Week in Tech: Viva la Vita: Sony's new handheld hits right note

This week's biggest news is about something quite small: the Sony PS Vita, which went on sale in the UK this week and was topping Amazon's charts before a single unit had shipped.

It's a serious bit of kit. As you'll discover in our in-depth Sony PS Vita review, Sony's handheld console is "the most powerful, dazzling and impressive handheld games console ever built" with "not one but two quad-core processors, a sparkling 5-inch touchscreen OLED display, dual analogue stick controls and games that go way beyond what any other portable device is currently capable of."

Is it better than a 3DS? You betcha: it's "a beast among men", apparently.

FutTv : 1EH83eETugX1H

Will anybody buy one? That's a very good question. "It's a luxury item launching post-Christmas into a Western world ravaged by recession, and further hindered by Sony's desperate need to make money at a time when the strength of the Yen makes Japanese products very pricey."

But around 12.4 million PlayStation Vita handhelds will be sold in 2012, according to a forecast by Strategy Analytics.

While the PlayStation Vita represents the cutting edge of handheld gaming, some gamers' thoughts are turning to the next generation of consoles. Fancy a bit of Metal Gear Solid 5 on your Xbox 720 or PS4? Kojima productions is hiring for games running on "next-gen game engine technology." The game's years away, but that doesn't stop us from being a little bit excited.

Windows Phone 8 is coming

The PS Vita isn't the only little thing making big waves this week. While the giants of the phone world were getting ready to show off their stuff at next week's Mobile World Congress, we discovered stacks of information about the forthcoming Windows Phone 8. It'll have Skype, SkyDrive and possibly many other things starting with "Sky", and there should be four new form factors ranging from little tablets to little watches.

When Windows Phone 8 ships later this year, we might even be able to use it on 4G: according to Everything Everywhere, the terribly-named parent of Orange and T-Mobile, it could launch its 4G network by the end of this year if Ofcom lets it convert some existing frequency from 3G to 4G.

The firm also promises to complete its HSPA+21 high-speed 3G rollout by the second quarter of this year, with some lucky people getting HSPA+42 this year too.

So what sort of phones will we be using on the super-speedy mobile internet of the future? We reckon they'll look a lot like the LG Optimus 4X HD, a quad-core monster with an enormous screen and Google's Ice Cream Sandwich.

If that isn't impressive enough, it turns out that quad-core really means four-and-a-bit cores: the Nvidia Tegra 3 features hugely impressive technology with a hugely unimpressive name, 4-PLUS-1. That means the processor has four cores, with a fifth companion core for less strenuous tasks.

Technology doesn't get much smaller than processor cores, so let's look at something a little bit bigger. Fancy an enormous earth-to-space elevator? Of course you do. There's just one catch: it doesn't actually exist - yet.

That might change, because a Japanese firm wants to build it. As Marc Chacksfield puts it: "By 2050, Obayashi Corp is hoping to create a space lift, which involves a massive cable and something called nanotubes. The company doesn't know how much it will cost but promise it won't "simply be a dream". Sounds like someone has being reading too many Roald Dahl stories."

In Depth: Which cloud services are right for you?

Cloud services compared

Cloud computing is no longer the future – it's here. Chances are you already use web-based email, store some or all of your music, photos or videos online, or even just stream your televisual entertainment to your living room straight from the internet.

We are slowly being encouraged to store less and less of our content on our own hard drives, and instead entrust it to the servers of a few corporate giants.

Whether you're uploading photos and movies to Facebook, videos to YouTube, saving and sharing work in Google docs, downloading music using your iTunes account or reading books using your Kindle, your details and data are mainly held in the cloud, and it's a revolution that's growing.

It's going to affect you in other ways too, as more and more companies – and even governments and councils – are considering using cloud computing to provide the hosting and compute power for their services.

Using the cloud is often cheaper, more adaptable and surprisingly, more reliable than running their own servers. Even a couple of years ago, cloud services were seen as something not to be trusted as a substitute for your own backups, but now the world is embracing cloud computing as never before.

From the office to the sofa, the cloud is powering our document creations tools, our calendars, our address books and even our viewing and gaming experiences, and with the advent of high-speed broadband allowing apps to handle ever more involved processes and deliver them to us on low-powered devices, it doesn't take a lot of future-gazing to see that online is the future.

Entertainment revolution

There is a new revolution coming to cloud computing as well – the entertainment revolution. This year has seen many companies competing to offer cloud services to buy, store and stream your entertainment collections for you. You aren't just backing up your content to the cloud – you often haven't downloaded it at all.

Amazon, Apple and Google want to store your music, films and books on their cloud servers, and will let you stream them to your internet-connected devices. All you need is your browser to get to all your entertainment services wherever you are.

So which company should you turn to for your cloud computing services? Where should you entrust your beloved music, films and book collections? And what else are these companies planning in the future to make your life more secure, easier and stress-free?

We've taken a close look at four major players in the burgeoning field of personal cloud services – Amazon, Microsoft, Apple and Google – and asked which one is for you, or will be soon.

Cloud services compared: Google

Google's often-stated mission is 'to organise the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful', and what better way to do this than by putting everything online?

But nowadays Google isn't just about information – it's also about applications that can store, display and manipulate that information in useful ways.

Google has been moving everyone onto its cloud web servers for years. If you use Gmail, Google Docs, Google Calendar, Picasa or YouTube, you are already putting your data onto its cloud servers. With only a login between you and your content on any internet-connected device, Google can truly lay claim to not only seeing the future of computing as web-based, but actually making it happen.

Google makes no bones about this. When PC Plus asked Robert Whiteside, head of Google Enterprise UK, Ireland and Benelux, how important cloud computing is for Google, he told us: "Google is taking a '100 per cent web' approach to all our services and solutions, meaning we believe applications will be browser based and hosted in the cloud, rather than in a desktop environment."

Google's cloud computing is already a success. As Robert is keen to point out, "Over four million organisations use Google Apps, our flagship cloud product." And that number is increasing by 5,000 companies every day (up from 3,000 a day last year).

Google is even stealing the march on companies targeting businesses, with cloud-based collaborative office products that even Microsoft can't match.

Cloud, what cloud?

Google has been very good at getting ordinary people to use cloud computing without them thinking of it as such. Most people accept the usefulness of Gmail and Google Calendar without worrying that the data contained on these services is saved in one of Google's server farms dotted around the world.

Google is so reliable (it has a non-failure rate of 99.948 per cent – approximately a mere seven minutes of downtime a month) that people don't even think about backing up their emails or Google Docs to their PCs.

Most companies see the cloud as a backup solution, but Google was one of the first to see further than that. In 2009, Google Docs came out of beta and allowed anyone to create documents in the cloud via a web browser for free.

When Google Docs first appeared it was clunky and felt half finished, but now the documents is produces are customisable, shareable and let numerous people edit the same document in real time – perfect for a work or collaborative project scenario. Google has blazed a trail that has left companies like Microsoft desperate to catch up.

It isn't all altruistic, of course. The more eyes Google gets looking at its web apps as opposed to desktop programs, the more money it can make. Hence the fact that Google has made so many cloud-based apps.

The list is being added to all the time; for example, there are Google Maps, Google Mail, Google Earth, Google Docs, Google Blogger, Google Site Manager, Google Contacts and the business offering Google Apps. All of these fill a niche, and often provide a free solution where before you would have had to buy a program or do without.

The downside to this is that Google also has a record of letting its less popular services dwindle away. These include Google Wave, Google Buzz, Google Labs, Google Health and Google Powermeter. This may seem like a sensible move if few people are using them, but it no doubt alienates those who do.

