Sony WH-1000XM64.5 ExcellentBottom LineSony's high-end WH-1000XM6 headphones feature foldable earcups, new driver tuning, and noise cancellation that rivals the best from Bose.US Street Price$449.99Learn MoreSony WH-1000XM6 ReviewVSBose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones4.5 ExcellentBottom LineThe Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones pump out robust sound and offer the best noise cancellation of any over-ear models we've tested.Street Price1699.0Learn MoreBose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones Review Table of ContentsPriceDesignComfortCases and CablesBluetooth and ConnectivityBattery LifeMobile AppNoise CancellationTransparency ModeSound QualityMic Quality PriceIf you want the best over-ear noise-cancelling headphones available, be prepared to pay up. None of these models comes cheaply. It's not entirely surprising that Apple has the priciest pair of the bunch at $549—the AirPods Max are also the oldest. The brand-new Sony WH-1000XM6 headphones cost a cool $449. Bose now has the "cheapest" pair of the bunch with its two-year-old QuietComfort Ultra ringing in at $429.99. Winner: Bose QuietComfort UltraDesignAll three headphones have their own look and defining features. Sony's resembles the previous model, with a matte plastic look and a lightweight build. They come in three colors (Black, Midnight Blue, or Silver), and the earcups can fold flat for portability. The Bose QuietComfort Ultra headphones, meanwhile, are mostly plastic, even more compact when folded, and come in four colors (Black, Lunar Blue, Plum, or White Smoke).Left to right: AirPods Max, Sony WH-1000XM6, Bose QuietComfort Ultra(Credit: Christian de Looper)Aesthetically, the AirPods Max stand out thanks to their metal build and clean lines. They have removable earcups and come in the most color options, including Blue, Midnight, Orange, Purple, and Starlight. Their use of metal makes them heavier, but ensures they look the most luxurious. They also have a fantastic rotating digital crown for adjusting the volume and controlling other features.Winner: AirPods MaxComfortBose QuietComfort Ultra(Credit: Christian de Looper)The metal build of the AirPods Max makes them the heaviest of the three (13.6 ounces), but doesn't impact their comfort as much as you might expect. They're good at distributing weight across the top of your head, and their plush earcups don't clamp down too tightly. Nonetheless, both the Sony WH-1000XM6 and Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones (8.8 ounces each) are more comfortable. Of the three, the lower clamp force and thicker padding of the Bose headphones make them the most comfortable for extended listening.Winner: Bose QuietComfort UltraCases and CablesWhile the AirPods Max may look the most high-end, the same can't be said of their meme-worthy rubber case, which is more of a barely there cover-up than a case. They only come with a USB-C cable, though you can use it for lossless USB audio. To connect them to a 3.5mm source, you’ll need to buy Apple’s USB-C to 3.5mm adapter separately.Left to right: AirPods Max, Sony WH-1000XM6, Bose QuietComfort Ultra(Credit: Christian de Looper)Both the Bose QuietComfort Ultra and Sony WH-1000XM6 come with a clamshell hard case and the cables you need for both charging and wired listening. They each include a USB-A-to-USB-C charging cable, while the Bose headphones have a 2.5mm-to-3.5mm cable for their smaller input port, and the Sony headphones have a standard 3.5mm cable. Sony's carrying case has a magnetic clasp instead of a zipper, but I prefer the smaller leather case that comes with the Bose QuietComfort Ultra.Winner: Bose QuietComfort UltraBluetooth and ConnectivityAll three headphones support the standard SBC Bluetooth codec, and they all have AAC on top of that. That’s where Bluetooth codecs end on the AirPods Max, though. The Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones add support for AptX Adaptive, which works with compatible Snapdragon-powered phones. As has been the case with Sony's high-end headphones for years, the WH-1000XM6 also support LDAC, which works with most modern Android phones, and LC3, which is becoming more common on Android devices.AirPods Max(Credit: Christian de Looper)Both the Bose and Sony headphones have Bluetooth multipoint for connecting to two devices simultaneously. If connecting to multiple Apple devices is your goal, the AirPods Max enjoy a significant ecosystem benefit—they can switch seamlessly between any Apple device (Apple TV, iPad, iPhone, Mac) signed into the same iCloud account. Sony gets the win here for codec support (LDAC works with more phones than AptX Adaptive and LC3 is a nice addition), while Apple gets the win for versatile ecosystem connectivity (as long as you use Apple devices).Winner: Tie (AirPods Max and Sony WH-1000XM6)Battery LifeNone of these headphones stand out when it comes to battery life. The AirPods Max have a rated battery life of 20 hours with noise cancellation on, but you might find that you get less actual listening time if you don't put them in their case every time you take them off (they enter standby mode rather than turn off completely). The Bose QuietComfort Ultra headphones step that up to 24 hours, while the Sony offers 30 hours of listening and the fastest charging. While the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones can get three hours of listening from 15 minutes of charging, the Sony WH-1000XM6 headphones can get three hours of listening from just three minutes of charging. Winner: Sony WH-1000XM6Mobile AppThe mobile experience associated with these three headphones is starkly different. On the surface, the AirPods Max appear to be the most bare-bones. Rather than rely on a separate app, their settings are integrated deeply in your iPhone's operating system. To access them, you have to wade through the Bluetooth settings menu where you can tweak things like noise modes and automatic head detection, but there's no EQ. You can also tweak some settings through Control Center, including spatial audio settings. Recommended by Our EditorsSony WH-1000XM6(Credit: Christian de Looper)The Bose app is minimalist and easy to navigate. The main screen grants you access to noise modes, Bluetooth settings, button shortcuts, and a rudimentary EQ. It lets you tweak what it labels as bass, mid, and treble, but doesn't specify which frequencies each slider affects.Sony's Sound Connect app offers far more control than Bose. You can set up your noise modes, button shortcuts, and location-based noise settings. You also have access to a comprehensive 10-band EQ, with bands ranging from 31Hz to 16kHz. Apple beats the others on depth, but Sony keeps everything in one spot and has the best EQ.Winner: Tie (AirPods Max and Sony WH-1000XM6)Noise CancellationUntil the Sony WH-1000XM6 headphones arrived, Bose was the clear winner when it came to noise cancellation. The QuietComfort Headphones silence most environmental sounds. The AirPods Max offer respectable ANC, but it can't compete with Bose or Sony offerings, both of which excel at dampening ambient noise, whether you're on a plane or in a busy coffee shop.Bose QuietComfort Ultra(Credit: Christian de Looper)Sony has a slight edge when it