Technology - Google News

Get Your Retro Fix With Sony's PlayStation Classic Mini Console
Nvidia RTX 2080 And 2080 Ti Versus GTX 1080 And 1080 Ti: Ultimate Upgrades Or Fantastic Flops?
Apple Watch Series 4 review roundup: This is the one we've been waiting for

Get Your Retro Fix With Sony's PlayStation Classic Mini Console

Posted: 19 Sep 2018 07:15 AM PDT

Nearly 25 years after making its debut, the original PlayStation is coming back.

Following Nintendo's lead on the retro console front, Sony has announced it's bringing back the original PlayStation in mini form.

Priced at $99.99, the PlayStation Classic is available for pre-order via select retailers in the US and Canada. It's slated to launch on Dec. 3 – the same day the original first went on sale in 1994.

PlayStation Classic is around 45 percent smaller than the original PlayStation, but looks pretty much identical, down to its controllers and packaging. It comes pre-loaded with 20 retro games, including Final Fantasy VII, Jumping Flash, Ridge Racer Type 4, Tekken 3, and Wild Arms. Also included in the box is an HDMI cable so you can connect it to your TV, plus a USB cable and two controllers.

"Developed by Sony Computer Entertainment, it was the first home console in video game history to ship 100 million units worldwide, offering consumers a chance to play games with real-time 3D rendered graphics in their homes for the first time," Eric Lempel, SVP of PlayStation Marketing, wrote in a Tuesday blog post. "Long-time fans will appreciate the nostalgia that comes with rediscovering the games they know and love, while gamers who might be new to the platform can enjoy the groundbreaking PlayStation console experience that started it all. All of the pre-loaded games will be playable in their original format."

If Nintendo's retro consoles, the NES Classic and SNES Classic, are any indication, the PlayStation Classic will be extremely popular. In its first launch of the retro NES Classic in late 2016, Nintendo sold approximately 2.3 million units in five months and sold out its entire stock by July 2017. It then sold 5 million units of the SNES Classic in a few months.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Nvidia RTX 2080 And 2080 Ti Versus GTX 1080 And 1080 Ti: Ultimate Upgrades Or Fantastic Flops?

Posted: 19 Sep 2018 06:00 AM PDT

Today we can finally talk about how fast Nvidia's new GeForce RTX 'Turing' graphics cards are in games as the embargos on the RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Ti performance discussions have lifted. In this article you'll find all my benchmark numbers and a discussion about the GTX 1080 versus the RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Ti and GTX 1080 Ti.

The new RTX-series has been the talk of the PC hardware world for months and rightly so. They're some of the most sophisticated kit ever to have graced the hardware scene and the stage is potentially set for a revolution in image quality and performance too. They're also extremely expensive and at the moment, precious few titles support either ray tracing or deep learning super-sampling (DLSS) - Nvidia's frame rate-boosting feature that we'll talk about later, yet it's these titles that are the main reason for the cards being so much more expensive than their predecessors.

Nvidia GeForce RTZ 2080 TiAntony Leather

For example, the GTX 1080 Ti retailed for $700 when new - while when I was writing this I couldn't find an RTX 2080 Ti for less than $1,150 on pre-order. That's a 64% markup, yet the lack of titles that support these features means coming to any kind of conclusion about value is going to be difficult. As I mentioned in my Nvidia RTX architecture and specifications reveal article, this story is going be a longer one than just today's reviews - they're only part of puzzle.

However, there's still a huge amount that can be done today, not least of all looking at the other side of the story - performance in some of the most popular games released in the last 12 months or so and whether the new cards are fast enough to warrant their enormous price tags outside of ray tracing and DLSS. However, I will be looking at DLSS courtesy of the new Final Fantasy XV DLSS-enabled benchmark to at least see the benefits of this new technology in at least one title that's due to support it fully in the near future. Without further ado, let's take a look at the performance numbers.

	RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition	RTX 2080 Ti	RTX 2080 Founders Edition	RTX 2080	RTX 2070 Founders Edition	RTX 2070
Base Freq	1,350MHz	1,350MHz	1,515MHz	1,515MHz	1,410MHz	1,410MHz
Boost Freq	1,635MHz	1,545MHz	1,800MHz	1,710MHz	1,710MHz	1,620MHz
CUDA Cores	4,352	4,352	2,944	2,944	2,304	2,304
Tensor Cores	544	544	368	368	288	288
GigaRays/sec	10	10	8	8	6	6
Memory	11GB GDDR6	11GB GDDR6	8GB GDDR6	8GB GDDR6	8GB GDDR6	8GB GDDR6
TDP	250W	250W	215W	215W	175W	175W
Price	$1,199	$999	$799	$699	$599	$499

Test system

Test systemAntony Leather

I should point out that I'm using the Founders editions of both the RTX 2080 Ti and 2080, which have slightly higher core frequencies than the stock models. The rest of my test system includes an Intel Core i9-7900X, 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 3,200MHz memory, an Asus ROG Strix X299 Gaming motherboard, a 500GB Samsung 960 Pro SSD, NZXT Kraken X42 cooler and Corsair RM850i PSU. I'm also using a fully up-to-date install of Windows 10 with all security patches including those for Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities. I used Nvidia driver version 411.51 to test all of the Nvidia graphics cards and AMD driver 18.9.1 for the Vega 64 except for Shadow of the Tomb Raider where I had to revert to 18.5.1 as the game crashes instantly with the latest driver. I've also omitted Battlefield V as the beta wasn't available for long enough to get through all the testing plus it doesn't support RTX features yet anyway.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmarkAntony Leather

A title that will soon offer RTX features, Shadow of the Tomb Raider performed well with both RTX cards with the RTX 2080 Ti offering a 25% boost over the GTX 1080 Ti and the RTX 2080 performing 34% faster than the GTX 1080 at 1440p's minimum frame rates. I should reemphasize that I had to backtrack to AMD's 18.5.1 driver in this game as the 18.9.1 driver would crash it instantly so the RX Vega 64 may well have performed better here. Moving up to 4K and the RTX 2080 Ti is more at home, offering a 35% boost over the GTX 1080 Ti, maintaining at least 50fps using the highest detail settings. The RTX 2080 also edged out a bigger lead, reaching a 39% advantage over the GTX 1080.

Forza Horizon 4 demo benchmark

Forza Horizon 4 demo benchmarkAntony Leather

The Forza benchmark was released while I was benchmarking and was a little temperamental so take these results with a small pinch of salt. The RTX 2080 Ti was a mediocre 20% quicker than the GTX 1080 Ti at 1440p while the RTX 2080 was 29% quicker than the GTX 1080. It was a similar story at 4K with the RTX 2080 Ti being 21% quicker than the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2080 being 30% quicker than the GTX 2080.

Far Cry 5 benchmark

Far Cry 5 benchmarkAntony Leather

At 1440p, Far Cry 5's results were a little strange with not much separating the top three cards so I suspect something else is throttling the PC here or it's an issue with the benchmark or driver. Needless to say, there are some pretty poor gains across the board, especially between the RTX 2080 Ti and GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 2080 was 22% quicker than the GTX 1080. Switch to 4K, though, and there's a massive shift with the RTX series. The RTX 2080 Ti was 30% quicker than the GTX 1080 Ti and the RTX 2080 was 31% quicker than the GTX 1080.

World of Tanks benchmark

World of Tanks is still massively popular and received a graphics overhaul recently so it's still a valid test. It's clearly no match for the high-end cards on test here at 1440p with the lowest frame rate being 93fps. the RTX 2080 Ti was 23% quicker than its predecessor and RTX 2080 was 28% quicker. Moving up to 4K once again saw these leads increase - the RTX 2080 Ti was now 27% faster than the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2080 was 29% faster than the GTX 1080.

World of Tanks benchmarkAntony Leather

Final Fantasy XV benchmark

This is the standard TAA-based benchmark and once again at 2560 x 1440, the RTX 2080 Ti doesn't offer much of a benefit, offering only a 16% boost over the GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 2080 was 29% quicker than the GTX 1080. At 4K, it was a much better story with the RTX 2080 Ti edging out a 29% lead over the GTX 1080 Ti and the RTX 2080 managing a massive 41% advantage over the GTX 1080.

Final Fantasy XV benchmarkAntony Leather

3DMark VR Mark benchmark

VR Mark is here as a guide on virtual reality performance and the only real difference here was between Nvidia and AMD with the benchmark not showing much scaling elsewhere.

