Google announced that WebVR, the API that allows developers to build VR experiences for the web, is now supported by its Google Cardboard platform. The company also introduced a new WebVR Experiments page to make it easier for you to explore what developers are doing with the API.
Mozilla and Google introduced the WebVR API 1.0 Proposal in March 2016 with the intent of making VR content accessible to anyone with a web browser. Google expanded on that mission in February with the announcement that its Chrome browser and Daydream platform would support WebVR, which meant you could interact with VR experiences on practically any PC, tablet, or smartphone, albeit in 2D and with limited features.
Now the API has made the jump to Google Cardboard. This should make true VR experiences more accessible–few Daydream phones have been announced, which means WebVR currently offers just a small taste of what VR is like. Not everyone can afford a high-end PC, VR HMD, and all the other equipment needed to experience VR; Google Cardboard lets you see what all the fuss is about without breaking the bank on a full setup.
“Everyone should be able to experience VR, and WebVR is a big step in that direction,” Google said in today’s announcement. “It’s open to all browsers, making it easier for developers to create something quickly and share it with everyone, no matter what device they’re on.” That sentiment will ring a little more true when WebVR support heads to Chrome for the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive, which the company said is “coming soon.”
WebVR Experiments: Virtual reality on the web for everyone
Google also introduced a new WebVR Experiments website to collect VR experiences compatible with the API. At launch, the site features a variety of games, an interactive music video, and other VR experiences that sit in between “tech demo” and “real product.” Google said in its announcement that WebVR Experiments will feature other VR experiences, in time; you can submit your own work for inclusion by filling out a form on the website.
It’s almost time. Grab the portal gun, Morty! Rick and Morty: Virtual Rick-ality, Adult Swim and Owlchemy Labs’ Rick and Morty-themed VR game, launches next week, and we have some exploring to do!
Last year, Adult Swim decided to bring one of its most successful shows to the virtual screen. The broadcast network partnered with Owlchemy Labs,creators of the highly-acclaimed Job Simulator, to bring Rick and Morty’s alternate universe to life in VR.
Rick and Morty: Virtual Rick-ality puts you in the shoes of a Morty clone in the Smith household. Rick and the real Morty are off having inter-dimensional adventures, while you’re supposed to do Rick’s chores for him. Just like Job Simulator, the game includes tasks and puzzles for you to complete, but you’re free to do whatever you please. You can explore the house, for example, or search for weird experiments and devices in Rick’s garage. You may even find yourself slipping through a portal into a new dimension.
“We really believe fans are going to lose their minds at what we’ve developed,” says Owlchemy Labs CEO Alex Schwartz. “It’s been an incredible experience to develop for one of our favorite shows and see the joy on players’ faces when they get to explore Rick’s garage in VR, physically step through portals, and interact naturally with their hands in the world they’re already so familiar with. Players are interacting with the world ofRick and Mortyin a way only possible in virtual reality, and they love it!”
We had the chance to try the Rick and Morty: Virtual Rick-alitydemo at GDC in March, and we liked what we saw. We’re eager to get our hands on the full game and explore Rick’s garage at length.
Fortunately, we won’t be waiting much longer. Owlchemy Labs announced that Rick and Morty’s VR adventure kicks off on April 20. Rick and Morty: Virtual Rick-ality will be available on Steam and Oculus Home for $30.
Now that spring has sprung, retailers are hyping their weekly sales with supposedly deeper discounts and big savings events. Some of those deals aren’t quite what they claim to be, but there are still some pretty good buys.
Today, Best Buy is selling Lenovo’s Flex 4 convertible laptop for $280 instead of the usual $399. This clamshell features a 14-inch touchscreen display with 1366-by-768 resolution, 4GB RAM, and a 500GB hard drive. The processor is a Skylake-era 2.10GHz, dual-core Intel Pentium 4405U with Intel HD Graphics 510. You also get one USB 2.0 and two USB 3.0 ports, HDMI out, a media card reader, Ethernet, 802.11ac Wi-Fi, a webcam, and Bluetooth.
