The original Switch featured 32GB of eMMC storage, a figure that subsequently doubled in the OLED version. The Switch 2, on the other hand, arrives with a whopping 256GB of UFS 3.1 storage, a massive upgrade in both capacity and speed. The Switch 2 offers gamers up to 7X more storage capacity compared to the Switch and up to 3X more than the Switch OLED.

As is customary with gaming consoles, not all of the internal storage is available to you. For the Switch 2, Nintendo has allocated approximately 7GB of the 256GB for system use. Consequently, the actual usable space amounts to approximately 249GB. However, while 249GB of storage capacity may appear like a lot on paper, any avid gamer would dispute this perception.

Take first-party titles such as Mario Kart World and Donkey Kong Bananza, for example — two games that will likely make your Switch 2 collection. They require approximately 22GB and 9GB of storage space, respectively. Modern AAA games aren't any lighter, either. If you like genres like Cyberpunk 2077 and Split Fiction, those occupy an additional 60GB and 70GB, respectively. Thus, only four games have already eaten up half of your available storage. If you share your Switch 2 with your children or a family member, space becomes even more important. The internal storage will inevitably fill up as your gaming library grows.

In its initiative to modernize the Switch 2, Nintendo adopted the microSD Express standard, thereby becoming a pioneer in this area. As of the time of this publication, the Switch 2 is the only device to use microSD Express cards. Although the standard has been in place since 2019, it has not yet gained momentum, which has primarily led to the limited availability and high cost of microSD Express cards.

Best MicroSD Express Cards At A Glance

Here's the shortlist of our recommendations and rankings, but we have a more detailed card-by-card breakdown and far more detailed in-depth performance benchmarks of these drives below. To find the best microSD Express cards for the Switch 2, we tested numerous cards of different capacities from various vendors.

Further below, we also have a hierarchy that ranks the microSD Express cards based on performance. Since it’s not possible to evaluate every card due to regional availability, we will continue testing and updating our recommendations as new cards become readily available for purchase in the U.S. market. We also have a detailed definition and explanation of the different speed classes across the various generations of the microSD specification.

Best 1TB MicroSD Express Card

The TeamGroup Apex SD7.1 1TB stands out as the fastest 1TB microSD Express card we've tested so far. Priced at $209.99, it's a more budget-friendly option than the Lexar Play Pro 1TB and also comes with the reassuring benefit of a limited lifetime warranty.

The Lexar Play Pro 1TB is one of the best 1TB microSD Express cards for the Switch 2. It's an excellent choice if you seek the highest capacity currently available. This card is available at major U.S. retailers, offering greater convenience than some other brands. Additionally, Lexar's limited lifetime warranty enhances the product's appeal by ensuring that your investment is consistently safeguarded. These benefits come at a higher price, though. The Lexar Play Pro 1TB retails for approximately 16% above the GameStop 1TB card with similar characteristics.

GameStop's 1TB microSD Express card is a similarly fast and spacious option as the Lexar Play Pro 1TB, making it the best budget 1TB microSD Express card on the market. One downside is that the microSD Express card is exclusive to GameStop, limiting its availability, especially outside the U.S. market. Moreover, it is noteworthy that GameStop's microSD Express card is covered by only a standard one-year manufacturer's warranty, one of the lowest on the market.

Best 512GB MicroSD Express Card

The Adata Premier Extreme 512GB has proven to be the fastest 512GB card we have tested to date, making it the best 512GB microSD Express card. However, this level of speed comes at a price of $129.99. However, if you want the ultimate performance, the Adata Premier Extreme 512GB is definitely one of the top options to consider.

The GameStop 512GB microSD Express card is slightly slower than the Adata Premier Extreme card, but it remains a compelling option. Once again, the limitation associated with GameStop cards is that they are exclusively available at GameStop, and the warranty period is limited to one year, which can quickly pass.

Best 256GB MicroSD Express Card

The Sandisk 256GB microSD Express card's performance is exemplary, making it the best 256GB microSD Express card on the market. At $71.99, the Sandisk card isn't easy on the pocket, but it does flaunt excellent performance and a lifetime warranty.

The Samsung Super Mario Edition 256GB card is the only officially licensed Nintendo microSD Express card for the Switch 2. Although it doesn't exhibit chart-topping performance, it serves as the best alternative 256GB microSD Express card for budget-conscious Switch 2 users who do not prioritize maximum performance. It only has a three-year warranty. Although it is not a lifetime warranty, it still provides two more years of warranty coverage than GameStop cards.

Best 128GB MicroSD Express Card

The AGI TF338 is a mixed bag in terms of performance. The AGI TF338 is relatively difficult to obtain and commands a substantial price because it ships from Amazon Japan. The AGI offers a limited five-year warranty on the product, which surpasses the standard three- or one-year warranties provided by other brands.

MicroSD Express Card Hierarchy

Our hierarchy ranks each microSD Express card that has undergone extensive benchmarking in our lab, which is then organized by capacity. The overall throughput result represents the geometric mean of the bandwidth tests conducted using our storage benchmark suite. Conversely, the other results derive from real-world testing in the actual Switch 2. The hierarchy will expand as we proceed to test additional microSD Express cards in the future.

1TB MicroSD Express Cards

512GB MicroSD Express Cards

256GB MicroSD Express Cards

128GB MicroSD Express Cards

MicroSD Express Card Performance Charts

Nintendo Switch 2 Benchmarks

PC Storage Benchmarks

microSD Express Performance and Specifications

microSD Express Performance and Specifications

Nintendo's adoption of microSD Express cards for the Switch 2 is both a blessing and a curse. Nintendo has disabled the Switch 2 from playing games off a standard microSD card, thereby persuading gamers to pay the early adopter tax associated with new microSD Express cards if they want to play games. The new microSD Express format offers improved tangible performance compared to the regular microSD cards used in the original Switch.

The only way to expand the Switch 2's gaming storage is to buy into the microSD Express standard. The new cards have a similar resemblance to standard microSD cards. A simple way to tell them apart is to look for the 'EX' logo on the label of the microSD Express cards. If you're an experienced user, you can probably tell one card apart from the other because, although microSD Express cards have two rows of metal pins, like microSD UHS-II cards, the position and size of the pins on the second row differ.

You can still insert a standard microSD card into the Switch 2, and it'll work in a way. Usage is limited to screenshots, video playback, or file transfer, as the console doesn't allow gameplay from these media types. The funny thing is that MicroSD Express maintains backward compatibility with devices that lack support for this standard; it just defaults to UHS-I speeds in such cases. Consequently, the limitation observed in the Switch 2 is more attributable to Nintendo's design choices, potentially serving as a strategy to prevent any adverse impact on the device's reputation due to lower performance levels with standard microSD cards.

The original Switch utilizes microSD cards, specifically those that support the UHS-I interface. That's why even Nintendo advised Switch owners to select a microSD card with transfer speeds ranging from 60 to 95 MB/s (theoretical maximum for UHS-I is 104 MB/s); investing in higher standards, such as UHS-II or UHS-III, would be an unnecessary expenditure because the Switch couldn't tap into the higher transfer speeds. On the other hand, microSD Express cards offer significantly higher performance, resulting in reduced game loading and transfer times.

The Switch 2 uses microSD Express, which is based on the SD 7.1 specifications and theoretically achieves transfer speeds of up to 985 MB/s. This represents an approximately 9.5X increase over UHS-I cards. The enhanced performance is enabled by the current SD 7.1 revision's use of the PCIe 3.0 x1 interface, finally moving away from the antiquated SD bus. The standard will continue to improve, and once it leverages a faster interface, such as PCIe 4.0 x2, projected speeds could reach up to 3,938 MB/s. However, this is a topic for another time.

Like regular microSD cards, microSD Express cards also come with their own speed classes. These ratings are designated by the "E" prefix followed by a number, which represents the minimum sustained write speed. For example, a card marked with E150 guarantees 150 MB/s of sustained write performance. None of the brands, at least the ones we tested, labeled their microSD Express cards with the appropriate speed class ratings. However, our storage benchmarks include a sustained write test, and some of the cards comply with the E150 or E300 categories.

Despite their higher transfer speeds, microSD Express cards continue to fall short compared to the Switch 2's internal UFS 3.1 storage system. UFS 3.1 technology, primarily used in smartphones and tablets, achieves maximum sequential read and write speeds of up to 2,100 MB/s and 1,200 MB/s, respectively. Therefore, when performance is at stake, the most efficient method for loading games remains loading them from internal storage. But when you're out, that's when the best microSD Express cards become relevant.

How We Test MicroSD Express Cards

We first test each card on the Switch 2, then move it to a PC test bed for further benchmarking. Although we charged the battery to 100% and had the Switch 2 connected to the wall, we used the device in handheld mode during our tests. We kept the firmware to version 20.5.0 to ensure consistency for all future evaluations. Should Nintendo release a subsequent update that improves transfer performance, we will retest each microSD Express card to incorporate the changes.

For the transfer tests, we used two games: Mario Kart World and Pokémon Legends: Z-A. We ran our benchmarks on versions 1.3.0 and 1.0.1 of the aforementioned titles, with sizes of 21.9 GB and 7.7 GB, respectively, for a total of 29.6 GB. We conducted each three times and picked the median result.

We employ a consistent PC test system for all benchmarking of our microSD Express cards. The specifications are in the table below. This system essentially serves as the test bed used in our RAM reviews. We apply our extensive SSD storage benchmarking suite to evaluate each microSD Express card. The evaluation encompasses trace tests, transfer rate tests, synthetic tests, and sustained write performance.

We have a consistent series of benchmarks, each executed multiple times. We utilize the highest result from each test. Windows 11 was held at version 24H2 to ensure consistent testing outcomes, as various security updates have influenced specific benchmarks over the years.

We utilize the Lexar microSDXC Express card reader (pictured above), available for $112 on Amazon, to interface our microSD Express cards with the system. The selection of the Lexar card reader was due to its active cooling design, incorporating a built-in fan to maintain optimal conditions for the microSD Express cards during rigorous testing. The reader connects to our system via a USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C port.

🟦🟥 Stock Build Plates 🟥 🟦

Before we dive into aftermarket print surfaces, a word on stock plates. Every modern 3D printer we’ve reviewed since 2024 has come with a very usable build plate. Textured PEI flex plates have become somewhat standard, and that’s a good thing. If you’re buying a printer today, you may be quite happy with your stock plate. You may only need this list if your build surface has been scratched, worn down, or otherwise damaged.

3D printing has been constantly evolving, with new technologies emerging every year. My first printer had a rudimentary glass build plate held down with binder clips, but now I have a plate with my own logo embedded right in the center.

There’s a buffet of build plate options out there: flexible, coated, textured, dual-sided, and optimized for specific filaments and print styles. But not all build surfaces are created equal. Here are the best third-party build surfaces you can buy for your 3D printer to get that first layer buttery smooth.

Best Build Plates for 3D Printers at a glance

Best Build Plates For 3D Printers You Can Buy Today

Tyson Flex Plate System

Tyson Build Plates are a revolution in 3D printing build surfaces. The T-95 plate is made from a thick Tempered 1095 spring steel with a proprietary coating that is truly universal. The plate can handle everything from PLA to PEEK, and the only limits are from the machine you put it on.

We tested this plate on the Qidi Tech Plus 4 and ran PLA, PETG, TPU, ASA, and Nylon without glue stick or any adhesion aid. Prints pop off easily and release on their own when allowed to cool. The bottom of the print is smooth and glass-like.

For an extra charge, the plate can bear your logo or an etched pattern that will transfer to the bottom of the print.

BIQU CryoGrip Pro “Glacier”

Glacier is one of BIQU’s two new cold plates, which rely on texture and Arctic Fairy Dust to hold down prints with minium heat. Ok, we’re kidding about the fairy dust, but there’s definitely some magic to the “porous oleophobic polymer coating” used on the top surface. Glacier plates have superior holding powers and defy dirt and grease from ordinary handling, and are scratch resistant. They work for every material without a need for gluestick, even TPU.

Because the Glacier is a cold plate, it will continue to hold at room temperature, which is nice if you’re worried about power outages. Most prints come off with a flex after it’s cooled a bit, but smaller things – like flexi animals – may need light persuasion. If you still have problems, 10 minutes in the freezer will help.

BIQU CryoGrip Pro “Frostbite”

Frostbite is the other new cold plate from BIQU, and could have been called “Rottweiler” considering how well it holds on to prints. It has a courser texture than Glacier, and holds prints at low temperatures. The plate is almost TOO sticky, but if you’ve ever had just one segment of a 3-day print pop off, you’ll appreciate the holding power of this plate. Frostbite plates defy dirt and grease from ordinary handling, and are also scratch resistant.

Because the Frostbite is a cold plate, it will continue to hold at room temperature, which is nice if you’re worried about power outages. Prints need more than a little flex to pop off this plate, and definitely need to cool down before you even try. If you still have problems, 10 minutes in the freezer will help.

SliceWorx Dipped PEI

Like Oreos dipped in chocolate, SliceWorx had a brilliant idea: what if we dip a PEI Flex plate in…rubber? Ok, it's not rubber, and they aren’t saying what the “high quality polymer” actually is, but rubber is pretty close. The coated surface of SliceWorx’s dipped plates is pure genius for those of us hooked on tiny articulated prints with a high failure rate.

Like the FrostBite plate from BQ, these dipped wonders are strictly for cool filaments like PLA and PETG. They need to be cooled a bit before flexing to remove your prints.

WhamBam PEI

Wham Bam PEI flex plates are no longer “revolutionary” after manufactures adopted PEI sheets for themselves. But their commitment to quality ensures that when you need a better build plate, Wham Bam has you covered with every size imaginable.

It’s line of PEI plates are known for consistent quality and come in both a smooth sheet that gives a shiny surface, or a baked on textured plated.

Holographic Build Plates

A holographic build plate has a specialized surface that leaves a shimmering “holographic” pattern on the bottom of the print. The plate has an ultra fine textured surfaces that diffracts light and can be transferred to the PLA print.

The holographic sticker is easily scratched, so great care should be taken when removing prints. The effect is also spoiled by finger oils and glue stick, so you’ll need to keep the plates super clean and additive free, which is why PLA is the go-to filament for these special effects plates.

The plates do not have any special gripping powers, so you’ll need to have a well tuned printer, and slow your speed for the best chances.

Custom Textured PEI Plate

Ember Prototypes knocked our socks off when it introduced custom PEI plates that bore whatever artwork you wanted to show off on your prints or the printer itself. The plates are not laser cut, but rather uses a proprietary coating that leaves a raised image on the plate that can transfer to the bottom of your print.

While they have some generic artwork available, the best plates are the ones where you supply the art. I had one made up with a hexagon pattern and my logo in the center, which is a little hit or miss as to what will end up on the finished print. Because these are bespoke plates, theres’s no refunds, so double-check your artwork before sending it over.

Best Build Plates for 3D Printers: How We Test

How we test the best build plates for 3D printers

We test all the build plates we recommend.

Our favorite test model for build plate adhesions is the humble “Mini Cute Octopus” by McGybeer – one in each corner – run at default speeds for the printer. We used a Bambu Lab P1P, A1, A1 Mini, QIDI Plus 4 and MK4s, all capable of running at an average speed of 200mm/s. It’s eight tiny tentacles each have 5 sections, meaning there’s 40 individual sections, some as small as 6x11mm.

I tested each printer’s stock plate – many of which failed without the help of glue stick - before switching to the aftermarket plate. Each plate had a few weeks of regular printing in addition to the test prints. The Octopus models will be given to children (for free) at 3D printing festivals when they visit my table, so there is no plastic wasted.

Best Build Plates for 3D Printers: FAQs

FAQs for the best build plates for 3D printers

🟢 What’s the best build plate surface to print on?

A clean one! Many first layer issues can be fixed by washing your build plate with hot soapy water, then drying the plate with a lint free cloth. Preheating the bed and using a little “purple” washable glue stick can also help give some extra stick for your models.

🟢 What’s the best build plate surface for PLA?

Textured PEI is one of the best all around surfaces, very affordable and generally works well for easy going PLA.

🟢 What’s the best build plate for PETG?

PETG is known to bond with just about anything, but a good clean, smooth PEI works best. And it never hurts to add a little glue stick for insurance.

🟢 What’s the best build plate for ABS?