Content is key

Google knows that to keep people coming back, it needs to give them access to cloud-based entertainment as well as services – hence new additions like Google Books, Music and the film rentals now available from the Android market and YouTube.

Google has always dabbled with content – its ownership of YouTube and Picasa attests to that, as do its projects that aim to digitise books that are out of print and out of copyright, but now it wants you to rent or buy directly from Google, while still keeping the products in the cloud.

Google Books was brought to the UK in October 2011. As Google said, "Readers in the UK now have access to the world's largest ebook collection, with hundreds of thousands of ebooks for sale from major UK publishers like Hachette, Random House and Penguin, as well as more than two million public domain ebooks for free." These books are then stored in the cloud and accessible via any web browser.

Also introduced in October was the Android film streaming rental service. You can choose to rent any of thousands of films and watch them in any browser at any time within 30 days of purchase, with 48 hours to play with once you hit play. A similar service is available from YouTube.

There's also the US-only Google Music, which lets you buy from a list of 13 million songs. You can also upload up to 20,000 songs to its online library, and the service will automatically upload any music you add to your computer's music folders. This means you can then play these songs from any device with an internet connection – you can access your music wherever you go. This service is free, whereas Amazon and Apple charge an annual fee to store music not bought in their stores.

The future is the cloud, and Google has the infrastructure, the money to spend on research and the vision to ensure it continues providing free apps that are game-changing. It's not only keeping up with the trends in cloud computing, with free and paid-for entertainment, it's ahead of the curve, producing products like Chrome OS that rely solely on the web for their functionality.

Google is clearly the one to watch for the future of the cloud, and with Microsoft, Apple and Amazon following it closely, the need to keep innovating will ensure it keeps producing services and content with the potential to change how you use your computer forever.

The quiet Chromebook computing revolution

If there was ever any doubt which company is the true champion of cloud computing, Google need only hold up a Chromebook running Chrome OS. It's the only company to produce a computer with an operating system that gets almost all its functionality from the internet.

For the Chromebook, Google teamed up with Acer and Samsung to produce low-powered netbooks that, when switched on, are essentially full-screen web browsers that only run web apps. It really is a revolutionary idea – so much so that when the device was first released, Sergey Brin hailed the Chromebook as a "new model of computing".

Chromebooks have only minimal local storage, so you can't install programs like Microsoft Outlook, Word or Adobe Photoshop. But, Google argues, why would you need to when you can, and probably already do, use online programs with these functions for your day-to-day needs? Web apps will let you create documents and spreadsheet, edit pictures and watch movies – all you need is an internet connection.

The simple nature of the Chromebook makes it very fast to turn on too – in a mere eight seconds you'll be ready to surf the internet. We've seen this before, of course.

This is the idea of the thin-client: an under-powered computer you could take from workstation to workstation in an office so you could work anywhere, with office servers providing the processing grunt as opposed to the devices themselves. However, here the internet provides the connection to the servers making the whole world your office.

Sadly, their uptake is currently very limited. Most commentators feel it was too much too soon; that the world, and the internet, isn't ready for solely web-connected devices.

There are other issues too. The price of the Chromebook isn't that much lower that a normal netbook, and normal netbooks have the advantage that they can run all the web apps a Chromebook can, but still let you install other programs on to it.

The fact that you always need an internet connection could be severely limiting in certain situations. Imagine turning up at to pitch an idea to a company, finding there's no mobile signal in the office you are in and having to ask for access to their Wi-Fi so you can show them your work.

The idea has a lot going for it though, and as working in the cloud becomes a reality it may become a more attractive idea. Updates to Chrome OS can be automatically added to the Chromebook via the internet, ensuring you have the latest version of the OS at all times.

As Sergey Brin said at its launch: "Ultimately the most precious resource is the user's time. I think the complexity of managing your computer is really torturing users." The fact that most of the processing is done in the cloud extends the battery life to 8.5 hours, and if you lose your Chromebook, all your data, photos and files are still merely a login away.

So how worried is Google about the slow uptake of Chrome OS and the Chromebook? We asked Robert Whiteside, Head of Google Enterprise UK, Ireland and Benelux whether cloud-based operating systems like Chrome OS could still be the future.

"Google Chrome OS is being created for people who spend most of their time on the web, so as more and more of us adopt cloud computing, its game-changing potential will only increase. Two or three years ago, a browser app looked second rate compared to a desktop application, but that isn't the case any more. A browser application can be very stable and rich."

At the moment we feel the Chromebook is a taste of the future that arrived a little too early, but watch this space…

Cloud services compared: Apple

With the release of iCloud, all of your Apple Devices are connected as never before. But what if you don't want to just use Apple for your computing?

Before Steve Jobs died, he made a very strong statement at the Worldwide Developers' Conference keynote in San Francisco: "We're going to demote the PC and the Mac to just being devices," he said. "We're going to move your hub, the centre of your digital life, into the cloud."

He was taking about the introduction of iCloud, a service that will automatically update all your Apple documents and iTunes purchases across your suite of Apple devices. Download a track from iTunes on your iPhone and it will be waiting for you on your Mac. Take a picture on your phone and you can show people the result almost instantly on your iPad. Start a presentation in Keynote at home and it will be waiting on your work Mac.

It uses the almost-always-connected nature of these devices in an integrated way. As Jobs said, "Today it's a real hassle and very frustrating to keep all your information and content up to date across your devices. iCloud keeps your important information and content up to date across all your devices. All of this happens automatically and wirelessly, and because it's integrated into your apps you don't even need to think about it – it just works."

There should, however, have been a caveat to this. He was only talking about iOS devices – iOS 5 specifically. Poor old iOS 4 and Snow Leopard users aren't part of Apple's new iCloud gang, and neither are those who don't use Apple's software on their PCs.

Apple has always enjoyed ring-fencing its content to its own software and devices, and the iCloud experience is only for the iTunes set. If you have an Android phone, you won't be using any of these new services any time soon.

Similarly, although you can get iCloud support for iTunes on your PC, this isn't the same as just logging in to a browser-based version. You won't be able to listen to your music at work if your IT department won't let you install iTunes on your office desktop machine, for example.

Apple-only documents

iCloud isn't like Amazon Cloud Drive, Dropbox or SugarSync, which will let you back up anything. Only files created by iCloud-supporting applications will be synchronised to all your devices.

Neither is iCloud as free and easy as other cloud storage apps, which usually offer browser versions that let you download any of your files by logging into a website. Although there's a website for Apple's service at icloud.com, this just lets you see your mail, contacts and calendars.

You can't stream your entertainment content from the site – instead it's more of a backup for when things go wrong, giving you access to Apple's Find My iPhone service or merely letting you use the site to upload documents created on iCloud-enabled apps like Pages, Numbers and Keynote, not edit them online.

Of course, if you only use the latest Apple devices, these issues won't worry you and iCloud will be a fantastic free extra that puts the cloud to work for you. Some of the services are really fun and useful.

Take Photostream for example, the newest version of which takes the last 1,000 photos from your Apple device, saves them online for you to see on iCloud, and downloads them to all your devices when you switch them on. It will also let you pause supported games on your iPad and then continue later on your iPhone.

The free 5GB of iCloud storage for mail, documents and other backups isn't to be sneezed at, although it's not as generous as some other companies' offerings. That said, this limit isn't affected by any content bought from iTunes, so your Apple-bought music, apps and books are stored separately. Photostream photos don't count towards this 5GB, so the offer is more generous than it first seems.

