Chuwi, a popular Chinese brand known for its affordable and accessible products, uses some of the best CPUs in its devices, but the vendor is currently at the center of a major scandal. According to a recent exposé by Notebookcheck, Chuwi has allegedly been deceiving customers by shipping an outdated Ryzen processor in its CoreBook X laptop, despite advertising a newer and far superior model. The report follows feedback from a plethora of CoreBook X users who have voiced their discontent on Reddit.

Chuwi neither admitted to nor denied the accusations. The company vaguely referenced different production batches and how leftover stock in circulation is outside the company's control. Logically, Chuwi's answer left much to be desired. Nonetheless, the brand says it is taking the matter seriously and has launched an internal investigation to find out what went wrong.

There were many unsettling details about this case. What really stood out was that Chuwi seemed to use firmware-level modification to fake the processor's identity. The chip was showing as the Ryzen 5 7430U inside the CoreBook X's firmware, in Windows, and even trusted diagnostic tools, such as CPU-Z and HWiNFO64. However, the silicon never lies. The team at Notebookcheck tore the laptop down and discovered a Ryzen chip labeled with the 100-000000375 OPN code, which corresponds to the older Ryzen 5 5500U.

The Ryzen 5 7430U (codenamed Barcelo-R) is a six-core, 12-thread processor with Zen 3 execution cores. While the Ryzen 5 5500U (codenamed Lucienne) shares the same core configuration, the chip leverages the previous Zen 2 execution cores. More importantly, the Ryzen 5 7430U also has twice the L3 cache and a higher clock speed.

One reason the deception was so effective is that the Ryzen 5 7430U and Ryzen 5 5500U share similar specifications, so close that most people, even tech-savvy users, may be easily fooled. The smaller L3 cache and lower clock speeds in the Notebookcheck screenshots showed that the Ryzen 5 7430U wasn't what it claimed to be. However, these details are so subtle that you can easily overlook them unless you're specifically searching for inconsistencies.

On average, the Ryzen 5 5500U is approximately 7% slower than the Ryzen 5 7430U. In the CoreBook X's case, the performance gap is 10% because the laptop's single-channel memory is holding it back. You could argue that 10% isn't a big deal, and the average consumer would unlikely notice the difference in normal usage. However, a customer should always receive what they paid for, and manufacturers who use the old switcheroo should be called out for doing so.

If Chuwi wanted to do damage control, there are better ways than just blaming different production batches and leftover stock. The alleged fraud is seemingly too complex for it to be an oversight on Chuwi's part: You don't spoof processor strings at the firmware level by accident. Trying to cover up the discrepancies makes things even worse.

Apple's desktop and notebook processors traditionally lead the pack in single-thread workloads, as industry-leading single-thread performance has been the company's focus for a long time. However, Apple's M5 Max processors not only outperform rivals by a huge margin in single-thread workloads, but beat all of them — including the 96-core AMD Ryzen Threadripper Pro 9995WX — in multi-thread workloads in the Geekbench 6 benchmark. However, when it comes to GPU compute performance, not everything is that rosy for the M5 Max.

Single-thread and multi-thread champion

According to recent Geekbench 6 results, Apple's 18-core M5 Max not only beats its direct predecessor, the 16-core M4 Max, in single-thread (4,353 points) and multi-thread workloads (29,644 points), but also the 32-core M3 Ultra that is supposed to be Apple's unbeatable multi-thread machine.

Furthermore, Apple's new flagship CPU beats AMD's 96-core Ryzen Threadripper Pro 9995WX in single-thread (which is not surprising) and multi-thread workloads in Geekbench 6. It should be noted that while most Threadripper Pro 9995WX CPUs score around 26,000 GB6 points in multi-thread workloads, there is one example when this processor hits 30,170 points, which is a bit ahead of M5 Max's 29,644 points.

There is a major catch here as the Geekbench 6 multi-thread benchmark is a brief, bursty test intended to mimic common consumer tasks such as archive compression, PDF processing, and image editing. Its short runtime and bursty nature prevent it from fully stressing ultra-high-core-count processors like the Ryzen Threadripper Pro 9995WX.

Furthermore, many of the suite’s multi-threaded subtests scale efficiently only to roughly 8 – 32 threads, which leaves much of such CPUs' parallel capacity idle, but which creates an almost perfect environment for Apple's CPUs that feature a relatively modest number of cores, but which evolve noticeably in terms of per-core performance from one generation to another. Also, keep in mind that Geekbench 6 is a synthetic benchmark that reflects the potential of the tested hardware but may not reflect its performance in real-world applications.

