ASUS announced their availability on October 28, following its earlier US MSRP announcement. Beyond 720 Hz, the extra money buys an on-screen position sensor. It also buys a DisplayPort input that only some graphics cards can fill at full speed.

One panel in both monitors

Both use a 24.5-inch 1080p tandem WOLED panel with a glossy finish. Tandem means two light-emitting layers are stacked in each pixel, which ASUS credits with more brightness and a longer life than a conventional WOLED.

ASUS rates both at 0.02 ms gray-to-gray. Both peak at 1,700 nits in HDR, and both carry a three-year warranty that covers burn-in.

The stands are the same too, with printed measurement scales and 155 mm of height adjustment. Each monitor also has two HDMI 2.1 ports.

ASUS publishes the same key panel ratings for both models. That does not establish identical picture quality or input lag; this comparison has no independent measurements of either.

What the extra $400 buys

At 720 Hz the screen can show a new frame every 1.4 ms. At 540 Hz the gap is 1.9 ms, so the faster model cuts the wait between frames by about half a millisecond.

To supply more than 540 distinct frames each second, your game has to render faster than 540 fps. Check a frame counter through a busy round. If it rarely stays above that level, you will not use the full 720 Hz ceiling. A frame counter alone does not establish whether the monitors have identical input latency at lower frame rates.

The Position Sensor shows the screen's tilt, height and distance from you on the display, so you can rebuild a setup exactly at another desk. It's worth having if you carry your monitor to LAN events. At home, the printed scales on both stands do most of the same job.

A 1440p alternative

Also compare the ROG Swift OLED PG27AQWP-W if you want more detail than 1080p. Its published specification is a 26.5-inch 1440p tandem WOLED panel, up to 540 Hz, with a UHBR20 DisplayPort input. Check current retail prices rather than assuming the launch-price gap will hold.

We'd put the money there unless you play only esports shooters at 1080p, because the extra pixels help in every other game and on every page of text. It does ask more of your graphics card, since 540 frames a second at 1440p is harder to reach than at 1080p.

Which graphics cards fill the UHBR20 port

ASUS's announcement ties full 720 Hz performance to the PG259QWS Ace's DisplayPort 2.1 input. That input runs at UHBR20, the fastest DisplayPort rate, and your graphics card has to support it too.

NVIDIA lists DisplayPort 2.1b with UHBR20 for its GeForce RTX 50 cards. Its RTX 40 cards stop at DisplayPort 1.4a. AMD's launch release gives DisplayPort 2.1a for the Radeon RX 9000 cards but doesn't name the link rate. Look for UHBR20 on your own card's spec sheet.

By our arithmetic, the PG259QWS Ace's full resolution at 720 Hz works out to about 1.5 billion pixels a second. With 10-bit color, that's about 45 Gbps of picture data before any timing overhead.

VESA certifies DP40 cables for up to 40 Gbps. Certified DP80 cables carry up to 80 Gbps, so of the two, only a DP80 cable has room for that signal uncompressed. ASUS's US accessory list for the PG259QWS Ace has no DisplayPort cable on it, while the XG259QWPG Ace's list includes one. Buy a certified DP80 cable rather than reuse an older one, and keep the run short.

HDMI is listed at 720 Hz too

ASUS's US spec page lists both HDMI ports at up to 720 Hz, the same ceiling as the DisplayPort input. On paper, that gives a card without UHBR20, such as an RTX 40 card, a way to reach 720 Hz.

The listed maximum refresh rate does not by itself confirm every combination of color depth, chroma format and compression on your graphics card. Confirm the supported timing and color mode in the monitor’s manual and GPU settings. Raw HDMI link bandwidth cannot be treated entirely as available picture data.

Whichever input you use, check it once the monitor is connected. Open Start > Settings > System > Display > Advanced display, and look for 720 Hz next to Choose a refresh rate.

How much air the Mini moves

Coway lists the Mini’s clean air delivery rate (CADR, the cubic feet of cleaned air a purifier puts out each minute, or cfm) at 143 for smoke. The Airmega Mighty2 is listed at 240. The Mini’s dust and pollen ratings are lower too.

By Coway’s count the Mini is 40 percent smaller than the Mighty2, and the dimensions bear that out. Worked out from the published dimensions, the Mini’s box has about 42 percent less volume. Its smoke CADR is about 40 percent lower, so the airflow shrank along with the cabinet.

Those are Coway’s figures, and we haven’t used a Mini. AHAM, the appliance makers’ association that runs the CADR program, keeps a directory of lab-verified models for the US and Canada. It showed no Coway model when we searched it on October 20.

Room size by AHAM’s rule

AHAM’s rule of thumb asks for a smoke CADR of at least two-thirds of the room’s floor area. Under an 8-foot ceiling, the height Coway’s manual assumes for its one-pass figures, that works out to about five air changes an hour.

By that rule, the Mini suits rooms up to about 215 square feet. That is a bedroom of 14 by 15 feet. The Mighty2 reaches about 360 square feet. Coway’s one-pass figures are about five times larger for both, so use them only to compare one Coway with another. A ceiling above 8 feet shrinks every one of these room sizes.

One filter set a year

Coway’s launch announcement says the Mini’s filter lasts six months. Its product page gives six months for the carbon filter and a year for the HEPA filter. The replacement filter’s own page lists six to 12 months for both.

The user manual lists three parts, each with its own schedule:

• Pre-filter: vacuum or wipe it every two to four weeks.
• Custom filter, a carbon sheet for odors: replace it every six months.
• HEPA filter: replace it once a year.

A spare carbon sheet comes in the box, so the first year is covered. Coway’s $49.99 replacement set holds one HEPA filter and two carbon sheets. One set a year keeps the Mini on schedule after that.