Your music in the cloud

Some iCloud services are available in the US, but have yet to make their way to the UK. These include iTunes in the Cloud and iTunes Match.

iTunes in the Cloud lets you re-download previously bought content on to your newer gadgets at no additional cost, so everything you've bought is available on all your devices. iTunes Match will scan your entire iTunes library and replace each song not bought via iTunes (music you have ripped from a CD, for example) – even low bitrate versions – with 256kbps, DRM-free AAC versions. These can then be downloaded or streamed to all your other iOS5 products, basically putting your entire music library onto all your Apple devices.

iTunes Match is a subscription service. Unlike Google Music, which is free, Apple charges $25 (about £15) annually to upload and store music not purchased through iTunes. On the other hand, it's a very fast service compared with Amazon and Google's offerings – backing up your entire collection will take hours rather than days.

No song is excluded either; you can manually upload any song not listed in the 20 million-strong iTunes library. Another unusual thing about iTunes Match (which may mean it will take a while to get to the UK) is that Apple has obtained permission for the service from all the major music labels. Google and Amazon have gone for a more 'suck it and see' approach, describing their services as hard drives in the cloud and not seeking permission for the content – or only striking a deal with some labels.

Google and Amazon argue that the tunes are just data, but it could be said that Apple is on a more sound legal footing. It wouldn't be fun to upload your collection to Google or Amazon and then have access denied due to a legal ruling.

The death of MobileMe

It's no secret that Apple has a poor record when it comes to cloud computing. iCloud started as iTools in 2000, and became a much-mocked subscription service called MobileMe in 2008.

MobileMe is now being discontinued, to the chagrin of some dedicated users, with subscribers being transferred to iCloud. They are gaining all its new services, but losing some older MobileMe-only ones like the Gallery, iDisk, and iWeb publishing services.

Although iCloud is a revolation compared to these earlier offerings, Apple still isn't exploiting the full power of cloud computing. For Apple it's all about the content – films, books, TV and music. Microsoft and Google are all about online collaborative services, where people use the cloud not just for syncing, but for shared document creation online, while Apple has stuck to using it for content delivery.

The cloud means you no longer have to plug your iPad into your Mac to update it – it happens automatically and out of sight. This is admirable, but leaves a big hole in its functionality. Where are the online versions of Pages, Notes and Numbers? Why can't people collaborate on these programs using the cloud?

Anyone who needs this kind of service has to go to another company for it, and it may yet be to the detriment of Apple. In fact, it's already starting to show – Microsoft boasted that in November 2011, Hotmail was being used on two million iOS 5 devices, and was growing by 100K users per day. This may change once the full impact of iCloud is felt, or may be due to legacy use as more people switch to Apple from Microsoft devices, but Apple should be worried that people are sticking to its competitors' services.

A restricted hard drive

At the iCloud launch, Steve Jobs noted that "a lot of people think the cloud is just a hard drive in the sky." Clearly a lot of people do, and with iCloud Apple has challenged this idea by using it to store Apple-only documents.

Integration is key to true cloud computing; no one company can provide everything you want to do on a computing device. There has to be an opening for other company's technologies or people start to look elsewhere for a less restrictive service. This is a common complaint levelled at Apple.

The cynical see iCloud as just another way to encourage people to just buy more Apple devices, but is that really any different to the ring-fencing demonstrated by Amazon's Kindle Fire, or the bundling of all of Google's services from your Google home page?

Admittedly, the limits are a lot more delineated with iCloud, but if you have more than one iOS 5 device, there is little doubt that the convenience offered by iCloud and its associated services will be very attractive. If you only use Apple hardware and software, iCloud will give you everything you need.

Cloud services compared: Microsoft

Microsoft has a history of leading the field with cloud services, having launched MSN Messenger back in 1999 and Hotmail in 1997. Back then, getting a service like email for free was surprising and for the average person, the ability to access email from any internet-connected computer was groundbreaking.

In fact, because of this, Hotmail was launched on July 4, American Independence Day, to highlight the fact that it offered you independence from ISP-based email. Those days are long past, and Microsoft has spent years playing catch-up with other cloud services like those offered by Google.

Microsoft originally dismissed the likes of Google Docs as nothing to worry about, but that is clearly not the case. Microsoft has stepped up a gear in the last few years and may yet be a cloud computing force to be reckoned with.

Being last to the party isn't always a bad thing, especially if you happen to own the suite of office applications used by most of the world. Google may have made inroads into that audience, but people have trusted Microsoft with their office documents for decades. All Microsoft needs to do is offer the functionality that makes Google Docs so attractive, but designed to look like a trusted product.

Office online

This is where the paid-for versions of Microsoft 365 and the free personal consumer service SkyDrive with Web Apps come in.

Microsoft 365, launched in June 2011, is the latest version of the clumsily named Business Productivity Online Suite (BPOS). It's a subscription-based online version of Microsoft Office, offering online collaboration and document sharing for businesses.

Microsoft 365 is Microsoft's answer to Google Apps, albeit a more expensive one. There aren't a lot of figures available for its uptake yet, but in November 2011, Office division chief Kurt DelBene said: "We are seeing positive momentum for Office 365. Customers are adopting Office 365 eight times faster than our previous service, and it's on track to become one of the fastest growing offers in Microsoft's history."

Of more interest to the ordinary user are SkyDrive and Live Mesh. SkyDrive has been around since 2007, and offers 25GB of free online storage via Windows Live. It also lets you use Web Apps – cut-down versions of tools like Excel and Word – to collaborate online with others in the creation of Office documents.

However, Web Apps don't offer the real-time collaboration of Google Apps. For example, you won't see characters on the screen as people type them; instead you're frozen out of the piece of the document where someone is typing, and can only see those changes once that person saves their work and you refresh your screen.

However, the actual look of Web Apps is one most of us are used to seeing in Office. It takes a lot of effort for people to learn new icons and new styles, so Microsoft still has the upper hand at least in the familiarity of its product.

Live Mesh is a handy free service that lets you sync your files across multiple PCs and locations. Just download the Live Mesh client onto each PC you use, assign the folder you want to sync, and whatever changes you make to documents in that folder will be automatically synced to your SkyDrive and to the other PCs in your 'mesh' when they are switched on.

All work and no play

Microsoft is increasingly becoming seen as the business side of cloud computing, but if Apple and Google let you work as well as play, Microsoft could soon find itself left behind.

Not that it doesn't have entertainment-streaming cloud services – Zune Pass is a cloud-based evolution of Microsoft's Zune media players, which were designed as the company's answer to the iPod. It's a subscription-based service that lets you stream music and music videos to devices like Windows Phone 7 handsets, Xbox 360s, Windows PCs and Zune MP3 players. It lets you download TV programmes and rent films too.

At its launch in 2010, Craig Eisler, corporate vice president of Microsoft's Interactive Entertainment Business Group said: "The integration between Zune, Windows Phone 7 and Xbox Live is an exciting advance in our entertainment offering. Zune enables users access to the entertainment they want, wherever they want it – and now, more people than ever will be able to enjoy the freedom and flexibility that the Zune service offers."

Well, not quite wherever they want it. Zune can only be used on four Microsoft devices and doesn't support Android or iOS. Although there is an online version of the service at zune.net, it doesn't work in a web browser – you need to be on a machine with the software installed.

It's expensive too, costing £8.99 a month for the music streaming service, with an extra charge for TV and film rental.

Xbox Live without the Xbox

Microsoft has other online content available via Xbox Live, letting you watch films and TV using your Xbox 360 or Windows Phone 7 handset. It hasn't taken these technologies fully into the cloud, but there are rumours that Xbox Live may be integrated into Windows 8.