3DMark VR Mark benchmarkAntony Leather

3DMark Time Spy benchmark

Time Spy is a different story and the RTX 2080 Ti scored 34% higher than the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2080 was 37% better than the GTX 1080.

3DMark Time Spy benchmarkAntony Leather

Load system power consumption

Load power consumption was roughly where I expected it to be given we're dealing with 200W+ TDP graphics cards but the coolers, apart from looking fantastic, also did a decent job of dealing with the heat too, keeping noise levels to low levels and usually hovering aroud 75°C in games. This was the maximum power drawn by the system in games so for the RTX 2080 Ti, you'd be well-advised to get at least a 700W PSU. Anything less will likely see it's fan ramp up all the time.

Load system power consumptionAntony Leather

Idle power consumption

I was surprised to see higher load power consumption here for the RTX cards, but Nvidia emailed me while I was writing this saying they're aware of the issue and will be releasing a driver fix.

Idle power consumptionAntony Leather

Overclocking results

I used the Nvidia Scanner built into EVGA's new Precision overclocking software to overclock both the RTX 2080 Ti and RTX 2080, which automatically overclocks the cards based on power and temperature feedback. The RTX 2080 Ti saw its boost frequency increase to 1692MHz with the peak boost ranging from 1980-2025MHz. The RTX 2080 saw its boost frequency rise to 1552MHz with a peak boost of 1995-2025 in games.

Nvidia Scanner overclockingAntony Leather

Overclocking resultsAntony Leather

Final Fantasy XV saw an 8% increase to the minimum frame rate with the overclocked RTX 2080 Ti, while the mediocre overclock on the RTX 2080 only yielded a 2% boost.

Overclocking resultsAntony Leather

It was a similar story in Shadow of the Tomb Raider with 7% being the gains with the RTX 2080 Ti and 5% with the RTX 2080.

DLSS Performance

Now for one of the more controversial features of the RTX series - Deep Learning Super-Sampling (DLSS). So we already know that Nvidia is claiming DLSS can produce similar image quality to temporal anti-aliasing (TAA) but at much higher frame rates, and as I wrote about here, I saw a live demo at the RTX launch event that seemed to confirm this. Till, now we've been unable to put DLSS to the test but thankfully, a new Final Fantasy XV benchmark including both DLSS and TAA modes was released in time for this review and I managed to test the RTX 2080 against the GTX 1080 for a comparison.

DLSS versus TAA - RTX 2080 versus GTX 1080Antony Leather

In short, image quality aside, DLSS is astounding and offered a 95% performance boost with the RTX 2080 compared to the GTX 1080 using TAA. I also ran a test in the standard benchmark I used above to make sure Nvidia hadn't fiddled with it but sure enough, there was just 1fps difference between TAA mode in both benchmarks - these numbers are real.

Percentage increase in performance over GTX 1080Antony Leather

The benefits are even more impressive when you look at the percentage improvements over the GTX 1080. the RTX 2080 is 30-40% quicker anyway everything else being equal. Switch to DLSS mode, though and it's essentially twice as fast.

Screen capture in Final Fantasy XV DLSS benchmarkAntony Leather

As for the image quality, while you're playing the game there's no discernable difference. The image above shows a screengrab in the Final Fantasy XV benchmark in DLSS mode and the image below taken at roughly the same moment in the benchmark, but in TAA mode. Running through in real time in the game I certainly couldn't pick out any differences - they both look the same.

Screen capture in Final Fantasy XV TAA benchmarkAntony Leather

Delving into these screen grabs for a few moments and I spotted some differences around the number plate on the vehicle and on zooming in, some of the more detailed text here couldn't quite be made out with DLSS while it was legible with TAA as you can see below.

DLSS versus TAA with Nvidia's RTX seriesAntony Leather

It's slim pickings, though, and even here you have to zoom right in on a rendered frame to see the difference. However, DLSS appeared to have advantages elsewhere. Below you can see the same frame, but in a different spot above the car looking at the trees. There was much more detail on show with DLSS than there was with TAA.

