Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune are coming to streaming for the first time. The two game shows will arrive on Hulu and Peacock in September, according to a report from The New York Times.
Under the multi-year deal, new episodes of Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune will appear on both streaming services one day after they air on linear TV. The agreement will include older episodes of each show, too.
For decades, Jeopardy! and Wheel of Fortune have been staples on linear TV, and their expansion to Peacock and Hulu is part of a broader pattern that’s bringing key series, like WWE’s Monday Night Raw, to streaming.
As pointed out by The Hollywood Reporter, this streaming deal isn’t directly connected to the legal battle involving Sony — the producer of Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy! — and its distributor, CBS.
Last year, Sony sued CBS over claims it breached their agreement by not doing enough to boost revenue from licensing the shows. A judge granted Sony the rights to distribute Wheel of Fortune and Jeopardy! in April, but an appellate court ruled last week that CBS can keep distributing the shows during the legal battle.
Regardless of what kind of exercise you’re into, if you’re working out, you’ll want a pair of wireless workout headphones. They allow you to be free and untethered during a serious weight-lifting session, a 5K run, an hour at the skate park and everywhere in between where you’re moving and sweating a ton. There are dozens of great wireless headphones and wireless earbud options out there, but for exercise in particular, there are additional factors to consider before picking one up like water resistance, battery life and overall comfort.
At Engadget, we’ve tested a bunch of fitness-ready headphones and earbuds to come up with our top picks, plus some advice to consider before you pick up a pair. All of our top picks below will work in and out of the gym, so you can invest in just one pair and make those your daily driver. If you’re primarily a runner, check out our list of best headphones for running.
The Apple AirPods Pro have an IP54 rating, which protects them from brief encounters with dust and splashes. While that’s more dust protection than many other earbuds we tested, it’s the same level of water resistance that most exercise-specific competitors have. We generally like the AirPods Pro, but the Beats Fit Pro offer many of the same features and conveniences (namely good transparency mode and the H1 chip), with a design that’s more appropriate for working out.
The Powerbeats Pro are a good alternative to the Beats Fit Pro if you’re a stickler for a hook design. However, they cost $50 more than the Fit Pro (although they often hover around $180) and don’t offer any significant upgrades or additional features aside from their design. They’re also quite old at this point (launched in 2019) and it appears Beats is putting more effort into upgrading and updating its newer models rather than this model.
The Soundcore AeroFit Pro is Anker’s version of the Shokz OpenFit, but I found it to be less secure and not as comfortable as the latter. The actual earbuds on the AeroFit Pro are noticeably bulkier than those on the OpenFit, which caused them to shift and move much more when I was wearing them during exercise. They never fell off my ears completely, but I spent more time adjusting them than I did enjoying them.
The most noteworthy thing about the Endurance Peak 3 is that they have the same IP68-rating that the (now discontinued) Jabra Elite 8 Active do, but they only cost $100. But, while you get the same protection here, you’ll have to sacrifice in other areas. The Endurance Peak 3 didn’t blow me away when it came to sound quality or comfort (the hook is more rigid than those on my favorite buds of a similar style) and their charging case is massive compared to most competitors.
Before diving in, it’s worth mentioning that this guide focuses on wireless earbuds. While you could wear over-ear or on-ear headphones during a workout, most of the best headphones available now do not have the same level of durability. Water and dust resistance, particularly the former, is important for any audio gear you plan on sweating with or taking outdoors, and that’s more prevalent in the wireless earbuds world.
Most earbuds have one of three designs: in-ear, in-ear with hook or open-ear. The first two are the most popular. In-ears are arguably the most common, while those with hooks promise better security and fit since they have an appendage that curls around the top of your ear. Open-ear designs don’t stick into your ear canal, but rather sit just outside of it. This makes it easier to hear the world around you while also listening to audio, and could be more comfortable for those who don’t like the intrusiveness of in-ear buds.