We highly recommend the Tyson Build plate, a specialized high temperature plate that works for all filaments and absolutely excels at high temperatures.

MORE: Best 3D Printers

MORE: Best Resin 3D Printers

MORE: Best Budget 3D Printers

MORE: Best Filaments for 3D Printing

MORE: How to Buy the Right 3D Printer

Picking the Best SSD for You

The era of PCIe 5.0 SSDs is also upon us, propelling storage performance to new heights. Blazing-fast PCIe 5.0 M.2 SSDs, which offer up to twice the sequential speeds of the older PCIe 4.0 standard, are now supported with Intel and AMD's current platforms, like Zen 5 Ryzen 9000 and the Intel Core 200S series.

It's great if your desktop system can handle a PCIe 5.0 drive, but they are still new and more expensive and certainly aren't a requirement. For example, the PCIe 4.0 Samsung 990 Pro is our current choice for the best SSD overall, and the best SSD for gaming. This drive is rated for 7,450 / 6,900 MBps of sequential read/write throughput and 1.2 / 1.55 million read/write IOPS. That means less time waiting for game levels to load or videos to transcode, not to mention a snappier experience in Windows.

PCIe 5.0 SSDs still have plenty to offer. The Crucial T705 ranks as the fastest consumer SSD in the world that you can actually buy, alongside similar SSDs like the Sabrent Rocket 5, delivering up to a blistering 14.5 GB/s of sequential throughput and 1.8 million random IOPS over the PCIe 5.0 interface. That's an amazing level of performance from a surprisingly compact device.

While the PCIe 5.0 drives are the fastest SSDs money can buy right now, believe it or not, raw speed isn't everything. In regular desktop tasks such as web browsing or light desktop work, you may not even notice the difference between a PCIe 3.0 SSD and one with a 4.0 interface, let alone a new bleeding-edge PCIe 5.0 model. The latest PCIe 5.0 SSDs also carry a heavy price premium for now, so you're probably best suited with a PCIe 4.0 model — unless you're after the fastest possible performance money can buy, of course. If that's the case and your system supports it, go for a new PCIe 5.0 SSD.

Ultimately, the best SSD for you is one that provides enough capacity to hold your data at a price you can afford. Consider that a high-end, AAA game can use more than 100GB of data, and Windows 11 all by itself may need 60GB. These days, we feel 2TB drives represent the sweet spot, with 4TB models becoming increasingly common.

Best SSDs in 2025 at a glance (more info below):

Here's the shortlist of our rankings, but we have deeper breakdowns for these drives below, along with far more picks for other categories, like PS5 SSDs, RGB SSDs, workstation SSDs, and SATA SSDs, among other categories.

Quick Shopping Tips

Below, you'll find our list of the best SSDs. For even more information, check out our SSD Buyer's Guide. Iif you're looking for an external SSD, you can check out our Best External Hard Drives and SSD page, or learn how to save some money by building your own external SSD.

Best SSDs You Can Buy Today

Samsung hit back at its competitors with this impressive update to the 980 Pro. New hardware and new options, including a heatsink with RGB and a 4TB variant, have allowed Samsung to retake the M.2 SSD crown. Performance is excellent across the board, setting a few new performance records, such as with 4K random read performance. In our testing, the drive was consistent, power-efficient, and cool. Samsung has also updated its software for this drive, giving it the best SSD toolbox available, and the drive is backed by a competent warranty and decent support.

$20 extra for a heatsink and RGB is a good deal, and Samsung will likely discount this drive over time. Competing PCIe 5.0 drives on the market offer faster performance, but they still carry a premium.

Read: Samsung 990 Pro review

WD has taken its popular Black SN850 SSD and turned it up to 11. The Black SN850X leverages an improved controller and newer flash to get the most out of the PCIe 4.0 interface. Performance is improved across the board, and the drive rivals most of the top contenders in the PCIe 4.0 market. There's also a heatsink option that comes with RGB at 1TB and 2TB. WD also supports the SSD with its decent Dashboard application and a respectable five-year warranty.

The M.2 Black SN850X was a bit pricey at launch, however, with a daunting MSRP, but those prices have largely come down. The touted Game Mode 2.0 feature felt incomplete in our testing, although WD ensures us that this will improve with future firmware updates. All-in-all, this is a good compromise if you can’t find the Samsung 990 Pro.

Read: WD Black SN850X review

Fastest Best SSDs

Not content with the release of the WD Black SN7100, our pick for the best laptop M.2 SSD, Sandisk followed up quickly with the WD Black SN8100. This drive is a response to the Samsung 9100 Pro – a good drive in its own right – with the added desire to destroy all existing high-end PCIe 5.0 SSDs. The SN8100 achieves this by using a new, more efficient controller from SMI along with very efficient BiCS8 flash. Through this, the drive is not only highly power-efficient for an SSD of this caliber, but it’s also able to hit higher performance levels with less overhead. For the time being, it’s the fastest all-around drive out there.

Sandisk could have skimped on the capacity end, but there’s 1TB to 4TB at launch, with 8TB promised in 2025. Historicall,y it has been difficult to get even 4TB drives out the door at this performance level and while it might take some time for Sandisk to improve availability there, the upfront promise of 8TB has us more hopeful. An 8TB drive in this class is a dream come true for many enthusiasts. That said, you’ll pay for the privilege. The SN8100 is not and will not be an inexpensive drive..

Read: Sandisk WD Black SN8100 review

The Crucial T710 is a sort-of successor to the T705, the fastest drive we tested at the time it launched, which in turn superseded the early adopter T700. Crucial is still using its own Micron TLC flash – albeit updated from 232 to 276 layers – but has switched from the Phison E26 to the SMI SM2508. The E26 was no slouch by any means, but it was built in an older process node, which created significant downsides with regard to power consumption and heat production. Phison’s E28 wasn’t ready in time for the T710 but luckily, SMI’s controller is also very power-efficient and powerful.

Coupled with the newer flash, the T710 hits all the right marks and feels like a natural progression from the T705. There are no performance lapses, but on the other hand, it doesn’t really stand apart from other drives in that department either. It is single-sided and therefore could work in laptops and tight HTPCs – unless maybe if you go for the heatsink version – which might be its primary advantage over older high-end Gen 5 drives.

Sandisk’s WD_Black SN8100, our top pick ahead of this drive, uses the same controller but with Kioxia 218-Layer BiCS8 TLC flash instead. That drive’s sublime random 4K results make it the overall faster drive in our opinion. However, we will point out that the 1TB T710 has the highest sequential performance potential – especially for writes – and its overall performance keeps it firmly above other, less expensive options on the market like the Acer Predator GM9000.

Read: Crucial T710 review

Best Laptop SSDs

If you’re looking for a new SSD for your laptop or other portable device, the Sandisk WD Black SN7100 should be at the top of your list. Battery life is usually of utmost importance, and there is no drive on the market more efficient than this one. In the grand scheme of things, your SSD probably won’t make a huge dent in your power budget unless you’re pushing things a little harder, but on the other hand, every bit matters. That selling point alone might not be enough for everyone, but luckily, the Black SN7100 also has fantastic random read performance, which makes it exceptionally responsive.

While the drive did not have a 4TB model at the time of launch and review, it is now part of the lineup, which removes one of the negatives we had for the drive. You no longer have to compromise on capacity. However, the drive still suffers from middling all-around performance, and its pricing remains a sticking point. Sandisk has been more prone to sales as of late, though, and we think that even if this drive isn’t the best pick for desktop, it’s pretty hard to beat for laptops.

Read: Sandisk WD Black SN7100 Review

The Crucial T500 combines cutting-edge flash with a customized controller that manages to be power-efficient with just four channels but also squeezes in the coveted performance-boosting DRAM cache. The T500 is also a single-sided drive with TCG Opal support, making it perfect for professional laptop use.

Many laptops are still stuck with PCIe 3.0 slots, and that’s fine. The T500 will be even more efficient when run at 3.0, and its benefits, aside from bandwidth potential, do not disappear. While the T500 does offer a heatsinked version, which we have in our all-around best SSD category, you’ll be going bare for a laptop. In this respect, it can even be better than DRAM-less drives, as the T500’s controller has more surface area and a metal IHS to prevent controller overheating. It’s simply the finest drive for laptops at this time unless you really want more horsepower. That’s on the menu, too, especially once the 4TB version arrives.

Read: Crucial T500 Review

Best 4TB SSD

4TB has become a more attractive capacity point for SSDs as time has gone on. While there are now many options available, most come with compromises of one sort or another. You may have to settle for QLC, a weaker controller, no DRAM, unreliable hardware, etc. This is not always a big deal, especially if the drive is intended to be a secondary gaming drive. In the PlayStation 5, however, extra cooling is beneficial, so it’s convenient to have a heatsink option available. At the same time, laptops favor bare drives and especially single-sided drives, the latter of which have been very rare with TLC until recently.

Samsung has managed all of this with its high-performing 990 Pro SSD. You have a powerful controller with DRAM, cutting-edge TLC flash, and a single-sided drive with or without heatsink even at 4TB. WD’s SN850X has been out a while at 4TB but has no heatsink option and is double-sided, with the SN850P being a latter heatsinked version for the PS5. There has been an increasing amount of 4TB TLC drives, including the Lexar NM790 and Addlink A93, but these cannot compare to the power and brand power of Samsung’s 990 Pro. You do have to pay for that privilege given the high MSRP, but at this time there is no substitute.

Read: Samsung 990 Pro Review

Now that Crucial has finally brought out the 4TB SKU for the T500, it can replace the T700 on our best SSDs list for the best 4TB SSD alternative. The T700 is still a good choice for this, but the T500 is better for a few reasons. While both drives have a heatsink option, the T700 requires one, while the T500 can work bare in a laptop. The T500 is also more power-efficient but doesn’t skimp on performance by omitting DRAM. And while the T700 is PCIe 5.0 capable, many machines — including laptops and the PS5 — won’t benefit from that extra bandwidth.

The 4TB T500 is not without its faults, though. Its pricing is a little high for what you get, matching other high-end drives, which makes more sense on desktops. This is partly because the T500 has inconsistent sustained performance while those like the 990 Pro and SN850X do not. The 4TB T500 is also double-sided, which potentially reduces its compatibility. There are already single-sided, 4TB DRAM-less drives for less, such as the Lexar NM790, and there may be more in the future, although in general, this fact shouldn’t reduce the T500’s appeal.

Read: Crucial T500 4TB review

Best High-Capacity (8TB) SSD

The Samsung 9100 Pro is not a record-setting drive now that the second generation of Gen 5 SSD controllers are coming out in retail products. However, it is the first high-end drive to offer an 8TB SKU. This is a massive amount of storage, especially for a drive at this performance level. The 9100 Pro delivers good results in all of our tests, and the overall package is perfect for enthusiasts who want this much space in one drive for their HEDTs and workstations. It can also work in laptops, but the double-sided nature of the drive makes it more suitable for desktops, especially with the optional and affordable heatsink. Behind it all is Samsung’s name, so you know you’re getting a high-quality product with support to back your expensive investment.

Read: Samsung 9100 Pro 8TB SSD review

Best Budget M.2 SSD

The Teamgroup MP44 is one of those drives that remains a value champion just for being in the right place at the right time. It feels like a natural successor to the Teamgroup MP34, a drive that was once the most popular 4TB choice among budget PCIe 3.0 drives. The MP44 is even better than that, though, as it has a more reliable controller with up-to-date flash. As such, performance is good everywhere it matters and the drive is power-efficient, too.

It’s probably not the best SSD for laptops as the controller can act as a hotspot, but otherwise it’s a good choice at any capacity. However, it faces more competition below 4TB. There are faster drives either way, but it’s difficult to argue about the MP44’s price. Its most direct rivals would be the Patriot Viper VP4300 Lite, the Lexar NM790, and the Addlink A93, but it generally beats them all with its lower cost, particularly at the coveted 4TB.

Read: Teamgroup MP44 Review

We recently replaced the TeamGroup MP44L on our Best PS5 SSDs list for a good reason: the MP44L has had its hardware changed over its life, but it’s now showing up with decidedly bad controllers and QLC flash. It was our budget champion for quite some time, but it feels like Team has introduced the MP44Q to fill that gap.

Drives in the middle of the PCIe 4.0 range – usually around 5 GB/s peak, give or take – are becoming less sensible by the day. What this means for you is that it’s more appropriate to opt for budget-friendly 7 GB/s drives, such as the MP44 and MP44Q, if you’re budget-conscious. Which drive to pick depends on the pricing and availability at the time of purchase. The MP44Q can end up competing with the MP44 with comparable pricing at times, and even at its best, it’s up against other QLC-based drives.

That doesn’t mean the MP44L and its class of drives should be ignored completely, as sometimes it really does come down to a few $ in either direction. However, we would strongly recommend going up to the MP44Q at the least if you value hardware longevity. Cheap drives are cheap for a reason. The MP44L once stood out with good controllers and TLC flash, but now that the market squeeze has left it as a poor man’s Kingston NV3 – Kingston’s NV series being the poster child for hardware that changes in some budget SSDs – we think you can do better. The MP44Q offers a good, power-efficient alternative.

Read: TeamGroup MP44Q review

Sandisk’s newest Blue NVMe SSD is an achievement despite its complete transition from TLC to QLC flash. This drive has something for everyone, offering decent all-around performance, low 4K random read latency, and high power efficiency, all within a nice capacity range. In fact, it’s difficult to tell it apart from the TLC-based Black SN7100 in everyday use. Given that the Blue SN5100 is using less-expensive QLC flash, it should end up priced better, too, which would be quite something given the great value the Black SN7100 provides.

The Blue SN5100’s excellent balance makes it an all-around winner for use in mobile systems, the PS5, HTPCs, and as a secondary or gaming desktop drive. It’s a drive for everyone and is our pick for the best QLC drive on the market, although the Crucial P310 comes close. QLC usually means capacity, and thankfully, the Blue SN5100 is available up to 4T,B which leaves us with few criticisms. Yes, it still has weaker sustained write performance than a TLC drive, but this is less concerning than the launch price. This drive, when settled at its proper price point, will be a great pick.

Read: Sandisk WD Blue SN5100 Review

WD took its popular Black SN850 SSD and turned it up to 11, but luckily for value seekers, the price isn't nearly as extreme. The current $156 price on Amazon for the 2TB model is a great deal, even if it's now $25 more than it cost last year. The Black SN850X uses an improved controller and newer flash to get the most out of the PCIe 4.0 interface, thus delivering excellent performance with the Sony PlayStation 5. WD improved performance across the board, and the drive comes with a heatsink option at 1TB and 2TB capacity points.

WD also supports the SSD with a solid five-year warranty that will let you game with peace of mind. This drive is made for the PlayStation 5, and while it can be a bit pricier than budget options, overall, it's still our top pick for the PS5. It's also fast for gaming on a PC, particularly with DirectStorage starting to become useful, so this drive is plenty attractive.

WD has taken the course of releasing an officially licensed SN850P SSD. That drive is a glorified heatsinked SN850X and you should only pick it if you want the heatsink at 4TB. Even then, it's far cheaper to get a bare SN850X and add your own heatsink.

Read: WD Black SN850X Review

The Addlink A93 is a perfect example of a great PlayStation 5 expansion drive – it delivers top performance at up to 4TB without breaking the bank. The PS5 doesn’t need anything special, but you might as well get a drive that will last a long time. The A93 checks this box with its TLC flash, and it’s also designed for the PS5 with a compliant heatsink and a single-sided drive design. It’s DRAM-less with a four-channel controller, which means it’s power-efficient and, with its heatsink, it’s therefore unlikely to overheat, which is always good news for console lovers.

That said, enthusiasts would still prefer to have DRAM, which is why we have the WD Black SN850X as our first pick for a PS5 drive. If you’re trying to save some money, though, the A93 is a decent substitute. There are competing drives that would work as well, such as the Lexar NM790, but currently, the A93 offers the best package for the best price. It has all the performance you need with no real drawbacks, unless you really have your heart set on 8TB.

