While desktop gamers, power users, and OEM system builders eagerly await the launch of Intel’s Ivy Bridge chip next week, Intel has quietly been working on a smartphone chip to power the Xolo X900 in India. While a single device might not look like a game changing move, Intel’s first forray into Android smartphones appears to me to be a first move in an eventual overthrow of ARM-based processors’ smartphone monopoly.

Intel dominates the desktop market, with AMD – Intel’s only true “competition” – essentially waving a white flag. AMD has long been unable to actually compete with superior processing technology, and now seems unable to even Yet somehow Intel, with all of its superior firepower, managed to totally miss the mobile device craze, making very little effort to compete with ARM-based chips in smartphone and tablets.

What finally caused Chipzilla to awaken to the mobile market? Perhaps the fact that ARM is set to invade the desktop market, with Windows 8 supporting ARM for the first time. Intel seems to have responded to the invasion on its home turf with a counter-attack in smartphones. One must wonder whether the move comes too late in the game; however, with ARM architecture accounting for over 98% of the mobile phone market. Every market analyst from Cuppertino to Cuba has known for some time that the future growth market was in mobile, yet Intel seemed slow to take it seriously.

The new phones, will give Intel an opportunity to test their new chips in a relatively safe environment, away from the harsh criticisms of iFan Sites and ARM-loving gadgeteers. I strongly suspect that this chip isn’t even the best that Intel can do, and that mobile chip fabrication is just getting started over at Intel.

The Xolo X900 boasts some impressive specs for a first try, and seems to blow similarly-priced smartphones away in terms of processing power. Still, expect that Intel will have to do a little better on power consumption and battery life if it really wants to win over the hearts of smartphone users.

With the big launch of Intel’s Ivy Bridge – or third-generation Core – processors in just under two weeks, hardware manufacturers have already begun selling their 7-series motherboards, also known as “Panther Point.” You can see some of the Z77′s available now on Newegg. Right now, of course, the boards will sell off slowly, mostly to buyers who have no idea that new Intel chips are coming in under 20 days.

It’s too early to see how the chips will run Ivy Bridge processors, as Intel has placed an embargo on Ivy Bridge info until the 23rd of this month. Tom’s decided to go ahead and test the chips with the last-generation Sandy Bridge chips:

If those bars look really similar, it’s because they’re all close enough to the margin of error to be called “exactly the same.” This is actually exactly what we expected – no true benefit for gaming.

What is the benefit, then? Well there is native support for USB 3.0 and PCIe 3.0, but both of those are available on recent Z68 boards. Tests have already shown that data transfers are no faster for the Panther Point chipset.  The power consumption is a little lower, but nothing that a single user is going to get excited about. It is possible that the latest chipset will blow us away when Ivy Bridge chips are placed inside – but it’s very, very unlikely.

So if there is no noticable benefit for gamers, why should they buy 7-series motherboards over the 6-series? The wise gamer may remember the nasty recall that Intel was forced into when the 6-series was new. These bugs have been ironed out in previous 6-series revisions, but we don’t know whether the new 7-series boards will experience similar bugs.

For desktop users who aren’t really concerned with extra space and extra ports, we recommend sticking with reliable 6-series boards unless the 7-series boards feature something (e.g. HDMI ports or a low price) that you just can’t do without. The primary benefit of the 7-series motherboards are likely to be seen by laptop users, where extra space on the boards will allow for more add-on ports.

I almost hate to do this, but here are 5 reasons why Google Glasses would suck:

1) You’ll die.

You think it’s distracting to talk on a cell phone and drive? What happens when people have little maps flashing over their eyes to get directions? Or when they take video calls in the car? Or cross the street, and get distracted by the alert box?

But maybe people will be totally responsible.

2) We hate glasses.

Remember 3D television? They sold almost half of the display models. The lesson we learned is that people don’t like putting bulky objects on their faces. I need glasses to read my monitor from a comfortable sitting position, and I don’t even wear those.

There's nothing like relaxing with 10 extra pounds of hardware compressing my neck.

3) It won’t work.