Apple's M5 Max processor in its maximum configuration packs six 'super' performance (SP) cores featuring increased front-end bandwidth (i.e., wider decoder?), enhanced branch prediction, and a new cache hierarchy to deliver unbeatable single-thread performance as well as 12 new performance (P) cores designed to deliver power-efficient multithreaded performance in professional applications, up from 16 cores (12P + 4E cores) offered by the M4 Max. We do not know details about microarchitectures of Apple's 'super' performance and performance cores, though the 12% single-thread performance difference between M5 Max's SP and M4 Max's P cores is evident.

As for the memory subsystem, the M5 Max features up to 128 GB of LPDDR5X-9600 memory connected to the host via a 512-bit interface, offering 614 GB/s of bandwidth, up 12% from M4 Max (546 GB/s). For now, no workstation processor can match the memory bandwidth of M5 Max or M4 Max. Efficient cache and memory subsystems are crucial for single-thread performance, so this part of the M5 Max also played a significant role in its performance boost compared to the predecessor.

Not quite a GeForce RTX 5090

In addition to its revamped CPU subsystem, Apple's M5 Max also boasts a new GPU that is based on a PowerVR-derived microarchitecture developed by Apple. As it turns out, a big integrated GPU and plenty of memory bandwidth can deliver serious GPU compute oomph: the M5 Max scores 232,718 points on the GeekBench 6 GPU compute benchmark when using the Metal API. Apple's previous-generation M4 Max scores up to 204,453 points in the same tests. Evidently, the new GPU is better than the predecessor, but not that significantly.

When compared to non-Apple GPUs, the one inside the M5 Max easily beats the iGPU inside the Ryzen AI Max+ 395, which scores 133,447 points when unconstrained by thermals. When it comes to discrete graphics cards, Apple's flagship iGPU is ahead of Nvidia's GeForce RTX 5070 (207,061 points, Vulkan), but trails the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (253,890 points, Vulkan) and has no chance against the GeForce RTX 5090. Still, building an integrated GPU that delivers compute performance comparable to one of the best graphics cards is a breakthrough.

Japan Display Inc. (JDI) has proposed a new state-of-the-art display factory to be set up in the U.S., in collaboration with the Japanese and American governments. This factory would be worth up to $13 billion, according to the initial reporting by Nikkei Asia. Reuters has now confirmed that Washington and Tokyo are in active talks to explore this idea. Just this confirmation made JDI's stock surge 80% on Monday.

Neither state, nor JDI itself, has said anything about this publicly, but it's being heavily inferred from industry sources. Both Japan and America lack a modern, large-scale display factory whereas China has become a global superpower in the segment as of late. Market leaders Samsung and LG operate out of South Korea — the other dominant display region — but the China holds the likes of BOE, TCL CSOT, and HKC.

This new factory, therefore, would be aimed at not only strengthening Japan-U.S. ties, but will also rival the high-volume, low-cost production China has mastered. It could potentially reduce foreign reliance, which is a national security concern as well, while bolstering domestic manufacturing capabilities.

The plant is being considered as part of a broader $550 billion investment framework that Tokyo has planned for the United States. While the U.S. was never a hotspot for display production, Japan was once seen as the industry giant thanks to pioneers such as Sharp, Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba and Hitachi. In fact, JDI was created in 2012 by merging the LCD units of Sony, Toshiba, and Hitachi with government backing.

Since then, JDI has struggled, and even reported net losses for ten consecutive years. The inflection point came when Apple switched to OLED screens on the iPhone, because JDI was the main supplier for its LCDs before. Moreover, JDI is not state-owned, but it is indirectly backed by the Japanese government — similar to JOLED, another financially-troubled display firm that went bankrupt in 2023.

Despite Japan's withering display industry, JDI has avoided bankruptcy itself due to repeated support from state-backed funds. Building a new display factory is extremely expensive, so partnering with Washington makes sense from both a financial and geopolitical standpoint. For now, JDI has focused on the automotive sector with innovations in car displays, so only time will tell what this proposed factory produces.

Hardware and software laden with ads have, unfortunately, become part and parcel of modern life, but there are occasions when the hunt for revenue goes too far. One of those cases comes from Hisense, known across Western markets as a budget electronics brand. The firm's TV sets have repeatedly come under fire for forcing non-skippable ads when switching inputs, turning the TV on, navigating to the home screen, and even when switching channels — all changes that took effect unilaterally after purchase, reportedly even for users who had all ad-related options disabled.