Read: Addlink A93 SSD Review

The Crucial P310 came as a bit of a surprise, but a welcome one. M.2 2230 SSDs have ratcheted up in popularity ever since Valve’s Steam Deck launched, and now there are more portable gaming systems than ever. There’s also Microsoft’s Surface Pro line and some laptops that take M.2 2230 or M.2 2242 - this drive can be extended up to M.2 2280 if needed - which used to mean going to eBay for OEM options like the WD SN740. This hasn’t been the case in a while, but finding a decent 2TB drive has remained difficult. The P310 handles that challenge like a champ.

Sure, it’s QLC-based, which means it’s not quite as fast or consistent as it could be, but it’s more power-efficient than the TLC-based WD Black SN770M and has more throughput. In fact, it’s the fastest 2TB M.2 2230 SSD we’ve ever tested. We expect the updated Corsair MP600 Mini would beat it, but the P310 has better availability and should be less expensive. It’s fast enough where it matters, which makes it the best option if you’re looking purely for capacity, but your host system should be able to take PCIe 4.0 drives to fully benefit.

Read: Crucial P310 SSD review

Kingston’s NV3 (2230) is a good example of a budget drive done right. Our reviewed version has good hardware, including superior QLC flash. However, the specifications are lower than normal which gives Kingston the ability to change the hardware down the road. This isn’t a big trade-off considering the drive is priced right at 1TB and 2TB, the most popular drive capacities for this form factor. The good power efficiency also means it won’t drain your battery or overheat.

When we’re talking about the Steam Deck this drive is more than fast enough as the device is limited to PCIe 3.0. Other and future devices will take PCIe 4.0 and even 5.0 SSDs, however. For the most part you don’t need a drive with TLC flash even in that case if your primary workload is gaming. The NV3 would have more competition there, certainly on the performance front but also possibly with capacity down the line. Aside from the excellent Crucial P310, we may begin to see 4TB drives in this and the M.2 2242 form factor with double-sided solutions, 2TB dies, or both. Right now the NV3 is a solid deal, though.

Read: Kingston NV3 (2230) SSD review

Corsair’s second run at the MP600 Mini, now with a faster controller and flash, is an example of how to do things right. It takes M.2 2230 SSDs to the next level in terms of performance while maintaining excellent levels of power efficiency. To top it off, it brings TLC flash at up to 2TB in a single-sided package. Previously, it was necessary to go with QLC flash - which in some cases is slower than TLC flash - or the power-hungry WD Black SN770M, which in any case isn’t as fast. This isn’t as big a deal with the PCIe 3.0 Steam Deck, as you can’t reach the full potential of today’s drives with that interface.

The new MP600 Mini comes at a price, though. Literally - it costs a bit more than the competition. The least expensive way to get this level of performance is to go with the Crucial P310, the best choice for M.2 2230 on any PCIe 4.0 platform if you want the highest capacity and 7 GB/s. For a 3.0 platform like the Deck and TLC flash, the Black SN770M remains solid. If you want the best performance possible, then the updated MP600 Mini is the way to go. For the time being, it is even good for M.2 2242 with an extender, otherwise, the native Rocket Nano 2242 will do the trick at 1TB.

Read: Corsair MP600 Mini (E27T) SSD Review

The WD Black SN770M is unique in that it offers 2TB of TLC NAND flash in the tiny M.2 2230 form factor in a single-sided design. This makes it optimal for use in the Steam Deck, ASUS ROG Ally, and other portable gaming/computing devices. Some of these can take double-sided drives or longer drives, but the most popular of them all - the Deck and Deck OLED - work best with this form factor. For a long time, it was only possible to get a drive with less-desirable QLC if you wanted 2TB, but with the SN770M, that compromise is no longer required.

This comes at a cost as the older hardware on the SN770M - which is the same as the popular M.2 2280 Black SN770 - pulls more power and puts out more heat. For regular gaming use, this wasn’t an issue in our testing. The difference in battery life is essentially negligible, and the drive is usually not pushed enough for its direct heat output to be an issue. Therefore, it offers the best baseline performance in this form factor for now, but QLC-based alternatives may be more affordable.

Read: WD Black SN770M Review

With the growing popularity of M.2 2230 SSDs, it was only a matter of time before we saw retail 2242 options. The Sabrent Rocket Nano 2242 is one of these, alongside the Corsair MP600 Micro. Alternatives include OEM and last-gen drives, like Sabrent’s original Rocket 2242, but some are double-sided. Not so with the Rocket Nano 2242, which will fit in the Lenovo Legion Go and many laptops with at least one M.2 2242 slot. It’s an easy drop-in solution with good performance and power efficiency.

The drive is only currently available at 1TB. However, with dual NAND packages, we expect larger capacity options in the future. M.2 2230 SSDs can also be extended for M.2 2242, but the 2TB options currently on the market all have their own drawbacks, except perhaps for the imminent Corsair MP600 Mini (E27T). However, the Rocket Nano 2242 gives plenty of performance for portable devices as it stands and is an easy pickup for M.2 2242.

Read: Sabrent Rocket Nano 2242 SSD review

PNY had its heart set on producing a very fast RGB-capable SSD, and with the CS3150 XLR8, or CS3150, it succeeded. This PCIe 5.0 SSD also has a heatsink with dual fans to ensure it never overheats. PNY’s software allows control over the RGB and fans, with synchronization possible for the former if you have other PNY RGB products. The warranty is standard, but the drive does support hardware encryption via the TCG Opal 2.0 specification, which may be a selling point for some.

The CS3150 isn’t perfect, though. It’s expensive and can be difficult to find. It’s only available at 1TB and 2TB capacities, needing 2TB to hit its maximum performance numbers. There are also other drives equal or faster to it, although for many workloads this isn’t particularly relevant. If RGB isn’t your thing, this drive also comes without the RGB in both white and black variants. Regardless of the model you go for, the drive can operate without throttling, and its performance is good across the board.

Read: PNY CS3150 Review

Best Workstation SSDs

At first glance, the Adata Legend 960 Max seems like just another drive among many. That’s true, as there are better drives in almost every category. There’s faster drives, drives with more IOPS, more efficient drives, etc. What the Legend 960 Max does right is typically of little interest to desktop users: it has good sustained performance and runs cool while maintaining that speed. It also has DRAM, living in a world where DRAM-less drives are becoming more popular and are affordable but aren’t always ideal for heavier workloads.

The fact is, this drive is quite consistent, which is potentially useful for NAS and even workstation use. Its warranty doesn’t lag behind and the addition of a heatsink means it’s ready to go right out of the box - or you can get the regular Legend 960 without a heatsink. It’s also pretty much the least expensive drive of this type, with DRAM, at 4TB, when ignoring drives with problematic hardware like the Silicon Power XS70 or Adata S70 Blade. It’s one of those drives that goes unnoticed which means at the right price it could be a niche solution for a tucked-away server.

Read: Adata Legend 960 Max Review

The Corsair MP600 Pro LPX has come a long way since our original review. Its performance has been straightened out and Corsair has also added an 8TB SKU. The drive has good availability and fair pricing, which is what helps it stand out in this category. While there are many drives similar to it, including our original pick - the Seagate FireCuda 530, which is now hard to find, Corsair has focused more on simply having the drive available. Throw in a heatsink - in black or white, to match your decor - and you have an attractive and very consistent all-around performer.

What makes this drive good for workstations is that it has a powerful, eight-channel controller with DRAM, in an era when four-channel DRAM-less drives are becoming more popular. PCIe 5.0 SSDs still carry too much of a premium. The MP600 Pro LPX also has tried-and-tested hardware that’s mature and reliable, which isn’t the case with some IG5236-based drives like some Silicon Power XS70s. Corsair also offers this drive from 500GB up to 8TB, which gives a ton of flexibility to suit your needs. It’s not power-efficient by today’s standards, but this isn’t a huge factor for workstations and HEDTs, making it a safe choice.

Read: Corsair MP600 Pro LPX Review

Best Workstation SSD Alternate

The Kingston KC3000 is a long-standing favorite, a popular Gen 4 SSD that has been around for a while. There are many drives out there with the same hardware, including the previous holders of our Best Workstation SSD and SSD Alternate slots. The primary reason for the change is that drives with the Phison E18 controller have been identified with issues that could impact performance or reliability. However, only a few manufacturers have actually addressed this with a firmware update. Kingston is the primary one, offering the update for both the KC3000 and the Fury Renegade.

This makes the KC3000 a safer pick for workstation use, given that it also has decent all-around performance and is readily available. It also has a higher-than-standard TBW endurance rating and the Kingston name, which means it can be serviced more widely around the world. The only downside is that there are competing products, including some that are less expensive. However, if the reported issues are something you take seriously, then that brings things into focus. The KC3000 – or its sibling, the Fury Renegade – checks the right boxes for workstation use if you want a reliable solution.

Read: Kingston KC3000 Review

Best NAS SSDs

The Addlink NAS D60 is a niche drive but fills its designated role pretty well. If you have a NAS system, a workstation, or other servers - whether for home lab use or SOHO - this drive may be worth looking at. Assuming your server can take an M.2 NVMe drive or two, the NAS D60 can do caching duty in tandem with mechanical hard drives or even be used in an all-flash array. Whichever way you go, some special features of this drive help it step away from other retail consumer drives, which justifies its price premium. But it’s still more affordable than full-out enterprise solutions.

The first thing that stands out about this drive is that it’s using enterprise-grade flash. Such flash is more reliable with higher baseline endurance. This lets Addlink extend the warranty to 1 drive write per day (DWPD), which is three times the retail standard. The second thing that stands out is that it has capacitors on-board for power loss protection. This means improved integrity for data-in-flight. Lastly, the NAS D60 foregoes any pSLC cache, which, while hurting all-around performance, does give more consistent sustained performance. This combination makes it particularly good for a write cache, singly or in RAID, for NAS and other systems.

If you’re looking for a more traditional drive or one with a larger capacity option, the Adata Legend 960 Max remains viable. It also has a heatsink, which the D60 NAS lacks. Pick the D60 Max if you want the higher TBW, the PLP, and/or the non-cache performance characteristics. Oh, and remember that the NAS D60 will not be very power-efficient if that’s a factor for you.

Read: Addlink NAS D60 SSD review

Best SATA SSDs

You can get a SATA drive in the M.2 form factor, but most SATA drives are 2.5-inch models, which allows them to drop into the same bays that hold laptop hard drives. SATA drives are the cheapest.

If you’re still buying SATA SSDs, your options are vanishingly few if you’re looking for a quality drive. Crucial has stopped making its popular MX500 – our previous Best SATA SSD – and other manufacturers have swapped to DRAM-less hardware in some cases, the WD Blue SA510 being the most prominent example. While having DRAM isn’t make-or-break with newer M.2 NVMe SSDs, it’s more useful for maintaining good performance with SATA SSDs. TLC flash is also preferable to QLC if you want to maintain high write speeds and performance.

This leaves the Samsung 870 EVO as the likely best remaining SATA SSD available. You’re going to get quality TLC flash and DRAM. Samsung also offers a decent capacity range, which means you should be able to find the drive you need when you need it. The vast majority of SATA SSDs out there are DRAM-less nowadays, but they’re also cheaper and might be good enough for basic upgrades. The 870 EVO, as a result, is an expensive proposition, but if you want a drive to last, it’s the best option.

Read: Samsung 870 EVO Review

How We Test SSDs and Benchmark Charts

We use the same test system for all our SSD benchmarks. You can find the specifications in the boxout, and the short summary is that it's an Intel Alder Lake platform — chosen because it was the first platform to support PCIe 5.0 for expansion cards and M.2 slots. We have periodically looked at newer platforms, but Raptor Lake didn't change the results much if at all, and AMD's PCIe 5.0 platforms tend to be slightly slower than Intel's platforms.

We have a battery of benchmarks, each of which gets run multiple times. We use the best result from each test. Here are the charts of all currently tested SSDs (from the past three years, give or take). We froze Windows 11 at version 22H2 in order to keep the test results consistent — various security updates have had an impact on certain benchmarks over the years.

We've grouped the SSDs by capacity, beginning with the 4TB and larger drives, then the 2TB drives (which are easily the most popular and well-represented class in our testing), then the 1TB drives, and finally all the 2230 drives (in both Gen3 and Gen4 modes). We haven't tested any new 500GB-class or smaller SSDs in several years as that market is mostly dead for DIY upgrades these days.

4TB SSD and larger testing results

2TB SSD testing results

1TB SSD testing results

M.2 2230 SSD testing results

Finding Discounts on the Best SSDs in 2025

Whether you're shopping for one of the best SSDs or one that didn't quite make our list, you may find savings by checking out the latest Crucial promo codes, Newegg promo codes, Amazon promo codes, Corsair coupon codes, Samsung promo codes or Micro Center coupons.

MORE: Best External SSDs and Hard Drives

MORE: All SSD Content

Finding the best PS5 SSD can be daunting due to the wide variety of choices. Plenty of SSDs will work in the PS5 and provide a simple and hassle-free capacity upgrade for your game library, but which ones rise above the crowd? To narrow down the options, we've tested many drives in a battery of tests, including many models from our SSD benchmarks hierarchy. From these, we've picked the best SSDs for the PS5 based on performance and price at several different capacities.

Nearly any new drive you buy for the PC can also be used in the PS5, so you'll also find many of these same picks on our list of Best SSDs for desktop PCs. You can also use everything from a tiny M.2 2230 drive up to a longer M.2 22110 model in the PS5, but there's no real benefit from choosing the other form factors. M.2 2280 SSDs are ubiquitous and typically offer the best combination of value, performance, and capacity.

The PS5's internal SSD is a restrictive 825GB (or 1TB on the PS5 Slim), and after formatting, updates, and bloatware, it typically leaves you with about 670GB free for games. That's bad news because today's games are becoming larger with each new release, and you'll also need somewhere to store all the screenshots and video clips you gather while you play. Call of Duty, as an example, can use more than 200GB all by itself!

The good news is that Sony has an M.2 expansion slot where you can put a second SSD for the PS5, and the current system firmware allows you to use SSDs with up to 8TB of capacity. That's hopefully enough storage to satiate even the most demanding of gamers, but there are also far more affordable options, with modern 2TB and 4TB models being particularly attractive choices for the PS5.

The TLDR: Best SSDs for the PS5 (more info below):

Here's the quick list of the best SSDs for the PS5, but we have further breakdowns and testing results below. There are also similar drives in some cases, with effectively the same hardware, and we'll list those alongside our primary selections. When searching for the best SSD for the PS5, you'll want to be careful about which drive you pick. The Samsung 990 Pro and WD SN850X are great SSDs for the PS5, though pricing has been trending upward for the past several months — on all SSDs. The SN850X also comes as an SN850P that's just an overpriced SN850X with a different heatsink and PlayStation 5 branding.

We've broken things down by category, with our top picks being the WD Black SN850X, SK hynix Platinum P41, and Samsung 990 Pro. For capacity or budget minded shoppers, we also have the Acer GM7000, Silicon Power US75, and Netac NV7000. Which drive will fit your particular needs best depends on what you're after, so we list multiple alternatives for most categories and SSDs.

Best SSDs for PS5

WD took its popular Black SN850 SSD and turned it up to 11, but luckily the price isn't nearly so extreme. The current $124 price on Amazon for the 2TB model is a great deal, though other capacities may not be as attractively priced. The 4TB drive at $249 is worth a look for those who want more capacity; the 8TB drive at $549 is also worth a thought if you really want all the capacity you can pack into that M.2 slot — and it's now $300 off the original launch price.

The Black SN850X leverages an improved controller and newer flash to get the most out of the PCIe 4.0 interface, thus delivering excellent performance with the Sony PlayStation 5. Performance is improved across the board, and the drive comes with a heatsink option at all capacities. You'd be better served by a purpose-built PS5 heatsink, however.

WD also supports the SSD with a respectable five-year warranty that will let you game with peace of mind. It's a great match for the PlayStation 5, and while it can be a bit pricier than budget options, overall it's still our top pick. It's also fast for gaming on a PC, particularly with DirectStorage starting to become useful.

WD has taken the course of releasing an officially-licensed SN850P. That drive is a glorified heatsinked SN850X and should only be picked if you really want the PS5 logo on your heatsink for whatever reason. It's far less expensive to get a bare SN850X and add your own heatsink.