I know, I know – we just saw how it would work. The difference is that real-life head-up displays are either totally passive or controlled by hand-held controllers. Pilots don’t shoot missiles by blinking. If you’ve ever tried to use a webcam to navigate the internet, you know that eye-tracking interfaces are the most frustrating thing since heat-sealed packaging. I don’t personally love the idea of blinking at the wrong spot by accident, and opening a call from a crazy ex.

Add to that the fact that you probably won’t be able to see. There’s a really good reason we don’t make transparent screens outside of sci-fi films. Do you want black text? What about when you’re looking at the asphalt? With constantly shifting light levels and backgrounds, you’ll have to stand still and focus to even read – which kind of defeats the purpose, doesn’t it?

4) Everyone will be talking to themselves, and we will all go insane.

It’s happened to us all: a guy walks into the elevator and asks, “Hey, how’s it going?” “Good,” you respond, as he turns his head to give you an odd look, just as you notice the bluetooth in his far ear. Now imagine this, compounded by everyone, speaking personal commands to their own digital slave.

The horror is too great to comprehend. My first thought was of a bunch of people on a bus, all talking to themselves. “Remind me to turn on the oven when I get home,” says one guy, awkwardly avoiding eye contact with anyone. “Open bookmarks,” says another. “Where is my husband?” asks another lady.

You’ll soon lose your mind, and begin rambling to yourself to “make the voices stop.” Sadly, no one will no the difference, because they will think you’re talking to your glasses.

5) Software constantly identifying everything you see – is that what you want?

Remember when we freaked out because Google/Apple were tracking our location all the time? Here’s an idea – let them identify every person and object that you interact with, all the time. I’m sure the federal government will have no interest in a limitless supply of wandering video cameras, and that corporations won’t be interested in mining the data.

These are just five of the least cynical reasons I could imagine for not wanting Google Glasses on my face. I’m willing to settle for a future where I can buy a single replacement for a smartphone, laptop, e-reader, tablet, and desktop.

Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Google is working on a tablet to compete with rivals Apple and Amazon. This naturally reminds us of the Nexus One – by all accounts a failed Google experiment to sell their own phone. Is the Google tablet bound to be the next Nexus One, just as Google+ is poised to become the next Wave, Orkut, Buzz – will the Google Tablet be another failed Google experiment?

Despite knowing very little at this point, I affirm PCMag‘s suggestion the Google Tablet has some serious potential. What really doomed the Nexus One was not the lack of functionality from the phone itself. It was, at the time of its launch, superior to the iPhone in terms of hardware, and only slightly lacking on aesthetics and software. The Nexus One attempted to sell itself directly to consumers, circumventing wireless providers who subsidize the vast majority of hardware in the United States.

Not everyone thinks Google is cruising for success in the highly-competitive hardware industry. Rebecca Greenfield with the Atlantic Wire argues that Google should stay out of tablets, saying that, “hardware isn’t Google’s game.” The author further argues that Google can’t do a better iPad, nor can they compete with Amazon on low-cost tablets.

It might be tempting to look at the history of a company and write it off. After all, why would a company continue to try hardware with so many failures? A company where products hadn’t caught on in the market, and where the hardware division was losing money? You know, like the unprofitable company that Steve Jobs took control of in 1997.

Let’s talk about the difference that Google’s new advertising muscle could make. When the Nexus One launched, Google had done almost no traditional advertising. In 2011 alone, Google’s spent over $213 million, up from a previous-record $56 million in 2010. Studies into the reception of Google’s ads show the company absolutely killing it on their TV ads, with real success in print to top it off.

I strongly expect that Google will release a few more details at I/O 2012 at the end of June. It’s likely that Google will get the tablet out shortly after, leveraging some of recently-acquired Motorola’s assets to launch with plenty of time for holiday spending.

We’ve seen AMD and Nvidia trading blows back and forth in a never-ending competition to create the  fastest (and ultimately best-selling) graphics card. With the entry of the GTX 680 to the market this month, that competition just kicked into overdrive. Nvidia’s Southern Islands GPU, the Radeon 7970, was initially priced at $549, causing AMD to fire back with the well-priced GTX 680 for $499.

Performance

It’s not a knock-out, but the GTX 680 scored some solid wins over the Radeon cards. From Tom’s Hardware:

GeForce GTX 680 is now the fastest single-GPU graphics card, and not by a margin that leaves room to hem or haw. Making matters worse for AMD, the GTX 680 is priced right between its Radeon HD 7970 and 7950. Providing that Nvidia’s launch price sticks, both Radeon HD 7900s need to be significantly less expensive in order to compete.