The affected models are mostly but not exclusively lower-end units with Hisense's VIDAA operating system, recently rebranded as Home OS. The vast majority of reports come from Hisense TV owners, but we saw at least one such complaint about a Toshiba set. The operating system is also licensed by Schneider, Akai, and Loewe, among multiple other brands.

This issue came to light recently due to press coverage, but it dates back at least a year, and possibly three, depending on how you count. The earliest notable report dates to 2022, when a user spotted an ad option in their input selection menu. These complaints have gotten more frequent with time, with some people noticing they were forced to watch ads when they turned on their sets. Reports from the last two weeks display the more aggressive tactic of forcing ads when changing TV inputs. Spanish outlets El Español and La Razón covered reports that users were being delivered ads when simply changing channels, too

The situation gets sketchier when reading through user discussions of how to avoid this madness-making behavior. Most suggestions for avoiding the ads are predictable, such as changing the TV's DNS servers or disconnecting it from the internet entirely. Still, a common solution is to contact Hisense support with the TV's unique ID at the seemingly Australian address [email]service.tv.au@hisense.com[/email].

Users who contacted support via email reported that the ads were disabled on their sets, which raises the question of whether Hisense is simply managing delivery on the ad server side or has deeper access to the TVs in question. Additionally, while a sufficiently motivated or technically minded user will forge all the way through this route, it's reasonable to expect that the public at large would grudgingly accept the ads if the sets are outside their store's return window.

Then there's the matter of the location of these incidents. Most reports seem to come from British and Spanish users, but we also found a German-language post and screenshots of a TV set in German. La Razón dug into this matter and published a statement from Hisense that arguably raises more questions than it answers.

Hisense says the ads did not stop owners from "using their devices normally" (a fact reiterated three times) and that the ads were part of "spot tests within the Spanish market," meant to "evaluate certain advertising formats linked to free content within the platform itself."

Verdict - M5 Pro is a perfect fit for the MacBook Pro 16

The new Apple M5 Pro SoC is a perfect fit for the MacBook Pro 16 because it can utilize the full performance of the chip without throttling. We see noticeable performance advantages over the previous M4 Pro chip (~20 % CPU, 30-50 % GPU) and Apple also includes Wi-Fi 7 as well as much faster PCIe 5.0 SSDs. The battery runtime is a bit shorter compared to our previous M4 Pro review unit, but the additional RAM most likely increases the power consumption as well.

very good (92%) MacBook Pro 16 2026 M5 Pro Apple M5 Pro 18-CoreApple M5 Pro 20-Core GPU Multimedia - 03/09/2026 - v8
Test device courtesy of Apple Deutschland

Other aspects remain unchanged, which means you get Thunderbolt 5 ports, but still no SD Express support for the card reader. The Mini-LED panel is still among the best, and the optional matte surface is big advantage over most rivals; only Lenovo offers a matte Tandem-OLED panel in the ThinkPad T1g. The MacBook also stays very quiet in most scenarios.

Prices are still high, especially when you add upgrades. Windows laptops with the RTX 5070 offer more GPU performance, even though the MacBook is obviously not limited to 8 GB VRAM, which is a big advantage for creative workflows. The included 140W PSU is also insufficient, even though the issue is not nearly as bad as on the M5 Max model, which we will see in the upcoming review of the MacBook Pro 14 M5 Max.

All in all, the MacBook Pro 16 got even better with the new M5 Pro chip and additions like Wi-Fi 7 as well as PCIe 5.0.

Pros
+ high-quality and stable case
+ brilliant display with accurate colors/optionally with a matte panel
+ extremely high HDR/SDR brightness
+ always extremely quiet during everyday use and gaming
+ very high system performance
+ M5 Pro with considerably better performance
+ very long runtimes
+ excellent speakers
+ up to 128 GB RAM and 8 TB SSD storage (M5 Max)
+ 12-MP webcam with advanced functions
+ Wi-Fi 7, Thunderbolt 5 and PCIe 5.0 SSDs
Cons
- constant PWM flickering & slow response times
- only 12-month warranty
- practically no maintenance options
- no SD-Express support
- webcam without Face-ID, low resolution when taking photos/videos

Price and Availability

You can purchase the new MacBook Pro 16 M5 Pro starting at $2699 from Amazon.