Speaking to the Seattle Times, Microsoft vice president Mike Delman said: "Live has been successful on the Windows Phone. Live will be built into the PC. It will be the service where you get your entertainment."

There are more developments coming for Xbox Live. According to some sources, Microsoft's developers are looking at services like Onlive, the service that has proved that high-powered gaming can be delivered to mobile devices via the internet, and may be planning something similar.

As Microsoft cloud developer Brian Prince said at the GDC China conference, "You will be seeing things in the Xbox platform that are cloud-specific. I'm already doing it, it's really exciting, but I can't tell you about it or else I'll get fired."

So the future of cloud computing could be rosy for Microsoft, even if its present isn't much to shout about. We aren't writing off Redmond just yet, even if we would probably look elsewhere for most of our cloud services at the moment.

Cloud services compared: Amazon

Amazon has a strong track record in the sphere of cloud computing, and is rapidly expanding its online services in the US. It's challenging its reputation as an online shop, albeit a huge one, and is diversifying into areas that could help you enjoy online services that are better than, on a par with, or totally unique compared with the biggest players in cloud computing.

Today it's one of the largest providers of cloud services in the world, challenging the likes of Google and Apple, and even pipping them to the post to launch new services like its music-streaming service, Cloud Player.

It's also championing a cloud-powered web browser called Silk, which uses Amazon's servers to load web pages so your device doesn't need to. Amazon could easily own cloud computing in the future, in much the same way it did in the past.

It was one of the first major companies to open up cloud computing to the masses over nine years ago. This wasn't through cloud services like webmail or online document creation, but by hiring out storage space and raw computing power.

In 2002, with Amazon Web Services (AWS), the company opened up the power of its unused servers to companies and individuals. It made sense – why should the company pay for all that server space and processing power that wasn't being used when there was a desperate need for it in other companies?

Later it refined this offering with Amazon EC2 (Elastic Compute Cloud), which allowed anyone to rent Amazon's spare server capacity by the hour. This is a truly adaptable service that lets companies expand and contract to match demand for their services without having to pay for extra servers that may be redundant the following month.

It's a flexible service that saves people money as customers are only charged for what they use, and its adaptability means businesses can grow in line with their needs without costly infrastructure investment. Despite concerns about storing private or business data in the cloud, EC2 has grown at an astonishing rate.

Cloud outage

In fact, some people's fears about the reliability of the cloud were apparently realised in April 2011 when an Amazon outage closed many sites, including Foursquare, Reddit and Quora, some of which were down for days.

Amazon released this statement after the outage: "We know how critical our services are to our customers' businesses and we will do everything we can to learn from this event and use it to drive improvement across our services."

We're only in the first few years of the major uptake of cloud computing, so there are likely to be more teething issues and there seems to be little you can do about them other than having a backup system of your own – which does seem to defeat the purpose of using cloud computing.

Tellingly, no cloud computing firm currently offers insurance against lost data. Despite this, a global study carried out by IBM in 2011 said that over 60 per cent of organisations plan to "embrace cloud computing over the next five years".

But Amazon isn't all about business and web development. In 2011 it extended its cloud computing reach to include other, more personal services. It's catching up with (and even overtaking) the other big cloud players like Google and Apple by offering online film streaming through LoveFilm, online book offerings through the Kindle, music streaming through its new Cloud Player, vetted apps through its Android app store, and personal online storage through its Cloud Drive service.

Amazon is on Fire

It has also released a modified Android tablet in the form of the Kindle Fire, which lets users store purchased media like books, films, music and apps in the cloud, and access them on Amazon mobile devices.

Amazon is cementing its journey from an online store to an entertainment destination. It has embraced this challenge in a big way, not only providing places for content to be streamed from, but even making its own.

To do this, it has become a publisher of its own books. This could change publishing forever, with fewer intermediate steps between the author and reader. As top Amazon executive Russell Grandinetti told the Times, "The only necessary people in the publishing process now are the writer and reader."

With the release of Amazon Music Player in America, there's speculation that it may soon do the same with music. Amazon is muscling in on the turf of Apple and Google, and it's going about it in a very competitive way.

Amazon is so keen to get you using its cloud services to buy its online content, it's even willing to subsidise the cost of its devices to get you using it. The Kindle Fire, currently only available in America, costs over $10 more to make than its $199 price tag. In much the same way that Sony and Microsoft subsidise their games consoles in the hope that they will recoup their money on games and services, Amazon has brought out a very low-cost tablet that is so integrated with the shop's selection of books, music and other content, you may never need another media provider.

Let's go to the movies

Amazon has a huge consumer base, and realised it needed to get into online content to avoid being left behind. It acquired LoveFilm in January 2011, putting it on a sound footing to take on Netflix should the American rental service make its much rumoured appearance on British shores next year.

As Simon Calver, Chief Executive of LoveFilm International said at the time, "The deal is a winner for the members who love LoveFilm because of its value, choice, convenience and innovation in home entertainment. With Amazon's unequivocal support we can significantly enhance our members' experience across Europe."

LoveFilm is also a good way of drawing people into the Amazon fold – it's already everywhere. You see LoveFilm apps built into smart TVs, on Blu-ray players and on your iPad. The iPad release was a big step for the company – it finally managed to put Amazon content on an Apple device.

Upon its release, Calver said: "LoveFilm on iPad is the latest exciting step in giving film fans total control over their viewing schedule and our commitment to expanding the ways in which members can stream movies on a range of devices."

There is still some way to go though; LoveFilm phone apps only let you organise your film and game rentals. Amazon and LoveFilm are staying tight-lipped about when a full LoveFilm player for phones will be released. Netflix is breathing down their necks having just launched in the UK, and Google is already offering an Android movie player.

However, we're sure it won't be long before we see a phone app that lets you watch Amazon's offerings anywhere with an internet connection.

Cloud music

When it comes to streaming music from the cloud, Amazon was a surprise early adopter. It beat Google and Apple by releasing Cloud Player, in March 2011. Although it's only available in the US, it's impressive, letting users back up pretty much their entire music collections to Amazon's servers. Users can then access it from computers and Android devices.

As Amazon's vice-president of music and movies Bill Carr said, "Our customers have told us they don't want to download music to their work computers or phones because they find it hard to move music to different devices. Now whether at work, home or on the go, customers can buy music from Amazon MP3, store it in the cloud and play it anywhere."

US Amazon account holders can get Cloud Player free, with 5GB of storage, but if they buy an MP3 album from Amazon that increases to 20GB. Music bought from Amazon doesn't count towards your storage limit.

So how does Amazon licence the music stored on Cloud Player? Simple – it doesn't. As Amazon's director of music Craig Pape explained: "We don't need a licence to store music. The functionality is the same as an external hard drive."

Amazon's Cloud Drive was introduced at the same time as Cloud Player. It gives US-based Amazon account holders 5GB of online space free, allowing them to back up their most important documents and photos to the cloud.

So is Amazon the future? There do seem to be gaps in its online offerings. For example, there are no email services or online apps for the creation of spreadsheets or documents, but when it comes to online content, it has most bases covered.

It may not be ready for us in the UK just yet though. Amazon is announcing no plans to extend Cloud Player and the Kindle Fire outside of the US, although some people claim to have found loopholes that let them use Amazon's Music Player on British shores.

However, until these services are fully rolled out across the world, they appear to be merely hinting as what is possible, but not quite within reach.

Buying Guide: Best computer: how to choose the right one

How to choose best PC for you

When buying a new computer, it's easy to become confused by the sheer volume of technical decisions that you'll have to make.

How to choose the best desktop PC for you? Well, you might wonder how much RAM you'll need, for instance, which CPU or which graphics card to pick, what display to look for, which hard drive will be best for you - there are so many issues that it's difficult to know where to begin.