TAA versus DLSSAntony Leather

This is just one frame in one game, but it's fairly clear that it's tit-for-tat in terms of image quality, at least in the limited comparisons I've seen. Overall I think it's fair to say that the two modes are roughly equal in image quality when viewed live in games, meaning the only difference we need to be concerned with is frame rates and DLSS has a massive advantage.

Conclusion: Is the RTX series an ultimate upgrade or a fantastic flop?

I don't think there's ever been a more complicated answer to that question with a graphics card. In terms of cold hard cash, the 64% markup for the RTX 2080 Ti is not justified in the standard benchmarks I've used here. You typically see between 30-40% uplift from the GTX 1080 Ti (sometimes lower) and that's typically what you'd see moving from a GTX 1080 to a GTX 1080 Ti too, and the latter had a markup a fraction of that between it and the RTX 2080 Ti. The RTX 2080 usually offered a bigger benefit compared to the GTX 1080, occasionally reaching the 40-50% range. I think it's fairly clear, then, that performance outside of RTX features doesn't justify the price.

However, that's only half the story. Starting with DLSS, this is a revolutionary new feature that does actually deliver the kind of uplift Nvidia claims and these prices suggest. In Final Fantasy XV, the RTX 2080 was 95% faster than the GTX 1080 while the Founder's Edition I tested demands only a 45% increase over the current price of a GTX 1080, with third-party RTX 2080's on pre-order for similar cash. If anything, this is even more exciting than ray tracing.

Nvidia RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 TiAntony Leather

So, should you buy one? That depends on the games you play. If you'll be spending a lot of time in DLSS-enabled games and you want better frame rates, then the answer is clear.. For this reason, Nvidia needs to get DLSS support in as many games as possible and probably look at getting support in popular current and older games too - I was told at the launch that would be possible. In short, the more games that support DLSS, the more successful it will be and the more justified the RTX series prices will become.

Ray tracing also needs to be supported in as many games as possible to be successful, but is it any good? Well, the demos are certainly impressive and something a lot of people seem to be forgetting is that graphics card launches aren't just about better performance - they're often about better image quality too. I remember spending a hideous amount on an Nvidia 6800GT about 13 years ago just to be able to play a select few games with Direct3D 9.0c and Shader Model 3.0. Was it worth it? Absolutely - I spent most of my time in these games and for me it was a great buy so if you're considering pairing the RTX series with Battlefield V, for example, don't let anyone tell you it's a bad idea, at least in terms of better visuals. The issue there, though, is performance. We literally have no way of testing the impact of ray tracing on performance yet until enabled games arrive so while it certainly looks great, if it means a massive hit in frame rates, this could be a deal breaker.

So, the TL;DR version of should you upgrade to the RTX 2000-series is:

For older games that don't support ray tracing or DLSS? The performance uplift is questionable; RTX 2080 is about 30-40% quicker than the GTX 1080 for about 45% extra ($800 versus $550) but the GTX 1080 Ti is cheaper and quicker in some tests. The RTX 2080 Ti is a beast and the ultimate 4K card, but you pay a huge amount more than the GTX 1080 Ti did at launch.

For DLSS-enabled games? Absolutely. I've only tested one game but both it and Nvidia's DLSS demo show around 100% frame rate boost at comparable image quality. In other words, the RTX 2080 using DLSS was twice as fast as the GTX 1080. You pay 45% more for 95% more performance. The RTX 2080 Ti is still less impressive with a 70%+ markup on current GTX 1080 Ti prices, but again, if you're looking at double the performance, that's still not a bad deal at all.

For RTX ray tracing-enabled games? The jury is still out as we have yet to see a retail version of an RTX-enabled game. What we've seen so far is massively impressive and graphics card launches are not just about higher frame rates so it's great to see Nvidia improving image quality too. However, there's not enough evidence either way to warrant investing in an RTX-series card for ray tracing alone.

I'll be back with more benchmarks when more DLSS and RTX-enabled games hit the shelves so stay tuned and make sure to follow me at one of the social media outlets below.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Apple Watch Series 4 review roundup: This is the one we've been waiting for

Posted: 19 Sep 2018 06:32 AM PDT

Following yesterday’s iPhone XS/Max reviews, it’s now the turn for reviews of the Apple Watch Series 4 – and there couldn’t be a greater contrast between the two.