As this is a 2-in-1 machine, the laptop’s display can rotate around to create the usual form factors, including tablet, tent, and standard laptop.
Despite the use of a spinning hard drive, this laptop is pretty light at 3.86 pounds. It’s not clear how easy it would be to replace this unit’s hard drive with a faster SSD, though. Lenovo’s laptops are generally DIY friendly, but if you plan to swap out with an SSD, make sure you research how easy it is to replace this model’s hard drive.
MSI announced five new AM4 motherboards boasting the A320 chipset that AMD introduced alongside its Ryzen 5 processors.
A320 is the baseline chipset for AM4 socket motherboards. It offers fewer PCI-E lanes, SATA-III ports, and USB ports than the mid-tier B350 and high-end X370. It’s supposed to make up for those missing features by offering decent performance at a lower price. AMD said in a blog post that it expects A320 motherboards to cost around $50, although manufacturers and retailers naturally influence or set the boards’ actual prices.
MSI announced the A320M Grenade, A320M Bazooka, A320M Pro-VD, A320M-Pro-VD/S, and A320M Gaming Pro. The company didn’t share availability or pricing information on the boards–its U.S. website hasn’t even been updated to include the A320 chipset on its search page at the time of writing–but B&H Photo Video lists the A320M Pro-VD and A320M Gaming Pro at $60 and $70, respectively, with expected availability in 3-7 business days.
We expect to learn more about these motherboards soon. MSI hasn’t even issued a press release about them, to our knowledge, instead announcing the new boards with a tweet. In the meantime, you can check out B350 and X370 motherboards in our price lists for each chipset.
Product
MSI A320M Grenade
MSI A320M Bazooka
MSI A320M Pro-VD
MSI A320M Pro-VD/S
MSI A320M Gaming Pro
Socket
AM4
AM4
AM4
AM4
AM4
Chipset
A320
A320
A320
A320
A320
Form Factor
Micro-ATX
Micro-ATX
Micro-ATX
Micro-ATX
Micro-ATX
Memory Support
2 x DDR4-2667
4 x DDR4-2667
2 x DDR4-2400
2 x DDR4-2667
2 x DDR4-2667
Onboard Graphics
1 x VGA port, supports a maximum resolution of 2048×1280@60Hz, 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x DVI-D port, supports a maximum resolution of 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x HDMI port, supports a maximum resolution of 4096×2160@24Hz
1 x VGA port, supports a maximum resolution of 2048×1280@60Hz, 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x DVI-D port, supports a maximum resolution of 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x HDMI port, supports a maximum resolution of 4096×2160@24Hz
1 x DVI-D port, supports a maximum resolution of 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x VGA port, supports a maximum resolution of 2048×1280@60Hz, 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x DVI-D port, supports a maximum resolution of 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x VGA port, supports a maximum resolution of 2048×1280@60Hz, 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x VGA port, supports a maximum resolution of 2048×1280@60Hz, 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x DVI-D port, supports a maximum resolution of 1920×1200@60Hz
1 x HDMI port, supports a maximum resolution of 4096×2160@24Hz
Audio
Realtek ALC887 Codec
7.1-Channel High Definition Audio
Realtek ALC892 Codec
7.1-Channel High Definition Audio
Realtek ALC887 Codec
7.1-Channel High Definition Audio
Realtek ALC887 Codec
7.1-Channel High Definition Audio
Realtek ALC887 Codec
7.1-Channel High Definition Audio
LAN
1 x Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN controller
1 x Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN controller
1 x Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN controller
1 x Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN controller
1 x Realtek 8111H Gigabit LAN controller
Storage
4 x SATA 6Gbps ports
– Supports RAID 0, RAID 1, and RAID 10
1 x M.2 slot (Key M)
– Supports PCIe 3.0 x4 (Ryzen Series Processors) or PCIe 3.0 x2 (7th Gen A-series/ Athlon processors ) and SATA 6Gbps 2242 / 2260 /2280 storage devices
4 x SATA 6Gbps ports
– Supports RAID 0, RAID 1, and RAID 10
1 x M.2 slot (Key M)
– Supports PCIe 3.0 x4 (Ryzen Series Processors) or PCIe 3.0 x2 (7th Gen A-series/ Athlon processors ) and SATA 6Gbps 2242 / 2260 /2280 storage devices
4 x SATA 6Gbps ports
– Supports RAID 0, RAID 1, and RAID 10
4 x SATA 6Gbps ports
– Supports RAID 0, RAID 1, and RAID 10
4 x SATA 6Gbps ports
– Supports RAID 0, RAID 1, and RAID 10
1 x M.2 slot (Key M)
– Supports PCIe 3.0 x4 (Ryzen Series Processors) or PCIe 3.0 x2 (7th Gen A-series/ Athlon processors ) and SATA 6Gbps 2242 / 2260 /2280 storage devices
Samsung’s highly promoted Bixby voice assistant won’t be shipping with the Galaxy S8 smartphone on April 21, as previously announced.