There is a simple way to at least begin cutting down the choices on offer, though, and ensure you get the best PC for your needs.

And that's to forget about the low-level technical specifications, and fine details like the brand of graphics card just for the moment and instead concentrate on something much more fundamental and important: what you will be expecting your system to do.

So read on to find out how to buy the best computer for you, then check out our 10 best desktop PCs on page 2.

Best computer: using your new PC

Take a moment to think about the sort of applications you'll want to run on your new PC, as these will help to decide which features your system will need.

If you only intend to run basic tasks - browsing the web, sending emails, running office-type software like Microsoft Word - then the good news is that most computers, even at the budget end of the market, will be able to cope with your requirements.

An entertainment PC can handle those basic jobs, too, but might also be used to watch TV and movies, listen to music, play some games, perhaps share music and video files across a home network. Systems like this need a little more in the way of hardware power, like a larger hard drive to store all your music and movies, as well as a big screen, a good sound card and speakers, but they still don't have to be too expensive.

If you want to play the latest games with the best possible performance, then you'll need a gaming PC. This can be much more expensive, as not only will you need a quality screen, a good sound card and speakers, but you'll also require a powerful graphics card, fast hard drive and a decent processor.

And if you're not a gamer, but need to run some heavy-duty software - editing HD videos, say - then you'll need a high-end performance PC. This should include a powerful CPU, plenty of memory, and a large, fast hard drive, so expect a sizeable bill. But you may not need the large screen or powerful graphics card of the entertainment or gaming systems, which will help to keep prices down a little.

Best computer: netbook, laptop or desktop?

With the basic applications of your new computer resolved, it's time to think about the type of system that might be appropriate: a netbook, laptop or desktop?

Netbooks are compact notebooks with small screens (typically 10 to 12 inches), and components that are more about saving battery life than delivering raw power. So expect a slow CPU, only a little RAM (1 to 2GB, usually), no DVD drive, not too much hard drive space, and so on.

This is all that you need for basic web browsing, emailing and similar tasks, though. Their small size makes netbooks extremely portable (most are only around 1-1.5kg), battery life is usually very good at 4 to 10 hours, and you can buy some great systems from as little as £249. Our articles on the best cheap notebook and the top 15 notebooks in the world today will tell you more.

Laptops can seem bulky by comparison to their tiny netbook cousins: they might be more than twice the weight, with larger screens, and more powerful CPUs, which means battery life may struggle to reach 3 hours in some cases.

Of course they can also handle much more powerful applications, though. If you'll be spending hours typing on the system then you'll appreciate the larger keyboard. The built-in DVD drive makes it easier to install software and create backups, and high-end laptops can even deliver very acceptable gaming performance.

Again, we've a guide to suit everyone: The best cheap laptop under £350 focuses on budget systems, while our article on the best student laptops and the best 13" laptops cover a wider range of systems.

The best gaming laptops guide reveals that you buy mobile gaming performance for as little as £599, while the more general Which laptop should I buy? article walks you through the buying process and explains how to make sure you get the right system for you.

If you don't need a computer you can carry around, though, a desktop will be your best option. These are larger, but deliver more power for your money, and are generally much easier to upgrade or reconfigure. So if you decide you need better gaming performance, say, you can just buy another graphics card at a later date, something that won't be possible at all with most netbooks or laptops.

If you'd like an idea of what's available in the desktop world than our guide to What's the best desktop PC for you? will point you to some great systems.

And if you're wondering whether you really need a PC at all - could a Mac be better? - then reading PC or Mac? should help you to decide.

But if you've already got a list of preferred PC manufacturers then it might be more interesting to think about the hardware that your new computer should include - and there's plenty to consider.

Best computer: technical specs

In the past, one of the first questions to ask about your new PC has been how much memory you'll need. These days, though, even many budget PCs come with 4GB of RAM, the maximum a 32-bit Windows system can use.

If you're short of cash and only want to run very basic programs, perhaps to browse the web or send emails, then you might just about get away with 2GB. Maybe. But opting for 4GB will help to improve your system's performance, even here, so avoid skimping on memory if you possibly can.

If you're buying a more high-end system, though, you might also want to consider the type of memory it should include to deliver the best results. Our articles on DDR2 vs DDR3 and How to buy RAM will tell you more.

It's a similar situation with hard drives. If you're buying a budget PC (around £400, say) then look for the highest capacity you can afford; we'd recommend at least 500GB, although even many budget PCs now include 1TB drives.

If you've more cash to spend, though, it's worth paying more attention to the technical details. Read How to buy the best new hard drive for a grounding in the basics. And if you've a big budget, then solid-state drives (SSDs) deliver the best performance around, though their capacities are low. Our guide to 12 top solid-state drives will highlight the key details you need.

To help you choose between a hard disk drive and a solid-state drive, take a look at our guide SSD vs HDD: which is best?

Then of course there's the issue of your computer's processor: which one is best? The good news here is that even the cheapest PCs now include CPUs with two cores, essentially separate processors that allow you to run multiple tasks at the same time. But even if money is tight, look for something with more cores, if you can: something like Intel's Core i3-530 or AMD's Athlon II X4 640 offer decent performance at a budget price.

If you're looking to build a high-end PC that will keep you happy for a few years, however, you'll benefit from spending more on a processor, and once again we've plenty of guides to help, covering everything from value CPUs to gaming processors, our pick of the best desktop processors, and a roundup of the best 14 CPUs currently available.

While we've hopefully covered most of your concerns here, there may be one or two other issues you want to consider.

If you aim to play the latest games on your computer, for instance, the choice of graphics card will be critical. Let us help you out with our guides to the 10 best graphics cards under £100 and 10 best graphics cards under £200, and our roundup of the 15 best graphics cards in the world today.

And whatever you're doing on your system, a quality LCD monitor will be crucial - so be sure to read our guide to the technical details you really need to know before you buy a monitor.

It's a lot to consider, then, but doing your homework now will really pay off later. And that's because understanding the features you need (and the ones you really don't) will both save you money and help you choose the best PC that will serve you well for years to come. Which, of course, is the best news of all, because your systems' extended life means you won't have to go computer shopping again for a long, long time.

10 best PCs to choose from

So what's the best desktop PC for you? Although they've been overshadowed by just about everything recently, the fact that they're comfortable to use and can be upgraded easily means that they're still our weapon of choice when it comes to both gaming and general computing.

We've poked through the TechRadar archives to bring you 10 of the best desktop PCs, including the best all-in-one PCs. If you're after a top desktop, look no further.

1. Acer Revo RL100 - £390

A triumph of form over function, Acer's ultra-tiny media center PC includes a slide-out backlit touchpad keyboard. It also packs a Blu-Ray/DVD-RW combo drive, with an Nvidia Ion 2 processor to power those high-definition films and a touch of light gaming. An integrated digital TV tuner means that it will compliment a plush home cinema set up quite nicely, and it runs very quietly. It's not the cheapest media center option, but it does perform perfectly adequately.

Read our Acer Revo RL100 review

2. Shuttle SX58H7 - £409

A great place to start your media centre PC. Stick a Core i7 CPU, some DDR3 RAM and a DX11 graphics card in this barebones PC and you'll have a fully-fledged unit that's actually capable of running the latest games. It's got a compactl form factor, and it'll certainly look the part next to a TV of epic proportions. It is a tad pricey for what it is, but in recent years Shuttle has got tiny PCs like these down to a fine art.