That is the layout of the original Mighty, which pairs a yearly HEPA filter with carbon filters changed at about six months. The Mighty2 moved to a single combined filter that costs $69.99 and lasts a year. According to Coway’s filter page, Mini filters fit neither of the other two.

Three years of ownership

Coway’s store listed the Mini at $169.99 and the Mighty2 at $269.99 on October 20, 2026. Each needs two filter purchases in its first three years, one after each of the first two years. By our arithmetic, that puts the Mini at $269.97 over three years and the Mighty2 at $409.97.

Three years is also how long Coway covers the Mini’s motor and electronics. The manual gives other internal parts one year, a split the launch announcement’s “three-year limited warranty” leaves out.

Per unit of clean air, the Mighty2 is a little cheaper. Its three-year cost comes to about $1.71 for each cfm of smoke CADR, and the Mini’s to about $1.89. So the $140 the Mini saves holds up only in a room its airflow can cover on its own.

Noise, power and the sensor

The Mini isn’t quieter than the Mighty2 on its lowest setting. Coway lists 19.2 dB for the Mini and 19 dB for the Mighty2, and the announcement compares the Mini’s figure only with other brands. At top speed the two are a decibel apart.

Coway rates the Mini’s power draw at up to 32 watts and the Mighty2’s at 56. The Mini’s particle sensor reads fine particles, known as PM2.5, and shows the result as one of four colors. The Mighty2’s laser sensor also counts smaller and larger particles and shows a number.

In Smart mode, the Mini switches to Sleep after three minutes of darkness. The manual says five minutes of light, or any button press, wakes it.

Coway’s microplastics claim rests on a lab test using plastic beads 0.3 microns across, run at Turbo speed. That is the particle size the HEPA rating covers, so the result shows the HEPA filter doing its usual job. The test chamber held about as much air as a 130-square-foot room with an 8-foot ceiling.

Which Coway for which room

Measure the room before you choose. Up to about 215 square feet, the Mini covers it by AHAM’s rule and costs $140 less over three years. In a larger bedroom or a living room of up to about 360 square feet, the Mighty2 is the one that keeps up. An original Mighty already running in a bedroom should stay there, since its smoke CADR of 233 is well above the Mini’s.

What the faster model buys

The XP-5250 is rated at 15.5 ISO pages per minute in black and 8.5 in color. The XP-5200 is rated at 14.0 and 7.5. ISO speeds come from a standard test document set, so the two figures compare fairly, and they still describe printing after the first page is under way.

Turned into a job you would actually print, the gap is small. A 20-page black document takes about 77 seconds at the XP-5250’s rate and about 86 seconds at the XP-5200’s, a difference of eight or nine seconds. Ten pages of color take about 71 seconds against 80. Neither saving is noticeable on a printer that sits in a hallway and wakes up a few times a week.

Epson’s announcement and product page name no feature the XP-5200 lacks. Both models print, copy and scan, print on both sides of the page automatically and connect over Wi-Fi, with Wi-Fi Direct for printing without a router. The XP-5200 has no document feeder, so a multi-page scan means lifting the lid for every sheet, and the XP-5250’s page lists no feeder either.

Identical ink costs

Both printers appear on the same cartridge listings in Epson’s ink pages. The black 222 cartridge costs $22.99 and the three-color 222 pack $32.95, and the XP-5200 page gives the yields: 210 ISO pages for black, 185 for each color. The 222XL black costs $39.99 and is rated for 550 pages.

That works out to about 11 cents per black page with the standard cartridge, or 7.3 cents with the XL. A full-color page uses all four cartridges and costs about 28.8 cents. The XP-5250’s page does not print yields, but it takes the same cartridges, so the cost per page should carry over unchanged.

One listing looks odd at first. The single 222XL black cartridge names the XP-5250 among its printers and leaves out the XP-5200, while the 222XL combo pack names both. The XP-5200’s yield line includes 222XL, so the high-capacity cartridge fits the older printer too.

What the October discount buys

While the offer runs, the $70 gap buys three standard black 222 cartridges at Epson’s list price, with change left over. That is about 630 ISO pages of black text, more than a year of printing at ten pages a week.

During the offer, the XP-5250 asks $70 more for about eight seconds saved on every 20 pages, on a printer whose ink costs the same either way.

XP-4250 and XP-4200, a smaller copy of the gap

The smaller XP-4250 lists at $99.99 and is rated at 10 ISO pages per minute in black and 5 in color, with a 100-sheet tray. Until October 10, 2026, Epson’s store lists its predecessor, the XP-4200, at $59.99, $40 off, though it shows as out of stock. Both use Claria 232 cartridges, which the XP-4200’s page rates at 150 pages for black and 140 for each color, against 210 and 185 for the 222 cartridges in the 5000 series. A household that prints every week replaces them more often.

Same cartridges, plus a document feeder

Epson’s October release puts a third printer on the 222 cartridges, the WorkForce WF-2990 at $179.99. It adds what the two Expression Home models lack: an automatic document feeder, fax and a 2.4-inch color touchscreen, with the same 150-sheet tray. That is $30 above the XP-5250’s list price and $100 above the discounted XP-5200.

For a home that scans a lease, a tax return or a stack of school forms a few times a year, the feeder is worth more than either printer’s extra speed, and the ink bill stays the same across all three. Epson calls the WF-2990 its fastest WorkForce home office printer, and its release rates it at 15.5 ISO pages per minute in black and 8.5 in color, the same as the XP-5250.

When the discount ends

Epson presents the XP-5200’s price as “Save $70 Today,” and the page’s offer text dates it from October 4 to October 10, 2026, while supplies last. On October 9, 2026 the page showed a Notify Me button where the cart should be. Once the older model sells out or goes back to $149.99, the XP-5250 costs the same, prints slightly faster and takes the same ink, and it becomes the obvious pick.