To be clear, that means that the GTX 680 is still out-performed in many instances by cards with multiple GPUs – the GTX 590 and Radeon 6990 from generations past, which will still set you back just under $700. Here’s a benchmark from Battlefield 3:

This is about what we see everywhere: the GTX 680 out-performing the 7970 by a few frames. It’s bad enough to be beat at the same price, but it really hurts to be beat at a lower price point.

Power

Talk about hitting a guy when he’s down – the GTX sucks much less power than comparable graphics cards. From Bjorn3d:

Wow. Personally, I don’t pay a lot of attention to power consumption. That might just be because electricity is really cheap where I live, or because power consumption isn’t exactly the first thing on your mind when you buy cards that costt $500-700. Still, I am certainly not going to complain about saving tons of money over the life of the card, and I don’t think anyone else is either. As is usually the case with lower power consumption, the card also runs a little cooler under a full load.

So which one should you serious gamers buy? Neither – at least not yet:

• Intel is launching Ivy Bridge at the end of next month. If you’re going to upgrade a system or get a new one, that’s the time to do it.
• We expect to see some price cuts once the products are actually available, which may trigger retaliatory price cuts.

If you were going to choose a graphics card as of the 23rd of April, there’s no question that the GTX 680 deserves your money. Nvidia might have to drop prices by at least $75 on the 7970 to even be competitive. I expect that they are also rushing to finish the 7990 and reap some profits, but don’t expect it in the next few months.

Strange as it may seem, numerous studies (like this one by MIT) have shown that we think and learn better when we literally shock the brain. One study specifically showed that gamers showed faster improvement and increased performance while their minds were being zapped at low voltage.

Brain electrocuting devices have supposedly been used in the military for snipers and fighter pilots with stunning success. The effects are acheived by passing low levels of direct current to the brain, generally to the frontal cortex. The clinical electrocution, called transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS Wikipedia article), works by exciting the neurons and increasing brain plasticity – essentially making your brain more flexible and ready to learn.

There are currently no known negative side-effects to tDCS when properly used. Early trials suggest that there may be potential in improving symptoms of neurological disorders like Parkinson’s disease, tinnitus (ringing in the ear), and fibromyalgia. Stroke victims may also regain motor control more easily through tDCS treatment – the MIT study cited above showed improvements in learning motor skills. Some suspect that tDCS treatment may even be beneficial for the treatment of depression and schizophrenia, with trials planned later this year.

Consumer Devices

Tom’s Hardware reports that one company is looking to sell  ”GoFlow” devices to increase learning. Prices would start around $99, compared with $600 for the devices being used in medical studies. How these devices will compare to medical-grade devices remains to be seen, but the company might start out by promising “better video game performance.” The company plans to sell devices directly to the consumer, as the new technology is currently not explicitly regulated.

The device raises some interesting questions, with some comparing the effects of brain-enhancing devices to performance-enhancing drugs. It would certainly not be surprising to see conservative lawmakers in the US make a fuss about artificial enhancement, cheating nature, etc. Perhaps we are cheating nature by creating spears, building shelter, and curing cancer, but tDCS, like the other tools and technology, appears to have a bright future.

Is this the future of learning? Do you see students and employees strapped in to brain-electrocution devices in the future?

I’m not sure this video taps into the real potential of the device. It certainly doesn’t scream “credible medically-tested device that you should feel safe attaching to your head and running electricity through.” We’ll give them a break for trying to advertise on a low budget, pending the outcome of the actual product.

Did you see how quickly he learned to skateboard!?

Apple has reportedly run into a serious imbalance between supply and demand, according to ComputerWorld.

How bad is it? Pretty bad, apparently. Apple won’t even have the stock to satisfy pre-orders, and is now telling customers that they won’t receive their product for at least another three weeks.

The delay in production appears to be a result of the retina display – one of the new device’s biggest selling points. USA Today had previously reported that other manufacturers stuck with lower-resolution displays – not out of concern for cost, but mostly due to a lack of suppliers. Apple will be taking as many screens as they can get from suppliers Samsung and LG, but supply is not expected to outpace demand for the next three months, according to one

If you really can’t wait, though, sellers who pre-ordered iPads and rogue suppliers are selling pre-orders on eBay at around $1,000 for the 32GB 4G version.