Read our Shuttle SX58H7 review

3. Dino PC Evolution 2600K - £1,799

£1,800 is a lot to drop on a PC, but you get what you pay for. This cutting edge machine includes an Intel i7 2600K chip overclocked to an immense 5GHz. It's one of the fastest PCs we've ever seen, and able to handle just about everything we threw at it. It comes packed in a lovely, ultra-cool case, with SATA 6Gbps and USB 3.0 ports for high speed connectivity. This particular Dino is far from extinct.

Read our Dino PC Evolution 2600K review

4. Cryo PC Nemesis - £1,850

Another pricey i7 2600K-based system, and this one comes with a fetching pink case. Although the chip's overclock is 0.1GHz lower than Dino's offering, it's still a beast of a machine, and eminently capable. You get a mouse, keyboard and two-year warranty thrown in for the price, as well as a 64GB SSD and a 1TB HDD. Graphics are covered in the shapely form of the Nvidia GTX 580. There are better systems out there, but they cost far, far more.

Read our Cryo PC Nemesis review

5. Lenovo IdeaCentre C200 - £445

Despite the hype, all-in-one touchscreen desktop PCs never really took off, no thanks to the ubiquitous iPad and subsequent tablet PCs. If you're going to get one, though, make sure it's the Lenovo IdeaCentre C200. Its luxurious black finish and curvy aesthetics make it stand apart from the crowd, and a wonderful 18.5" LCD display begs you to reach out and touch it - literally. Perfect as a family PC in the living room, or as an addition to a technologically-augmented bedroom.

Check out TechRadar's best all-in-one PCs

6. Apple iMac 27-inch 2011 - £1,649

The mighty Apple's first venture into the world of Intel's Sandy Bridge processors comes in a 21.5-inch form factor (below), and this whopping 27-inch model. It's the most powerful iMac we've ever seen, and it totes a 2TB HDD in partnership with a 256GB SSD so it doesn't get too bogged down. Graphics are catered for with an AMD Radeon HD 6970M, and as gaming on Macs becomes more popular you'll need every megabyte of its 1GB of DDR5 memory. It looks pretty darn nice, too.

Read our Apple iMac 27-inch 2011 review

7. Apple iMac 21.5-inch 2011 - £999

Apple's smaller all-in-one addition is a powerful upgrade from 2010 models, and not hugely pared down from its bigger 27-inch brother. Its 21.5-inch screen doesn't need quite as much power, and the price reflects this. The graphics chip - a HD 6750M in this case - can handle games and video editing, and there's even a built-in 720p camera to take advantage of Apple's FaceTime. Just about everything impressed us here, and it's a great first step if you want to move away from Windows.

Read our Apple iMac 21.5-inch 2011 review

8. YoYoTech Dragon F-58 - £599

Sitting firmly at the cheaper end of desktop PCs, YoYoTech's scaly computer packs a surprising amount of power for the price. The graphics card - an AMD Radeon HD 5850 - is at the heart of the beast, and it's able to chomp through demanding DirectX 11 titles. It comes overclocked out of the box, too, and we have a lot of faith in YoYoTech's expertise. It's not the best PC you can buy, but it's certainly the best at this price point.

Read our YoYoTech Dragon F-58 review

9. NoFan SET A40 fanless bundle - from £399

Not hearing the whirr of a fan when you power up your PC may be a little discerning to some, but, as the name suggests, NoFan's PC is completely silent. This is thanks to a humongous passive cooler that sits atop the CPU, and a completely silent 400W PSU. You'll need to add all the usual components (motherboard, CPU, RAM, hard drive and graphics card), but QuietPC will provide a pre-built rig for a premium. Totally innovative, and worth paying extra for a little piece and quiet.

Read our NoFan SET A40 fanless bundle review

10. Chillblast Fusion Rocket - £750

Another reasonably-priced gaming rig, the Chillblast has a trick up its sleeve: flash the BIOS of its AMD HD6950 and you get a fully-fledged HD6970, giving you a £300 graphics card for the price of a £200 one. Chillblast has installed this transmographying graphics card in conjunction with some reasonable components, such as a Core i5 2500K processor overclocked to 4.5GHz, and a 1TB hard drive. A great little performer, especially given the reasonably low price.

Read our Chillblast Fusion Rocket review

Related Stories

• Opinion: Don't pay for hardware specs you don't need

Buying Guide: Processor upgrade: how to choose the right CPU

Upgrading your PC's processor isn't the easiest or cheapest way to boost its performance, but it can deliver dramatic results. The right chip can transform a sluggish machine into a powerhouse.

The practicalities of fitting a processor have remained largely unchanged since the early days of PCs, but selecting a new chip isn't so simple. Once it was just a matter of picking the one with the highest GHz rating. Now you've got to keep that in mind, along with an increasingly complex set of other variables.

First, you need to look at the CPU socket on the motherboard to see whether you need an Intel or AMD processor. Next, you need to consider the processor itself. Each manufacturer will have a slew of subtly different technologies, all packaged inside chips with names that tell you little about them.

When you've chosen a chip type, you'll need to weigh up how many processor cores you need. Should you pick fewer faster cores or go for more cores that run at a comparatively slow speed? Then there are nuances like automatic turbo modes and hypertheading to consider.

Finally, you need to think about the interplay between your CPU and graphics processing unit.

Lets consider one factor in detail: the number of cores. As perverse as it sounds, more cores don't necessarily mean more speed. Speed is largely determined by the applications you're running, and how they use those cores.

Thankfully, many video editing suites and games are now written to use multiple cores simultaneously. The same applications (including Photoshop, Adobe Premiere and HD video players) can take advantage of GPU acceleration. You therefore need to think about your system holistically, considering your requirements.

Video-editing professionals, for example, might opt for a dual-core MacBook Pro, with a GeForce chip for encoding HD streams with Final Cut Pro. This would do a better job than a PC with a quad-core CPU and a non-programmable graphics card.

There are other factors to consider, too. For example, Intel's new Sandy Bridge CPUs have an astonishingly good Quick Sync video encoding engine, which is often better than GPU acceleration.

We'll guide you through the business of picking the best chip. It might not be an easy decision, but with the array of new silicon, you're sure to find one that's a good fit for you and your system.

The great processor war heats up

The battle between AMD and Intel has been raging for decades, but it feels like Intel may have gained the upper hand. Even the billion-dollar recall of its new 6 Series motherboards failed to upset the launch of its Sandy Bridge processors - the week the recall was announced, Intel's share price actually rose. Such is the market's confidence in Intel's silicon.

AMD has been trailing in raw performance since the launch of Intel's Core 2, which blew the Athlon 64 out of the water. Throwing cores at the problem hasn't helped either - six-core Phenom II chips can't keep pace with their Intel quad-core rivals.

Don't write AMD off just yet, though. This summer we're expecting to see AMD processors based on a completely new design, currently called Bulldozer, which could pose a real threat to Intel's dominance.

Bulldozer's design looks very advanced and efficient. AMD has yet to confirm which chips it's planning to launch, but the internal structure is very different from what's gone before.

The basic unit within Bulldozer is a dual-core module, which can share resources across its two execution engines or divide them up for increased parallelism. The first Bulldozer chips, codenamed Zambezi, will be come in four, six or eight-core variants, which suggests they'll build on AMD's current strategy of offering more cores for less than Intel.

The biggest problem AMD faces will be branding. It's already begun its Fusion project, which - like Intel's Sandy Bridge chips - integrates a graphics core onto the same die as a CPU. Bulldozer, however, won't be part of the Fusion line-up for over a year.

AMD's first Fusion processors have been built around the low-end Bobcat core, which is aimed at netbooks and thin and light laptops - somewhere above an Atom, but below a Core i3.