Two panel types under one Alienware name

The AW3226Q’s panel is listed as “RGB stripe tandem OLED.” Tandem means the panel stacks light-emitting layers on top of each other. RGB stripe means each pixel has red, green and blue subpixels side by side in a row, which is the layout ClearType, the text smoothing built into Windows, is designed for.

The AW3225QF is a QD-OLED, a Samsung Display panel whose subpixels sit in a triangle. ClearType still renders for a row, so letters on it can show faint colored fringes along their edges. The 140 ppi of both screens keeps those fringes small, and on the AW3226Q there are none to keep small.

The AW3225QF also curves at 1700R, while the AW3226Q is flat. A curve brings the edges of the picture toward one player centered in front of it. It sits less neatly beside a flat second monitor and bends the straight lines of a page layout or a drawing.

165 Hz against 240 Hz at 4K

The AW3226Q refreshes at 165 Hz, a new frame every 6.1 ms. The AW3225QF reaches 240 Hz, a frame every 4.2 ms. Dell rates both at 0.03 ms gray-to-gray in their fastest mode, so on either screen the refresh rate sets the limit on motion clarity, not the pixels.

The gap shows only when a graphics card delivers more than 165 frames per second at 4K. In recent games that takes a top-end card, or a competitive shooter at low settings. Below that point both monitors follow the game’s frame rate through variable refresh, and the AW3225QF’s higher ceiling sits unused.

The DisplayPort line on Dell’s page

Dell’s AW3226Q page disagrees with itself. The tech specs table lists one DisplayPort 1.4 input and two HDMI 2.1 inputs, and the box contents include a DisplayPort 1.4 cable. The ports diagram further down the same page labels that socket “Displayport 2.1 UHBR20.” Both the table and the cable in the box say DisplayPort 1.4, so that is the figure to plan around.

A 4K frame at full refresh with 10-bit color is about 41 Gbps of pixel data before blanking: 3840 times 2160 pixels, times 165 frames, times 30 bits. DisplayPort 1.4 carries 25.92 Gbps, so the picture travels with Display Stream Compression, which VESA describes as visually lossless. UHBR20 carries about 77 Gbps and would not need it.

Dell’s spec table for the AW3225QF lists the same single DisplayPort 1.4 input, with DSC, for its 240 Hz mode, so the two Alienwares are equal here. Use the cable in the box, and skip buying a DisplayPort 2.1 cable for either monitor.

Same HDR badge and the same burn-in cover

Dell lists both monitors as DisplayHDR True Black 400 with a 1,000-nit peak rating. Neither model was on VESA’s public list of certified DisplayHDR products when we checked it on October 18. Dell rates the AW3226Q at 250 nits in SDR.

The warranty text matches word for word on Dell’s two pages: three years of Advanced Exchange Service and Premium Panel Exchange, including coverage for OLED burn-in. Under Advanced Exchange, Dell ships a replacement after a phone or online diagnosis and charges a fee if the faulty unit is not returned.

Dell rates the AW3226Q at 33.3 W in use against 42.5 W for the AW3225QF. At eight hours a day, the 9.2 W gap comes to about 27 kWh a year.

Picking between the two

Take the AW3226Q if your games run below 165 frames per second at 4K and you also read and write on the screen. It is $50 cheaper, flat, and free of text fringing.

The AW3225QF earns its extra $50 only for a player whose card pushes past 165 fps in fast shooters, and only while Dell’s discount holds. At Dell’s estimated value of $999.99 it would cost $300 more than the AW3226Q for 75 Hz and a curve.

Two spec sheets, side by side

Epson publishes a spec sheet for each model, and most rows read the same.

The press release lists what Epson changed: a new white housing, an updated interface and “enhanced network-security support,” which it does not describe further. The extra Wi-Fi letters are the roaming standards mesh routers use to steer a device toward the strongest access point. Both printers keep the PrecisionCore Heat-Free head, which needs no warm-up, both use DURABrite Ultra pigment ink, and both carry a one-year limited warranty in the US and Canada.

If you want more speed, the WF-5930 at $399.99 is the model that moves. It prints color at 25 ISO ppm, more than double the WF-4930’s color rate.

What a page costs on 842 and 822 ink

Cost per page here is the cartridge price on Epson’s store divided by its ISO yield. A color page uses black plus cyan, magenta and yellow, so its cost is the four figures added together. Prices are from Epson’s store on October 3, and retailers often charge less.

On high-capacity cartridges, a color page comes to about 14.5¢ on 822XL and 14.6¢ on 842XL, which is a draw. Black text is where the new ink costs more. At 500 black pages a month, a year of 842XL black runs about $290 against about $262 for 822XL, a difference near $28.

Standard cartridges go the other way. The 842 set yields more pages, and a color page drops from about 25¢ to about 23.7¢. Standard cartridges still cost far more per page than XL on either printer, so an office printing hundreds of pages a month should buy XL whichever model it picks.

The four cartridges in the box are setup cartridges, and Epson says part of their ink is spent priming the printer, so the first replacements arrive sooner than the yields suggest. Epson’s footnote applies to every row above. ISO yields come from continuous printing, all four colors are used for printer maintenance as well as printing, and yields drop when a printer sits idle for long stretches.

Cartridges that do not cross over

Epson lists the 842 series for the WF-4930, WF-4920 and WF-3920, plus three related model numbers (WF-4935, WF-4933 and WF-3925). The WF-4830 is not on that list, and the 822 series does not fit the new models. An office replacing a WF-4830 with a WF-4930 cannot use the spare 822 cartridges in the cupboard, so run them down before the swap or give them to someone who still has an older printer.