Even if a pair of headphones for working out aren’t marketed specifically as exercise headphones, a sturdy, water-resistant design will, by default, make them suitable for exercise. To avoid repetition, here’s a quick primer on durability, or ingression protection (IP) ratings. The first digit you’ll see after the “IP” refers to protection from dust and other potential intrusions, measured on a scale from 1 to 6. The second refers to water resistance or even waterproofing, in the best cases. The ratings for water resistance are ranked on a scale of 1 to 9; higher numbers mean more protection, while the letter “X” means the device is not rated for protection in that regard.
All of the earbuds we tested for this guide have at least an IPX4 rating, which means there’s no dust protection, but the buds can withstand splashes from any direction and are sweat resistant, but probably shouldn't be submerged. For a detailed breakdown of all the possible permutations, check out this guide published by a supplier called The Enclosure Company.
Active noise cancellation (ANC) is becoming standard on wireless earbuds, at least those above a certain price point. If you’re looking for a pair of buds that can be your workout companion and serve you outside of the gym, too, noise cancelation is a good feature to have. It makes the buds more versatile, allowing you to block out the dull roar of your home or office so you can focus, or give you some solitude during a busy commute.
But an earbud’s ability to block out the world goes hand-in-hand with its ability to open things back up should you need it. Many ANC earbuds also support some sort of “transparency mode,” or various levels of noise reduction. This is important for running headphones because exercising outdoors, alongside busy streets, can be dangerous. You probably don’t want to be totally oblivious to what’s going on around you when you’re running outside; adjusting noise cancelation levels to increase your awareness will help with that. Stronger noise cancelation might be more appealing to those doing more indoor training if they want to block out the dull roar of a gym or the guy exaggeratingly lifting weights next to you.
All of the Bluetooth earbuds we tested have a battery life of six to eight hours. In general, that’s what you can expect from this space, with a few outliers that can get up to 15 hours of life on a charge. Even the low end of the spectrum should be good enough for most athletes and gym junkies, but it’ll be handy to keep the buds’ charging case on you if you think you’ll get close to using up all their juice during a single session.
You’ll get an average of 20 to 28 extra hours of battery out of most charging cases and all of the earbuds we tested had holders that provided at least an extra 15 hours. This will dictate how often you actually have to charge the device — as in physically connect the case with earbuds inside to a charging cable, or set it on a wireless charger to power up.
In testing wireless workout headphones, I wear them during every bit of exercise I do — be it a casual walk around the block, a brisk morning run or a challenging weight-lifting session. I’m looking for comfort arguably most of all, because you should never be fussing with your earbuds when you should be focusing on working out. In the same vein, I’m cognizant of if they get loose during fast movements or slippery when I’m sweating. I also use the earbuds when not exercising to take calls and listen to music throughout the day. Many people will want just one pair of earbuds that they can use while exercising and just doing everyday things, so I evaluate each pair on their ability to be comfortable and provide a good listening experience in multiple different activities.
While I am also evaluating sound quality, I’m admittedly not an audio expert. My colleague Billy Steele holds that title at Engadget, and you’ll find much more detailed information about audio quality for some of our top picks in his reviews and buying guides. With these headphones for working out, however, I will make note of related issues if they stood out (i.e. if a pair of earbuds had noticeably strong bass out of the box, weak highs, etc). Most of the wireless workout headphones we tested work with companion apps that have adjustable EQ settings, so you’ll be able to tweak sound profiles to your liking in most cases.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/audio/headphones/best-wireless-workout-headphones-191517835.html?src=rss
©
© Engadget
Finding the best wireless earbuds can make a huge difference in your day-to-day life, whether you’re commuting, working out, traveling or just zoning out with your favorite playlist. Today’s earbuds aren’t just about cutting the cord — they’re smarter, more comfortable and packed with features like active noise cancellation, customizable sound profiles and even spatial audio support.