Intel’s newest set of gaming CPUs should be on the virtual shelves starting on the 29th of April, according to Fudzilla. While previously expected to launch “early in April,” the processors will roll out just in time to make that partly true.

Coming later this month, we expect to see the near-simultaneous launch of Nvidia’s 600 series and AMD’s Southern Islands Radeon GPUs. The new graphics cards are expected to ramp up competition (and hoefully trigger price wars) in mid to high end desktops and laptops. Personally, I’m eyeing the Radeon HD 7850 for my own use, but we’ll have to wait and see what Nvidia fires back with in terms of price and computing power.

For the last several months, we have been encouraging gamers to delay their purchase of new computers pending the release of Intel’s code-named Ivy Bridge processors and Nvidia/AMD’s graphics cards. Rest assured that our recommendations for gaming rigs will be updated on or before launch day to reflect the new changes. All signs point to late next month being an excellent time for PC gamers to upgrade.

When I first started using the Internet, it was common knowledge that you never used your real name. I don’t know how common it was, but I was frightened by the mostly over-exaggerated stories of unwelcome attention people received when they dropped their real information on chat rooms and forums.

My aversion to posting real information persisted into adulthood. Despite the fact that I worked in online marketing, I avoided public profiles and public posts with my actual name. The result of anonymity was a lower standard of quality. While there is some high-quality content out there attributed to made-up people, the vast majority of it is really bad. ReviewRelay was originally launched without author names attached to any of the reviews.

As time went on, I decided that an online reputation was more important than my concern for privacy. I was coaxed along by Google, who seemed to be giving weight to real people and influential authors. As someone who makes a living in search engine optimization, I would know. I began – very reluctantly – writing content with my real name attached.

Seeing my own name had a profound impact on me . Those two words are how I am known and remembered in the minds of my friends, family, and everyone I have ever cared about. I found myself obsessing over the content, and taking criticism to heart. And a strange (yet not entirely surprising) thing has happened – the quality of my posts has improved, as have my writing skills. Simply attaching my name to a thing created an unavoidable investment equal to my own concern for my reputation.

I have decided to force myself to make the content on ReviewRelay better. I have attached my name to every single review. To me, this will be a powerful motivator in the upcoming weeks and months to make this site better and invest in it. There’s no doubt that I’m not a web designer, but hopefully I can make things look a little better. I hope you, my unnamed visitors, will enjoy reading the reviews as I revise them and add new reviews.

ince launching our mouse surface reviews, people have been looking at our site to determine which mouse pad they should be using with their super-high sensitivity mouse.  This is probably because Google has us pegged for some awfully strange key words so far…

Anyway, we kind of mentioned it in our mouse pad reviews, and in pieces throughout the individual reviews.  The point of this article, though, is to tell you what surfaces are really meant for high-DPI mice.

As a general rule, cloth pads are not meant for high DPI mice.  While there are exceptions, there aren’t many.  Keep in mind that most of the highest DPI mice are laser mice, and laser mice don’t track on surfaces like glass or ultra-smooth no-contrast surfaces.

Let’s get into the specifics.  Note that the links will take you to our reviews.  The following pads are generally good for a high DPI mouse on high DPI settings:
Steelseries SX
Steelseries S&S
Steelseries 5L
Steelseries 4HD / 9HD
Razer Vespula

The following are generally NOT good for high-sensitivity gaming:
SteelSeries Qck 
Razer Goliathus Control AND Speed
Razer Sphex
Steelseries SP
Razer Megasoma
XTRAC Ripper

And finally, the following mice are good for high-dpi optical mice, but NOT for high-DPI laser mice:
The Icemat

One more thing to note: squishy pads are generally a bad idea if you click the mouse buttons hard – either because of your mouse (i.e. the Lachesis), or because you like to really jam that sucker when you go for a headshot.  Pressing the mouse down pushes the pad all up in your sensor’s grill, causing it to skip.

For an overall comparison of mouse surfaces, please see our gaming mouse pad reviews or the individual mouse pad reviews.