Neither printer gives you a cheaper route through third-party ink. Both spec sheets say the printer is designed for genuine Epson cartridges only, and both add that other cartridges, “even if described as compatible, may not function properly or at all.” The cost table above is the cost you will pay.

Which one to buy

Epson’s $149.99 price on the WF-4830 runs from October 4 to October 10, 2026, while supplies last, and on October 9 the page showed the printer in stock. At that price the WF-4830 is the better buy for a text-heavy office. It saves $130 up front and costs less per black page on XL ink, and nothing in Epson’s spec sheets shows the WF-4930 printing, scanning or faxing faster. Once the offer ends, both printers list at $279.99. At the same price the older model still saves about $28 a year in black XL ink at 500 pages a month, and the WF-4930 brings the white housing, the newer Wi-Fi and the cartridges Epson has just launched. Pick the WF-4830 for the lower running cost, or the WF-4930 to keep for years.

Above about a thousand pages a month, both cartridge printers get expensive to feed. The bottle-fed EcoTank Pro ET-5850 prints color at the WF-5930’s 25 ISO ppm, and Epson rates its black bottle at 7,500 pages.

Epson has not said how long it will keep making 822 cartridges, which is the one thing to weigh before buying a WF-4830 to keep for years.

Three multipliers, three baselines

The launch release of September 2 and the product page carry five comparative claims between them, and the footnotes point each one at a different reference.

The suction multiplier works out exactly. The 875 is rated at 35,000 Pa, and the Plus 505 is sold with a 7,000 Pa rating. Neither figure says anything about the Max 775, because iRobot has never published a pascal rating for it. The 775’s own page claims “4X more power-lifting suction” against yet another model, the entry-level Roomba 105.

Two of the remaining claims compare the 875 with itself, with a feature switched off. They describe what SealForce and ThermaMist add, and nothing about how the robot ranks against a rival.

The roller speed does not add up

iRobot’s Max 775 page describes “200 RPM scrubbing”. The Max 875 spins its roller at 300 RPM. That is 1.5 times as fast, yet the footnoted claim against the 775 is 2.5 times.

A larger roller could close part of the gap, since its surface travels further on each turn. iRobot says the new PowerSpin Max roller is 44% larger than the standard one, without saying whether that means diameter, length or area. Even if every bit of it were diameter, 1.5 times 1.44 comes to about 2.2, still short of 2.5. iRobot has not explained what its “faster” measures, and the 3.75x scrubbing claim carries the same footnote.

Downforce you can compare

The pressure, at least, can be checked. iRobot rates the 875’s roller at 18 newtons of downward force, about 1.84 kg pressing on the floor. The cheaper Plus 678 Combo, announced the same day, is rated at 15 N, about 1.53 kg.

That puts the 875 above the eufy Omni E35 on paper. Eufy lists 1.6 kg of pressure and a 220 RPM roller at the same 35,000 Pa, and our explainer on robot vacuum mop pressure covers why a dried spill responds to pressure more than to suction. iRobot publishes no pressure figure for the Max 775, which is why its 3.75x claim cannot be tested from the outside.

What the extra $200 buys

SealForce is the new part for carpets. The robot lowers a skirt that seals against the carpet pile so that the 20 L/s of airflow has to pass through the fibers. The only published result for it is the 3x figure against the same robot with the skirt raised.

Mopping changes more. ThermaMist sprays heated mist at 140°F ahead of the roller to soften dried spills, the roller itself is washed with 140°F water while it works, and the dock washes it at 176°F and dries it with 131°F air. The Roomba Max 775 washes at 75°C, about 167°F, and already retracts a cover over its roller on carpet. On the 875 that job goes to DriLift, which raises the mop and lowers a shield once the robot detects carpet.

The rest is smaller. The 875 is 9.98 cm tall, climbs thresholds up to 3.5 cm and adds a hair-cutting main brush. Its dock holds up to 90 days of debris, and on iRobot’s store the price includes two years of protection, which iRobot values at $239.

Before you order

At list price the 875 is the better-documented robot, with a published suction rating, roller speed and downforce where the 775 has only multipliers against older Roombas. For $200 with the extended protection included, buy the 875 new, unless your home is almost all hard floor and you find the 775 discounted well below $999.99.

Nobody has published independent carpet or stain tests of the 875 yet. iRobot’s store offers a 60-day home trial with free returns on robots, so run it on your own worst rug and dried kitchen spill in the first weeks, while sending it back is still free.

Why the old board stops at 1,000 Hz

A USB Full speed link, the 12 Mbps mode in the first RAPID’s spec sheet, carries data in frames that start once every millisecond. A keyboard on it can report once per frame at most, hence the report rate in the spec sheet. Reporting 8,000 times a second needs the 125-microsecond slots of High speed USB, a different mode of the controller inside the keyboard. Firmware can change how a keyboard uses its connection. It cannot change which USB mode its controller supports.

The PRO X2 RAPID scans its switches and reports to the PC at 8 kHz, according to Logitech’s store page. The worst-case wait between a key press and the next report drops to an eighth of the old figure.

In a game running at 240 frames a second, each frame lasts about 4.2 ms. The polling change saves under 0.9 ms at best, less than a quarter of a frame, and only when a press happens to land just after a report. It is the least visible upgrade on the new board.

What the $40 buys that you will notice

The OLED screen does the most. It lets you change Rapid Trigger, actuation points, Key Priority and lighting on the keyboard itself, without opening G HUB. The first RAPID already stores three profiles on board, so your settings travel to a tournament or office PC either way. The difference is being able to change them once you get there.