With so many options out there, there’s truly a pair of wireless earbuds for everyone. Whether you want something that's perfect for running, built for all-day wear at the office or tuned for serious audiophiles, the choices have never been better. Some models prioritize battery life, others deliver premium sound quality and a few somehow manage to do it all without blowing your budget. No matter what you’re looking for, we’re here to help you find the right set of wireless earbuds to match your lifestyle.
When it comes to shopping for earphones, the first thing to consider is design or wear style. Do you prefer a semi-open fit like AirPods or do you want something that completely closes off your ears? If you’re shopping for earbuds with active noise cancellation, you'll want the latter, but a case can be made for the former if you want to wear them all day or frequent places where you need to be tuned in to the ambient sounds. The overall shape of earbuds can determine whether you get a comfortable fit, so can the size and weight, so you’ll want to consider all that before deciding. And remember: audio companies aren’t perfect, so despite lots of research, the earbud shape they decided on may not fit you well. Don’t be afraid to return ill-fitting earbuds for something that’s more comfortable.
As wireless earbuds have become the norm, they’re now more reliable for basic things like consistent Bluetooth connectivity. Companies are still in a race to pack as much as they can into increasingly smaller designs. This typically means a longer list of features on the more premium sets of earbuds with basic functionality on the cheapest models. Carefully consider what you can’t live without when selecting your next earbuds, and make sure key items like automatic pausing and multipoint connectivity are on the spec sheet. You’ll also want to investigate the volume and touch controls as you’ll often have to sacrifice access to something else to make that adjustment via on-board taps or swipes. Some earbuds even offer app settings to tweak the audio profiles or firmware updates to improve performance over time.
For those in the Apple ecosystem, features like auto-pairing with devices, especially with AirPods Pro 2, can be an added advantage, while Android users may want to look for models that offer similar cross-device functionality.
When it comes to battery life, the average set of earbuds lasts about five hours on a single charge. You can find sets that last longer, but this is likely enough to get you through a work day if you’re docking the buds during lunch or the occasional meeting. You’ll want to check on how many extra charges are available via the case and if it supports wireless charging.
Companies will also make lofty claims about call quality on wireless earbuds. Despite lots of promises, the reality is most earbuds still leave you sounding like you’re on speakerphone. There are some sets that deliver, but don’t get your hopes up unless reviews confirm the claims.
Sound can be subjective, so we recommend trying before you buy if at all possible. This is especially true if you're an audiophile. We understand this isn’t easy when most of us do a lot of shopping online, but trying on a set of earbuds and listening to them for a few minutes can save you from an expensive case of buyer's remorse. If a store doesn’t allow a quick demo, most retailers have return policies that will let you take earbuds back you don’t like. Of course, you have to be willing to temporarily part with funds in order to do this.
We also recommend paying attention to things like Spatial Audio, Dolby Atmos, 360 Reality Audio and other immersive formats. Not all earbuds support them, so you’ll want to make sure a perspective pair does if that sort of thing excites you, especially if you plan to use them for playback of high-quality audio.
The primary way we test earbuds is to wear them as much as possible. We prefer to do this over a one- to two-week period, but sometimes embargoes don’t allow it. During this time, we listen to a mix of music and podcasts, while also using the earbuds to take both voice and video calls. Since battery life for earbuds is typically less than a full day, we drain the battery with looping music and the volume set at a comfortable level (usually around 75 percent).
To judge audio quality, we listen to a range of genres, noting any differences in the sound profile across the styles. We also test at both low and high volumes to check for consistency in the tuning. To assess call quality, we’ll record audio samples with the earbuds’ microphones as well as have third parties call us.
When it comes to features, we do a thorough review of companion apps, testing each feature as we work through the software. Any holdovers from previous models are double checked for improvements or regression. If the earbuds we’re testing are an updated version of a previous model, we’ll spend time getting reacquainted with the older buds. Ditto for the closest competition for each new set of earbuds that we review.