The first Fusion chips for desktop use will be based on Phenom II, and will launch around the same time as Bulldozer. That gives AMD the problem of trying to communicate the relative strengths and weaknesses of many different CPU types at the same time.

By comparison, Intel has already begun retiring many of its Nehalem-based Core processors, giving it two main platforms - Atom and Core - which are relatively easy to understand. Pentium and Celeron will continue to exist as value brands, but even these will use Sandy Bridge designs and the new socket 1155 motherboards.

Only at Intel's extreme high end, where six-core CPUs based on the older Gulftown design are still being released, is there any inconsistency - and these are already starting to look irrelevant in the wake of Sandy Bridge's performance (see the 980x review).

By the time the new Bulldozer Fusion chips arrive, Intel should have completed its plans to migrate Sandy Bridge onto a 22nm process. With that sort of performance increase and cost reduction, AMD could be left trailing behind.

12 CPU choices

Intel processors: The high end

Intel Core i7 980X
Performance
Price: £750

Want the finest CPU money can buy? Look no further than the Intel Core i7 980X. It's the undisputed world heavyweight champ among chips. Just remember you'll need a lot of it. The money, that is.

But what a processor you get in return. The Core I7 980X is, of course, a six-core beast. But this is six-cores Intel style, so that's two threads per core and a dozen of those little green graphs when you fire up task manager. That's unparalleled, er, parallelism in a PC processor.

In that context, even AMD's Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition looks rather ordinary. It may have six cores. But each is single-threaded only. Moreover, AMD's underlying CPU architecture is pretty ancient while the Intel Core i7 980X is literally the latest thing, right down to is impossibly tiny 32nm underpinnings. What it isn't however, is unique. The recently released Core i7 970 is largely the same six-core, 12-thread processor at a slightly less offensive price point.

Read the full Intel Core i7 980X review

Verdict: 4.5/5

Intel Core i5 2500K
Budget
Price: £190

Ready or not, here they come. Intel is rolling out a thoroughly overhauled range of PC processors based on its new Sandy Bridge microarchitecture. Our first taste of the new chips comes in the form of the Intel Core i5-2500K and Intel Core i7-2600K desktop CPUs.

Thanks to the baffling array of chips, sockets and brands, we've barely got to grips with Intel's existing CPU range. Certainly Intel's main rival, AMD, has no answer in outright performance terms to the chips Intel already offers, but the relentless march of technology must go on.

So, ignore the familiar Core i5 and Core i7 branding. These are all new processors and they're ready to roll.

As it happens, Intel could actually do with more powerful and, crucially, more power efficient processors for laptop PCs. Deep down, that's what Sandy Bridge is really about. However, as we'll learn, Sandy Bridge has a lot to offer for the desktop, too, including exciting new features such as a hardware video transcoding engine and much-improved integrated graphics.

Read the full Intel Core i5 2500K review

Verdict: 4.5/5

Intel Core i7 2600S
All Rounder
Price: £235

Another day another new Sandy Bridge CPU, and another new suffix to get your head around. This time it's the Intel Core i7 2600S.

Many people have heard of the Core i7 2600K by now, the unlocked overclocking demon that was part of the original Sandy Bridge launch, but the Core i7 2600S you may not have heard of.

It's also pretty well known that if a second-gen Core CPU doesn't have a K at the end of the model number, its pretty much game over for any sort of serious overclocking. So what does the S stand for, and does it mean even more features turned off?

Well no, the S models represent more low power units, but just not as low powered as the T models. So instead of the 95W of a standard 2600 part, they have a TDP of 65W, as compared to the 45W of the T series.

Apart from the low power rating, the Intel Core i7 2600S still retains all the familiar features of the 2600 family: four cores, eight threads and 8MB of Smart Cache. But as with all the S class chips, it's clocked slower than the rest of the their family.

In the case of the Core i7 2600S, this means it runs at 2.8GHz compared to the 3.4GHz (3.8GHz max Turbo) of the i7 2600 and Intel Core i7 2600K.

Read the full Intel Core i7 2600S review

Verdict: 4/5

Intel processors: The mid-range

Intel Core i5 2300
Performance
Price: £150

This is the lowest specced of Intel's new Core i5 series, but it only costs a little less than the faster 2500. That said, there's not a lot of difference in performance either unless you're planning to overclock, so you may as well opt for this slightly cheaper model and save a little cash.

This quad-core Sandy Bridge CPU has a base clockspeed of 2.8GHz, and can accelerate to 3.1GHz under Turbo mode. Like all i5s, it doesn't have Hyperthreading enabled, but it's still more than a match for all but the very fastest of AMD's six-core Phenom IIs in everything except demanding video encoding applications.

Even though it's Intel's least expensive quad-core, the i5 2300 still isn't cheap. Factor in the price of an H67 motherboard, and it highlights a significant problem for a lot of the current Core line-up: there are a lot of three, four and even six-core AMD processors available for less, and if you're on a really tight budget there's every reason to be swayed by them.

Verdict: 4/5

Pentium G6950
Budget
Price: £75

This the cheapest CPU currently available from Intel, costing just £75, but it still offers an impressive balance of performance and value.

Its low price can be attributed to the fact that it's not a new chip. Launched last year and based on the Clarkdale architecture, the Pentium Dual Core G6950 is almost identical to the outgoing Core i3s in that it requires a Socket 1156 motherboard, has an on-board graphics accelerator (albeit a low power one) and is designed around the superb Nehalem core.

With a base clock of 2.8GHz and no Turbo Boost or Hyperthreading abilities, the G6950 can't keep up with its Core i3 brethren, but it's proved itself to be a top overclocker in the past.

Ultimately though, if you're looking at spending less than £100 on a new CPU, you'll probably be more attracted to the even cheaper Athlon IIs. They aren't as fast as the G6950, but they'll get the job done perfectly well for less.

Verdict: 3/5

Intel Core i3 2100
All Rounder
Price: £108

After all the Sandy Bridge goodness without the quad-core price-tag? Then the dual-core Intel Core i3 2100 might well be up your street.

While the high-end unlocked Sandy Bridge CPUs, the Intel Core i7 2600K and Intel Core i5 2500K were rightfully taking all the plaudits for being overclocking monsters, the 2600K especially, not many people were looking at the other end of the food chain.

That is to say in the value end of the market where the lowly Intel Core i3 2100 is to be found. As with all the current Sandy Bridge processors, it's built on the 32nm process and manages to pack 504 million transistors into its die.

The Core i3 2100 is clocked at 3.1GHz with 3MB of L3 cache, which sounds like it should be a fairly blazing chip. However it has no Turbo Boost and is totally locked down, so there's no overclocking fun available on the processing side.

This is a pity, because some of the best overclockable Intel chips in the past have come from this segment of the market.

You may not be able to overclock the CPU core but you can though do a smidgen of tinkering to the HD2000 graphics core integrated into this second generation Core CPU.

Read the full Intel Core i3 2100 review

Verdict: 3/5

AMD processors: The high-end

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T BE
Performance
Price: £208

This new hex-core chip is symptomatic of AMD's current predicament: that its most expensive PC processors sell for barely one-third the price of Intel's.

And that's not a situation the new AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition is going to change – despite the fact that it's officially AMD's fastest and most expensive chip.

With a retail sticker around £215, the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition is priced on a par with the very cheapest of Intel's Core i7 processors such as the Intel Core i7 870. Nevertheless, it serves up six execution cores to the 870's four. Six-core Intel CPUs are far more expensive, starting around £700.