Actuation is finer as well. Both boards set the actuation point per key between 0.1 mm and 4 mm, but the X2 moves in 0.05 mm steps where the first RAPID used 0.1 mm steps. That is 79 positions instead of 40. The switches are Logitech’s new factory-lubed KS-20 magnetic switches, rated at 30 g of force against the 35 g of the originals, so each key needs a slightly lighter push.

Smaller changes fill out the box. The Space, Enter and Shift keys get screw-in stabilizers, an XL silicone palm rest comes included, and there are spare keycaps for four keys plus a combined switch and keycap puller. The X2 measures 363 by 143 mm, a little wider and shallower than the 357 by 150 mm of the first RAPID, at the same 38 mm height.

The competitive settings are all still there. On the X2, Key Priority, which decides what happens when you hold opposing keys such as A and D together, can favor the last key pressed, the key pushed furthest, or one key you give absolute priority. Keycontrol macros, per-key lighting, the Game Mode button and the double-shot PBT keycaps return from the first board.

The older board costs more than it did at launch

Logitech announced the PRO X TKL RAPID in September 2024 and sold it from December at $169.99. Logitech’s store now lists it at $189.99, $20 above that launch price. The new model’s $229.99 is $60 above the first RAPID’s launch price and only $40 above what the older board costs today.

So the first RAPID makes sense below its list price, and retailers have sold it for about $150 in past discounts. At that level it keeps Rapid Trigger, per-key actuation, Key Priority and onboard profiles.

Upgrade or buy new

If you already own a PRO X TKL RAPID, keep it. The polling gain is below a quarter of a frame, and the finer steps divide a range you probably set once. Buyers starting from scratch at list price should take the X2, because the screen and the lighter switches are worth more than $40 to anyone who adjusts settings between games.

Logitech has not published everything yet:

• the X2’s weight
• whether its switches can be swapped without soldering, which the included switch puller suggests but the store page does not state
• whether 8 kHz polling needs a particular USB port or cable on the PC side

The click tuning is the same on both

Both mice use HITS, Logitech’s Haptic Inductive Trigger System. An inductive sensor reads how far each main button has traveled, and a small haptic actuator produces the click you feel. Like other haptic mouse clicks, it can feel odd at first to a hand used to a physical switch.

The settings did not grow. Logitech’s X2 page lists “ten actuation points and five rapid-trigger reset points” and six haptic intensity levels. Its announcement of the X3 lists 10 actuation levels, 5 rapid trigger reset options and 6 haptic feedback settings. The claim attached to both is the same too, that HITS cuts click latency “by up to 30 ms” against a conventional switch. That is Logitech’s figure, and no independent measurement of the X3 exists yet.

So the part of the SUPERSTRIKE that people argue about, whether a haptic click feels right under your finger, is no different on the new model. If you tried an X2 in a shop and disliked it, the X3 will not change your mind.

Where the PRO X3 SUPERSTRIKE differs

The changes sit inside the shell. The X3 is the first PRO mouse with Logitech’s new NxLOGI chipset, which the company credits with lower power draw, sturdier wireless and lower latency. Both columns of the table come from Logitech’s own US product pages.

The X2 drops to 1,000 Hz when you plug the cable in, and the X3 keeps 8,000 Hz either way. That matters to players who run a cable at tournaments or charge while they play.

The weight saving is two grams on the US pages. Logitech’s announcement adds that the X3 weighs 61 g in EMEA, which puts a European X3 at the same weight as a US X2. The company does not explain the difference.

The battery claim, checked

Logitech says the chipset “reduces power consumption by 50% compared to PRO X2 SUPERSTRIKE, adding 45 hours” per charge. Those two numbers do not fit together on their own. Halving power draw on the same battery would double the X2’s 90 hours to about 180. The rated 135 hours is 1.5 times the X2, which works out to roughly a third less power over a full charge.

There are honest explanations. The 50 percent may describe one component rather than the whole mouse, or the X3 may carry a smaller cell to hit its lower weight. Logitech publishes no battery capacity for either model, so the gap cannot be settled from its pages. For a buyer, the 135-hour rating is the figure to plan around. At four hours of play a day, that is a charge about once a month instead of every three weeks.

Sensor figures that disagree

Logitech’s store page for the X3 listed the HERO 2 sensor at 100 to 44,000 DPI and more than 888 IPS, the same figures as the X2. The company’s announcement blog says the X3 has an “upgraded HERO 2 sensor” that reaches 48,000 DPI and 930 IPS. One of the two pages is out of date, and Logitech had not corrected either by September 24. By October 9, 2026, the store page’s spec table read 100 to 48,000 DPI and more than 930 IPS, though one feature block there still said up to 44,000 DPI and over 940 IPS.

For play it changes little. You choose your own DPI in G HUB, and either ceiling sits far above the settings people aim with.

When it ships, and where

Logitech’s US store showed the X3 as in stock and ready to ship on September 24, in Magenta Eclipse and Midnight Black. Logitech’s press release says regional prices and launch timing will come through its regional channels, so there is no confirmed European or UK price yet.

Which one to buy

If you own a Logitech G PRO X2 SUPERSTRIKE, keep it. The clicks are configured identically, the sensor is at worst the same, and the main gain is fewer charges.

For a new buyer, the X3 is the one to pick at $20 more. Forty-five extra hours of rated battery and full-speed wired polling are worth that difference, unless the X2 drops in price once the X3 is widely stocked. Wait for independent latency and battery testing if you are paying full price outside the US, where the X3’s price is still unknown.

What Dyson announced on September 3

The Nurovi range has three models. Dyson says the name combines its Neural Intelligence technology with its latest Vision system.