Read: WD Black SN850X Review, WD Black SN850X 8TB Review

The Samsung 990 Pro was not our original pick for the best PS5 SSD alternate option, but the drive has grown on us over time. Samsung experienced some firmware issues with the 990 Pro that were eventually resolved, and the manufacturer later introduced a single-sided 4TB SKU with newer flash to enhance the product. This newer flash has trickled back into the smaller SKUs, making the mature version of this drive an excellent all-around pick. That means it’s great for the PlayStation 5 even though it lacks the 8TB option that WD/SanDisk offers with the SN850X/SN850P line.

Samsung also offers the drive with a PS5-compliant heatsink, which means one less worry if you’re running your system hard in a hotter environment. You can also take advantage of Samsung’s software and support if you have a PC available to host the drive. The main downside of the 990 Pro, especially when it’s being used for the console, is that it costs more per GB than many alternatives on the market. If you want a high-quality drive, though, it’s near the top of our list.

Read: Samsung 990 Pro Review

High-Capacity SSD for PS5

If you want the largest possible SSD for your PS5, look no further than the WD Black SN850X 8TB. 16TB drives aren't really a thing in the consumer space, likely because even 8TB drives remain relatively niche parts with a higher price per TB of capacity than 4TB and 2TB drives. But the SN850X online prices have dropped quite a bit since it initially launched with an $849 MSRP.

In our PS5 test suite, the SN850X 8TB was effectively just as fast as any other drive. The PS5 doesn't support PCIe 5.0 speeds and the internal drive ends up being a bottleneck for both the copy to and read from tests that we run. That means you not only get maximum capacity but also maximum performance.

What's not to love? The price. $579 for 8TB isn't terrible, but that's more than a PS5 costs on its own. $649 for the heatsink version is a bit of a joke, since you can put on your own $10–$15 heatsink instead (but without the WD Black branding). It's also a double-sided drive, which means the underside can run a bit hotter if you're doing a bunch of writes — both most writes will be limited by the internet connection so it's not really a concern.

Read: WD Black SN850X 8TB review

The Samsung 990 Evo Plus takes the same Piccolo controller found in the 990 Pro and pairs it with newer, higher capacity 236-layer (v8) V-NAND. Performance ends up being very good, particularly if you're planning on putting it into a PS5, and you can get up to 4TB of capacity in a single-sided drive.

Samsung is also about as well-known and reliable an SSD brand as you can find. There have been issues with a few models over the years, but the 990 Evo Plus has so far been free of any notable problems. Whether it's in a PS5, laptop, or desktop, the 990 Evo Plus is efficient and fast.

While our primary capacity pick has double the storage, for many 4TB of storage in a PS5 will be "enough" to hold a sizable gaming library.

Read: Samsung 990 Evo Plus review

Best Cheap SSD for PS5

Our biggest complaint about the Crucial P310 – both in this and the shorter M.2 2230 form factor – was its high price for what it offered. This has changed as the price of the drive relative to the competition has lowered significantly. Memory and SSD prices are currently in a large upward swing, but Crucial benefits from using its own Micron NAND flash and can position QLC, which is in high demand in the enterprise, more aggressively in the consumer market. This means it’s a good pick for the PS5 right now, as our original entry for this category – that would be the SanDisk WD Black SN7100 – uses TLC flash but has become more expensive.

While we’re all about getting a drive with TLC flash whenever possible, and better yet with DRAM, the PS5 console’s storage requirements are very modest. Almost any Gen 4 drive will do, and, as it so happens, the P310 isn’t at the low end of that segment anyway. It’s one of the best QLC-based drives on the market – only the WD SanDisk Blue SN5100 gives it a real run for its money – and it performs well even without DRAM. The P310 was only available up to 2TB at the time of our review, but now comes in 4TB, which removes another caveat we had. The Blue SN5100 does have higher rated endurance, but we don’t suspect that it is an issue on the PS5.

Read: Crucial P310 (2280) Review

Oh, how the mighty have fallen. We long had the popular TeamGroup MP44L on our list as a good budget SSD for the PS5, but times have changed. With the release of the MP44Q earlier this year, settling for a 5 GB/s drive like the MP44L doesn’t make much sense anymore. Especially as the MP44L is using questionable hardware these days. The MP44Q excels in its role, even with the transition to QLC flash, delivering good performance and power efficiency. More importantly, it’s affordable with a decent capacity range.

There are some caveats, though. The drive does have the typical issue with sustained write performance that QLC flash is known for, but this is not a huge deal with the PS5. The MP44Q may also have to face the superior Crucial P310 and Sandisk WD Blue SN5100 down the road if prices come down. Currently, however, it offers an affordable alternative to the TeamGroup MP44 – which would fill a gap if not for the Sandisk WD Black SN7100 – and has a good price per GB at 1TB and 2TB. The SN7100 currently beats both at 4TB, but on a tighter budget, you can get by with the MP44Q at lower capacities.

Read: TeamGroup MP44Q review

Benchmarks / How We Tested PS5 SSDs

Swipe through the galleries for different capacities

Some of the best SSDs for the PS5 are either specifically designed for the console, or come with an integrated heatsink. However, some drives don't come with a heatsink, so we equip them with the Sabrent M.2 NVMe heatsink for the PS5 to both meet the requirements for the PS5 and to ensure a level playing field. We've found that this cooler is a great solution if you're looking for a cheap, versatile, and easy-to-install solution. There are other similar heatsinks, like the SK hynix Haechi H01 that will work just as well (though apparently neither of those work with the newer PS5 Slim).

The Sony PS5 has an internal benchmark measuring how fast the system can read data from the drive. This is the most critical performance metric for gaming, as a speedy response time is responsible for ensuring a smooth gaming experience. As you can see in the 'PS5 Read Benchmark' column above, the fastest SSD in our test pool was 90% faster than the slowest model. Sony will even flag performance as being potentially inadequate if the read score is below about 4,000 MB/s. However, this read tests only takes a few seconds and basically shows the burst speed of the SSDs, so it's quite synthetic in nature.

Real-world tests show much smaller differences. For instance, our 'Copy to M.2' benchmark consists of timing how long it takes to move four games totaling more than 200 GB (we use Mass Effect: Andromeda, Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Elden Ring, and Astro's Playroom) from the internal PS5 SSD to the expansion drive. In most cases, we only see a difference of a few seconds, and converting to MB/s the difference between the fastest WD Black SN850X and the Solidigm P41 Plus is only 10%. But then there's a pretty big step down to the Samsung 990 Evo and the various Phison E27T-equipped SSDs, followed by the Transcend 250H, and in dead last (for now) sits the Inland TN470 1TB — another Phison E27T drive. How much will this matter in terms of gaming performance? Probably not at all, but when you move a bunch of data from the integrated SSD to the M.2 drive, it will take longer.

On the flipped side, we also tested this process in reverse, moving the four games back to the internal drive for our "Transfer From M.2" benchmark. Here, the sustained write speed (and encryption/security protocols) of the integrated 825GB SSD becomes the limiting factor, and there's only a 5.6% difference between the fastest and slowest SSD we've tested. The current 825GB SSD only appears to write data at up to ~250 MB/s, and all of the M.2 SSDs are easily able to maintain read speeds much higher than that figure.

Likewise, real-world testing (i.e. launching games) has failed to expose meaningful differences between the drives — it's common to see at most a one to two second difference between drives in game load times. Other testing we've seen from multiple outlets indicates very few meaningful differences, if any, for game loading times. Overall, you're unlikely to notice the speed difference between most PCIe 4.0 SSDs and could make a good argument for simply selecting the most cost-effective drive that meets the capacity target that you want — 4TB and 2TB drives are particularly popular.

Naturally, not all of the drives that we test will make the final cut for our list of Best SSDs for the PS5, but that doesn't mean those drives failed the test, or wouldn't be a great deal if you can catch them on sale. The Solidigm P44 Pro is a great SSD that delivered respectable performance in our PS5 SSD benchmarks (it's the same hardware as the SK hynix Platinum P41), and given the slim difference between the fastest and slowest SSDs on our list, it could make a great drive if the price is right. The only thing we'd try to avoid is any SSD that uses QLC NAND, as those drives can slow down significantly as they're filled to capacity.

There's also no real benefit at present to selecting any of the PCIe 5.0 SSDs, as they tend to use more power then PCIe 4.0 drives, making them a poor choice for the PS5. Given current prices there's no real purpose in using a PCIe 5.0 drive for your PlayStation 5, though we've included results from several of the newer models (on the assumption that price differences between PCIe 4.0 and 5.0 drives will shrink over time).

Tips for Finding the Best SSD for the PS5

Sony PS5 SSD Requirements

The Sony PS5 requires an M.2 SSD that communicates over the NVMe protocol. Officially, you'll need a PCIe 4.0 x4 model that can deliver up to 5,500 MB/s of sequential read throughput. In practice, you can use slower SSDs, and you'll just get a warning that performance may be inadequate — note that PCIe 3.0 models are explicitly prohibited from working. The console supports 250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB, 4TB and 8TB models.

These small, rectangular drives look like sticks of RAM, only smaller, and the PS5 accepts both single-sided and double-sided versions. You'll also need to ensure that your drive has a cooling solution pre-applied. These can consist of thin copper heat spreaders that look like a label, or a full-fledged metal heatsink with a thermal pad.

Not all of the best SSDs for the PS5 come with a heatsink, but you can easily use your own double- or single-sided heatsink. We recommend the Sabrent M.2 NVMe heatsink for the PS5, which actually replaces the outside SSD panel on the PS5 with a heatsink, giving the SSD access to nice cooler air from outside the system. We've found that this cooler is a great solution if you're looking for a cheap, versatile, and easy-to-install solution, but there are many options on the market. For instance, TeamGroup has its new TForce AL1 heatsink, which operates similarly, coming to market soon.

Just make sure the SSDs don't exceed 110 x 25 x 11.25mm. M.2 SSDs are usually 80mm long by 22mm wide, described as size 2280, but some may be shorter or longer. The PS5 supports M Key Type 2230, 2242, 2260, 2280 and 22110. Some M.2 drives are also SATA interfaces instead of NVMe, but those are rare and would not be listed as being PCIe 4.0 compliant. Regardless, make sure your SSD supports NVMe.

Sony has detailed instructions on how to install a PS5 SSD. As you can see in the video above, installing the SSD is a simple process that only requires a #1 Phillips head screwdriver. After you've installed the SSD, you can navigate through the menus to the 'Settings→Storage→Installation Location' area and change it to your new SSD. All new games will now install directly to the SSD.

To move existing games to your new drive, select the internal SSD, highlight the item you want to move, press the Options button, and then select 'Move Games and Apps.' Select any other games that you would like to move in the checkboxes, then select 'Move.' As noted in our above testing, moving from the integrated SSD will generally be much faster than moving to the integrated drive.

Now that AMD, Nvidia, and Intel have finalized their product lineups for this year, the war for gaming GPU supremacy shifts to pricing and bundled incentives.

We've long been skeptical that AMD's $549 RX 9070 and $599 RX 9070 XT would ever be available at their MSRPs, but recent pricing shifts have made at least one partner model of both cards available at MSRP and from stock. That makes those cards even more appealing for value-conscious enthusiasts.

At the same time, Nvidia's board partners have started making the popular $429 RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, $549 RTX 5070, and $749 RTX 5070 Ti widely available for at or under MSRP - sometimes much less, in the case of the RTX 5070. You can also still find $999 RTX 5080 cards in stock if you need the minor bit of extra oomph over the RTX 5070 Ti. But you're unlikely to see $1999 RTX 5090s any time soon - Nvidia's Blackwell halo card is as marked up as ever.

Any pricing relief for gamers seems unlikely to last. The data center AI gold rush is consuming every available silicon wafer, making everything from NAND flash to DRAM to GDDR memory more expensive for PC builders and buyers. If you've been holding out on a graphics card upgrade or a new build in the hope of lower prices, now is the time to buy. Period.

Best graphics cards for gaming, at a glance

The above list shows all the latest-gen graphics cards we feel stand out in their segments. If you want to see how all of the current and prior generation GPUs stack up, check our GPU benchmarks hierarchy.

When accounting for pricing, we perform our own research to find the midpoint of current prices for a given graphics card, rather than taking a vendor's MSRP at face value. We feel this method tends to be more representative of the price you're likely to see for products in stock.

If you can find a card in stock for less than this midpoint figure, it's likely closer to (or even less than) a vendor's MSRP and a better value. Conversely, if you find one for more than this midpoint, it could be a worse value (or too close in price to a more powerful card that's a step up).

The overall performance ranking incorporates 21 games from our legacy test suite, which takes the geometric mean (i.e. equal weighting) for both rasterization and ray tracing games. Note that we are not including any upscaling or frame generation results in the table.

Some recommendations have been influenced by work on our updated test suite, which includes several heavier-duty ray-traced games and console ports that really stress every aspect of a graphics card, from compute to RT to memory management.

If you're buying a graphics card these days, performance goes beyond the hardware. Choosing a particular GPU vendor means you're buying into a complex software stack that includes upscaling and frame generation

The short summary: in Nvidia's corner, DLSS 4 offers superior image fidelity to other upscaling tech, and its transformer AI model works with cards going all the way back to the RTX 20-series. DLSS 3 and DLSS 2 offer similar upscaling quality, but Nvidia will allow you to force DLSS 4 in some older titles through the Nvidia App utility if you'd like the latest and greatest.

RTX 50-series GPUs are Nvidia's first with support for with multi-frame generation (MFG), which allows Blackwell GPUs to insert one, two, or three AI-generated intermediate frames between each native one (for a 2x, 3x, or 4x frame rate boost). RTX 40-series GPUs also support framegen, but only with a 2x boost.

Meanwhile, AMD's FSR 4 offers AI-enhanced upscaling, but only for RX 9000-series Radeon cards. AMD's FSR 3.1 and earlier upscalers still work on any GPU, but the image quality tends to be noticeably lower than both DLSS and FSR 4.

FSR framegen didn't get an AI enhancement with the move to FSR 4. Its framerate-doubling boost remains cross-compatible with GPUs from all vendors, but its image quality also remains unchanged from prior generations. FSR framegen tech is supposed to get an AI-enhanced update with AMD's Redstone feature release, but that tech will also only work on RX 9000-series graphics cards.

Intel XeSS 2 with AI-enhanced frame generation isn't widely supported yet and requires an Arc GPU, while XeSS upscaling can be superior to FSR 3.x but isn't used in as many games as FSR or DLSS. XeSS Frame Generation, like FSR, only supports a doubling of frame rates at best.

Raw performance may be the most important consideration for most gamers, but it's not the only metric that matters. Our subjective rankings below factor in price, power usage and power efficiency, and features colored by our own years of experience. Others may offer a slightly different take, but all of the cards on this list are worthy of your consideration.

1. Best all-around enthusiast graphics card: Radeon RX 9070 XT, $679

The Radeon RX 9070 XT is AMD's most well-rounded graphics card in years. It delivers raw performance within spitting distance of the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti for much less money.

AMD shored up two of its greatest weaknesses against Nvidia in the past with the RX 9070 XT's RDNA 4 architecture: RT performance and AI acceleration, both of which are now much closer to Nvidia's latest and greatest. And AMD did all that while keeping power efficiency right there with Nvidia, too.

The FSR4 upscaler is a big jump in image quality over FSR 3, and as it rolls out to more and more games, the RX 9070 XT's star will only grow brighter. AMD is rolling out a broad set of AI-powered gaming enhancements soon called FSR Redstone that could further burnish the RX 9070 XT's overall package.

Whether you're gaming at 1080p, 1440p, or 4K, the 9070 XT has the power and generous VRAM pool to get you there, all for a fairly reasonable price in today's weird world of graphics.

More and more GeForce RTX 5070 Ti cards are available for close to their $749 MSRPs as of this writing, and if you value the image quality and performance benefits of DLSS 4, you might want to spend the extra cash for Blackwell. But the RX 9070 XT offers the best balance of price, performance, and efficiency for enthusiasts who don't have unlimited budgets.

Read: AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT review

2. Best midrange graphics card: Radeon RX 9070, $569.99

The GeForce RTX 5070 and Radeon RX 9070 go neck-and-neck in our test suite, but the RX 9070 has 16GB of VRAM and the RTX 5070 has just 12GB. That extra 4GB of memory can make all the difference at higher resolutions in today's hottest games, and when you're spending this much money on a powerful GPU, we don't think you should ever have to worry about running out of VRAM.