comes to complicated settings like a city bus or a busy cafe, spaces that have uneven bursts of sound that Bose isn't quick enough to cut. Bose still delivers excellent ANC, but it's no longer head and shoulders above the competition, and Sony takes the win in this category.Winner: Sony WH-1000XM6Transparency ModeAirPods Max(Credit: Christian de Looper)While the AirPods Max trail behind the other two in ANC, they're a clear winner when it comes to transparency mode, which lets you hear your surroundings. They deliver natural and consistent audio and don't introduce the hiss that Bose and Sony do. Winner: AirPods MaxSound QualityAll three of these headphones offer outstanding sound quality. The 40mm drivers in the AirPods Max deliver deep bass and the best high-end response of the three, but the lack of a user-adjustable EQ is frustrating.The Bose headphones also offer excellent bass response with clear highs, but those highs aren't quite as crisp as they are on the AirPods Max. The audio also doesn't really feel as spacious as the AirPods Max, which have a wider soundstage and can sometimes come across as overly processed. Lastly, the Sony WH-1000XM6 headphones have a slightly sculpted sound, removing some of the mids that Bose keeps. If you want to change the sound signature, Sony offers the best EQ to do so.Sony WH-1000XM6(Credit: Christian de Looper)If spatial audio is important to you, then the AirPods Max are the best of the bunch, as long as you use them with Apple devices. The AirPods Max can actually process surround sound input, instead of artificially adding the effect to stereo sources (assuming the content offers it, of course).So while the AirPods Max have the best audio out of the box, the Sony offers much deeper customization, supports higher-quality sources, and works with more devices, making it a tie.Winner: Tie (AirPods Max and Sony WH-1000XM6)Mic QualityThe microphones across all three headphones are perfectly sufficient for voice calls. Bose offers a little more body than Apple or Sony, but not as much clarity and detail. The AirPods Max microphone is crisp and detailed, but of the three, Sony's headphones deliver the best experience thanks to their half-dozen microphones and improved beamforming technology.Winner: Sony WH-1000XM6

It’s difficult to pin the destruction of a tsunami to a tsunami — that is, unless someone was around to witness the devastation. But a new study shows that there are some surprising geological sources that scientists can consult as an archive of ancient tsunami occurrences, many millions of years after they occur. Turning to Hokkaido Island in Japan, the Scientific Reports study suggests that deposits of amber in deep-sea sediments on the island may reveal tsunamis that occurred there between 116 and 114 million years ago. At that time, the study authors say, one or more tsunamis may have swept this fossilized tree resin — then still soft — from the island’s forests to the ocean floor, where it settled and solidified, preserving its particular method of deposition within its structure.“We describe extraordinarily rich amber concentrations in Early Cretaceous deep-sea deposits,” the study authors write in their study. “The most plausible cause for the presence of this enigmatic amber in a deep-sea setting is large-scale tsunamis.” The Ancient Traces of TsunamisAmber concentration in Hokkaido deep-sea sediments. (Image Courtesy of Aya Kubota, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) from Kubota, A., Takeda, Y., Yi, K. et al. Amber in the Cretaceous Deep Sea Deposits Reveals Large-Scale Tsunamis. Sci Rep 15, 14298 (2025). This work is openly licensed via CC BY 4.0.)Despite their immediate devastation, tsunamis don’t leave a distinctive or long-lasting trace on the landscape. “Large-scale tsunamis destroy coastal areas and rapidly transport huge amounts of plants and other debris over long distances,” the study authors write. “However, due to their poor preservation potential and the lack of unequivocal identifying features, tsunami deposits are rarely recognized in the geological record.”One part of the problem is that the traces of ancient tsunamis are deposited along the coast, a dynamic landscape that’s constantly changing due to the crashing of continuous waves. Another is that distinguishing between tsunami deposits and storm deposits is incredibly difficult, with tsunamis leaving some of the same signs as hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons.The new study suggests, however, that records of ancient tsunamis may be found in the form of amber and other terrestrial material deposited in deep-sea sediments. Indeed, studying sediments that were once buried beneath the open ocean on Hokkaido, the study authors found that soft amber was moved, in water, so rapidly from land to sea between 116 and 114 million years ago, that it was probably transported by a tsunami. Read More: 5 Worst Tsunamis in HistoryAmber ArchivesTo arrive at their results, the study authors focused on amber-filled silica deposits from Hokkaido’s Shimonakagawa Quarry, which were deposited when the area was still covered with water. Fluorescence imaging found that “flame structures,” or distinctive flame-shaped deformations, were preserved within the deposits. Forming in amber that is still soft at the time of its deposition, these distortions suggest that the fossilized resin on Hokkaido traveled from land to open ocean in water, without popping up for air, only to sink to the ocean floor and solidify. “These resin deformations occurred underwater, implying their direct transport,” the study authors write. “Such rapid and direct transport of terrestrial materials from land to ocean could be driven by a tsunami.”According to the study authors, there are signs that landslides (and, thus, earthquakes) may have occurred on Hokkaido at around the same time in the Early Cretaceous, adding additional support to the tsunami theory. There are also displaced masses of mud, tree trunks, and other plant material that appear to have been deposited rapidly within the sediment between 116 and 114 million years ago — a deposition that is also more indicative of a tsunami than a storm. Similar deposits of amber in deep-sea sediments may reveal other tsunamis at other sites, the study authors say. And these archives aren’t limited to amber alone, as other material that starts on land and travels to open ocean may also signal the occurrence of ancient tsunamis, many millions and millions of years ago. “Large-scale tsunamis may not be recorded in coastal areas due to the destruction of such settings,” the study authors write, but deep-sea sediments and the terrestrial deposits within can still “serve as significant archives for large-scale destructive events.”Read More: Here’s How Earthquakes Cause TsunamisArticle SourcesOur writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:Scientific Reports. Amber in the Cretaceous Deep Sea Deposits Reveals Large-Scale TsunamisSam Walters is a journalist covering archaeology, paleontology, ecology, and evolution for Discover, along with an assortment of other topics. Before joining the Discover team as an assistant editor in 2022, Sam studied journalism at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois.