The newest version of the Powerbeats Pro have an improved, comfortable design, balanced bass and new H2 chips and a heart rate sensor inside. But heart rate support is currently limited on iOS, and there's a possibility those capabilities make it onto the next AirPods Pro models.
The Galaxy Buds 3 combine ANC with an open-type design, which renders the noise-blocking abilities of the earbuds mostly useless. Still, there’s great low-end tone with ample bass when a track demands it. There are also lots of handy features, most of which require a Samsung phone. But at this price, there are better options from Google, Beats and Sony
I really like the overall shape of the Momentum Sport earbuds. They’re more comfortable than the Momentum True Wireless 4 and fit in my ears better. What’s more, the body temperature and heart rate sensors work well, sending those stats to a variety of apps. However, that sport-tracking feature works best with Polar’s app and devices, so there’s that consideration. Also, the audio quality and ANC performance isn’t as good as the MTW4, and these earbuds are pricey.
There’s a lot to like about the Solo Buds for $80. For me, the primary perk is they’re very comfortable to wear for long periods of time thanks to some thoughtful design considerations. You only get the basics here in terms of features and, as expected, the overall sound quality isn’t as good as the pricier models in the Beats lineup. You will get 18 hours of battery life though, since the company nixed the battery in the case and beefed up the listening time in the buds themselves.
Bose created something very unique for this set of earbuds that allows you to stay in-tune with the world while listening to audio content. The clip-on design is very comfortable, but sound quality suffers due to the open-type fit, especially when it comes to bass and spatial audio.
These stick buds have a compact design that’s comfortable to wear and the warm sound profile is great at times. However, overall audio performance is inconsistent and there’s no automatic pausing.
Retooled audio, better ambient sound mode and reliable multipoint Bluetooth are the best things the MW09 has to offer. They’re expensive though, and you can find better ANC performance elsewhere.
Most wireless earbuds will last five hours on a single charge, at the least. You can find some pairs that have even better battery life, lasting between six and eight hours before they need more juice. All of the best wireless earbuds come with a charging case, which will provide additional hours of battery life — but you'll have to return each bud to the case in order to charge them up.
Comparing sound quality on earbuds and headphones is a bit like comparing apples and oranges. There are a lot of variables to consider and the differences in components make a direct comparison difficult. Personally, I prefer the audio quality from over-ear headphones, but I can tell you the sound from earbuds like Sennheiser’s Momentum True Wireless 3 is also outstanding.
With new models coming out all the time, tracking the hours of battery life for each this can be difficult to keep tabs on. The longest-lasting earbuds we’ve reviewed are Audio-Technica’s ATH-CKS5TW. The company states they last 15 hours, but the app was still showing 40 percent at that mark during our tests. The only downside is these earbuds debuted in 2019 and both technology and features have improved since. In terms of current models, Master & Dynamic’s MW08 offers 12 hours of use on a charge with ANC off (10 with ANC on) and JBL has multiple options with 10-hour batteries.
There are plenty of options these days when it comes to increased water resistance. To determine the level of protection, you’ll want to look for an IP (ingress protection) rating. The first number indicates intrusion protection from things like dust. The second number is the level of moisture protection and you’ll want to make sure that figure is 7 or higher. At this water-resistance rating, earbuds can withstand full immersion for up to 30 minutes in depths up to one meter (3.28 feet). If either of the IP numbers is an X, that means it doesn’t have any special protection. For example, a pair of wireless earbuds that are IPX7 wouldn’t be built to avoid dust intrusion, but they would be ok if you dropped them in shallow water.
A secure fit can vary wildly from person to person. All of our ears are different, so audio companies are designing their products to fit the most people they can with a single shape. This is why AirPods will easily fall out for some but stay put for others. Design touches like wing tips or fins typically come on fitness models and those elements can help keep things in place. You’ll likely just have to try earbuds on, and if they don’t fit well return them.