In our recent testing of RTX 50-series cards, loading up RT and DLSS and framegen, as Nvidia pushes as the future of gaming, can really put pressure on VRAM in some of today's most demanding titles. As a result, you may sometimes have to pick and choose which of those features you want to enable on the RTX 5070 (a balancing act you don't have to perform on the much cheaper RTX 5060 Ti 16GB!)

All of that means the RTX 5070 is great most of the time across our evolving game test suite, but the RX 9070 is great all of the time.

The RX 9070 also benefits from not being pushed to the very edge of its voltage-and-frequency curve to hit the highest possible performance levels, as the RX 9070 XT is, so it's also among the most efficient graphics cards available today if performance-per-watt is a concern for you.

If you're not gaming at 4K with all the RT and DLSS bells and whistles turned up, the RTX 5070 is still a great graphics card, and the image quality and smoothness benefits of DLSS 4 can't be dismissed. Even so, we've seen performance drops with the 5070 too many times in our test suite for us to generally recommend it right now. (The correct number of times this should happen on a graphics card this expensive is zero.)

Rumors are swirling that Nvidia could eventually release refreshed Blackwell cards with more VRAM, and if that happens, the RTX 5070 will be the biggest beneficiary. But if you're shopping in the sweet spot of enthusiast gaming, we think the RX 9070 remains the card to get right now.

Read: AMD Radeon RX 9070 review

3. Best enthusiast GeForce RTX Blackwell card: GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, $809.99

If you want the best blend of high performance and cutting-edge graphics tech out there, the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti is it. This card comes with full support for Nvidia’s latest DLSS 4 upscaling and Multi-Frame Generation, and its 16GB of VRAM gives you full freedom to enable every DLSS 4 feature.

AMD’s closest competitor, the Radeon RX 9070 XT, tends to be significantly cheaper than the RTX 5070 Ti, but the AMD card obviously doesn’t support DLSS 4. For the privilege of those capabilities, you'll generally need to spend about 20% more money for just 5% more baseline performance than AMD’s current best before you start enabling all the DLSS 4 features Blackwell supports.

We're personally fans of MFG when it's implemented well, and DLSS upscaling is still superior to and much more widely adopted than FSR 4. Our expanded RT test suite also shows that Blackwell can keep an edge in performance and smoothness over RDNA 4 when the rays start flying, so there are still compelling arguments for choosing an RTX 5070 Ti over the Radeon RX 9070 XT. You'll just need to decide whether you can stomach the substantial upcharge.

What about the RTX 5080? Nvidia's second-fastest Blackwell card is anywhere from 8% to 16% faster than the 5070 Ti, with the biggest gap at 4K. Prices for the 5080 have come down somewhat since our last update, and it's fairly easy to find one in the $999-to-$1099 band that we consider reasonable.

Unless you really need every last drop of performance you can get for 4K gaming without upgrading to an RTX 5090, however, we don't think the RTX 5080 offers enough value for the money to justify shelling out the extra cash over a 5070 Ti.

Read: Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070 Ti review

4. Best mainstream graphics card: RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, $469.99

As we work through our evolving gaming test suite, the RTX 5060 Ti has been a standout. It consistently delivers faster and smoother gaming than the competing Radeon RX 9060 XT across today's most demanding titles with RT on or off, and its 16GB of VRAM means you can enjoy all of Nvidia's DLSS 4 features without endless tweaking to optimize memory usage.

The RTX 5060 Ti offers performance about 7-8% faster than the RX 9060 XT 16GB across our full test suite of raster and RT games at 1080p and 1440p, all for about 23% more money than the Radeon.

For the extra money, you get superior DLSS 4 Transformer upscaling, and Multi-Frame Generation gives you the flexibility to take greater advantage of a high-refresh rate monitor than cards that lack it.

16GB of VRAM on the 5060 Ti means you have all the space you need for both game data and DLSS’s AI models, unlike its 8GB counterpart. And while it’s not a decisive factor, the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB does draw about 10% less power under load than the RX 9060 XT 16GB, so its power efficiency is superior to AMD’s, too.

If you’re not sold on the value of MFG and are less sensitive to the image quality differences between upscalers, $90 or so is a lot to ask over the Radeon RX 9060 XT, and we’d happily game on AMD’s card all day long. AMD's upcoming FSR Redstone feature release could also get AMD a lot closer to Nvidia's gaming image quality and performance flexibility, too.

But of all the sub-$500 graphics cards I've gamed with, the RTX 5060 Ti is just nicer than the RX 9060 XT 16GB, even without DLSS and MFG enabled. The 9060 XT 16GB occasionally hitches and stutters in our test suite in ways that take me out of the experience, whereas the RTX 5060 Ti rarely does.

If you shell out for the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, you'll be rewarded with a consistently excellent experience, and that consistency is worth the bit of extra cash if you expect to get years of gaming fun out of a GPU.

Read: Nvidia GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB review

5. Best enthusiast value graphics card: Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB, $389.99

AMD's Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB can handle basically anything the mainstream gamer can throw at it at 1920x1080 and 2560x1440, all at a price that handily undercuts the comparable RTX 5060 Ti 16GB.

The RX 9060 XT enjoys the much-improved ray-tracing and AI performance of the RDNA 4 architecture, both of which bring Radeons a lot closer to the latest Nvidia competition. And its 16GB of VRAM gives mainstream gamers the assurance they'll basically never find VRAM a bottleneck in modern games at 1080p and 1440p resolutions.

Like the RX 9070 XT, the 9060 XT 16GB gives you access to AMD's much-improved FSR 4 upscaling tech, allowing you to boost performance with a small hit to image quality in the small but growing list of titles that support it. FSR Frame Generation, however, remains limited to a doubling of output frame rate at best, so it’s not a direct competitor to Nvidia’s DLSS 4 with MFG. That may be set to change with the upcoming FSR Redstone update, but we'll need to experience those features firsthand before we make any judgments.

The RTX 5060 Ti 8GB is the RX 9060 XT 16GB's closest Nvidia competition, dollar for dollar, but we can’t recommend it at all. If you're spending over $350 on a GPU, we don't think you should have to fine-tune every setting to avoid running out of VRAM. The RX 9060 XT is easy to live with for a wide range of gamers in a wide range of games, all for a reasonable price, and that’s why it won our Editor’s Choice award.

Read: AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB review

6. The best $300(ish) graphics card: Nvidia GeForce RTX 5060, $309.99

If you absolutely can't spend more than $300 or so and want to get your PC game on at 1080p, we think the RTX 5060 is your best bet. The midpoint of RTX 5060 prices is around $320, but it's so easy to find these cards for their $299.99 MSRP that we wouldn't look at anything pricier for even a second.

The RTX 5060 has impressive baseline performance for 1080p gaming in wildly popular titles like Fortnite, Counter-Strike 2, Marvel Rivals, and Apex Legends that aren't hungry for giant pools of VRAM, and access to the performance and image quality of the DLSS 4 upscaler is a big win in this segment.

If you can tune your settings right, enabling DLSS 4 Multi-Frame Generation could make for an even smoother ride on this card, but we find that 8GB of VRAM isn't enough to consistently enable framegen in the titles where you'd really want it. The feature often doesn't work if you're already at the limits of the RTX 5060's memory pool (or that of any 8GB Blackwell card), since the MFG AI model needs some VRAM of its own to run.

Every cent you can spend over $300 makes the RTX 5060 less appealing. If you can wait and save, the Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB is more capable across a broader range of settings and resolutions than the RTX 5060. It's well worth the extra money.

AMD's toughest competition for the RTX 5060 is the RX 9060 XT 8GB, which also lists for $299 but can often be found for as low as $269 (or less) on sale. Despite its much-maligned 8GB of VRAM, the 9060 XT 8GB put in a strong showing in our recent RTX 5050 review, but not consistently enough to beat out the RTX 5060 and take home our general recommendation.

When the RX 9060 XT can bring its full compute horsepower to bear in certain games, it can handily outpace the RTX 5060, so it's worth checking out our recent review and seeing whether a game you love benefits from the Radeon's raw muscle.

Read: Nvidia GeForce RTX 5060 Ti review

7. The best graphics card, period: GeForce RTX 5090, $2649.99

There's nothing else like the GeForce RTX 5090. There's practically nothing it can't do for the modern gamer at any setting or display resolution. If you want to turn on every bell and whistle in modern games at 4K (or beyond), the RTX 5090's sheer shader horsepower, along with support for Nvidia's DLSS 4 upscaling and multi-frame generation, lets you tune your gaming experience to perfection even on high-refresh-rate 4K displays.

If you're a hardcore PC gamer who demands only the best, the hair will stand up on the back of your neck when you watch the RTX 5090 breeze through workloads that other graphics cards leak out all their thermal gel about.

At its $3000-ish street price today, an RTX 5090 is an indulgence of the highest order, but without a compelling AMD alternative even on the horizon, considerations of value don't really apply in this segment.

This card needs a system with a massive power supply, one of our best gaming CPUs, and a top-shelf monitor to take full advantage of its astounding capabilities, and all those spendy components add up. But if you're shopping for a graphics card of this caliber, you probably don't need us to tell you all that.

If Nvidia and its industry partners fixed the meltdown-prone ATX12V-2x6 connector, the RTX 5090 would be as close to gaming perfection as any graphics card that's ever been made. Guess that's something to improve on the RTX 6090.

Read: Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition review

8. The best cheap graphics card: Intel Arc B570, $209

If even $300 is too much for a new GPU with a warranty in your parts list, you're hard up for options. Nvidia and AMD have sorely neglected this price point, and the recently launched RTX 5050 didn't change that much.

It's easy to find a B570 at or for less than its $219 MSRP now, and if you can't even stretch your budget up to an RTX 5060 or RX 9060 XT 8GB, this card is... fine.

10 GB of VRAM is handy insurance for the growing list of games that might want more than 8GB at 1920x1080. Stick to high settings, and this card should deliver a solid 60 FPS average or better in many games. Its modest power requirements won't strain a cheap or aged PSU, and the ASRock Challenger card you'll most often find at MSRP is practically silent.

Intel's Xe2 graphics architecture has everything today's games want, including credible RT support, XMX AI accelerators for XeSS upscaling and frame generation, and a modern media engine with high-quality accelerated encoding. The B570 is a modern graphics card through and through, just not a particularly powerful one.

In the event that the B570's baseline performance isn't enough, gamers can take advantage of Intel's XeSS upscaling in a broad range of titles to get the most out of this card. Intel's AI-powered upscaler tends to deliver better results than AMD's FSR 3.x and earlier attempts, and it's in enough major games that you might actually see it in settings lists.

Intel has the necessary weapons in its software arsenal to make the B570 an even smoother operator with XeSS 2 and Xe Frame Generation, but adoption remains glacial. XeSS 2 works well in our experience, but it's in just 44 games right now, far behind the hundreds of titles incorporating the latest DLSS and FSR features. We hope Intel continues to encourage more and more devs to incorporate XeSS going forward, as this card will become a stronger and stronger option with every title that supports it.

Read: Intel Arc B570 review

How we test the best graphics cards

Determining pure graphics card performance is best done by eliminating all other bottlenecks — as much as possible, at least. To that end, our updated 2025 graphics card testbed consists of an AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D CPU, ASRock X670E Taichi motherboard, 32GB G.Skill DDR5-6000 CL28 memory, Crucial T700 4TB SSD, Corsair HX1500i Platinum PSU, and a Cooler Master 280mm CPU cooler. The newer Ryzen 9 9950X3D might be slightly faster in some cases, but otherwise we've got just about the fastest components available so that our focus can be on the graphics cards.

We test across the three most common gaming resolutions, 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, using 'medium' and 'ultra' settings at 1080p and 'ultra' at 1440p and 4K. Where possible, we use 'reference' cards for all of these tests, like Nvidia's Founders Edition models and AMD's reference designs. Most midrange and lower GPUs don't get reference models, however, and in some cases we only have factory-overclocked cards for testing. We do our best to select cards that are close to the reference specs in such cases.

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. For example, we always expect the RTX 5080 to be faster than the RTX 5070 Ti. If it's not, and we're not in a CPU limited situation, we'll recheck both cards to ensure that our standings our accurate.

Due to the length of time required for testing each GPU, updated drivers and game patches inevitably 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 time, if one comes out that is popular and conducive to testing. See what makes a good game benchmark for our selection criteria.

Best graphics cards performance results

Our updated test suite of games consists of 18 games at present, four of which have ray tracing enabled (seven of the games support DXR, but we only turn it on in cases where we feel the visual upgrades are worthwhile). The other 14 games are run in pure rasterization mode, whether or not they support ray tracing.

We also test everything without any upscaling or frame generation technologies. The difficulty with both upscaling and frame generation is that they're not universally supported, and the resulting image quality can vary quite a lot between the various algorithms. But if you want a quick and dirty summary: DLSS wins on image quality, with DLSS 4 offering enhanced upscaling and framegen support. FSR 3 gets more of a performance uplift from framegen but often looks more like bad interpolation; 3.1 mostly fixes that but isn't supported in as many games, while FSR 4 requires a 9070 card and seems to offer comparable image fidelity to DLSS 2. XeSS 1.3 and later are also comparable to DLSS 2/3 but aren't as widely supported.

The data in the following charts is from testing conducted during the past several months. We've tested all of the latest GPUs at every resolution and setting, even where it generally doesn't make sense (e.g. 4K with ray tracing at single digit framerates). For each resolution and setting, the first chart shows the geometric mean (i.e. equal weighting) for all tested games. The second chart shows performance in the 14 rasterization games, and the third chart focuses in on ray tracing performance in four games. Then we have the 18 individual game charts, for those who like to see all the data.

The charts below contain all the current Nvidia RTX 50-series, AMD RX 9000-series, and Intel Arc B-series graphics cards, plus a few prior generation cards that are still worth considering. Our GPU benchmarks hierarchy contains additional data for other tested GPUs if you want to see that. The charts are color coded with AMD in red, Nvidia in blue, and Intel in gray to make it easier to see what's going on.

The following charts are up to date as of March 28, 2025. Additional GPUs will be tested and added as needed.

Best Graphics Cards — 1080p Medium

Best Graphics Cards — 1080p Ultra

Best Graphics Cards — 1440p Ultra

Best Graphics Cards — 4K Ultra

Best Graphics Cards — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures

Most of our discussion has focused on performance, but for those interested in power and other aspects of the GPUs, here are the appropriate charts. We'll run these from highest to lowest settings, as 4K ultra tends to be the most strenuous workload on most of these GPUs.

Choosing among the best graphics cards

We've provided eleven choices for the best graphics cards, recognizing that there's plenty of potential overlap. The latest generation GPUs aren't as readily available as we'd like, and the bottom of the new product stacks aren't completely fleshed out, so we've also included a few selections from the prior generation GPUs until such time comes that they're no longer relevant.

We've listed the best graphics cards that are available right now, along with their current online prices, which we track in our GPU prices guide. With so many cards selling above MSRP and a tight supply, it's not the greatest time to upgrade. Hopefully things continue to improve. Our general advice: Don't pay more today for yesterday's hardware, but if it's time for an upgrade, don't get stuck playing the waiting game — there's always something new coming down the pipeline.

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 Benchmark hierarchy to make sure you have the right CPU for the level of gaming you're looking to achieve.

Our current recommendations reflect the changing GPU market, factoring in all of the above details. The GPUs are ordered using subjective rankings, taking into account performance, price, features, and efficiency, so slower cards may end up higher on our list.

Additional Shopping Tips

When buying a graphics card, consider the following:

• Resolution: The more pixels you're pushing, the more performance you need. You don't need a top-of-the-line GPU to game at 1080p.
• PSU: Make sure that your power supply has enough juice and the right 6-, 8- and/or 16-pin connector(s). For example, Nvidia recommends a 550-watt PSU for the RTX 3060, and you'll need at least an 8-pin connector and possibly a 6-pin PEG connector as well. Newer RTX 40-series GPUs use 16-pin connectors, though all of them also include the necessary 8-pin to 16-pin adapters.
• Video Memory: A 4GB card is the absolute minimum right now, 6GB models are better, and 8GB or more is strongly recommended. A few games can now use 12GB of VRAM, though they're still the exception rather than the rule.
• FreeSync or G-Sync? Either variable refresh rate technology will synchronize your GPU's frame rate with your screen's refresh rate. Nvidia supports G-Sync and G-Sync Compatible displays (for recommendations, see our Best Gaming Monitors list), while AMD's FreeSync tech works with Radeon cards.
• Ray Tracing and Upscaling: The latest graphics cards support ray tracing, which can be used to enhance the visuals. DLSS provides intelligent upscaling and anti-aliasing to boost performance with similar image quality, but it's only on Nvidia RTX cards. AMD's FSR works on virtually any GPU and also provides upscaling and enhancement, but on a different subset of games. New to the party are DLSS 3 with Frame Generation and FSR 3 Frame Generation, along with Intel XeSS, with yet another different subset of supported games — DLSS 3 also provides DLSS 2 support for non 40-series RTX GPUs.