The company released a statement Tuesday night that said Bixby will be available in the U.S. on the Galaxy S8 “later in the spring.” Samsung didn’t explain the delay.
The Bixby will join a pack of artificial intelligence assistants that includes Amazon’s Alexa, Apple’s Siri and the Google Assistant that are changing the way people interact with their devices.
Some U.S.-based reviewers and analysts had noticed that the Bixby feature wasn’t fully demonstrated when the S8 was announced March 29.
The shipment delay applies only to the voice feature in Bixby, while Samsung said other key features of Bixby, like Vision, Home and Reminder will be available in the global launch of Galaxy S8 on April 21.
Samsung went out of its way to promote Bixby well in advance of the Galaxy S8 launch. It was announced in a blog on March 20, nine days before the phone’s launch, by Injong Rhee, executive vice president of software and services for Samsung Electronics.
Rhee pointed out a physical button on the side of the phone that would activate Bixby, differentiating it from Alexa or Siri and others that are activated by a spoken trigger word. Bixby would offer a “deeper experience” than some others, including support for touch commands. Also, Bixby is designed to know the current state of an app to allow users to carry out work in progress without further explanation. Rhee said the Bixby interface is “much more natural and easier to use.”
Bixby was already two years behind those digital assistants as well as Google Assistant, analysts said. “Bixby is going to be playing catch up,” said Gartner analyst Werner Goertz in March.
One analyst forgave the Bixby delay. “I commend Samsung for trying to get it right rather than just launching and hoping for the best,” said Jack Gold, an analyst at J. Gold Associates.
“It’s never a good idea to put out less than great software on a consumer device. So in this case, if Samsung can delay a few weeks and get a better product, it makes sense to do so. That said, voice recognition generally is not all that easy to do. It’s not just the recognition software itself, but the whole voice chain that has to be tailored. That includes everything from the microphone through the audio channel on the phone to the recognition algorithms and the user interface. If they tested and it wasn’t at their expected level of accuracy, then it’s better to get it right than to get it out fast.”
On Wendesday, Goertz agreed with Gold. “Yes, the delay is disappointing … but Samsung’s postponement of Bixby voice is still better than launching a virtual personal assistant that is not entirely ready for prime time.”
BlackBerry was awarded $814.9 millionfollowing a dispute with Qualcomm over patent royalties.
How The Dispute Started
Back in 2010, BlackBerry signed a license agreement with Qualcomm, in which it paid royalties for all the Snapdragon-based smartphones it was expecting to sell by 2015.
As we know, BlackBerry hasn’t done so well in the smartphone market over the past few years, and in fact it even got out of the market last year. The company entered arbitration with Qualcomm last year to recuperate some of the money it paid for licenses that it never used.
Even though the original deal was supposed to be non-refundable, per the contract between the two companies, the arbitrator seems to have agreed with BlackBerry that it doesn’t make sense to pay royalties for units it never sold. As such, Qualcomm was ordered to refund BlackBerry a part of the original sum. Qualcomm said in a statement that it disagrees with the decision, but it’s binding, so it will have to refund BlackBerry.