• R1 Nurovi Dry is a vacuum-only robot with 21,000 Pa of suction and Dyson’s new Twin-capture system. That system uses brush bar bristles to sweep in larger debris, while the motor focuses on fine dust.
• R2 Nurovi Wash+Dry adds mopping with Reuleaux triangle pads, a constant-width shape designed to reach into corners. Its dock heats water to 167°F. In the US, it sells as a Costco exclusive for about $700.
• R3 Nurovi Spot+Scrub UV is the flagship wet and dry robot, and the model Dyson compares directly with the Spot+Scrub Ai.

Dyson’s launch materials do not give a US price for the R1.

R3 Nurovi vs Spot+Scrub Ai: the published numbers

The table uses Dyson’s published figures for both models, plus the suction and height listed on our Dyson Spot+Scrub Ai page. Prices are the ones Dyson’s US store showed on October 10, 2026.

Both machines use a self-cleaning wet roller rather than spinning pads. Both also rewash a stain in repeated passes until the robot judges it gone. So the R3 is a refinement of the same design, not a new cleaning method.

Where the R3 is better on paper

The suction jump is the clearest change. Dyson says the R3 has 65 percent more suction pressure than the Spot+Scrub Ai. A quick check agrees: 30,000 divided by 18,000 is about 1.67, or roughly 67 percent more. Suction pressure is measured at the motor, though, and it does not translate directly into dirt picked up from a rug. Brush design and airflow matter too. Still, a stronger motor gives the most benefit on carpet, and our product page already flags suction as the Spot+Scrub Ai’s weak point.

Stain detection is the headline feature. Dyson’s US listing says the Spot+Scrub Ai already lights up hidden stains and identifies wet and dry spills. The R3 adds ultraviolet light to that system, and Dyson says the combination identifies nearly 200 types of household substances and objects. Dyson’s Romanian store makes a similar “nearly 200” claim for the Spot+Scrub Ai, so the count itself may not be new. The UV light is. Some dried residues are easier to see under UV light than under ordinary white light. Our guide to UV stain detection in robot vacuums explains why, and where the technique runs out.

The water is also hotter. The R3 feeds its roller with 158°F water through a 12-point hydration system, compared with 140°F on the older model. Hotter water tends to help with greasy and sticky marks. But Dyson has not published results that isolate the effect of that change.

What the R3 launch materials left out

Several specifications that shape a real purchase were missing from the launch materials. Dyson’s US listing has since filled in the first three.

Height. At 110 mm, the Spot+Scrub Ai is tall for a robot vacuum. Most robot vacuums sit between 80 and 100 mm. As of October 2026, Dyson’s US listing gives the R3’s height as 4.3 in, the same height it lists for the Spot+Scrub Ai.

Detergent dosing. Our product page notes that the Spot+Scrub Ai dock doses detergent automatically. Dyson’s R3 announcement describes a dock that empties, cleans and recharges, but it does not mention automatic detergent. As of October 2026, Dyson’s US listing says the R3 dock auto-doses Dyson 02 Probiotic hard floor cleaning solution, which is sold separately.

Dock capacity. Dyson says the Spot+Scrub Ai stores dry debris for up to 100 days. For the R1 and R2 dock, Dyson quotes up to 90 days. As of October 2026, Dyson’s US listing gives the R3 dock the same 100 days.

Real-world results. Dyson footnotes its stain claims with the warning that results vary by stain type and severity. This comparison relies on Dyson’s own figures. How much better the R3 cleans than the older model is a question for independent testing.

Which one should you buy?

The right choice depends on your floors, your furniture and how much the price gap matters to you.

• Buy the Spot+Scrub Ai now if most of your home is hard flooring, your furniture clears the robot’s height, and the $849.99 price appeals. You get a roller mop, automatic detergent dosing and a known track record. Sale prices can change without notice, so check the current price first.
• Pick the R3 if you have a lot of carpet or deal with dried spills that are hard to see, such as in a kitchen or a home with pets. The suction and UV upgrades target exactly those jobs. Even so, it is worth reading independent tests before paying $1,199.99.
• Look at the R2 if you are a Costco member and want corner-reaching mop pads at a lower price, and you can live without stain detection.

Bottom line for shoppers

On paper, the Dyson R3 Nurovi is a clear step up from the Spot+Scrub Ai in suction, stain detection and water temperature. Yet it costs about $350 more than the older model’s current sale price. If the discounted Spot+Scrub Ai fits your home, it remains a sound buy. If carpet and invisible stains are your main problems, the R3 is the better match on paper.

Two popular options are laptop screen extenders and portable monitors. Both give you more display space, but they do it in different ways. A screen extender attaches to the laptop or sits directly behind it. A portable monitor stands separately and connects through USB-C, HDMI, or another supported video connection.

For most people, a portable monitor is the more practical choice. It gives you greater flexibility, a wider selection of screens, and fewer physical compatibility concerns. Still, a laptop screen extender can be very convenient if you often need two or three displays while traveling.

Here is how the two options compare and what you should check before buying either one.

What Is a Laptop Screen Extender?

A laptop screen extender adds one or two displays beside your laptop’s built-in screen. Some models clip directly onto the lid, while others use a frame that rests behind the computer.

A single-screen model gives you one extra display. A dual-screen extender adds a panel to each side, creating a three-screen workstation once you include the laptop display.

The biggest advantage is the integrated design. You do not need to find a separate position for each monitor. Open the frame, slide out the panels, connect the necessary cables, and you are almost ready to work.

Still, screen extenders are not as universal as they sometimes appear. The frame must fit your laptop’s screen size and lid thickness. It also needs enough space around the vents, ports, and hinges.

The added weight matters too. Some extenders are surprisingly heavy, especially models with two panels. A lightweight laptop may become rear-heavy or unstable once both screens are open.

What Is a Portable Monitor?

A portable monitor is a separate, slim display designed for travel. It normally includes a folding cover, kickstand, or detachable stand.