Finding Discounts on the Best Graphics Cards

With the GPU shortages mostly over, you might find some particularly tasty deals on occasion. Check out the latest Newegg promo codes, Best Buy promo codes and Micro Center coupon codes.

Want to comment on our best graphics picks for gaming? Let us know what you think in the Tom's Hardware Forums.

MORE: HDMI vs. DisplayPort: Which Is Better For Gaming?

MORE: GPU Benchmarks and Hierarchy

AMD's Ryzen 7 9800X3D is now the fastest gaming chip on the planet, and it isn't even close — the fastest AMD CPU for gaming is a whopping 35% faster in 1080p gaming than Intel's competing flagship Core Ultra 9 285K, and 30% faster than Intel's previous-gen flagship, the Core i9-14900K.

The 9800X3D is on the pricey side with a $480 MSRP, but this chip delivers the pinnacle of gaming performance. AMD's previous-gen Ryzen 7 7800X3D is still a great buy for gaming, and there are good sales on it now that it is officially a last-gen product (see below), but it does lag the 9800X3D by 15% in gaming. However, AMD has also improved the 9800X3D's performance in applications, giving it another advantage over the prior-gen model.

We reviewed AMD's new Ryzen 9 9900X3D, but we found that the chips' close proximity to the company's own other gaming chips makes the price tag hard to justify. You shouldn't opt for this chip unless we see a significant price drop.

If you need bleeding-edge gaming performance and the full performance in productivity work, the higher-tier Ryzen 9 9950X3D is the chip for you. Zero compromises — that was AMD's mission when it designed the 9950X3D; from our testing, that mission was a rousing success. The second-gen revision of 3D V-Cache propels the 16-core, 32-thread $699 Ryzen 9 9950X3D to a whole new level of gaming performance — all while preserving the full performance in productivity applications, a first for AMD's gaming-optimized X3D chips.

AMD's standard Ryzen 9000 models made a somewhat underwhelming debut due to lackluster gen-on-gen gaming performance improvements, but recent firmware and operating system tweaks that improved performance, not to mention some price cuts, have made them far more competitive. As such, we've added the Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X to our list for their strong level of gaming performance at their price points.

Here's the shortlist of our buying recommendations — use the 'More' links, or just simply scroll down the page, to jump to a more detailed description of each processor and its alternatives:

Best CPU for Gaming in 2025 at a glance (more info below):

The list below is for the best CPUs for gaming, while our list of best CPUs for workstations is for those who frequently tackle high-end content creation or professional work, while the best budget CPUs can help you find a cheap chip. Processors benefit from the best thermal paste, so check out our guide if you're shopping for a new processor. But if you're after the best CPU for gaming, you're in the right place.

Best CPU for Gaming Benchmarks

We rank all the Intel and AMD processors based on our in-depth CPU benchmarks hierarchy. You can see some of those numbers in the charts above, including CPU overclock performance results (marked as PBO for AMD processors). We're currently retesting all of these processors with the Nvidia RTX 5090, but only the first four slides have that testing. The remainder are historical testing results with the RTX 4090, which we'll remove once we have fully retested all of the gaming CPUs with the RTX 5090 for our benchmarks. This group of results comprises only the chips that have passed through our newest test suite. Additionally, the tables in our CPU benchmark hierarchy include rankings based on past CPU benchmarks and breakdowns of single- and multi-threaded performance in productivity applications across a broad spate of processors. Finally, be aware that the pricing in the charts above can fluctuate.

Quick Shopping Tips

When choosing the best CPU for gaming in 2025, consider the following:

• You can't lose with AMD or Intel: As noted in our AMD vs. Intel feature, AMD tends to make the best all-around CPU for gaming for mainstream PCs lately, but both offer compelling performance options at any given price point.
• For gaming, clock speed is generally more important than the number of cores: Higher CPU clock speeds generally translate to snappier performance in simple tasks like gaming, while more cores will help you get through heavy workloads faster.
• Budget for a full system: Don't pair a strong CPU with weak storage, RAM, and graphics.
• Overclocking isn’t for everyone, but if you follow our How to Overclock a CPU guide, you can scrape out extra performance gains.

Best CPU for Gaming 2025 - $300 to $400

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is not only AMD's fastest gaming chip but also the fastest available on the market. It easily beats Intel's more expensive competitors, not to mention AMD's own lineup. At $480, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is both the fastest gaming CPU on the market and a solid value in the high-performance category.

This chip really has no peer in the market — the Ryzen 7 9800X3D delivers outstanding gaming performance, beating Intel's fastest gaming chip, the $440 Core i9-14900K, by 30% in our test suite. The 9800X3D is also almost unbelievably 35% faster than the current-gen Intel flagship, the $629 Core Ultra 9 285K. The stock Ryzen 7 9800X3D's 1% low frame rates (a good smoothness indicator) also deliver an exceptionally smooth gaming experience, benefiting gamers even in GPU-limited scenarios.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has eight cores and 16 threads that operate at a 4.7 GHz base and 5.2 GHz boost clock rate. The chip employs AMD's 3D V-Cache tech with a new spin, which places a 3D-stacked SRAM chiplet underneath the die to deliver an incredible 96MB of L3 cache to great effect. AMD moved the L3 cache chiplet from the top to the bottom of the compute die this generation to improve performance in productivity applications, and the end result is a comparatively low-power chip that delivers incredible gaming performance and comparable productivity performance to other eight-core models on the market.

You have to be aware of the tradeoffs with this highly specialized chip — our gaming benchmarks show that the 3D V-Cache doesn't boost performance in all games, though we found that it impacted nearly every title we tested.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has much lower power consumption than the Intel competition, making it a far cooler processor that won't require as expensive accommodations, like a beefy cooler, motherboard, and power supply. That means the 9800X3D delivers top-notch gaming performance and a cooler, quieter, and less expensive system than you'll get with an Ultra 9 or Core i9.

Read: AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review

The $318 Ryzen 7 9700X had a rough initial product launch, but AMD's targeted firmware and operating system improvements have changed the picture tremendously, allowing the chip to place much higher on our CPU benchmark hierarchy (head there for the most up-to-date gaming benchmarks). Combined with its $40 lower-than-launch pricing, the Ryzen 7 9700X is a strong contender, tying Intel's Core i9-14900K in gaming and beating the Core i7-14700K, as well. That's not to mention that it beats Intel's entire lineup of new Core Ultra processors as well. Now, all of those processors offer faster performance in heavily-threaded productivity applications than the 9700X, but when it comes to just a pure gaming experience, the 9700X either ties or beats all competitors.

The Ryzen 7 9700X has eight Zen 5 cores with 16 threads that operate at a 3.8 GHz base and 5.5 GHz boost clock. The chip has a 65W TDP, though AMD retroactively added a 105W TDP option you can select in the BIOS that helps boost performance in productivity applications. With either setting, the 9700X has comparatively tame power consumption, so it is an easy chip to cool. You'll have to buy your own cooler for the processor, though.

The Ryzen 7 9700X drops into socket AM5 motherboards, and B-series motherboards make the most sense for this class of chip. AMD's partners have plenty of 600-series 'B' motherboards on the market that will make a good pairing with this chip. However, the much-anticipated B850 and B840 motherboards will not arrive until early next year.

Read: Ryzen 5 9700X Review

Intel boosted the Core i7-14700K's core count by adding four more e-cores and tweaked the boost clock rate, but left its recommended pricing the same as the prior-gen model. At $339, the 14700K delivers essentially the same gaming performance as Intel's own flagship $435 Core i9-14900K — but for significantly less. You can also discard the integrated graphics engine and get the otherwise identical Core i7-14700KF for $327.

As always, if you aren't after top performance in heavy productivity tasks, the Core i7 model takes the shine off the Core i9. The Core i7-14700K is a great high-performance gaming chip at its price point, offering 97% of the flagship Core i9-14900K's performance for $90 less. Better yet, you can overclock the chip and get basically identical performance to the stock Core i9-14900K.

Our benchmarks show the Core i7-14700K is a much better all-rounder than Ryzen if you're looking for performance in productivity work. The Core i7-14700K has eight P-cores (high-performance) and 12 E-cores (efficiency), for a total of 28 threads. The P-cores run at a 3.4 / 5.6 GHz base/boost, while the E-cores weigh in at 2.5 / 4.3 GHz. In addition, the execution engine is fed by 33MB of L3 cache and 28MB of L2.

The 14700K also supports leading-edge connectivity with support DDR4-3200 or up to DDR5-5600 memory, along with 16 lanes of PCIe 5.0 and an additional four lanes of PCIe 4.0 from the chip for M.2 SSDs. The 14700K has a 125W PBP (base) and 253W MTP (peak) power rating.

You'll need to buy a capable cooler for the chip, and you'll also need a new 700-series or previous-gen 600-series motherboard. You can find a wide selection of high-end motherboards that support DDR5 memory, and although you'll only find lower-end and mid-range DDR4 motherboards, there's still plenty of selection available. Gamers will enjoy the lower price option of selecting DDR4, but it does come with 5 to 8% lower performance in gaming. You can upgrade to the slightly more expensive DDR5 if you need access to more memory throughput.

Read: Core i7-14700K Review

Mid-Range Best CPU for Gaming - $200 to $300

The $240 Ryzen 5 9600X had a rough start, but AMD's targeted firmware and operating system improvements have changed the picture tremendously, allowing the chip to place much higher on our CPU benchmark hierarchy (head there for the most up-to-date gaming benchmarks). Combined with its $40 lower-than-launch pricing, the Ryzen 5 9600X is a strong contender in the sub-$250 weight class.

The Ryzen 5 9600X has six Zen 5 cores with 12 threads that operate at a 3.9 GHz base and 5.4 GHz boost clock. The chip has a 65W TDP, though AMD retroactively added a 105W TDP option you can select in the BIOS that helps boost performance in productivity applications. With either setting, the 9600X has comparatively tame power consumption, so it is an easy chip to cool. You'll have to buy your own cooler for the processor, though.

The Ryzen 5 9600X drops into socket AM5 motherboards, and B-series motherboards make the most sense for this class of chip. AMD's partners have plenty of 600-series 'B' motherboards on the market that will make a good pairing with this chip. However, the much-anticipated B850 and B840 motherboards will not arrive until early next year.

Read: Ryzen 5 9600X Review

Our in-depth testing shows that the $235 Core i5-14600K is a strong gaming chip. You can also sacrifice the integrated graphics engine — you won't need it if you have a discrete GPU — and go with the $200 Core i5-14600KF and get the same level of performance. Intel has since released the newer $320 Core Ultra 5 245K, but it offers virtually the same performance in gaming as the Core i5-14600K, but for $85 more. That leaves the Core i5-14600K as the better option in this price range for now.

The Core i5-14600K comes with six threaded P-cores that operate at 3.5 / 5.3 GHz and four E-cores that run at 2.6 / 4.0 GHz, for a total of 20 threads. That's paired with 20MB of L3 and 24MB of L2 cache.

The chip supports 16 lanes of the leading-edge PCIe 5.0 interface and an additional four PCIe 4.0 lanes for a speedy M.2 SSD port, and it also supports either DDR4 or DDR5 memory. Some gamers will enjoy the lower price and comparable performance of DDR4, but you can step up to the slightly more expensive DDR5 if you need access to more memory throughput.

The 14600K comes with a maximum power rating of 181W. The power consumption threshold allows the chip to work well with a wide variety of standard air and water coolers, but you'll need to ensure your model supports the LGA 1700 socket.

Speaking of which, you'll also need a 700 or 600-series motherboard for the processor (with 600-series, make sure the BIOS supports the chip). You can find a wide selection of high-end models that support DDR5 memory, and although you'll find fewer lower-end and mid-range DDR4 motherboards, there's still plenty of selection available.

Read: Core i5-14600K Review

The $229 Ryzen 5 5700X3D offers the fastest possible gaming performance in the ~$200 price range, bar none, but it does come with some performance tradeoffs in productivity applications.

The Ryzen 7 5800X3D is the king of the gaming hill for the Ryzen 5000 series, but the 5700X3D has the same number of cores for 35% less cash while delivering 91% of the gaming performance of its more expensive counterpart. That's a win for value gamers and brings AMD's vaunted game-boosting 3D V-Cache tech to a new lower price point.

The Ryzen 7 5700X3D is basically a down-clocked Ryzen 7 5800X3D, losing 400 MHz off its base and boost frequencies. All other details remain unchanged, including the voluminous 96MB of game-boosting L3 cache.

The Ryzen 7 5700X3D drops into existing socket AM4 motherboards dating back to the 300-series, which debuted in 2017. Thus, it makes a great high-performance drop-in upgrade for Ryzen owners on the AM4 platform.

You have to be aware of the tradeoffs with this highly specialized chip. Our gaming benchmarks show that the 3D V-Cache doesn't boost performance in all games, though we found that it impacted nearly every title we tested. The Ryzen 7 5700X3D is optimized specifically for gaming but isn't as fast as similarly priced chips in productivity applications. Also, the Ryzen 7 5700X3D doesn't support the latest leading-edge connectivity options, like DDR5 and PCIe 5.0.

If you're willing to accept lower performance in productivity applications and do your homework to ensure the Ryzen 7 5700X3D accelerates the types of games you play frequently, it's hard to go wrong—especially for upgraders with AMD AM4 systems.

Read: Ryzen 7 5700X3D Review

Highest Performance Best CPU for Gaming - $400+

Zero compromises. That was AMD's mission when it designed the Ryzen 9 9950X3D; from our testing, that mission was a rousing success. AMD's 3D V-Cache technology has proven to be the killer tech that delivers dominating performance over Intel in gaming, and the second-gen revision propels the 16-core, 32-thread $699 Ryzen 9 9950X3D to a whole new level of gaming performance — all while preserving the full performance in productivity applications, a first for AMD's gaming-optimized X3D chips.

Our CPU benchmarks show the 9950X3D is an incredible 37% faster than Intel's flagship Core 9 285K on average in 1080p gaming. It also beats Intel’s fastest competing gaming chip, the Core i9-14900K, by 26% on average in our test suite. In fact, on average, the 9950X3D even ties the hands-down best CPU for gaming on the market, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is impressive in productivity work, too, matching the standard Ryzen 9 9950X in our overall measure of both single- and multi-threaded workloads, an impressive accomplishment. It’s also 11% faster than the competing Intel Core Ultra 9 285K in threaded workloads, though Intel does maintain a 7% lead in single-threaded work.

The Zen 5-powered Ryzen 9 9950X3D comes armed with 16 cores, 32 threads, 144 MB of total cache, and a peak boost clock rate of 5.7 GHz. It drops into Socket AM5 motherboards.

The 9950X3D uses AMD’s cutting-edge 3D chip-stacking technology, 3D V-Cache, to enable an incredible 128MB L3 cache. AMD's game-boosting 3D V-Cache tech is now in its third generation, and this time around, AMD moved the vertically-stacked 64MB L3 cache chiplet from the top to the bottom of the compute chiplet to enable higher thermal headroom. As a result, the 9950X3D has the same 170W/230W TDP threshold as the standard Ryzen 9 9950X model instead of the 50W lower rating the company used with the previous-gen chip. That unleashes the ultimate in performance.

For those searching for the highest-end performance money can buy, if you can afford it, you won't find a mainstream desktop PC chip that offers a stronger blend of gaming and productivity performance.