Who do you think is the best publisher? (Capcom) The Friday letters page tries to work out what’s been going on with Nintendo Switch 2 pre-orders this week, as one reader gives up on the Xbox format. To join in with the discussions yourself email gamecentral@metro.co.uk East vs. West I agree with the reader yesterday, who said that Capcom, and other similar companies, improve their reputation simply by putting out good games and not being anti-consumer, whether you’re interested in a particular title or not. I also agree that failure of Western publishers to earn that sort of popularity is why no one is loyal to them.So that got me thinking: who is the best third party publisher at the moment, i.e. not Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft? I’d say it probably is Capcom, but there’s a lot of Japanese publishers that are doing good work at the moment, where I’m automatically interested in almost anything they do. But what about Western companies? It’s not EA or Activision or Ubisoft, I’m sure most people would agree. Or Warner Bros. or Take-Two, who have barely released anything in years. Bethesda’s track record is very bumpy and the who else even is there anymore? No wonder people think first party games are so important.Dempsy Astronomically big It’s crazy to think that GTA 6 is big enough that even releasing a game next autumn is a risk. It’s like a black hole, creating a gravity well so deep that nothing can escape. I’d like to see Resident Evil 9 next year, but I understand Capcom not wanting to risk that. I think instead we’ll get a minor release, like the Resident Evil Zero remake, to keep things ticking along and that’s it.I think the situation is going to be mirrored to a degree by the Switch 2, which is going to have a big launch this summer but then still be the hottest thing this Christmas. Nintendo must be over the moon about the GTA 6 delay, but I have to agree with recent letters that their post-launch line-up is not very exciting, and I’m surprised at that, given how long they’ve had to get ready.Danson Final Edition Is there a chance in the future, providing the manufacturers don’t stop adding discs, the companies will sell game of the year editions on disc? By this I mean a fully patched and finalised game can be bought from Xbox or PlayStation stores and sent to your house for you to keep and display. Companies like Limited Run and PlayAsia do something like this and it seems popular.It would be a middle ground of giving more options and providing sales maybe a year after release. Every time I look at Limited Run they’ve sold out.Bobwallett GC: It sort of happens sometimes, with things like The Last Of Us compilation, but you’re right in suggesting that places like Limited Run are the only ones likely to do it on a regular basis. But even then we don’t think they guarantee that downloads are not necessary. Email your comments to: gamecentral@metro.co.uk Bad timing I downloaded Nine Sols on Game Pass, as I like the games it was said to be a mix of: Hollow Knight and Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice. The combat is centred around parrying.It’s been rough though. I’m just not that great at parrying in games and that’s why l found Sekiro the most difficult FromSoftware game to get to grips with. The Soulsborne games difficulty are less about reaction skills and about harsh punishment on death and a lack of handholding. Although I’m rubbish, I think I’ll persist. Everything about the game is very intriguing and high quality so far, I’m surprised it seems to have been largely overlooked. Also, like any parry-based combat, when you nail it it’s very satisfying.Simundo GC: It’s probably the game we most regret not reviewing in the last few years, as we’re big fans of Red Candle Games. We still haven’t played it, as both its release dates were at very inconvenient times. Correct opinion I’ve been going through the Mass Effect trilogy and have just finished 2. That last mission is one of the best last levels in any game, in my opinion. Pure action and I just didn’t know who was going to die and thankfully the teammates I wasn’t fond off all got killed and I kept the ones I like alive (Garrus, Miranda, and Mordin). Great end to a great game.I know it was a disappointment at the time, but I’m looking forward to going through 3 again and giving it another go. I remember at the time the ending didn’t bother me too much, but I’ll see how I feel about it this time!Simon PS: I managed to get the entire regular crew of the Normandy killed, so that wasn’t quite so good! A new crew awaits in 3…Calling it a day I have been meaning to write with a list of things that annoyed me with Xbox over the years, none of them were deal breakers until the Xbox One.The massive original controller for the original Xbox. Why? The enormous external power supply things. Something else to gather dust. The introduction of avatars during the Xbox 360 era. We know why, but why? My Xbox One turning itself on and staying on. This was the nail in the coffin for Xbox and me. Forza Motorsport (not Horizon), when racing in first person view, especially when racing against American cars, the car in front used to take up too much of the screen. It was like racing in the slipstream of a garage door, not a racing car. It lacked graphical and physical finesse. This last one was when I gave up on Forza Horizon 4. I used to drive to and from work every day, some of the journeys were quite arduous and stressful. Later in the evening when I got a chance to play Forza Horizon 4 I was forced to drive greater distances between races or to another garage find. I thought to myself, ‘Hang on, this isn’t fun. This is just adding to my daily commute.’ I think this was another case of games becoming larger than necessary. So that was that, I gave up on Forza Horizon and I gave up on Xbox. The fact is, I enjoyed the original Xbox, Project Gotham Racing, Jet Set Radio, and Splinter Cell. I used the Xbox 360 mostly for racing games, including Ridge Racer and Burnout, which I loved. But by the Xbox One the choice had worsened. I have bought and kept all the mainstream consoles and handhelds (and some of the less mainstream) since the SNES era and I still love gaming. But Xbox will probably fail to get my attention again. I have an extensive games backlog and Nintendo and PlayStation will probably continue to provide me with enough enjoyment for the rest of my days.Ed PS: it’s taken me a very long time to mention this, but the Xbox 360 controller got a lot of praise when it first came out, which was deserved, but did anyone else think that ergonomically it was very similar to the GameCube Wavebird? Button configuration very different obviously.Try it yourself Just thought I’d mention there is a good free demo on Xbox (maybe PlayStation 5 too?) for Star Wars Outlaws. I was very impressed.I will be getting the full game at some point.Johnny Alpha SD Currently playing: Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Halo infinite, and Doom EternalGC: As we’ve said before, it’s really not a bad game. It’s not a great game either, certainly not compared to something like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, but we do feel its reputation is unfairly earned. Rolling the dice I’ve been watching the pre-orders of the Switch 2 with interest. I ordered mine when they opened last month, however having bought every Nintendo console on day one since the N64 I have been burnt a few times with a lack of software support, early price cuts, and a shortened lifespan (Wii U and 3DS, I’m looking at you… although the 3DS turned out fine in the end).With these previous experiences I always find it a nervy time when Nintendo launch their latest; have I invested in a dud (Wii U) or will it be a resounding success and a great purchase (Switch 1 and Wii)? Only time will tell, however to me the Switch was the perfect console, and the Switch 2 seems to have refined this further. How can it be anything other than a colossal hit? Of course, in my eyes, all Nintendo consoles have been brilliant in their own right, with excellent first party games on each. Perhaps the spike in availability in the past few days has been to do with Nintendo redistributing North American stock following Trump’s tariffs, maybe it’s a lack of interest or it has plateaued, perhaps it’s too expensive for most families in these hard times or perhaps Nintendo have simply made more to meet demand. It has certainly been more readily available and easier to pre-order than I anticipated, a good thing as far as battling scalpers is concerned. But a part of me looks at the preorders every time a new Nintendo console is released and wonders…will this one get the support a Nintendo console deserves? I should really wait it out and see what happens, but I just cant resist a shiny new Nintendo console.Elliott GC: The stock issue has been puzzling the last few days, but originally the plan was that there would be enough to go around and there wouldn’t be any shortages. It may be that initially everything was diverted to the US, to get in before the tariffs, and now things are beginning to even out. Inbox also-rans Very are selling two Nintendo Switch 2 bundles as I’m writing this.DavidGC: Thank you. Very has had bundles available for the last two days. Which ones they are varies a lot, but they’ve never entirely run out of stock. Wow… just finished Act 1 in Clair Obscur: 33 Expedition… I’m not crying. A fly flew into my eye. What a game! Enjoying every moment, highly recommend if you haven’t picked it up just yet.Adam_Lion_23 (gamertag/PSN ID) More Trending Email your comments to: gamecentral@metro.co.uk The small printNew Inbox updates appear every weekday morning, with special Hot Topic Inboxes at the weekend. Readers’ letters are used on merit and may be edited for length and content. You can also submit your own 500 to 600-word Reader’s Feature at any time via email or our Submit Stuff page, which if used will be shown in the next available weekend slot. You can also leave your comments below and don’t forget to follow us on Twitter. Arrow MORE: Games Inbox: Is it weird to not like GTA games? GameCentral Sign up for exclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy

Once in a while, you might look up and marvel at magnificent views of our moon, its surface dramatically lit by our sun’s light. But have you ever paused to wonder what other moons might look like from the surfaces of other planets in our solar system? NASA’s Perseverance rover, which has been exploring Mars since arriving there in dramatic fashion in 2021, has just shared an exquisite image of Deimos, one of the red planet’s two moons.  Recommended Videos “Wishing upon a … moon?” NASA’s Perseverance team, based in California, wrote in a post on the rover’s X account on Thursday, adding: “That bright ‘star’ is actually Mars’ moon Deimos.” Perseverance captured the image in March “in the hours before dawn” via a long-exposure using its left Navcam. The picture also includes two stars — Regulus and Algieba — from the constellation Leo, which NASA has helpfully pointed out: NASA With a diameter of 7.7 miles (12.4 kilometers), Deimos, which scientists believe is likely to be a captured asteroid, is much smaller than Earth’s moon, which has a diameter of 2,159 miles (3,474 kilometers).  And while Deimos orbits Mars at a distance of 14,577 miles (23,460 kilometers), Earth’s next door neighbor orbits at a far greater distance of about 238,855 miles (384,400 kilometers). Also, our moon has a spherical shape, whereas Deimos has an irregular form that NASA has rather unflatteringly described as “potato-shaped.” The rover’s image offers a refreshing departure from its usual focus on the martian terrain where it’s searching for signs of ancient microbial life, allowing us to appreciate for a moment the broader cosmic context of Perseverance’s mission.  In many ways, the striking photo is more than just a technical achievement as it also offers a moment of reflection during the rover’s epic mission to seek knowledge beyond our home planet.

Subscribe to Nintendo Life on YouTube812k Fighting game and Rare fans are in for a treat today with Nintendo adding Killer Instinct Gold to the Switch Online + Expansion Pack service. As long as you have an active subscription to the Expansion Pack tier, you'll be able to update your Switch app and play it right now. Here's a bit more about it, courtesy of the official Nintendo description: "The Killer Instinct tournament is back in this classic 1996 fighting title originally released for the Nintendo 64™ system. Pick from a roster of 10 killer fighters, and test your instincts across multiple explosive game modes. Battle other fighters in classic Arcade mode, pit your favorite characters against a friend's in Team mode, or face off in the round-robin-style Tournament mode with up to eight players! There's even a Training mode where you can sharpen your techniques, and with hundreds of thousands of moves and killer Combos at your fingertips, a little training goes a long way. You'll need all the practice you can get to have a chance at landing a 70-hit Ultra Combo—and that's if you're not interrupted by a C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER!"Subscribe to Nintendo Life on YouTube812kWatch on YouTube Nintendo's Switch Online + Expansion Pack service in Japan today has added Ridge Racer 64. This game was added to the Switch's N64 service locally in a previous update. Every retro game available with an NSO sub (plus the Expansion Pack) Will you be revisiting this Killer Instinct game on the Switch? Let us know in the comments. Related Games See Also Share:0 0 Liam is a news writer and reviewer across Hookshot Media. He's been writing about games for more than 15 years and is a lifelong fan of many iconic video game characters. Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment... Related Articles Nintendo Updates Its User Agreement To Crack Down On Emulation Offenders may find their Switch bricked Nintendo Reconfirms Release Windows For Major Switch 2 Games And original Switch, of course The First Review For Fantasy Life i: The Girl Who Steals Time Is In A fantasy score? Nintendo Shares More Footage Of Zelda: Wind Waker On Switch 2 Available via Nintendo Switch Online

You can judge a mattress just by its looks. Nope. Two similar-looking and -feeling mattresses could be very different in quality.You can judge a mattress just by its price tag. False. An expensive product isn’t necessarily better for your particular body and sleeping habits.Firmness reflects quality. Actually, you may end up with a very firm mattress that doesn’t contour or offer enough support, eventually causing you pain. Firmness is a personal preference.Now, about that price point. Today, there are more mattress options than ever. If you’ve started browsing, you may wonder how two mattresses claim the same benefits but are thousands of dollars apart. In many cases, an expensive item is better. But in the case of mattresses, the expensive option might not be the one for you.A good place to start when comparing products is with the label. Mattress manufacturers are required by law to disclose the materials used in their product, and that can often dictate the quality and price. And most companies share the construction of the mattress, which helps us analyze the three most important factors when choosing a mattress:Weight: Heavier mattresses are denser, making them more durable and supportive. If there is a large weight difference between two mattresses (like 30-plus pounds), the heavier one will be of better quality.Layers: The material and positioning of each layer determine how comfortable it will be to you specifically.Cover: While you don’t sleep directly on the cover, its material and construction play into the coolness and immediate feel of the mattress.Hopefully, this breakdown aids in your mattress-shopping endeavor. Remember, you can’t learn everything about a mattress just from lying on it for a few minutes. Before testing one out, come prepared with your top priorities (level of firmness, sleeping position, edge support, motion transfer, cooling level, bounciness, delivery method, and warranty), and don’t forget to look at those labels for the construction details.FAQsHow often should you replace your mattress?It’s best to replace your mattress every eight years to make sure you have the support you need, recommends Michael Breus, PhD, a clinical psychologist, clinical sleep specialist, and the author of The Power of When. However, if you want to extend the life cycle of your mattress and give your bed a boost of comfort, you can always add a mattress topper for another cozy layer.What mattress type is the most durable?Latex is known as one of the most durable mattresses because it has solid support no matter your body weight or body type. And although the mattress feels soft to the touch, it can offer firm support depending on the model. Sleep expert Justin Redman recommends flipping and rotating your latex bed regularly (once every six months to a year) to keep it from sagging.What type of mattress is the most comfortable?We consider hybrid mattresses to be the most comfortable since they offer a balance between support and a plush sleeping surface. Mattress materials can vary, but since these beds include encased coils as well as layers of foam, you can often find soft mattresses or some with a purely firm feel under this category.But this answer depends on your personal preference. Some people want a soft, cozy mattress to sink into at night, but may opt for one with medium firmness for a guest room. A person who is a back sleeper may appreciate a firm mattress way more than anything with extra padding that, to them, might feel like sleeping in quicksand.