Qualcomm’s Patent Troubles
Over the past several years, Qualcomm has drawn the attention of multiple regulators who accused Qualcomm of abusing its market position to overcharge its customers and take out competitors.
Qualcomm was recently fined over $850 million by the Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC). Back in 2015, it also had to pay a $975 million fine to the Chinese government over similar accusations. The European Commission started its own ongoing antitrust investigation against the company in the same year.
This year, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) also charged Qualcomm with using anti-competitive tactics to monopolize the market. Apple sued the modem maker for $1 billion, too, arguing that it overcharged it for basic smartphone technology.
Qualcomm recently launched a counter-suit against Apple, but so far it looks like all the evidence is piling up against Qualcomm as being the aggressor in the market. It was also recently revealed from the KFTC’s case against Qualcomm that the company blocked Samsung from selling its own Exynos chips to other smartphone manufacturers for 25 years. This may explain why Samsung never decided to sell its highly competitive chip to other companies, the same way it sells its Super AMOLED displays or builds competitors’ chips in its manufacturing facilities.
AMD and Nvidia have a long-standing rivalry. These graphics card companies have been battling for a couple of decades now. In the middle of 2016, both firms announced their new ranges, but it’s only now in 2017 that Nvidia’s seems complete with the announcement of the monstrous Titan Xp.
AMD’s range tops out with the RX 480, which is roughly equivalent in terms of performance with Nvidia’s mid-range GTX 1060. So you could say that Nvidia is the obvious winner at the moment.
But hold on one second, reader. Unless you have a huge budget and you’re aiming to play games at resolutions higher than 2560×1440, or you want as much raw performance possible for the very best quality with a VR headset, then the dilemma of which brand to go for is as real as ever.
And don’t overlook the fact that AMD is about to announce its next-generation graphics cards called Vega, which should bring the fight to Nvidia’s top cards.
Here, we offer a comparison of the current flagship – the RX 480 – and Nvidia’s GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080 to help you decide which to buy.
In the green corner: Nvidia 1060, 1070 and 1080 prices
You can buy GTX 1080 from retailers such as Overclockers UK, eBuyer,Scan,Amazon,Maplin andCurrys. Prices have dropped since the 1080 Ti was announced, and now range from £479.99 all the way up to £699.99 for the most expensive water-cooled variant. Of course, you’d be quite mad to buy that latter version as that’s what a 1080 Ti costs.
The GTX 1070 comes in a Founders Edition for £395, but can be found cheaper at £349.99 from third-party manufacturers.
The GTX 1060 Founders Edition costs £275, but it doesn’t take much searching to find GTX 1060 cards for under £190. Those cheapest cards have 3GB of RAM, though, while the 6GB versions will cost you around £240.
In the red corner: RX 480 price
The Radeon RX 480 was launched on 29 June 2016. Like the GTX 1060 there are two versions – a choice of either 4GB or 8GB of RAM.
Expect to pay around £170-1080 for a 4GB card, and £210-230 for an 8GB model.
If you’re on a budget or looking to get the best bang for your buck, the RX 480 is better value for full-HD (1920×1080) gaming than the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080. AMD’s card is less than half the price of the GTX 1070 and is an astonishing 70 percent cheaper than the GTX 1080.
The GTX 1060 gives the RX 480 a good run for its money, and the choice between a 3GB 1060 and a 4GB RX 480 is tricky indeed. At a pinch we feel the £180 RX 480 is the best value option with its extra memory, but do check our reviews to see exactly how specific cards perform as manufacturers tend to overclock to get better performance.
Given the popularity of the older R9 390 and R9 380 cards among gamers on a fairly tight budget, the RX 480 somehow manages to offer the performance attributes of the R9 390, whilst being as cheap as the R9 380.