Read: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D Review

The prior-gen $438 Core i9-14900K is now selling for all-time low pricing, primarily because the newer $629 Core Ultra 9 285K has arrived to take its place. However, the Core Ultra 9 285K is actually slower than the 14900K in gaming, so it isn't a suitable replacement — at least not yet, but Intel is issuing patches in early December 2024 that will improve the 285K's gaming performance. Naturally, we won't know if those patches will change the balance of power until they arrive, so the 14900K is the better chip for now.

You should be aware that the much more economically-priced $339 14700K (listed above) is only 2% slower than the 14900K in gaming but costs roughly $100 less. The Ryzen 7 9700X, also listed above, is also less expensive and effectively ties the 14900K in gaming.

However, there are Intel fans willing to pay extra for the absolute most gaming performance they can get from an Intel platform. Also, the 14900K does offer more multi-threaded horsepower than the 14700K and 9700X, which could be useful if you game, stream, and record simultaneously or do other heavy multi-tasking while gaming. Just make sure that your use case justifies the extra cost.

The 14900K sports leading-edge connectivity, supporting DDR4-3200 or up to DDR5-5600 memory, along with 16 lanes of PCIe 5.0 and an additional four lanes of PCIe 4.0 from the chip for M.2 SSDs.

The chip comes with eight P-cores that support hyper-threading and 16 single-threaded E-cores for a total of 32 threads. The P-cores have a 3.2 GHz base, and peak frequencies reach an amazing 6.0 GHz with Turbo Boost Max 3.0 (this feature is only active on P-cores). Meanwhile, the E-cores have a 2.4 GHz base and stretch up to 4.4 GHz via the standard Turbo Boost 2.0 algorithms. The chip also has 36MB of L3 cache and 32MB of L2.

This 14900K has a 125W PBP (base) and 253W MTP (peak) power rating, but we recorded considerably lower power consumption than its prior-gen counterpart. You'll need to buy a capable cooler for the chip, and you'll also need either a new 700-series or a previous-gen 600-series motherboard. You can find a wide selection of high-end motherboards that support DDR5 memory, and although you'll only find lower-end and mid-range DDR4 motherboards, there's still plenty of selection available.

The lower price of DDR4 might entice some gamers, but you'll lose anywhere from 5 to 8% of gaming performance with higher-end Intel chips. You can step up to the slightly more expensive DDR5 if you need access to more memory throughput and, thus, every bit of performance possible.

Read: Intel Core i9-14900K Review

Best Budget CPU Pick - $100 to $150

At $110, the graphics-less Core i5-12400F is an exceptional value, and you can step up to the $130 Core i5-12400 if you need integrated graphics. This chip is slightly faster than the alternate in this class, the Ryzen 5 5600 listed below, in both gaming and productivity work. The 12400F's connectivity features and more modern platform are the big selling point, though. If you're looking for support for more modern interfaces, like PCIe 5.0, DDR5 and DDR4, this chip makes even more sense -- AMD's Ryzen 5 5600 only supports DDR4 and PCIe 4.0.

The Core i5-12400F comes with six P-cores and 12 threads, but it lacks e-cores. In contrast, its predecessor and our top pick above, the 13400F, comes with four e-cores to add more performance in threaded workloads. The 12400F has a 2.5 GHz base clock and boosts up to 4.4 GHz. The chip also comes with 18 MB of L3 cache and has a 65W PBP (base) and 117W MTP (peak) power rating.

The Core i5-12400F drops into the cheap and plentiful Socket 1700 ecosystem, so 600- and 700-series boards are fine. Naturally, a B-series model will be the best logical pairing for this class of chip. These come in either DDR4 or DDR5 flavors, so be sure to match your motherboard to the type of RAM you choose to use.

The Core i5-12400F also comes with a competent bundled cooler, but we always recommend stepping up to a more capable third-party model, some of which can be found as for as low as $20 if you're particularly price sensitive. All in all, the Core i5-12400F at this price point is a solid chip for a budget system.

Read More: Intel Core i5-12400F Review

The $107 AMD Ryzen 5 5600 delivers a solid blend of performance in both gaming and productivity applications, bringing a new level of value to the Zen 3 lineup. If you're fine sticking with a previous-gen AM4 motherboard, the Ryzen 5 5600 makes a great budget build. The primary trade-off for the AM4 platform is that you're limited to DDR4, and you don't have access to PCIe 5.0, but this isn't a problem for most users at this price point. However, the Core i5-12400F is a better deal if you're looking for DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 support.

The Ryzen 5 5600 also makes an absolutely unbeatable budget chip if you're updating a first-gen Ryzen system. The 5600 unseats the Ryzen 5 5600X, a long-time favorite. The 5600X is only a mostly imperceptible ~1% faster in gaming and multi-threaded PC work than the non-X model, but provides a 4% advantage in single-threaded work.

You can find the six-core 12-thread Ryzen 5 5600 at $107, a deep discount brought on by competitive pressure from Intel. In fact, our testing shows that the Ryzen 5 5600 generally matches the gaming performance of its more expensive sibling, the ~$175 Ryzen 7 5800X. That makes the 5600 an incredibly well-rounded chip that can handle gaming well, from competitive-class performance with high refresh rate monitors to multi-tasking gaming workloads like streaming, while also serving up more than enough performance for day-to-day productivity apps. As with all AMD CPUs for gaming, you can fully overclock the CPU.

The Ryzen 5 5600 has a 3.7 GHz base and 4.6 GHz boost clock. The chip also has a 65W TDP rating, so it runs cool and quiet. Existing AMD owners with a 500-series motherboard will be happy, as the 5600X drops right into existing 500-, 400-, and 300-series motherboards. If you need a new motherboard to support the chip, AMD's AM4 motherboards are plentiful and relatively affordable, with the B-series lineup offering the best overall value for this class of chip.

Read: AMD Ryzen 5 5600 Review

Entry-Level Best CPU for Gaming - For gaming on integrated GPUs

The $278 Ryzen 7 8700G, AMD's flagship APU, delivers the fastest performance on the market from integrated graphics, bringing passable 1080p gaming to the desktop PC without a discrete graphics card, but its high price point relegates it to a niche audience. In contrast, the $170 Ryzen 5 8600G delivers 90% of the 8700G's performance but for ~$110 less, making it a solid alternative for gaming systems that don't use a discrete GPU.

Naturally, you'll have to accept lower fidelity settings and be realistic about which titles can play at 1080p resolution. Still, AMD's Hyper-RX suite of features, which includes in-driver Radeon Super Resolution upscaling tech, frame generation with AMD Fluid Motion Frames (AFMF), Anti-Lag+, and Radeon Boost, helps boost performance at a slight cost to image quality. This new feature set, a first for AMD's iGPUs, is a boon for budget gamers.

The Ryzen 5 8600G has six Zen 4 CPU cores and the RDNA 3 GPU engine with eight CUs. The Ryzen 5 8600G drops into the AM5 platform, with value-focused B650 and A620 motherboards being the obvious best combination. These systems offer a new level of connectivity for AMD's APU processors, which were previously on the aging AM4 platform but require DDR5 memory. That adds some cost, so do a value analysis before selecting this processor. If you're looking for the lowest entry price possible with an APU, the Ryzen 5 5600G listed below slots in as the value alternative.

The Ryzen 7 8600Gs only supports 16 usable lanes of PCIe 4.0 connectivity, while other processors on the AM5 platform support PCIe 5.0. However, we don't feel this will impact this class of system.

More: AMD Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 5 8600G Review

The Ryzen 5 5600G steps into the arena as the value champ for APUs, which are chips with strong enough integrated graphics that they don't require a discrete GPU for light gaming—just be sure you're willing to accept lowered quality settings.

At $120, the Ryzen 5 5600G gives you 96% of the gaming performance on integrated graphics than its more expensive sibling, the $160 Ryzen 7 5700G, but for 25% less cash. Our testing shows that its level of performance makes it the best value APU on the market. As long as you're willing to sacrifice fidelity and resolution and keep your expectations in check, the Ryzen 5 5600G's Vega graphics have surprisingly good performance in gaming.

The 5600G's Vega graphics served up comparatively great 1280x720 gaming across numerous titles in our tests, but options become more restricted at 1080p. Of course, you can get away with 1080p gaming, but you'll need to severely limit the fidelity settings with most titles.

With eight cores and 16 threads that operate at a 3.9 GHz base and boost up to 4.4 GHz, the Ryzen 5 5600G also offers solid performance for its price point in standard desktop PC applications. The chip also comes with a bundled Wraith Stealth cooler, sweetening the value prop, and drops into existing 500-series and some 400-series motherboards, though support on the latter will vary by vendor.

If your budget is tight and you're looking to build a system for modest gaming, you should check out our Best Cheap CPU feature. Some of those chips can deliver passable gaming performance without a graphics card, and their prices start at just $55 (£40).

Read: AMD Ryzen 5 5600G Review

• MORE: CPU Benchmark Hierarchy
• MORE: AMD vs Intel
• MORE: Best Cheap CPUs
• MORE: Best CPUs for Workstations

If you’re serious about hosting a website for professional or business purposes, a Virtual Private Server (VPS) plan is what you need. Unlike the cheap shared plans that many hosting services offer for as little as $2 or $3 a month, a VPS gives you dedicated CPU, RAM and storage resources, along with root access to your server. And, unlike dedicated servers, which cost a lot more for a dedicated box, VPS is affordable, flexible and performant at the same time.

We’ve tested the leading companies and identified the best VPS hosting providers to help you choose.

Quick List

How to Choose a VPS Hosting Provider

When shopping for a VPS provider, decide:

• Managed or Unmanaged? You can save money by purchasing an unmanaged VPS where you have nothing but a terminal and must install all your own software and updates. We recommend against this (and only test managed VPS plans), because the possibility of running into problems without support is too much of a hassle.
• Linux or Windows OS: This is a no-brainer. Unless you have a Windows-specific application you already run, go with Linux for lower costs, stronger performance and better stability.
• Monthly or annual? Don’t pay by the month. Sign up for two, three or four years if possible as you’ll lock in much lower monthly rates, and renewal rates after the initial term tend to be much higher.
• cPanel or other control panel? cPanel is the most popular and easiest-to-use control panel software, but even many of the best VPS providers charge significant licensing fees it, while offering reasonably capable alternatives for free.
• How much RAM, storage and CPU cores? For mid-range performance, we recommend a minimum of 4GB of RAM, 2 to 4 vCPUs (or CPU cores) and at least 60GB of storage. For larger sites with more databases, go for over 100GB.
  

Best VPS Hosting Plans 2025

Best VPS Web Hosting

Founded in Lithuania in 2004, Hostinger has grown into one of the world’s largest and most potent hosting services overall. It’s also one of the cheapest VPS providers while not skimping on performance.

Hostinger’s VPS plans start at just $4.99 per month with a 24-month commitment, though we’d recommend going with at least the KVM 2 plan which has two CPU cores, 8GB of RAM and 100GB of storage allotted. There’s also a generous 8TB of bandwidth allowed — enough to serve a lot of traffic.

The one thing you don’t get for these low prices is cPanel, the easiest-to-use and most powerful control panel software around. If you want cPanel, you have to pay an astonishing $23 a month in licensing fees, although there are other control panel options that are cheap or free. We tested the KVM 2 plan with Webmin / Virtualmin, which costs nothing extra and provides a pretty straightforward interface. Virtualmin is the user-facing panel that controls each website you build while the Webmin admin interface controls the physical server and the software it runs.

Hostinger doesn’t provide a lot of documentation on how to use the Virtualmin / Webmin combo, however. My default account came with a disk quota that prevented me from uploading all of my test files, for example, and I had to do some Googling to figure out how to change the limit.

Once we had our server set up, it was very easy to manage, run tests and build our website. Connecting via SSH was a snap, particularly because our account did not force us to use an encryption key (though we could have). We ran a number of scripts, including our endless script, and the system never killed them.

Our plan came preloaded with the 10.3.39 version of MariaDB, a popular MySQL-compatible database server, and the performance was top-notch. First, we used MySQL to insert millions of rows of old Tom’s Hardware page-view data, and Hostinger outperformed almost all of its competitors with the exception of Liquid Web (more on that later).

The times for our other DB tests, including one where we replaced all the original numbers with random numbers and another where we do a massive table JOIN, were equally impressive.

Hostinger’s VPS plan scored a very solid 7.4 on the WordPress Benchmark (where 10 is best). It also took just 1.9 seconds to load our sample WordPress site, which is within range of its competitors.

We found support solid, but unexceptional. There’s a knowledge base with a lot of information, but not much on Webmin / Virtualmin, the only free server control software. You can eventually do a live chat with a human, but we wish you could file an email ticket.

Overall, you get a lot of performance and flexibility for your money with Hostinger. It’s a winning combination and a value, even at the renewal prices.

Read More: Hostinger Review

Best VPS Performance

If you’re looking for the fastest performance around and can spend a bit more money, Liquid Web is the best VPS hosting provider for you. Founded in 1997, the company has over 180,000 clients and hosts data centers in Michigan, Arizona and Amsterdam. It owns some other hosting companies including Nexcess and Servers.com, and it offers a variety of managed and unmanaged hosting services.

We concentrated our testing on the managed VPS plans; unmanaged plans may be cheaper but also leave you with a lot more work when it comes to installing software, updating software and making sure your server is still running. The managed VPS plans on Liquid Web don’t come cheap, and their promotional period is only three months, so in reality you should just count on paying the non-promotional price when you make your calculations.

The Liquid Web managed VPS plans start at a regular price of $59 a month for 2GB of RAM and $99 a month for the plan we tested with 4GB of RAM. For that price, you get 4 CPU cores, 100GB of storage and a whopping 10TB of bandwidth.

Like many of its competitors, including Hostinger, Liquid Web does not come standard with cPanel control panel software, which costs extra if you want it. Instead we used the free InterWorx software, which is divided into SiteWorx (for website management) and NodeWorx (for server management). We found the UI, particularly in SiteWorx, pretty easy to navigate.

Liquid Web has a variety of means of contacting support. You can use live chat, telephone or email. We got our quickest response when using email.

Overall, the most important and impressive thing about Liquid Web is its performance, which eclipsed all other sites we tested on most benchmarks. It dominated the competition on all three database tests, including the very time consuming SUM and JOIN test, which has been known to take some competitors more than 20 minutes. Liquid Web’s was done in 8:42.

Liquid Web also aced the WordPress Benchmark, scoring 8.4 where most competitors are in the 7s. It did particularly well on the CPU operations portion of the test, scoring 9.21 out of a possible 10.

Liquid Web was also pretty quick to load our sample site, taking just 1.6 seconds

With 10TB per month of bandwidth, high-speed loading and high-speed data processing, Liquid Web’s VPS hosting plans are great for those expecting a lot of traffic.

Read More: Liquid Web Review

Best Cheap Shared Web Hosting

For 25 years, Arizona’s Namecheap has offered inexpensive domain registration services, which is where its name comes from. But the company also offers inexpensive hosting, including some of the best VPS plans you can get.

As its name implies, the plans are cheap, particularly if you want to pay annually and then keep going for more than a year — which any serious website would. The plans start at just $6.88 per month and go up to a mere $24.88 a month for 8 CPU cores. You get just a little more for your money with Hostinger, but Hostinger’s rates go up after the initial period while Namecheap’s stay the same, making it a better value over 24 months or more.

If you’re building a larger site and expect a lot of traffic, note that the bandwidth limits are low on the first two plans.

As with many competitors, you have to pay extra for cPanel control software, to the tune of $10.88/month. There’s no completely free option so we went with Webuzo for just $2.88 a month. We found Webuzo’s UI easy to navigate and used it to enable SSL on our sample site and to turn on SSH remote access.

Performance-wise, Namecheap’s VPS places in the middle of the pack. It took a decent 11 minutes and 22 seconds, for example, to import our 4GB MySQL database file (filled with millions of Tom’s Hardware PV records), which is slower than Liquid Web and Hostinger but quicker than Bluehost or Dreamhost.

The load time test was less impressive, but still reasonable as Namecheap took an average of 2.4 seconds to load our sample site and a modest 1.6 seconds to network response.

Overall, you get a lot of value, good flexibility and solid performance from Namecheap’s VPS offerings. Best of all, the renewal price is the same as the starting price.

Read More: Namecheap Review

Best Cloud Hosting

In business since 2003, Bluehost is one of the largest hosting services around with more than 2 million customers. It’s owned by Newfold Digital, which also owns HostGator, another large hosting service that offers VPS.