In a saturated beauty market where "clean" and "science-led" are often tossed around as buzzwords, new skincare brand Kind Atoms stands out by actually delivering on both. London design studio Run For The Hills was brought on to bring the brand's story, identity and debut product to life, and the results are nothing short of stunning. Rooted in tradition and realised with scientific rigour, Kind Atoms draws inspiration from its founders' South Asian heritage. Disheartened by the lack of effective yet gentle skincare for sensitive skin, the team looked inward (and backwards) to childhood memories of natural remedies: turmeric, saffron, amla, and honey passed down through generations. Blending these time-honoured rituals with cutting-edge cosmetic chemistry, the founders – who also happen to be trained scientists – have created a brand that doesn't just trade on nostalgia. It builds on it. The result is a skincare brand that's kind in every sense of the word. To help bring their vision to life, the team tapped creative studio Run For The Hills, known for its work across branding, interiors and art direction. Co-founder and creative lead Chris Trotman steered the creative direction, designing a visual identity that balances the old with the new, the natural with the technical. At the heart of the branding is a bespoke serif logotype and an elliptical atomic logomark, nodding to the fusion of science and nature. "We designed the logo to be timeless and elegant," Chris explains. "Intentionally to feel more premium than the product's price point might suggest, offering skincare lovers a pleasantly unexpected touch of luxury." The same approach carries through to the packaging design. The brand's first product, The Atomic Moisturiser, comes in a sleek matte green bottle, embossed with delicate gold lettering and topped with a satisfying twist mechanism. Housed in a matching green box finished with gold typography, it's designed to feel luxurious but never exclusionary. True to its name, Kind Atoms aims to make high-quality skincare more accessible. The debut product is priced fairly, ensuring that the tactile unboxing experience and elevated visuals don't come at the cost of inclusivity. It's a clever balance, delivering aesthetic polish without drifting into elitism. The visual identity leans into earthy tones, like mustard yellow, deep green, cream, and charcoal black, offering warmth and grounded sophistication. "Every element from the bespoke logotype to the rich, earthy colour palette reflects our ethos of fusing nature with science," say co-founders Jusna Ali and Roxanna Maani. "Run For The Hills instinctively understood our vision, translating it into a design language that feels both timeless and modern." That clarity of vision extended into the launch campaign, which Run For The Hills art directed. The brand photography avoids overly stylised gloss in favour of an organic, tactile feel. Products were shot against softly coloured paper backdrops and paired with natural props like bark and olive branches foraged from local parks and gardens. "For the product shoot, we wanted to fully embrace the brand's deep connection to nature," says Chris. "We gathered props straight from our surroundings – wood stumps and bark from the park, olive branches from our garden – to bring an organic, authentic feel to the imagery." Real women—friends of the founders—were used as models, adding an extra layer of authenticity to the visuals. The brand's aesthetic is natural and elegant, one that feels deliberate and thoughtful without trying too hard. To complete the launch, Run For The Hills also designed and developed Kind Atoms' Shopify-powered website. A clean, scrollable layout allows for immersive storytelling, layering parallax visuals with generous negative space. The result is a minimalist yet engaging digital experience that foregrounds the brand's values: calm, clarity, and care. The Atomic Moisturiser may be the first product, but it sets the tone for a brand that promises to expand with care. While rooted in personal experience and cultural memory, Kind Atoms is looking ahead, creating products that are not only scientifically sound but also beautifully considered. In a category often dominated by extremes, with clinical minimalism on one end and chaotic maximalism on the other, Kind Atoms occupies a quietly confident middle ground. It doesn't shout, doesn't posture and shows what's possible when you take the time to do things properly.

A group of Republican lawmakers are urging the Trump administration to ban sales of TP-Link networking products, including the company’s popular Wi-Fi routers. The Commerce, Defense, and Justice Departments have reportedly been investigating TP-Link for national security risks. On Wednesday, the lawmakers—including 12 GOP senators—wrote to the Commerce Department to voice support for its investigation, and called on the White House to block further sales of TP-Link products in the US. “TP-Link’s deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), use of predatory pricing to eliminate trusted US alternatives, and role in embedding foreign surveillance and destructive capabilities into our networks render it a clear and present danger,” they wrote to Secretary Howard Lutnick.The lawmakers claim TP-Link is a security threat because Chinese state-sponsored hackers have exploited the company’s routers and networking devices before, giving them a way to conduct cyberespionage within the US. The letter doesn’t include any evidence showing TP-Link has been deliberately aiding Chinese hackers. Still, the lawmakers alleges that TP-Link has been offering low “predatory” prices for its products to help it capture “nearly 60% of the US retail router and Wi-Fi system market.” In turn, the Chinese government can allegedly piggy back off TP-Link’s hardware to launch future cyberattacks on the US. (Photo by: Bildagentur-online/Schoening/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)“For these reasons, Commerce should immediately prohibit future sales of TP-Link SOHO (small and home office) networking equipment in the United States. Each day we fail to act, the CCP wins while American competitors suffer, and American security remains at risk,” the letter adds. The FBI has long been concerned that Chinese state-sponsored hackers are laying the groundwork to disrupt US critical infrastructure in the event conflict breaks out between China and the US. Recommended by Our EditorsAlthough a ban would be drastic, some former US security officials want a crackdown on TP-Link, saying it's imperative the country remove such devices before they become a threat. Other former federal officials have also said a ban would send a message to Beijing that its state-sponsored hacking will have consequences for China-based companies that may be involved. However, TP-Link says the letter is based on misinformation. “The allegations are categorically false, and we look forward to setting the record straight about our company,” the vendor told PCMag, adding: “To be clear, TP-Link is not a state-sponsored company, has no 'deep ties' to, and is completely independent from, the Chinese Communist Party.” Last year, TP-Link went as far to establish a new global headquarters in Irvine, California, although it was founded in Shenzhen, China, and still has a headquarters there. As a result, TP-Link also told PCMag: “As a US company, no foreign country or government, including China, has access to or control over the design and production of our products.”TP-Link also says it only has around a 35% share of the US market rather than 60%. “The allegation that bad actors from China used our routers for cyberattacks is misleading and disingenuous – routers made by many companies have been targets of attacks,” the company added. “TP-Link has been the victim of a smear campaign, driven by the goal of removing a competitor from the marketplace.”The Commerce Department didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. In the meantime, TP-Link says it’s confident the Commerce Department’s investigation will lead it to “recognize the security of TP-Link’s operations and products.” TP-Link added that it has not received any inquiries from the Justice Department.