Apple’s cherry-picked quotes aside, reviewers were mostly underwhelmed by the new iPhone, advising iPhone X users not to bother upgrading and owners of older models to hold fire for the iPhone XR.

But when it comes to the new Watch, the clear majority view is that the Series 4 finally delivers on the promise of the device – and now is the time to buy. Even mechanical watch site Hodinkee shared this view …

NordVPN

Buzzfeed was less impressed than most, but then Charlie Warzel said that he was ‘not an Apple Watch devotee,’ and prefers his Garmin watch with its 12-hour battery life.

Right now, it only feels like a glimpse [of the future]. When the Apple Watch debuted in the spring of 2015, the company marketed it as one of its “most personal devices yet,” suggesting that people would use it to offload some of personal computing we’ve become accustomed to doing on our phones. I reviewed the watch back then; my gimmick was that I’d only use the watch for 24 hours — no phone or computer — and see if it was possible to replace the phone with the wrist. My takeaway then: “You can see a plausible future if you squint your eyes just so. That future looks enticing and cool as hell, but it’s just. not. there. Yet.”

A little more than three years later, I largely feel the same way. I can’t seem to shake the notion that the Watch is priming us for a new kind of ambient computing behavior, where all our hardware is barely noticeable but just kind of connects to us — through wireless headphones and little sensors and gyroscopes scattered in everything from hats to glasses to our clothing. We’re not there yet, but devices like the Apple Watch are getting us closer.

Watch site Hodinkee said the Series 4 is the right time for holdouts to try a smartwatch.

If you’ve never owned an Apple Watch and have found yourself wondering whether or not it could be a good fit for your life, the Series 4 makes a really compelling case for giving it a shot. This feels like the first iteration on Apple’s fully thought through Apple Watch archetype, defined by those three principles outlined by Jeff Williams at the beginning of last week’s keynote (and referenced at the beginning of this story). It’s cohesive, it’s ambitious, and it might just encourage you to reshape your habits and behaviors for the better. If you still haven’t given the Apple Watch a shot and you’ve been waiting for the right moment, this is that moment. Go for it […]

Will you want to trade in your mechanical watches for an Apple Watch? No, you won’t. But I do think it’s worth adding an Apple Watch to your rotation if you don’t already have one. I’m not one for working out with mechanical watches on, so right there I’ve got an opening in my life for an Apple Watch. There are also days where it’s good to have a little extra info at hand and leaving that vintage sports watch in its box at home for a few hours isn’t the worst thing in the world.

From there, I think you’ll likely learn a bit about your connection to watches too. What is it that you miss and what is it that you don’t miss about your more traditional timepieces? What does the Apple Watch bring to your life that your mechanical watches can’t? These are all good questions and I know plenty of watch collectors (myself and a few other Hodinkee editors among them) who enjoy rotating an Apple Watch in with their other watches. The days of watch lovers dismissing the Apple Watch are long gone and at this point it feels almost like a must-have for anyone truly interested in timepieces more generally.

iMore describes the haptic feedback that the redesigned Digital Crown now offers, as well as an interesting detail about the side button (there’s also a sweet fall detection test GIF included):

The new clicking absolutely feels more precise and more fun to use. It’s catchy, if not quite AirPods lid flipping catchy. I’m not sure it’s enough to break me of my bad habits just yet, but I’m a huge believer in the future of tactile interface and I very much like where Apple is going here.

The Side button is flush now but still a real button. It doesn’t make Series 4 any more water-resistant or “swim-proof” than Series 3 was. That’s still the same. But it does make it a little harder to find with just your finger, which might be an accessibility issue. If you’re not used to Apple Watch conventions, you’ll still be able to tell something is there, it might just take some experimentation or explicit information to help you figure out what it is. If you’re at all used to Apple Watch, though, you won’t even notice what you’re not noticing — you’ll just press the side and it’ll work, same as ever. […]

If you have an iPhone, you should have an Apple Watch. And you should probably have a Series 4. If you don’t have one at all, don’t give me any crap about not wanting or needing a watch or a wearable computer.

The Independent also said that if you haven’t yet bought an Apple Watch, now is the time to do so.

I love this Apple Watch. It is the biggest step-change by far between iterations of Apple’s wrist-born tech. It’s not perfect […] but it’s astonishingly good.