Bluehost’s plans don’t come cheap, but they aren’t as pricey as Liquid Web’s offerings either. We definitely recommend going with a three-year contract, which means you have to pay all 36 months upfront but you get a significant discount. The plan we tested is one we signed up for a couple of years ago that supplies similar specs to Enhanced NVMe 8.

We’ve been with Bluehost for several years now, long before we started testing web hosts, and we’ve used a couple of their plans. What we’ve seen is that Bluehost just works and is easy-to-use, particularly because cPanel, the powerful and simple control software that comes included. But our experience transferring a site to a new account was not good (they couldn’t get it working completely at the new server after several weeks) so we would recommend doing your own file transfer if you’re migrating from another service.

Bluehost’s performance on our three MySQL database tests was solid, mid-tier. For example on our randomization test, in which we have MySQL randomize and update all the traffic numbers in our sample database, Bluehost VPS finished in just 3 minutes and 6 seconds, which was faster than every other competitor except Liquid Web.

On the other hand, on the more intensive SUM and JOIN test, Bluehost finished behind Hostinger and DreamHost.

On the website speed test, Bluehost’s load times were middle-of-the-pack, with the network taking 0.9 seconds to respond and 1.75 seconds to load the entire site.

What we really like about Bluehost is how everything just works. In the years we’ve had the service, everything from setting up SSL to enabling new subdomains has been a snap. And we’ve never experienced an outage.

Our main beefs with the service are its middling support and somewhat high pricing. We wish it were easier to file support tickets – you need to wait for a live agent and deal with them. And, in our case, the transfer process of moving a site from one server to another required us to do the work. However, if you want a service that just works and works well, Bluehost is one of the best VPS hosting providers.

Read More: Bluehost Review

Best Shared Hosting

GreenGeeks, as its name implies, stands out from the competition by focusing on renewable energy. The company, which launched in 2010, replaces the power it uses for your account each month with 300 percent more electricity in wind-power credits. The company also claims that it plants a tree for each new account.

Going green with GreenGeeks is not cheap: The lowest-end plan costs $69 a month, with no discounts for purchasing years in advance. However, you do get cPanel included — and pretty good performance to boot.

Like Bluehost, GreenGeeks comes with cPanel control panel (and WHM for controlling the server) as standard so there’s no fussing with less-than-intuitive software to set up your site.

Performance is pretty good. In our third MySQL database test, where we do a large table join and SUM, GreenGeeks VPS took only 14 minutes and 12 seconds. That’s faster than most competitors. It’s not the fastest when it came to importing the database, but operations on the database were pretty speedy.

GreenGeeks VPS was also among the fastest to load, loading the complete home page of our sample Wordpress website in just 1.5 seconds. That’s pretty quick.

Read More: GreenGeeks Review

VPS Frequently Asked Questions

VPS FAQs

• What is a VPS? A Virtual Private Server combines the flexibility and admin access of a dedicated server with the price savings of shared hosting. You get dedicated CPU, RAM and storage resources while being part of a shared physical box that other customers use. In control panels, the VPS appears to be a separate machine.
• What’s the difference between VPS and shared hosting? In shared hosting, typically the cheapest form of web hosting, you don’t have admin access to your account and you don’t have a guaranteed set of resources such as CPU cores and RAM.
• What’s the difference between VPS and dedicated hosting? Dedicated hosting means you have your very own physical computer in the hosting company’s datacenter. This is usually at least double the cost of VPS and you often don’t get as many cores or as much RAM for the money.
• What’s managed hosting vs unmanaged? Managed hosting means that the hosting provider installs the basic software you need (such as control panels and database software) and keeps the server’s security up-to-date. Unmanaged hosting usually means that you get a command prompt and have to do everything else yourself.
• Is VPS hosting secure? VPS hosting should be just as secure as having a dedicated box. Your section of the server is completely isolated from all the other accounts.

How We Test VPS Hosting Providers

How We Test VPS Hosting Providers

We test each VPS provider in a few ways:

• We set up a sample WordPress blog that we use to test load times and run the WordPress Benchmark plugin. We test the load times using a combination of Dotcom-Tools’ Website Speed Test and the Apache benchmark.
• We import a large MySQL database with millions of records (based on old Tom’s Hardware traffic data). We then randomize all those page view numbers in a second operation and, in a third, we use a giant table JOIN to generate a SUM of page views for each page in the database. We perform each database operation three times and take the average completion time.
• We run an endless script that logs the time every minute so we can see if the VPS provider has a time limit on script execution.

Other VPS Hosting Providers We Tested

Other VPS Hosting Providers We Tested

We also tested the following VPS hosts, but they didn’t make the cut necessary to be named among the best VPS providers.

• HostGator VPS: The company offers decent, cPanel-enabled plans but they’re expensive and didn’t perform extremely well on our benchmarks.
• ScalaHosting VPS: Decent prices and a helpful control panel make this a solid choice, but performance was a bit below the competition.
• InMotion VPS: The prices are ok, but we got mediocre support in our tests and benchmark scores were unimpressive.
• DreamHost VPS: Prices are decent but database performance was pretty weak and human support was slow for us.
• A2 Hosting: Prices are decent, but database performance was among the slowest we saw.

A portable monitor can provide an extra screen for your laptop when you travel, serve as a compact display for a Raspberry Pi project, help you test a desktop that's still on your workbench, or even connect to a game console when you take it on vacation. When it comes to the best portable monitors, I prioritize good image quality, a lightweight chassis, strong usability, and versatile connectivity options.

With prices ranging from around $50 to well over $700, screen sizes from 10.5 inches to 18.5+ inches and beyond, resolutions reaching 4K, and options such as high refresh rates, wireless connectivity, and touch input, there are a ton of options to choose from. No matter what kind of user you are, I'm sure you can find a portable monitor that suits your needs at a price you're comfortable with. With this in mind, I've extensively tested various makes and models to help you find the best portable monitor for your needs.

Below are our top choices, followed by some portable monitor shopping tips and details on how we benchmark. If you're looking for a screen that stays on your desk, check out our list of the best gaming monitors.

The Best Portable Monitors You Can Buy Today

Best Overall Portable Monitor

The ViewSonic TD1656-2K is the sweet sport when it comes to portable monitors. Not only does it have a large 16-inch IPS panel, but it also boasts a generous 2K (2560 x 1600) display. At this price point, you’re usually stuck with 1080p or 1200p panels, so the TD1656-2K is a cut above the rest.

The TD1656-2K also has multi-touch, which is natively supported in Windows 11. However, that support also extends to macOS thanks to ViewSonic’s vTouch software package. An active stylus pen is also included in the box to assist in taking notes or drawing images in macOS or Windows.

Beyond the excellent hardware features (including a premium-feeling aluminum chassis), the TD1656-2K was near the top of the class in DCI-P3 and sRGB coverage and topped all competitors in brightness (363 nits).

More: ViewSonic TD1656-2K Review

Best Budget Portable Monitor

Over the past few years, we’ve seen a race to the bottom with respect to portable monitor pricing. However, the steep decline in street prices doesn’t mean that you have to contend with extremely poor quality (as was once the case in this segment).

Enter the Arzopa A1, which is a value-priced, no-frills 15.6-inch portable monitor. It has a 1080p resolution, which is standard for this class, and an integrated kickstand (which we absolutely love for portable monitors).

The A1 features two USB-C ports and even includes a mini-HDMI port (which is sometimes left out to reach a lower price point). I was even surprised at the dual 1-watt speakers, which offer good clarity and output. This is almost unheard of in a portable monitor that costs well under $100.

You can’t have it all regarding a budget monitor, and the A1 does fall behind the competition in color performance. In addition, its maximum brightness (which we measured at 228 nits) was vastly outperformed by its competitors. However, the current street price for the A1 is $70, making it an easy pick for value-conscious consumers.

More: Arzopa A1 review

Best Portable Monitor for Productivity

We’ve previously been impressed with the Espresso Displays 17 Pro, a 17-inch portable monitor that offers a remarkable picture, a high-quality chassis, and a trick magnetic stand. Now, the company has delivered a slightly smaller counterpart that still has all of those perks with a lower price tag.

The new 15 Pro features a 15.6-inch IPS panel (down from 17.3 inches), but still retains a 4K (3840 x 2160) resolution. Espresso Displays also managed to improve upon the 17 Pro by boosting the maximum brightness by over 50 percent in our testing.

The monitor ships with the Stand+, which is a versatile articulating stand that magnetically attaches to the back. Because of the magnets, you can easily transition the 15 Pro from landscape to portrait mode. Likewise, you can adjust the height and tilt to suit your viewing preferences. There’s also an extra hinged “leg” at the bottom of the stand that allows you to position the 15 Pro above your laptop’s integrated display.

But the perks don’t end there. The 15 Pro also has multi-touch support, which works natively in Windows 11. However, that support extends to macOS when you install the free EspressFlow software. EspressoFlow also lets you configure virtual desktops for the 15 Pro.

With a price tag of $699, the 15 Pro isn’t cheap, but it offers a complete package for productivity warriors who crave some extra display resolution, flexibility with viewing modes, and a well-integrated software experience.

More: Espresso Displays 15 Pro Review

Best Portable Gaming Monitor

The Nexigo NG17FGQ achieves a feat that we don't often see in the portable monitor realm: it offers a tantalizing 300Hz refresh rate in a 17.3-inch form factor and connects to a laptop or desktop via HDMI or USB-C (DisplayPort Alt-Mode).

However, you'll need to connect the monitor to a PC with a USB-C cable to reach that 300Hz threshold. Connecting via an HDMI cable limits you to 240Hz, which is still not bad for a portable monitor.

Thanks to its good build quality, excellent color representation, and great performance while gaming, the NG17FGQ is hard to beat for mobile gamers looking for a step up in performance. If that wasn't enough, a remote is included in the box to make it easier to navigate the OSD (instead of fumbling with sometimes poorly-placed physical buttons on the actual monitor) along with built-in speakers.

More: Nexigo NG17FGQ Review

Best Small-Screen Portable Monitor

Feelworld may not be a name familiar to the general public, but the company’s DH101 portable monitor is a real winner. Portable monitors typically measure 13.3 to 17.3 inches in size. However, the DH101 bucks that trend with a relatively small 10.1-inch diagonal.

Despite its small size, Feelworld has infused the DH101 with plenty of features, including a robust and adjustable kickstand. All of the monitor's ports are located on the kickstand, which prevents cables from hanging off the display, which is a huge plus. In addition, the monitor supports touch, which is a nice bonus for this value-priced offering. Other features include integrated speakers and an extra USB-C port to connect low-power devices like keyboards, mice, and USB sticks.

It’s hard to find any significant deficit with the Feelworld DH101, other than the speakers being a bit disappointing in audio quality. However, with a price tag of around $130, it easy to overlook that flaw.

Read: Feelworld DH101 Review

Best Dual Screen Portable Monitor

Limink truly has a standout product with its LK14 portable monitor. While we’re used to seeing single-screen portable monitors in various sizes, the LK14 bucks that trend with dual screens. You get multiple screens flanking your laptops, and the whole unit is built with high-quality materials and precision.

Each 14-inch monitor offers a 1920 x 1200 resolution, 60Hz refresh rate, and a maximum brightness of 400 nits. In addition to providing excellent overall image quality, the LK14 is also actually useful as an everyday accessory for your laptop. You get a huge increase in available screen real estate for your daily productivity needs.

Even though Limink bills the LK14 as a portable monitor, its 3.22-pound weight blunts its effectiveness there. However, the unit at least folds up into an easily transportable package and slips into a nice, book-style pleather case.

However, the Limink LK14 doesn’t come cheap, given its $700 MSRP. However, regular sales see the LK14 dip below $600 for those who can truly take advantage of its capabilities.

Read: Limink LK14 Review

Best Portable Wireless Monitor

ViewSonic has a vast portfolio of portable monitors, many of which I’ve reviewed for Tom’s Hardware. However, one of the company’s most impressive entries is the VG1656N, a feature-packed entry retailing for less than $300.

The monitor measures a relatively large 16 inches across with a resolution of 1920 x 1200 (16:10). If you’re looking for HDMI connectivity, you won’t find it here. However, the VG1656N does include two USB-C ports with DisplayPort Alt Mode support. More importantly, the VG1656N also supports wireless connectivity via the ViewSonic VG19948 USB-C dongle.

You can use the dongle with smartphones, tablets, laptops, and other computing devices. For example, the VG1656N shows up as an AirPlay display on Apple devices, allowing me to enjoy iOS games on the 16-inch display instead of my iPhone 16 Pro’s built-in 6.3-inch display. Bolstering this wireless support is a built-in battery for true “wireless” connectivity.

From a performance perspective, the VG1656N is among the top performers in terms of color but is mid-pack in brightness.

With a price tag of $299, the VG1656N isn’t an impulse buy for a portable monitor. However, it offers plenty of enticing features that make it a perfect fit for mobile warriors.

More: ViewSonic VG1656N review

Shopping Tips for Best Portable Monitors

• Make sure it connects to your device(s). Some monitors connect over standard HDMI, which lets them work with almost anything, while others use USB-C’s alternate mode. A select few provide DisplayLink connectivity, which allows them to plug into any USB 3.0 capable port, even an old-fashioned type-A connector.
  
  
• Pay close attention to monitor kickstands. A kickstand can be a make-or-break proposition for some portable monitors. The best portable monitors have a built-in kickstand that allows you to easily adjust the display for the best possible viewing angles. On the other hand, some monitors have separate, magnetic origami-style covers that double as a kickstand. These are rarely (if ever) better than a good built-in kickstand and can ruin an otherwise good display experience.
  
  
• Battery or no battery? Most modern portable monitors draw power over USB-C, either via a dedicated wall charger or by drawing power directly from your laptop. However, some models, like the Asus ROG ROG XG16AHPE and XG17AHPE, have a built-in lithium-ion battery that allows you to game without being plugged into a wall. So, if you prefer to connect to your laptop via HDMI, you could do so with just a single cable with battery-equipped monitors.
  
  
• Productivity or Gaming? Most portable monitors come with a standard 60Hz refresh rate, which is perfectly fine for productivity tasks and suits most consumers. However, some alternatives like the Asus ROG ROG XG16AHPE and ViewSonic VX1755 offer up to 144Hz refresh rates and support for Adaptive-Sync technologies for those that want to game on a portable display that’s larger than what their laptop natively offers.

For more guidance picking a monitor of any resolution – gaming or otherwise – check out our PC Monitor Buying Guide and list of the Best Computer Monitors.

Discounts on the Best Portable Monitors

Whether you're shopping for one of the screens that made our list of best portable monitors above or something else, you may find savings by checking out our best monitor deals page, along with our lists of Dell coupon codes, Lenovo coupon codes, LG coupon codes, HP coupon codes, Monoprice coupon codes and Newegg promo codes.

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

MORE: How We Test Monitors

MORE: All Monitor Content

MORE: HDMI vs. DisplayPort: Which Is Better For Gaming?

It's never too early to introduce your kids to the wonders of 3D printing. Many of us here at Tom’s Hardware are parents who love 3D printing, and these are the printers we would give our own kids.

Why buy a kid 3D printer? We have many machines on our Best 3D Printer list, but most of them are too advanced for younger kids. This is where “toy” printers and kid-friendly machines come to the rescue. These printers are perfect for young beginners, especially those without a knowledgeable grown-up to help with setup and maintenance. A good printer for a child works right out of the box and may sacrifice a little build volume or adjustability in order to be extremely easy to use.

What is a good age to start 3D printing? With adult guidance, children can begin exploring 3D printing as soon as they can read, operate phone apps, and understand safety measures. Some child-friendly 3D printers are no more complicated than learning to use a microwave, with easy-to-load filament and models that can be brought to life through curated mobile apps. Many of the “just for kids” 3D printers we’ve reviewed have cold build plates and safety doors that shut the machine off when opened.

Elementary-aged kids who can understand three-dimensional drawing concepts are ready for programs like Tinkercad to design their own creations.

All the kid-friendly 3D printers we reviewed also come with basic slicers with locked-in presets that make setting up prints simple. Most “grown-up” slicers can be set to a basic mode that hides advanced features to make the slicing process less overwhelming.

Below are our recommendations for the best 3D printers for kids and teens.

Quick List