The 2022.2 and 2021.3.14f1 releases have improved the scheduling cost and performance scaling of the Unity job system. In part one of this two-part article on what’s new with job systems, I offered some background information on parallel programming and why you might use a job system. For part two, let’s dive deeper into what job system overhead is and Unity’s approach to mitigating it.Overhead means any time the CPU spends not running your job, from the moment you begin to schedule it until the moment it finishes, unblocking any waiting jobs. Broadly, there are two areas where time is spent:1. The C# Job API layer2. The native job scheduler (which manages and runs all scheduled C# and, internally, C++ jobs)The C# Job API’s purpose is to provide a safe means to access the native job system. While this is a binding layer for the C# to C++ transition, it’s also a layer that allows you to prevent accidental scheduling of C# jobs that will run into race conditions or deadlocks when accessing NativeContainers from within a job.In addition, this separation provides a richer way of creating jobs themselves. At the C++ layer, jobs are just a pointer to some data and a function pointer. But with the C# API on top, you can customize the types of jobs you schedule, allowing for better control over how job data should be split up and parallelized to fit user-specific use cases.When scheduling a job, the C# job binding layer copies the job struct into an unmanaged memory allocation. This allows the lifetime of the C# job struct to be disconnected from the job lifetime in the job system, since this is affected by the job’s dependencies and overall load on the platform. The job system then conditionally performs safety checks in Editor playmode builds to ensure a job is safe to run.These steps are important, but they are not free and contribute to job system overhead. Since job size can vary, as well as the number of NativeContainers and dependencies a job might have, the cost to copy jobs and validate their safety is not fixed. Because of this, it’s important Unity keeps costs small and constrained to linear computational complexity.In the 2021.2 Tech Stream, the engineering team made significant improvements to the job safety system by caching the safety check result for individual job handles. This is particularly important, since the safety system needs to understand entire chains of job dependencies and each native memory reference all jobs contain to understand which may be missing dependency information and to which job a dependency should be added to. This can result in a non-linear amount of items to iterate over when scheduling (i.e., for each job and its dependencies, check the read/write access for each NativeContainer the job refers to and any job referring to the NativeContainers).However, Unity can take advantage of the fact that C# jobs are only scheduled one at a time, and check safety during this scheduling. Instead of rescanning all jobs each schedule, we can quickly determine if revalidating job dependency chains is necessary or not, allowing large amounts of work to be skipped. For even small job dependency chains, this dramatically reduces the cost of job safety checks. Ideally there should be no reason to turn job safety checks off when developing (job safety checks are not on in player/shipping builds).Whenever a C# or C++ job is scheduled for execution, it goes through the job scheduler. The scheduler’s role is to:Track jobs via job handlesManage job dependencies, ensuring jobs only start executing once all dependencies have completedManage “worker threads,” which are the threads that will execute jobsEnsure jobs are executed as quickly as possible – usually meaning they should run in parallel when dependencies allowAdditionally, while the C# Job API only allows jobs to be scheduled from the main thread, the job scheduler needs to support multiple threads scheduling jobs at the same time. This is because the underlying Unity engine uses many threads which schedule jobs and can even schedule jobs from within jobs. This functionality has pros and cons, but requires much more scrutiny for correctness and adds the requirement that the job scheduler must be thread safe.In the 2017.3 release, the basic look of the job scheduler was:Queue for jobsStack for jobsSemaphoreArray of worker threadsThe typical usage follows this pattern: As jobs are scheduled, they are enqueued into a global, lock-free, multiple-producer, multiple-consumer queue, which represents jobs that are ready for handling by a worker thread. The main thread then signals using a semaphore to wake up worker threads.The number of workers told to wake up depends on the job type being scheduled – single jobs such as IJob only wake a single worker, since that job type doesn’t spread work across multiple worker threads. IJobParallelFor jobs, however, represent multiple pieces of work that can be run in parallel. While one job is scheduled, there might be many pieces for some or all workers to help with at the same time. As such, the scheduler figures out how many workers can potentially help and wakes that number up.Once awake, worker threads are where the actual job work happens. In 2017.3, they were responsible for dequeuing a job from the job queue, ensuring all relevant job dependencies were complete. If they weren’t complete yet, the job and incomplete dependencies would be added to a lock-free stack as a way to jump to the front of the queue to try and run again. Worker threads do this in a loop until either the engine signals that it wants to shut down, or there are no more jobs in the stack and queue. At which point, the worker threads go to sleep by waiting on a signal from the main thread semaphore.The job scheduler creates as many worker threads as there are virtual cores on the CPU, minus one by default. The intention here is for each worker thread to run on its own CPU core, while leaving one CPU core free for the main thread to continue running. In practice, on platforms where a core isn’t reserved for non-game processes, it can be better to reduce the amount of worker threads so computation done by the operating system or driver threads doesn’t compete with the game’s main or job worker threads.Since the main thread is the primary place where jobs are scheduled from, it’s very important to not delay the main thread. Doing so directly affects how many jobs enter the job system and thus how much parallelism can occur within a frame.With the main thread theoretically scheduling lots of jobs and the rest of the CPU cores executing those jobs, we should be able to maximize how much parallel work can be done on the CPU and allow performance to scale as the hardware changes. If we had more worker threads than cores, the operating system could context switch the main thread, and switch to a worker thread. Having an additional worker thread running might help empty your job queue faster, but it would certainly prevent new work from entering the queue, which ultimately has a larger negative effect on performance.There are a couple of potential problems with the above job scheduler approach that can lead to job system overhead. Let’s look at some examples.Main thread schedules an IJob (non-parallel job) with no dependencies:A job is added to the queue, and a worker thread is signaled to wake upA worker thread wakes upThe worker executes the jobThe worker checks for any more jobs to executeThe worker goes to sleep since there are no more jobsOnce the main thread signals using the job scheduler’s semaphore, one of the sleeping worker threads (not necessarily worker 0) will wake up. Waking up and context switching takes some time on the worker core. This is because, while the worker thread is asleep, the CPU core that the worker thread will end up running on was likely doing something – maybe running another thread spawned by the game or some other process on the machine that was using the thread.To enable threads to be paused and resumed later, a thread’s register state needs to be saved, instruction pipelines need to be flushed, and the switched-to thread’s state