Many models use one USB-C cable for both video and power. Others connect through HDMI and need a second USB cable for power. Some include both connection types, which makes them easier to use with different devices.

Portable monitors come in a much wider range of configurations. You can find basic Full HD models for office work, as well as high-resolution, high-refresh-rate, touchscreen, OLED, and color-focused displays.

Because the monitor stands independently, you can place it on either side of your laptop. Some models also support portrait orientation. Better still, you can use the same screen with another laptop, a compatible phone, a tablet, a mini PC, or a game console.

Laptop Screen Extender vs Portable Monitor at a Glance

Which One Is Easier to Carry?

A portable monitor is usually easier to carry. You can place it in a protective sleeve next to your laptop and leave it at home when you do not need it.

A screen extender keeps the displays and mounting system together. This makes setup faster, but it also creates a thicker and often heavier package. Dual-screen versions include two panels, sliding rails, hinges, and a supporting frame.

If you work from hotels, client offices, or temporary desks every day, the integrated design may save you time. You open the system, connect it, and have three screens without arranging separate stands.

For occasional travel, though, a portable monitor feels less cumbersome. It also gives you more freedom when packing because you can store it separately from the laptop.

Whichever option you choose, use a proper protective case. Portable displays are thin and can flex under pressure. Screen extenders have moving parts that may bend or loosen if they are packed carelessly.

Screen Quality and Everyday Performance

Portable monitors usually offer more choice in display quality. You can find models with higher resolutions, faster refresh rates, better color coverage, OLED panels, and touch input. Most laptop screen extenders focus more on portability and screen count.

That does not mean every portable monitor looks better. Panel quality varies widely in both categories. Before buying, check the following specifications:

• Native resolution
• Refresh rate
• Panel type
• Brightness
• Contrast
• Color coverage
• Viewing angles
• Response time
• Screen coating
• Touch support

Full HD at 60 Hz is usually fine for emails, spreadsheets, documents, browser tabs, and video calls. Still, text may look less sharp on a larger Full HD screen, especially when you sit close to it.

A higher resolution can improve text clarity and give you more usable workspace. Yet it also needs more display bandwidth and may require scaling to keep menus and text readable.

If you edit photos or videos, pay close attention to color coverage and factory calibration. Portable displays rarely match the size and image controls of a full desktop monitor. For comparison, a professional model such as the ASUS ProArt Display 6K PA32QCV prioritizes resolution, workspace, and color-focused features rather than travel convenience.

Be cautious with basic HDR claims as well. A monitor may accept an HDR signal without producing convincing HDR images. Good HDR also requires suitable brightness, contrast, and color performance.

For gaming, a portable monitor is usually the better option. Gaming-focused models may offer higher refresh rates, faster response times, and adaptive-sync support. Most screen extenders are designed for office work and general multitasking.

Compatibility Matters More Than the Connector Shape

One of the most common mistakes is assuming that every USB-C port supports video. It does not.

USB-C only describes the physical connector. The port may support charging, data, video, or a combination of these functions. To send video directly to a monitor, the laptop normally needs DisplayPort Alt Mode, USB4, or a compatible Thunderbolt connection.

The cable must support video too. A charging-only USB-C cable may fit both devices but still show a blank screen.

HDMI can make things simpler because it provides a dedicated video connection. Still, many slim portable monitors use Mini HDMI rather than full-size HDMI. They may also need a separate USB connection for power.

Dual-screen extenders need even more attention. To show different content on both added screens, the laptop must provide two independent display streams. Depending on the extender, this may require:

• Two USB-C video connections
• One USB-C connection and one HDMI connection
• DisplayPort Multi-Stream Transport on compatible Windows hardware
• DisplayLink or another USB graphics system
• A dedicated dock or adapter

An HDMI splitter does not solve this problem. Most splitters copy the same image to two displays instead of creating two independent desktops.

Also, a hub with several video outputs cannot automatically increase the laptop’s display limit. The graphics hardware and operating system still decide how many native screens the computer can support.

Windows and Mac Display Support Can Differ

Windows handles extended displays well, but the laptop’s graphics hardware still sets the final limit. A Windows laptop may have enough ports for two screens while supporting only one additional display through a particular dock or connection.

Mac compatibility can be more confusing. The number of supported external displays depends on the exact Mac model, processor, resolution, refresh rate, and connection method.

Some MacBook models support only one native external display in certain configurations. Newer models may support more, but you should still check Apple’s specifications for your exact device.

Some dual-monitor adapters use DisplayPort Multi-Stream Transport. They can provide two extended desktops on compatible Windows computers but may mirror the outputs on macOS. A product description that simply says “Mac compatible” does not confirm that both screens will work independently.

If you own a Mac, look for a clear compatibility table that lists your processor generation and the number of supported extended displays.

Native Video vs DisplayLink

Native HDMI, DisplayPort, USB4, Thunderbolt, and USB-C video connections use the laptop’s regular display output. They normally offer the simplest setup and do not require extra graphics software.

DisplayLink takes a different route. Compatible hardware and software send display information through USB. This can add more screens when the laptop does not support enough native outputs.

For office tasks, DisplayLink can work very well. It is especially useful for email, documents, development tools, research, and spreadsheets.

There are still a few things to consider. DisplayLink needs compatible software or drivers. On macOS, the DisplayLink Manager application requires Screen Recording permission so it can access the pixels that appear on the external display.

A company-managed computer may block that permission or prevent you from installing the required software. For this reason, check with your IT department before buying a DisplayLink-based extender for a work laptop.

Software-driven displays may also use more system resources than native video connections. The effect depends on the laptop, screen resolution, displayed content, and DisplayLink hardware.