PlayStation 5 doesn’t support Bluetooth audio without an adapter or dongle. Even Sony’s own gaming headsets come with a transmitter that connects to the console. There are universal options that allow you to use any headphones, headset or earbuds with a PS5. Once you have one, plug it into a USB port on the console and pair your earbuds with it.
May 2025: Updated to ensure top picks and buying advice remain accurate.
March 2025: Updated the top pick for the best sounding wireless earbuds - runner up.
January 2025: Updated the top pick for best sounding wireless earbuds.
July 2024: Updated our list to include the Samsung Galaxy Buds 3 Pro.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/audio/headphones/best-wireless-earbuds-120058222.html?src=rss
©
© Engadget
The Trump administration is backing cable company Cox in a battle that could determine whether Internet service providers are forced to disconnect users accused of piracy.
Cox, which says ISPs shouldn't have to terminate customers based on unproven allegations of copyright infringement, has been seeking Supreme Court review of Sony's victory in the underlying lawsuit. The court asked the US solicitor general to file a brief expressing the views of the United States government. Solicitor General John Sauer, a Trump nominee, filed a brief yesterday.
The Supreme Court "should grant certiorari to address the first question presented in Cox's petition: whether an ISP materially contributes to copyright infringement by continuing to provide Internet access to particular subscribers after receiving notice that copyright infringement has occurred on their accounts," Sauer wrote.
© Getty Images | gaby_campo
Earlier this month, Nintendo received a lot of negative attention for an end-user license agreement (EULA) update granting the company the claimed right to render Switch consoles "permanently unusable in whole or in part" for violations such as suspected hacking or piracy. As it turns out, though, Nintendo isn't the only console manufacturer that threatens to remotely brick systems in response to rule violations. And attorneys tell Ars Technica that they're probably well within their legal rights to do so.
Sony's System Software License Agreement on the PS5, for instance, contains the following paragraph of "remedies" it can take for "violations" such as use of modified hardware or pirated software (emphasis added).
If SIE Inc determines that you have violated this Agreement's terms, SIE Inc may itself or may procure the taking of any action to protect its interests such as disabling access to or use of some or all System Software, disabling use of this PS5 system online or offline, termination of your access to PlayStation Network, denial of any warranty, repair or other services provided for your PS5 system, implementation of automatic or mandatory updates or devices intended to discontinue unauthorized use, or reliance on any other remedial efforts as reasonably necessary to prevent the use of modified or unpermitted use of System Software.
The same exact clause appears in the PlayStation 4 EULA as well. The PlayStation 3 EULA was missing the "disabling use... online or offline" clause, but it does still warn that Sony can take steps to "discontinue unauthorized use" or "prevent the use of a modified PS3 system, or any pirated material or equipment."
© Getty Images
Whether you're listening to playlists on your daily commute or zoning out with a podcast at home, wireless headphones can make your audio experience much more comfortable. With no cords to untangle or get caught on your bag, they’re a great pick for anyone who wants convenience without compromising on sound quality. If comfort and immersive audio are high on your priority list, over-ear wireless headphones are often the way to go — they wrap around your ears to help block out the world and deliver rich detailed sound that earbuds can sometimes miss.
There’s a wide range of over-ear wireless headphones to choose from, whether you want active noise cancellation, long battery life or a comfy fit for marathon listening sessions. Of course, if you're after something a little more compact or tailored to a specific use case, we also have you covered with our buying guides for the best earbuds, the best gaming headsets and the best budget earbuds. But if wireless headphones with top-tier sound and a comfortable, over-ear design are what you're after, read on — we’ve tested the top options to help you find the right pair.