needs to be restored. Even signaling the thread takes time on the main thread’s core, since notifying which thread to wake up is handled by the operating system. Ultimately, this all means that work is being done on the main thread core and the worker thread core that is not our job, and thus is overhead we want to reduce.How quickly workers can be notified and how much time an individual job takes to run can also have an impact on the system. For instance, if you take the above use case but schedule two jobs instead of one:A job is added to the queue, and a worker thread is signaled to wake upThe second job is added to the queue, and a worker thread is signaled to wake upIn some order, but twice: A worker thread wakes upA worker executes the jobThe worker checks for any more jobs to executeThe worker goes to sleep since there are no more jobsIf the timing works out, you have two workers working in parallel on the job.However, if one of the jobs is too small and/or it takes too long to signal and wake up both workers, one worker might steal all the work in the queue, and as a result we’ve signaled a worker for no reason.This type of job starvation and wake <-> sleep cycle can end up being quite expensive and limit the amount of parallelism the job system offers.You might be thinking, “Isn’t overhead from signaling threads and context switching a cost of doing business when dealing with threads in the first place?” You certainly aren’t wrong. But, while you don’t have direct control over how expensive signaling or waking up threads is, you can control how often those operations occur.One solution to avoid waking up workers for no reason is to only wake them when you suspect there are lots of work items in the queue for workers to take justifying the wake-up cost. This can be done by batching: Instead of signaling workers as soon as you schedule a job, add the job to a list and, at specific times, flush that batch of jobs into the job system, waking up an appropriate amount of workers at the same time.There is still a risk that the actual wake-up takes too long, the batched jobs are very small, or the number of jobs in a batch is just not very high. In general, the more jobs you include in the batch, the more likely it is to avoid overhead from waking up threads for no reason. Unity maintains a global batch which is flushed whenever a call to JobHandle.Complete() is called. So if you need to explicitly wait for a job to complete, try to do so as late and infrequently as possible, and generally prefer scheduling jobs with job dependencies to best control safe access to data.You might also be asking yourself, “If signaling threads and waiting for them to wake up/go to sleep is purely overhead, why don’t we keep our threads awake all the time looking for work?” When there are plenty of jobs in the queue, this can actually occur naturally. Unless the operating system deems the worker thread to be lower priority than some other work (or is explicitly time sliced and should be swapped to give other threads their fair share of CPU time – it depends on your platform), worker threads will happily keep working.However, as with the PartialUpdateA and PartialUpdateB functions we saw in part one, not all jobs are parallelizable and free of data dependencies. As such, you usually need to wait for some subset of jobs to complete before you can run others. As a result, we see bottlenecks in a job graph’s parallelism when there becomes fewer runnable jobs (jobs with no outstanding dependencies) than there are worker threads, resulting in some workers having nothing productive left to do.If you don’t everlet worker threads sleep, you can run into a handful of issues. When worker threads constantly check for new jobs and fail to find any, this is considered “busy waiting,” or work that’s wasteful and doesn’t progress the program. Keeping all cores running with maximum parallelism, but without progressing the game, is a drain on battery life. Not only that, if a core doesn’t have idle time, without sufficient cooling the CPU’s temperature will rise, leading to downclocking – running slower to avoid damage from overheating. In fact, on mobile platforms, it’s not uncommon for entire CPU cores to become temporarily disabled if they get too hot. For a job system, being able to use cores efficiently is very important, so there is a balance between putting workers asleep, and having them constantly loop looking for new jobs, hoping they get lucky.Another area that can generate overhead in the design above is the lock-free queue and stack. We won’t go into all the nuance of implementing these data structures, but one common trait of lock-free implementations is the use of a compare-and-swap (CAS) loop. Lock-free algorithms don’t use locking synchronization primitives to provide safe access to shared state, but instead use atomic instructions to carefully create higher-order atomic operations such as inserting an item into a queue in a thread-safe manner. However, perhaps unintuitively, lock-free algorithms can still prevent one thread from progressing until another is complete. They can also have secondary effects on the CPU instruction and memory pipelines, hurting performance scaling. (“wait-free” algorithms would allow all threads to always progress, but that doesn’t always provide the best overall performance in practice.)Here is a contrived example of adding a number to a member variable, m_Sum, with a CAS loop:CAS loops rely on the compare-and-swap instruction (here we use the C# Interlocked library abstracting platform specifics away), which “compares two values for equality and, if they are equal, replaces the first value.” Since we want Add() function users to not worry about this function potentially failing, a loop is used to retry if it fails because some other thread beat us to updating m_Sum.This retry loop is, in essence, a “busy-wait” loop. This has a nasty implication for performance scaling: If multiple threads enter the CAS loop at the same time, only one will ever leave at a time, serializing the operations each thread is performing. Fortunately, CAS loops generally do an intentionally small amount of work, but it can still have large negative impacts on performance. As more cores execute the loop in parallel, it will take each thread longer to complete the loop while the threads are in contention.Further, because CAS loops rely on atomic read-and-writes to shared memory, each thread generally requires its cache lines to be invalidated on each iteration, causing additional overhead. This overhead can be very expensive in comparison to the cost of redoing the calculations inside the CAS loop (in the case above, redoing the work of adding two numbers together). So, how high the cost is can be non-obvious at first glance.Under the 2017.3 job scheduler, when worker threads were not running jobs, they were looking for work in either a shared, lock-free stack or queue. Both of these data structures used at least one CAS loop to remove work from the data structure. So, as more cores became available, the cost of taking work from the stack or queue increased when the data structures had contention. In particular, when jobs were small, worker threads proportionally spent more time looking for work in the queue or stack.In a small project, I’ve generated deterministic job graphs that a typical game may have for its frame update. The graph below is composed of single jobs and parallel jobs (each parallelizing into 1–100 parallel jobs), where each job may have 0–10 job dependencies and the main thread has occasional explicit sync points where it must wait for certain jobs to finish before scheduling more. If I generate 500 jobs in the job graph, and make each take a fixed amount of time to execute (each portion of a parallel job takes this time as well), you can see that, as more cores are used, overhead in the job system increases.For jobs that take 0.5μs, once there are 20 workers, the frame updates as fast as not using the job system at all, and runs nearly twice as slow when using all cores on my machine. By default, all cores are used in