For a start it is the most achingly beautiful Watch yet from Apple. It takes my breath away each time I raise my wrist and the screen quickly fades up in full, colourful glory. If that sounds over the top, just wait until you see one in the flesh.

Seriously, this is not just the most elegant evolution of Apple Watch design – though it’s certainly that, too. It takes the design to a new, gleaming level of opulence […]

Last year’s Series 3 was great, but this is a whole new thing. The design is just gorgeous and the bright, vivid display with its narrow, curved bezels, looks sensational. The uptick in performance power is noticeable at every level and the increased health qualities and fitness monitoring are hugely welcome.

If you’ve held back from getting an Apple Watch because you thought it wasn’t quite there yet, well, it is now.

The New York Times liked almost everything about it, yet advised against buying it as your first smartwatch – or upgrading from the Series 3.

Much of the rest of the Apple Watch Series 4 sounds boring on paper. Compared with its predecessors, the fourth-generation smart watch has a slightly larger screen and is faster at tasks like loading apps. Yet the watch’s evolution from a fitness tracker into a health-monitoring device makes it vastly interesting in the long term […]

The screen stretches out from one edge to the other, letting apps take up more of the watch’s face. This enlarged display makes everything on the watch look better, including text […]

The speed difference was most noticeable when using Siri, Apple’s voice assistant. By simply raising the watch toward my mouth, I could speak a command like “Set a timer for 20 minutes,” and the watch reacted with barely any delay. The hands-free ability to summon Siri is a feature of Apple’s new watch operating system, WatchOS 5. In my book, this is how watches were meant to be used: without having to press any buttons.

I wouldn’t recommend it for people who are considering a smart watch for the first time. Here’s why: $399 is a stiff price to pay for a gadget with lightweight utility. Fortunately, Apple is selling its older Series 3 watch, which I rated as a great product last year, for $279. Now is a good time to get the older one.

I wouldn’t upgrade to the Series 4 from a recent generation of Apple Watch, either, because the improvements won’t feel significant. But if you bought the original Apple Watch in 2015 and liked it, this will be a great upgrade. The first watch was sluggish, with limited battery life, and it no longer receives operating system updates. The Series 4 addresses all of the first-generation watch’s flaws, and the speed boost will be a big step up.

Runner’s World said that the Apple Watch is finally a great option for runners – though more for watchOS 5 as for the new Series 4 hardware. In fact, it recommended the cheaper Series 3 for younger runners without health concerns.

With watchOS 5, you can now download podcasts to the watch and listen to them, even when you don’t carry your phone. Much like how the Music app works, the watch will sync new episodes when the watch is connected to a charger and wifi […]

At some point, we’ve all went out the door and forgot to start our watch. Now the watch will recognize when you’ve started an activity and even try to identify the type […] and the watch will have recorded your data from the start of the activity, not just when you hit the start button.

For marathon runners aiming for a specific time goal, you’ll like that Apple has added a feature common to other advanced GPS watches: pace alerts. You configure these within the Workouts app on the watch (click the three dots on the workout tile to access that workout type’s settings). On the run, the watch will alert you whenever you cross the predesignated threshold—for example, if you speed up and go from 8:05 per mile to 7:55 on average, it’ll alert you once. But the alerts are infrequent, so you don’t get annoyed.

The Sydney Morning Herald said that Apple made a slow start in the smartwatch race, but has now left everyone else far behind.

Apple joined the market in 2015, with a device I thought was confused mess (and it was). Back then, Google’s software was just so far ahead of Apple, and Google’s willingness to monitor your every move to guess what you might want to see on a tiny screen, contrasted with Apple’s commitment to privacy, gave them a lead I thought Apple could never catch […]

Like the fable of the hare and the tortoise, Apple has continued to iterate on its design, while Google seems to have abandoned the race. Today, Apple is miles ahead, with Samsung’s Gear Watch a distant second but still the best choice for Android users. Android Wear, now called Wear OS by Google, is far behind both.

Last year’s Apple Watch Series 3 was a massive leap forward, in both hardware and software. Apple is now competing with itself, and the Series 4 is leaps ahead again. The hardware is fast enough that no interaction has lag, be it flicking your wrist to turn on the screen, or tapping a complication to launch an app.

