 1440p using respectable quality settings in many titles.
Ray Tracing Performance
We don’t feel the RTX 3050's rasterization performance is powerful enough to justify turning ray traced effects on, but you can, and some of you might want to anyway, so let’s take a look.
Starting with Watch Dogs Legion, we see that stock the RTX 3050 is good for 88 fps on average with the dialed down medium quality preset. Enabling DLSS without RT effects can be of big help, boosting the average frame rate by 26% for 111 fps, and now we’re looking at RX 6600-like performance.
Turning on ray tracing with the medium quality setting + DLSS dropped the average frame rate to 60 fps, which is still very playale, but personally I’d rather play the game with a higher quality preset and perhaps leave DLSS enabled.
The game was playable with ray tracing enabled and DLSS, delivering ~60 fps on average. Without DLSS, the frame rate dropped into the low 40s, and that’s about the same level of ray tracing performance than you can expect from the RX 6600 in this title.
Testing with Far Cry 6, which doesn’t support DLSS, sees the RTX 3050 able to comfortably break the 60 fps barrier with ray tracing fully enabled. It was slower than the much more expensive RX 6600, but whereas it was 28% slower without RT enabled, it was just 14% slower with it enabled.
On Cyberpunk 2077 we find that DLSS is most impressive, boosting rasterization performance by an incredible 48%, allowing the RTX 3050 to beat the Radeon RX 6600. Then using ray tracing without DLSS enabled saw the RTX 3060 and RX 6600 delivering comparable performance at 30-40 fps. But of course, enabling DLSS offered a big boost and then the RTX 3050 was good for around 60 fps on average.
For those of you wondering why we are comparing with the RX 6600 and not the 6500 XT for the ray tracing benchmark, we simply didn't want to be so cruel. Seriously though, the 6500 XT is so weak with ray tracing enabled that the data isn’t useful for comparison.
Cost Per Frame
Time for the all important cost per frame analysis. We're going to start with the MSRP using the 1080p data, but we'll include 1440p results and other data points (and assumptions) for a more realistic pricing comparison in just a moment.
But let’s get the Fantasyland stuff out of the way first... if the RTX 3050 was to sell for $250 (which it obviously won’t), it would smoke the $200 6500 XT, offering a discount of 9% per frame or 28% when comparing the PCIe 3.0 data.
That said, it would also be much worse value than the GTX 1650 Super and slightly worse than the RX 5600 XT, but that’s to be expected given the current market, so we can accept a little bit of stagnation, even if we don't like it.
Now, if we look at real world pricing, the situation is quite different.
For the used GPUs, we’re taking the average sale price seen over at eBay over the past 4 weeks, and for the new GPUs the pricing is based on what we could find in stock at places like Newegg. This places the 6500 XT at $270, and we’re expecting the RTX 3050 to cost at least $450, though please note that’s an educated guess since the cards have yet to go on sale.
With the 6500 XT currently selling for at least 35% over the MSRP, we’re expecting the RTX 3050 to come in at a much larger 80% premium, but hopefully it will be less than that.
Even at $450, the RTX 3050 is better value for PCIe 3.0 owners as it reduces the cost per frame when compared to the 6500 XT (PCIe 3.0) by 4%, while including a number of important features.
If you have PCIe 4.0 and don’t require any of the missing features of the 6500 XT and are willing to sacrifice some visual quality in order to achieve acceptable performance, you could argue that the 6500 XT is "better value" at $270, as it was 18% cheaper per frame than the RTX 3050, but that’s a serious stretch given everything you get with the GeForce GPU.
If you’re targeting entry-level 1440p gaming, the RTX 3050 is without question the superior product, vastly superior in my opinion. Not only are you likely to be pushing well over 60 fps with the GeForce GPU, but it’s also just 8% more expensive per frame when compared to the 6500 XT in the PCIe 4.0 mode. So for those of you gaming at 1440p, even at $450, the RTX 3050 is a much better product and well worth spending the extra money on, or saving up for.
It’s worth keeping in mind that at this price point, the RX 6600 is technically better value as it costs just 24% more, but offers 26% more performance. Granted, they are about the same in terms of value, but when spending this much, the RX 6600 does become a viable alternative.
What Does It Need to Cost?
While we fear the GeForce RTX 3050 will end up around $450 or more, and we’ve seen even there it’s generally better value than the 6500 XT, what price does it need to be before no one can argue the 6500 XT has any value? We believe that figure is ~$370, which is likely wishful thinking, but if Nvidia pulled that off it would be extremely embarrassing for AMD.
At $370, the RTX 3050 would be on par with the 6500 XT using PCIe in terms of cost per frame (1080p), while offering twice as much VRAM, twice as much PCIe bandwidth, better decoding support, encoding support, and more than two display outputs. So I can’t see it being that competitive on pricing, but anywhere between $370 and $450 is going to be rough for the 6500 XT.
What We Learned
How desirable the GeForce RTX 3050 ends up being will depend entirely on pricing and availability. If it ends up costing over $500, it’s going to be a big fat nothing burger, and you might as well just get the faster Radeon RX 6600.
Thus, it’s difficult to say just how excited you should get about the RTX 3050. Based on the performance we've just seen, we know exactly where it should be priced in order to make sense, but making sense isn’t something the GPU market does anymore...
We expected the Radeon 6500 XT to come in at ~$300, where it's still awful, even when it's the cheapest "new" graphics card you can buy. So far it's done slightly better, hitting $270, at least for now, but ultimately sucks at that price and we don't recommend anyone to buy it. Instead you should continue to hold out or buy a used graphics card. Frankly, the RX 570 4GB for $220 second hand is a significantly better compromise, and hands down the best option for those using a PCIe 3.0 system.
As for the new GeForce RTX 3050, we’re expecting that part to come in for at least $450, but with the RTX 3060 selling for a 112% premium over MSRP on average, anything is possible. As noted earlier, we strongly believe that the RTX 3050 needs to be priced at around $370 to be a great deal in the current market and become the go-to option for PC gamers.
At that price it would be unbeatable, even when looking at the second hand market, which sees the similarly performing GTX 1660 Super going for $470. Based on that unfortunate reality though, it's likely that the 3050 will go for something closer to $500.
If that’s the case, then you’re best off being upsold to the RX 6600, or perhaps the smarter option would be to look for a cheaper second hand option to tie you over.
For now, we’ll have to wait and see where the RTX 3050 lands and surely we'll be following up in the coming weeks with a pricing update. But in the meantime, if you have the chance to snap up an RTX 3050 at the MSRP or around $400, that's a good deal in our opinion.