Then again, Intel's cores do much more work per cycle. Until it releases the long awaited Bulldozer CPU architecture, AMD needs to sell more cores for less cash. In the meantime, this revised six-core Phenom II X6 raises AMD's game incrementally with an increase in clockspeed from 3.2GHz to 3.3GHz.

For the most part, the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition is not a new processor. It's based on AMD's increasingly familiar six-core Thuban die, a chip that can trace its roots directly back to the AMD Hammer CPU architecture first seen in 2003. Thus, it's a 45nm CPU with 512k cache per core and a further 6MB of shared cache memory.

Read the full AMD Phenom II X6 1100T BE review

Verdict: 4.5/5

Phenom II X4 970BE
Budget
Price: £140

By now, we were hoping to able to get our hands on AMD's new Bulldozer archtecture processors, but there's still no sign of them, so instead we back with the familiar Phenom II theme. Give it up for the new AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition.

Based on the 45nm Deneb core that's being doing duty in quad-core Phenom II chips for nearly two years, the AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition sports a heady stock clockspeed of 3.5GHz. Yup, that's precisely 100MHz or three per cent faster than the Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition, previously the fastest X4 model.

This kind of incremental upgrade is symptomatic of an ageing processor architecture on it last legs. But while Bulldozer can't come soon enough, there's no reason why the 970 shouldn't be an attractive CPU. It all comes down to pricing and positioning. At £140, the 970 squares up directly against Intel's Core i5 760. Game on.

Read the full AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition review

Verdict: 4/5

Phenom II X6 1055T
All rounder
Price: £140

Remember when AMD launched its first quad-core processor in 2007? We can, because back then it seemed like AMD was months from keeling over stone dead. Today, the company is in much finer fettle. For proof, look no further than the new AMD Phenom II X6 1055T.

Somehow, AMD has managed to produce a six-core PC processor and sell it for just over £10 more than its best quad-core chip, the Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition. It's actually cheaper than several Intel quads. Inspect the detail specifications and the Phenom II X6 1055T only gets more impressive.

The transistor count has grown from 758 million transistors to 904 million. And yet the smaller quad-core 965 is rated at 140 Watts while this new six-core 1055T is a 125 Watt chip. Of course, at 2.8GHz, the 1055T is clocked quite a bit lower than the 3.4GHz 965 BE. But AMD has clearly done something right.

Read the full AMD Phenom II X6 1055T review

Verdict: 5/5

AMD processors: The mid-range

Phenom II X4 955BE
Performance
Price: £107

When AMD rolled out its chips for the new AM3 CPU socket, we were baffled. AM3 dragged AMD into the DDR3 era. But with that in mind, why were the first AM3-compatible CPUs groveling models with cut-down caches, lower frequencies or fewer cores?

Surely the new socket deserved a brand new processor to showcase its beefed up bandwidth and multi-core majesty? Finally that chip has arrived in the form of the new Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition.

For those of you without a double first in cryptography, allow us to decode the ludicrous product name. For starters, it's a Phenom II chip and that means cool-running, high-clocking 45nm silicon and hence not AMD's utterly rubbish 65nm transistors. X4, of course, indicates four cores, which is as good as it currently gets.

Read the full Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition review

Verdict: 4/5

Athlon II X2 260
Budget
Price: £50

Want to build a cheap media server? You may have been tempted by one those bare-bones net-tops with a dual-core Atom processor and an Nvidia video card, but why would you go for one of those when it's easy to build a system around this chip for less than £250?

Unlike the Atom, the dual core Athlon II is a 'proper' processor that supports out-of-order execution. It'll handle most games and multitasking, and doesn't suffer from the same grinding slowdown as an Atom.

The fact that it isn't as power-efficient as Intel's mobile marvel isn't such a concern if you're after a low-end desktop. In fact, the difference in overall performance between this and the Phenom II X2 565BE won't be tangible to most people.

It sits between five and ten frames per second behind its stablemate in games, and seconds (rather than minutes) behind in video encoding. It's one of the best ways to build a silent, low-cost second system for simple tasks. The question is, are you sure you want to?

Verdict: 4/5

Phenom II X2 565BE
All Rounder
Price: £90

Whatever happened to the triple core X3 processors that AMD was hoping would win over the sub- £100 crowd? They seem to have sold out or vanished from most of our favourite online retail stores, leaving us with this twin-cored chip as AMD's best performer at that price.

The X2 565BE certainly looks like good value for money. A high 3.4GHz clockspeed and unlocked multiplier make it a solid performer for older games. The problem is that, overall, it doesn't convince us that it's worth saving the £17 compared to the quad core X4 955BE, which is almost twice as fast for video encoding and has the framerate advantage in the increasing number of well threaded games.

Intel's lowest priced retail CPU, the Pentium G6950, will turn in better performance for less too. If you're after some real bargain silicon - for a silently-running second machine, for example - then you should be looking at the cheaper Athlon IIs instead. The 565BE is likely to be a disappointment.

Verdict: 2/5

How to keep your CPU cool

You could be forgiven for thinking that a processor upgrade is the most complex system improvement you can make. Sure, PC open-heart surgery can be nerve-wracking, but when everything is in place modern motherboards work in concert with processors to make the business of configuration very easy.

Indeed, everything is pretty much automatic. If you do run into problems, your chip may be overheating. This is increasingly likely if you're re-using your existing cooler. Read on as we detail the correct procedure for keeping new and existing chips cool.

Optimise your cooling

1. Check current temperatures

Before you start taking anything out of your machine, you need to check how hot your processor is running. CPU Hardware Monitor provides detailed temperature information for your CPU cores and motherboard, and is free.

Take a reading with nothing else running (idle) and then when another running Super Pi (under load). Then check these figures against your CPU's datasheet.

2. Remove your existing fan

Removing processor fans is easy. For Intel components, unlock the four holding pins by turning them clockwise; you should then able to pull the whole thing out.

The fans that ship with standard AMD processors are also simple to remove - just lift and release the holding arm and then gently ease the cooler out. Don't forget to unplug the fan power cable before removing the cooler completely.

3. Wipe off the thermal grease

Before you put the cooler down on your workbench, clean off the existing thermal grease using a tissue and possibly a little solvent.

You will need some to add more thermal grease later though, so if you don't have any new stuff to hand, it's best to place the cooler on a piece of paper without cleaning it so that no impurities are mixed into the existing grease. Remove the CPU and clean the grease off that too.

4. Clean the blades

Use a piece of folded tissue or a soft brush to clean along the line of the fan blade. Don't push too hard, though, as these can break off under pressure. Dust tends to accumulate on the top of the fan blades, so it shouldn't be too hard to clean away.

If your fan is in a housing, take it apart if needed so that you can get better access to the heatsink and the fan.

5. Add new thermal grease

Put the CPU back into its socket and apply a new layer of thermal grease to the top of the processor. Remember, your aim is to have a very fine layer to fill in any gaps between the CPU and heatsink, not to make a grease sandwich. A small blob should be sufficient.

If you didn't remove the old thermal grease, check how much is on the processor and remove any if possible.

6. Reseat and retest

Put the cooler back in its home and wiggle it in place a little to make sure that the thermal grease is spread evenly between the cooler and CPU.

Next, clip the retaining arms or pins back into place and reconnect the fan to your system. Boot your machine and run the same tests that you did originally. If your CPU is still running too hot then a new cooler is needed.

Related Stories

• Seagate breakthrough heralds bigger hard drives
• Buying Guide: RAM upgrade: the complete guide
• Buying Guide: Hard drive upgrade: what to buy and how to fit it
• Philips unveils LCD monitor with built-in TV
• AMD demos new 9-series chipset