Native video remains the safer choice for competitive gaming, demanding video work, color-sensitive projects, and high-refresh-rate output. Some protected streaming services may also behave differently on software-based display connections.

Power Use and Battery Life

A portable display needs power, and that power often comes from the laptop. One small screen may have a manageable effect on battery life. Two bright panels can drain the battery much faster.

Power use changes with panel size, brightness, resolution, speakers, touch input, and display technology. Lowering the brightness helps, but a three-screen setup can still be difficult to run for long periods without a charger.

Some portable monitors support USB-C power pass-through. In this setup, you connect a charger to the monitor, then connect the monitor to the laptop. The monitor powers itself and sends the remaining power to the computer.

Do not assume the laptop will receive the charger’s full rated wattage. The monitor uses some of the available power, and the pass-through output may have its own limit.

Before relying on this feature, check:

• The monitor’s maximum power input
• Its maximum power output to the laptop
• The wattage required by your laptop
• Whether the necessary USB-C cable comes in the box

A low-power charger may keep the laptop running during light office work but fail to charge it during gaming, rendering, or other demanding tasks.

Comfort and Desk Space

A screen extender creates a neat row of displays. Still, all the screens normally remain at laptop height. During a long work session, that may leave you looking downward for hours.

A portable monitor gives you more freedom. You can place it farther away, raise it with a stand, or turn it vertically. This makes it easier to create a comfortable arrangement.

Of course, a separate display needs space for its stand. That can become awkward on a small café table, train tray, or narrow hotel desk. A screen extender has a compact footprint, although it still needs enough room for the side panels to open.

Stability matters as well. A dual-screen extender can make a lightweight laptop feel top-heavy. Soft surfaces, narrow tables, and flexible hinges may make the setup wobble.

This does not mean an extender will automatically damage your laptop. Still, handle the system carefully. Avoid forcing the lid backward or carrying the laptop by the screen while the extender remains attached.

If you use a 2-in-1 laptop, detachable computer, or very thin ultrabook, a freestanding portable monitor will usually be the easier choice.

Which Option Gives You Better Value?

A portable monitor often delivers better screen quality for the money. Most of the price goes toward the panel, electronics, connections, and stand.

With a laptop screen extender, you also pay for the folding frame, sliding mechanism, hinges, and compact design. A dual-screen model includes two panels, so prices can rise quickly.

Still, value is personal. If an extender saves you setup time every working day, the added cost may make sense. If you want one screen that works with several devices, a portable monitor offers more flexibility over time.

Remember to include any extra accessories in your budget:

• USB-C video cable
• HDMI or Mini HDMI cable
• USB-C charger
• DisplayLink adapter or dock
• Protective sleeve
• Adjustable stand

A cheaper monitor can become expensive if you need several adapters just to connect it.

Choose a Laptop Screen Extender If You:

• Regularly need three visible applications
• Work from temporary locations
• Want all screens aligned with the laptop
• Prefer a quick, integrated setup
• Have confirmed support for two external displays
• Mainly use office, coding, research, or communication tools
• Do not mind carrying extra weight

A screen extender works best for someone who genuinely uses three displays. Buying a dual-panel system just because it looks productive may leave you carrying more equipment than you need.

Choose a Portable Monitor If You:

• Need only one extra screen
• Want simpler compatibility
• Care about image quality or gaming features
• Prefer flexible screen positioning
• Use several laptops or other devices
• Own a 2-in-1 or thin ultrabook
• Want to travel with the lightest practical setup

For many remote workers, a laptop and one 15-inch or 16-inch portable monitor provide a comfortable middle ground. You gain useful desktop space without carrying a full three-screen frame.

What to Check Before Buying

Before choosing either display type, answer these questions:

1. Does the laptop’s USB-C port support video output?
2. How many external displays can the laptop run natively?
3. Does the display need a driver?
4. Does the required driver support your operating system?
5. Will your employer allow the software on a managed laptop?
6. Does the product need one cable or several?
7. Can the laptop power the screen without a charger?
8. Does the frame fit your laptop’s size and lid thickness?
9. Will the screen block any vents or ports?
10. Is the display bright enough for your usual workspace?

These checks may feel tedious, but they prevent most compatibility surprises.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can any laptop use a screen extender?

No. The frame must physically fit the laptop, and the computer must support the required video connections. Some extenders also need drivers that may not work with every operating system.

Can a portable monitor work with one cable?

Yes, if the laptop’s USB-C port supports video output and provides enough power. The monitor and cable must support the same features. Otherwise, you may need HDMI for video and USB for power.

Do two USB-C ports mean I can use two monitors?

Not necessarily. Some USB-C ports do not carry video, while others share the same display resources. Check the specifications for your exact laptop model.

Can I use a laptop screen extender for gaming?

You can, but most extenders focus on productivity. A portable gaming monitor will usually offer better refresh rates, response times, and connection options.

Will an extra monitor slow down my laptop?

Basic office work across a native second display should have little effect on a modern laptop. High resolutions, fast refresh rates, games, video editing, and software-based USB graphics can place more demand on the system.

Does a portable monitor reduce battery life?

Yes, if it draws power from the laptop. The actual effect depends on the display, brightness level, workload, and laptop battery capacity.

Laptop Screen Extender or Portable Monitor: Which Is Better?

In the laptop screen extender vs portable monitor comparison, a portable monitor is the better choice for most buyers. It is easier to position, works with more devices, and gives you a much wider selection of display features.

A laptop screen extender makes more sense for people who often need three screens and want the fastest possible mobile setup. Yet compatibility can be complicated, especially with dual-panel models and some Macs.

Start by checking your laptop’s native display limit. Then confirm the connection type, cable requirements, power needs, and driver support. Once those details are clear, the final choice becomes much easier.