The screen on the Apple Watch 4 has been redesigned with a bezel-free, edge-to-edge display that fits more on the screen. The two new Infographic watch faces take advantage of all this space […] The Series 4 is compelling for those who can afford it.

Eleven years after the release of the iPhone, Apple’s most important product offers only incremental improvements with each new update. This seems to disappoint pundits, who demand giant leaps in technology with every release. But those wanting year over year drastic improvement need only look at the Apple Watch, which shows no signs of slowing down.

TechCrunch said that the best smartwatch on the market just got better – mostly in small ways, but they add up.

Roughly two-and-half minutes into my run, the watch kicks in. There’s a haptic buzz on my wrist. “It looks like you’re working out,” the watch face reads […] It feels like a small thing, but, then, most of the updates are relatively small in the grand scheme of things […]

If you’ve used an earlier version with any regularity […] the increase in surface area is pretty readily apparent, especially when an email notification comes through. It also means app developers can jam in more detail and the Watch’s faces can feature additional complications […]

Apple’s success doesn’t lie in any single standout feature. Rather, as with the iPhone, the company has excelled in providing an overall hardware and software experience that makes it possible to use the product mostly without thinking […]

The Series 4 isn’t the kind of refresh that justifies upgrading from the last generation, especially given the $399 and $499 starting prices for the standard and LTE models, respectively. But there’s certainly enough here to keep the Apple Watch at the top of the smartwatch heap. The addition of serious health features like ECG and fall detection further lay the groundwork for a what the device — and category — will become, going forward.

TechRadar said that Apple had hit the two things people were looking for from an update.

The Apple Watch 4 has finally brought the things that many were looking for from Apple’s wrist-piece: a new design, something that propels it forward in terms of usefulness.

The larger screen and more rounded edges are much nicer to look at and offer more functionality, and it also adds in some extra features too that are designed for those who are a little more vulnerable or suffer certain health conditions […]

The Apple Watch 4 stole the show at the launch of three new iPhones, and for good reason: where those were all just copying the iPhone X from last year, the Watch 4 feels materially different. This is Apple’s best smartwatch – not just because it’s the newest, but by a long way.

Not just for the upgrade in display and size, without adding that much heft, but in the way Apple is pushing it: the Watch 4 is now a health-focused device, something to help you get fitter or stay healthier if you’ve got a serious condition – or even just safeguard the more infirm for their loved ones.

For: Larger display. Lightweight design. Louder speaker.

Against: Still on the pricey side. Battery life needs to be more than two days.

USA Today said that the health features are the real reason to buy the Series 4.

Funny thing about the handsome new Apple Watch Series 4 I’ve been wearing on my wrist for several days. You hope you never actually need to use some of its most noteworthy features. And yet these features – fall detection, an ECG – are primary reasons for considering Apple’s latest timepiece.

At the risk of stereotyping, it’s safe to assume that Apple is grabbing at an older demographic, customers who, by and large, may have been more dismissive of earlier smart watches […]

Those of you who buy Series 4 will appreciate its larger display, louder speaker and such. But Apple has been pushing the new watch as a guardian for your health and that is arguably the most important reason to buy it. Even if your goal is never to have to use those features.

The Verge shared the majority view that the Series 4 finally realizes the original goal for the Apple Watch.

Launched with great fanfare four years ago, the initial version tried to do way too much with way too little, and it had confusing software to boot. Worst of all, it was unclear what the original Apple Watch was even for. No single thing stood out.

Then Apple did what Apple often does: iterated, refined, and fixed. But as much as there were software and hardware improvements to the Series 2 and Series 3, the most important refinements were to the Apple Watch’s purpose. It gained clarity. It was for fitness and notifications. Eventually, when it was ready, Apple added better connectivity.

Now, with the Series 4, Apple is iterating again. And, importantly, it’s learned how to iterate the product’s hardware and its purpose at the same time. The Series 4 has finally achieved something like the original goal of the Apple Watch. It’s not quite a do-anything computer on your wrist, but it can be different things to different people now.

Good stuff: Great battery life. Huge, beautiful screen. Health-tracking features, not just fitness.

Bad stuff: Siri is still unreliable. No always-on screen option. Complication options can be confusing.

We’ll of course be bringing you our own takes on the watch – including new pieces in my Apple Watch Diary series.