Unity, so with 1μs jobs, there is almost no improvement in performance despite using 31 worker threads. This is a direct result of high contention on the lock-free queue and stack. Luckily, user jobs tend to be larger in size and can hide this overhead. However, the scaling issue is there, and small jobs are still common enough (especially for parallel jobs). Even when using larger jobs, your scheduling patterns and worker timing can cause large amounts of overhead due to contention with the global, lock-free stack and queue in the job scheduler.By now, you can see that there are a few areas our team needed to address to reduce overhead in the job system, both on Unity’s side and on the game creator’s side:Avoiding stalls on the main thread: Signaling to wake worker threads is expensive – keep this to a minimum.Modifying state on the main thread shared with worker threads is likely to lead to cache invalidations and potential busy-waiting.The main thread should schedule jobs frequently – avoid explicitly waiting on jobs to .Complete(). Prefer submitting jobs with dependencies instead.Avoiding stalls on worker threads:Worker thread efficiency directly impacts parallelism. Avoid contending on shared resources where possible.Busy-waits on worker threads will drain battery life and can result in downclocking due to increases in temperature.While Unity can’t change how many jobs users submit in their games, there are a decent number of issues that our engineers can tackle with a different job scheduler approach. In the 2022.2 release, the job scheduler, at a high level, breaks down into a few basic components:Array of worker threadsArray of queues for jobsArray of semaphoresThis is very similar to the previous job scheduler. However, the main difference is the removal of the shared state between the main thread and worker threads. Instead, we make the queues and semaphores (or futex on platforms that support it) local to each worker thread. Now, when the main thread schedules a job, it’s enqueued into the main thread’s queue rather than a global queue.Similarly, if a worker thread needs to schedule a job (e.g., a job schedules a job in its Execute), that job is scheduled in the worker’s own queue rather than in the main thread queue. This reduces memory traffic, since workers reduce the frequency of invalidating cache lines when they write to a queue. As such, workers don’t read/write to all the different queues at the same frequency.The worker loop has also changed, now that there are more queues to work with:Workers look in their own queue for work and only look at other worker queues when theirs is empty. Since workers prefer their own queues for dequeuing and enqueuing work, the amount of contention on any one queue is reduced.Another difference is how threads are signaled to wake up. Worker threads are now responsible for waking up other worker threads, and the main thread is responsible for ensuring that at least one worker thread is awake when it schedules a job.This change in responsibility allows the main thread to remove excessive overhead since it no longer needs to be solely responsible for waking threads when parallel jobs are submitted. Instead, the job system performs tracking to know if it needs to wake any workers at all. The main thread can ensure a worker is always awake to make progress on jobs and when workers wake and find a job in its own queue or another’s, workers can signal other workers to wake up and help empty the queue if needed.The queue separation for workers also provides some interesting leeway for configuration and optimizations, which our team is continuing to add to and improve on. In 2022.2, users should see reduced cost on the main thread to wake up worker threads and improved throughput of jobs on worker threads, regardless of how many cores their platform has. Additionally, while Unity has not backported the queue separation to 2021.3 LTS, we have brought back the design change to make worker threads responsible for signaling each other rather than the main thread solely. High job system overhead on the main thread due to signaling the global semaphore should no longer be an issue as of 2021.3.14f1.If you have questions or want to learn more, visit us in the C# Job System forum. You can also connect with me directly through the Unity Discord at username @Antifreeze#2763. Be sure to watch for new technical blogs from other Unity developers as part of the ongoing Tech from the Trenches series.

Reviewers Liked Improved sound Class-leading noise cancellation Highly intuitive touch controls Supremely comfy Return of folding design improves portability Can finally charge during use Replaceable earpads Reviewers Didn't Like Price increase over previous model Speak-to-Chat still needs work Spatial audio upmixing is a useless gimmick Still no audio over USB-C Fragile-feeling articulating hinges The headband could use a bit more padding No aptX HD support Feature-rich app may be overwhelming for casual users Competitors and Related Products Our editors hand-pick related products using a variety of criteria: direct competitors targeting the same market segment, or devices that are similar in size, performance, or feature sets. Expert reviews and ratings 94 The crown is safe once again. Sony has managed to overhaul its flagship headphones in all the right ways that keep the 1000X line atop our best headphones list. By Engadget on May 15, 2025 80 Although they’re not the radical upgrade I was hoping for, the Sony WH-1000XM6 make some minor improvements to Sony’s flagship noise-cancelling headphones. They lack a wide soundstage, but they deliver crystal-clear vocals for close to 30 hours without fail. By Tom's Guide on May 15, 2025 90 These sound better than the latest Bose model, offer better noise canceling, and are generally better to use. Compared to the equivalently priced AirPods Max, all those things are also true, except that you might be enough of an iOS stan that the AirPods integrate better into your ecosystem. In any case, I’d strongly recommend you check out a pair of Sony’s new flagship headphones before you make a purchasing decision. They’re one of the finest wireless pairs of headphones ever made. By Wired on May 15, 2025 100 Sony’s wireless headphones deliver a performance more than befitting a flagship pair of wireless headphones. Comfort levels are great, they’re nice to use, ANC is excellent, call quality is class-leading, and sound quality can match anything at this level. Simply sensational. By What Hi Fi? on May 15, 2025 90 The Sony WH-1000XM6 are a fantastic pair of over-ear headphones that combine the best design elements of their predecessors, while levelling up the sonic and ANC capabilities of what came before. With super-clean touch controls, an ultra-comfy fit and a ton of features at your disposal, there’s a lot to love about these headphones, even if they do come at quite the cost. By TechRadar on May 15, 2025 90 Sony's high-end WH-1000XM6 headphones feature foldable earcups, new driver tuning, and noise cancellation that rivals the best from Bose. By PCMag on May 15, 2025 100 Sony’s legendary noise-cancelling headphones get even better, with the return of foldability, superb sound, and jaw-dropping ANC performance. By Stuff on May 15, 2025 93 Sony upgraded the design and performance of its flagship noise-canceling headphones, pushing them slightly ahead of the competition. But not surprisingly, their price has also increased. By cnet on May 15, 2025 Their higher-than-ever price might push Sony loyalists to explore what else is out there, and 1000XM5 owners shouldn’t feel any rush to spend the $450. But if your older Sony earbuds are on their last legs, these could be worth saving up for. By The Verge on May 15, 2025 Hands on: The WH-1000XM6 are amazing. They’re probably the new champs as far as wireless headphones go. But if you’re a happy WH-1000XM5 owner, I wouldn’t feel any pressure to upgrade. And if you’re looking to buy, it’s hard to ignore that Sony’s current discount on the XM5 brings them in at $100 less than the XM6. By DigitalTrends on May 15, 2025 Load More Reviews…