When it comes to shopping for a good pair of wireless headphones, the first thing you’ll need to decide on is wear style. Do you prefer on-ear or over-ear headphones? For the purposes of our buyer’s guide, we focus on the over-ear style as that’s what most noise-canceling headphones are nowadays. Sure, you can find on-ear models with ANC, but over-ear designs are much more effective at blocking sound. Speaking of noise cancellation, you’ll want to determine early on if you even want that. If you frequently crank up the beats in noisy environments, you’ll want to not only make sure it’s there, but also make sure it’s good, preferably with adaptive ANC. If you plan to use your new headphones in quieter spaces, skipping ANC can save you some money.
The next area to consider is features. We recommend trying to get the most bang for your buck, but as you’re shopping around you should determine which items are must-haves and what you can live without. And don’t take basic things like automatic pausing and Bluetooth multipoint connectivity for granted, as not all companies include them. We also suggest reading reviews to see how well a company’s more advanced features work. This will help you decide if those are something you’re willing to (likely) pay extra for. Keep an eye on better battery life estimates to avoid disappointment, as some manufacturers promise more hours than real-world testing delivers. And don’t be easily swayed by lofty promises about call quality without verifying them.
Sound can be subjective, so we recommend trying before you buy if at all possible. We understand this isn’t easy at a time when we’re doing most of our shopping online. But trying on a set of headphones and listening to them for a few minutes can save you from an expensive case of buyer’s remorse. We also recommend paying attention to things like Spatial Audio, Dolby Atmos, 360 Reality Audio and other immersive formats. Not all headphones support them, so you’ll want to make sure a perspective pair does if that sort of thing excites you. If you plan to use your headphones for other media besides music, checking for latency is also a must — some delay can impact playback for things like movies or games, even if most true wireless headphones now offer minimal lag.
The primary way we test wireless headphones is to wear them as much as possible. We prefer to do this over a one- to two-week period, but sometimes embargoes don’t allow it. During this time, we listen to a mix of music and podcasts, while also using the earbuds to take both voice and video calls. Since battery life for headphones can be 30 hours or more, we drain the battery with looping music and the volume set at a comfortable level (usually around 75 percent). Due to the longer battery estimates, we’ll typically power the headphones off several times and leave them during a review. This simulates real-world use and keeps us from having to constantly monitor the process for over 24 straight hours.
To judge the best Bluetooth headphones, we focus on higher-quality audio by listening to a variety of genres and paying close attention to how each style sounds. We also test at both low and high volumes to check for consistency in the tuning. To assess the quality of phone calls, we’ll record audio samples with the headphones’ microphones as well as have third parties call us.
When it comes to features, we do a thorough review of companion apps, testing each feature as we work through the software. Any holdovers from previous models are double checked for improvements or regression. If the headphones we’re testing are an updated version of a previous model, we’ll spend time getting reacquainted with the older set. Ditto for the closest competition for each new set of headphones that we review.
Apple’s AirPods Max are premium, well-designed over-ear headphones that incorporate all of the best features you find on standard AirPods: solid noise cancelation, spatial audio and easy Siri access. However, their $550 starting price makes them almost prohibitively expensive, even for Apple users. There are better options available at lower prices, but if you can pick up the AirPods Max at a steep discount, they might be worthwhile for the biggest Apple fans among us.
The On-Trac headphones have an almost infinitely customizable design, and that’s what’s most unique about them. The sound profile offers some nice detail, but lacks dynamic range overall. ANC is average at best and there aren’t any advanced features that will make your life easier. Well, except for the hearing health monitor which is actually handy. All told, that’s not a lot in a set of $500 headphones.
The Sonos Ace is an excellent debut for the company’s first headphones. The combination of refined design, great sound quality and home theater tricks creates a unique formula. However, ANC performance is just okay and key functionality is still in the works for many users.
If most headphones don’t have the level of bass you desire, the ULT Wear is an option to consider. The low-end thump isn’t for everyone, but there are also plenty of handy features and a refined look to make the $200 set more compelling than many in this price range.