Winner: AMD RX 480
Nvidia GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080 vs AMD RX 480: Specifications
Given the AMD RX 480’s price, we didn’t expect mind-blowing specs from the red team, however AMD hasn’t disappointed us, with specs that sit between its older R9 380 and R9 390 – impressive considering it costs just as much as the R9 380 when it was released. The most impressive part of the GPU’s specs is the high core clock it has versus previous generation AMD cards and the amount of stream processors.
RX 480 key specifications:
Stream Processors: 2304
Core Clock: 1120MHz
Boost Clock: 1266MHz
VRAM: 4 & 8GB
TFLOP: 5.8
Memory Clock: 7Gbps (4GB) & 8Gbps (8GB)
Memory Bus Width: 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/s): 224 (4GB) & 256 (8GB)
TDP: 150W
Transistors: 5.7b
Manufacturing process: FinFET 14nm
Power: 1x 6-pin
The GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 both have impressive specs, they are as follows:
GTX 1080 key specifications
CUDA Cores: 2560
Core Clock: 1607MHz
Boost Clock: 1733MHz
VRAM: 8GB GDDR5X
TFLOP: 9
Memory Clock: 10Gbps
Memory Bus Width: 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/s): 320
TDP: 180W
Transistors: 7.2b
Manufacturing process: FinFET 16nm
Power connector: 1x 8-pin PCIe
GTX 1070 key specifications
CUDA Cores: 1920
Core Clock: 1506MHz
Boost Clock: 1683MHz
VRAM: 8GB GDDR5
TFLOP: 6.5
Memory Clock: 8Gbps
Memory Bus Width: 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/s): 256
TDP: 150W
Transistors: 7.2b
Manufacturing process: FinFET 16nm
Power connector: 1x 8-pin PCIe
GTX 1060 key specifications:
CUDA Cores: 1280
Core Clock: 1506MHz
Boost Clock: 1708Hz
VRAM: 6GB GDDR5
TFLOP: 3.8
Memory Clock: 8Gbps
Memory Bus Width: 192-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/s): 192
TDP: 120W
Transistors: 4.4b
Manufacturing process: FinFET 16nm
Power connector: 1x 6-pin PCIe
The Nvidia cards all use the Pascal architecture. VR is a big focus for Nvidia, and Pascal brings big performance jumps in this area. Amazingly, the newer cards are not only cheaper than their predecessors (the GTX 980 and GTX 970), but the GTX 1080 and 1070 also out-punch the 2015 Titan X (based on Maxwell architecture).
That cost £850-900 and – at the time – was the best single-GPU card on the market. Of course, the first Pascal Titan X then out-punched the GTX 1080, but we now have the 2017 version: the Titan Xp.
Nvidia GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080 vs AMD RX 480: Performance
This is all rather besides the point, here, though.
So, to get back to the point, the GTX 1060 isn’t trying to compete with any Titan X, but rather the AMD RX 480. In some games the RX 480 is quicker. In others, it’s the 1060. Much of the time, you can say it’s down to which games are optimised for AMD or Nvidia, so it pays to find out for which side your favourites are optimised before buying either of these cards.
When you put the AMD RX 480 against the GTX 1070 and 1080, the AMD card is beaten by the amount of raw power the two Nvidia cards have, where it’s hard for the RX 480 to compete.
Clearly the GTX 1070 and 1080 are best suited to those who want to game at QHD or 4K.
Nevertheless, both the RX 480 and GTX 1060 provide fantastic value for money. If you’re just looking for the best 1080p (1920×1080) experience, then both cards will suffice. If however, you’re looking for more, then the GTX 1070 and 1080 are the logical choices.
It should also be noted that the RX 480 does better than a GTX 970 (especially given its 3.5GB VRAM memory problem) and be on-par in certain areas as the R9 390.
If you’re looking for outright performance, it’s a no brainer; the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 have far more graphics firepower. And the cost proportionately more. Yes, you could run two RX 480 cards in Crossfire, but you’d be roughly on a par with a GTX 1070, and have spent around the same money.