While the WH-CH720N are a great affordable option, we prefer the Audio-Technica in the budget category. Sony’s cans are lightweight with good sound quality, but ANC struggles at times and they’re made with a lot of plastic.
The Studio Pro lacks basic features like automatic pausing, and multipoint connectivity is only available on Android. Moreover, they’re not very comfortable for people with larger heads. Overall sound quality is improved, though, and voice performance on calls is well above average.
Bose’s latest flagship model has a lot to offer, but its trademark Immersive Audio feature can be inconsistent across different types of music. There’s still world-class ANC, excellent comfort and a clearer transparency mode, but for the price, the non-Ultra model is a better choice right now.
The MH40 are a great set of headphones if you favor crisp, clear and natural sound that isn’t overly tuned. This pair showcases the company’s affinity for leather and metal too, but limited customization and short battery life for non-ANC cans kept this set from making the cut.
The company’s trademark pristine sound is on display here, but the Px8 are more expensive and not nearly as comfortable as the Px7 S2.
I typically look at three factors: design, sound quality and features. In terms of design, I’m usually looking to see if the build quality of the headphones feels cheap and plasticky. Plenty of companies use plastic, but they can do so in a way that doesn’t look or feel like budget models. For sound quality, I want to hear a nice, even tuning where highs, mids and lows are all well represented. No overly boomy bass or scooped out mids. I also want good clarity where you can pick up fine details and an open, immersive soundstage. Features is typically a distant third, but if a company doesn’t cover basic functionality (automatic pausing, transparency mode, multipoint Bluetooth, etc.) it can be an indication of overall quality.
“Best” can be pretty subjective, but I always recommend going to a place where you can listen to the headphones you’re thinking about buying before you commit. Sometimes this isn’t possible, so you’ll want to check return policies. I also recommend doing some research to determine what your priorities are in a new set. Are you an audiophile who wants the best sound quality? Is powerful active noise cancellation (ANC) the most important? Would you rather have conveniences like automatic pausing?
Sony consistently tops our list with its 1000X line. This is mostly due to the combination of sound quality, ANC performance and the truckload of features these headphones pack in. I’ll be the first to tell you that there are better sounding options and other companies, like Bose, offer more effective noise cancellation. But when you add everything up, no one comes close to the full slate of tools Sony puts in its premium headphone line.
Exorbitant price tags don’t mean better audio quality. Bowers & Wilkins’ headphones are on the high end for wireless noise-canceling models and they sound amazing. However, Audio-Technica’s M50xBT2 is much more affordable and doesn’t have ANC, but these headphones have a warm, natural sound profile that I find very inviting. At the end of the day, it will come down to personal preference, but you don’t need to spend a lot to find great headphones.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/audio/headphones/best-headphones-wireless-bluetooth-120543205.html?src=rss
©
© Billy Steele for Engadget
Graduating college is a major milestone — then comes the not-so-fun part: learning to be an adult. If you know a recent grad and want to celebrate, there are countless gadgets and services you can give them to make the next step in their life a little less daunting. We spend our days testing exactly these kinds of products and figuring out which ones are actually good; if you need a hand coming up with something, we’ve rounded up a few of our favorite college graduation gift ideas below.
©
© Engadget
In this podcast, Motley Fool analyst Sanmeet Deo and host Mary Long discuss:
Then, Motley Fool analyst Asit Sharma joins Mary for a look at AMD and how the chip company is different from its biggest competitor.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More »
To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool's free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you're ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.
A full transcript is below.
Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you’ll want to hear this.
On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a “Double Down” stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you’re worried you’ve already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it’s too late. And the numbers speak for themselves:
Right now, we’re issuing “Double Down” alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join Stock Advisor, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.
*Stock Advisor returns as of April 28, 2025
This video was recorded on April 23, 2025
Mary Long: The robots are coming, but maybe not very quickly. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. I'm Mary Long, joined on this fine Wednesday morning by Sanmeet Deo. Sanmeet, great to see you. How are you doing?
Sanmeet Deo: Hey, nice to see you.
Mary Long: We've got one story that's going to be our single story today because there's a lot to talk about in this report, none other than Tesla. Dropped earnings yesterday after the bell. Lots of anticipation with this one. Obviously, it's a large company. It's a company led by a controversial leader. Let's put it at that. Coming into this report, we had Wedbush analyst Dan Ives. He's a longtime Tesla Bull, and he told NBC that this report is a ''Moment of truth for Tesla.'' We're going to dive into the details of this report in a second. As I said, it's our single, our sole story today. But let's start with the big picture idea here. You own Tesla? What truth was revealed in this report?
Sanmeet Deo: I think the truth is that the automotive segment is hitting the brakes. The one number that can symbolize everything that's happening for their segment this quarter was the 2.1% operating margin, which was significantly lower than last year's 5.5%. The whole story is really captured in that margin number. It's lower average selling prices for vehicles, lower delivery volumes, volume time price, lower revenues, and higher R&D expenses. That margin has significantly is lower than what they've had in really over the past few quarters, so very concerning in that sense. Now, energy and storage, and services came in very strong. That was great, but they're much smaller part of their revenue. The question is have they taken the eye off the ball? Is competition hitting them harder than the market suspects? The one other truth I'll say is that the market liked Musk's comment, which I think we're going to talk about, about reducing his time with DOGE and getting back to focusing on Tesla.
Mary Long: Let's hone in on that piece, because in spite of that comment seems to be what is causing this rise in Tesla stock that we're seeing this morning. We also saw a rise after hours yesterday, pre-market this morning, and that's only continued throughout today. But again, you just walked through the earnings. There were some glimmers there in other segments, but this automotive segment, as you said, largely was hitting the brakes. It seems that the surge is largely attributable to Musk's comment that he'll be taking time away from DOGE and returning to Tesla as soon as May. I've got a question on this, but is that what you two attribute this jump to, or do you think, maybe, there's something else going on?
Sanmeet Deo: No, absolutely. This quarter, if you look at it, with automotive segments being probably 80, 85% of their revenues, this is a bad quarter for them. Their vehicle deliveries were disappointment. That we already knew. That was already reported. Profitability came in a lot lower than expected. I would anticipated on a report like this, the stock would be down. But given that Musk made a statement that he's going to focus back on Tesla, that's something that has been an overhang on the stock. Also, the market is very big today off of relief rally. That, too, is helping their stock bounce.
Mary Long: This time allocation comment is an interesting one to me because I can see, obviously, why Musk returning to Tesla could be a boost for the company. But I also wonder how much of Tesla's miss here, in this quarter, is attributable to the time that he's not spending at Tesla versus how much of it is attributable to the political associations that he's tied himself to. How do you think about that? How much of this miss, especially in the automotive segment, do you say, hey, this is a problem that's due to Musk not actually being at the helm, and that will be solved by his return to the helm or actually, this is a problem that's attributable to the political associations that Musk has made for himself.
Sanmeet Deo: I think a decent amount could be alleviated with Musk spending more time at Tesla. He's known to have a tight reign and high attention to detail when he's focused on the company. I've heard reports from people that work at Tesla that he's very detail-oriented. He's very in the weeds when it comes to the company, but that's if his attention is there. His attention has not been there, so that's that eye off the ball part where he's not allocating the time needed to really guide that ship. Some of it, too, is increasing competition, cheaper cars from China, causing some effects there. I think there's been a lot of talk about brand degradation. Tesla is a brand. It's successful a lot due to its brand. Musk political associations have rubbed people the wrong way. People may not like his associations, how much time he's spending. It has taken a hit to the brand. That's pretty noticeable in the numbers as well.
Mary Long: We talked about this morning about how Wall Street is buying up Tesla. They like this comment from Musk. But if you look at insider activity at the company, it seems that over the past 12 months, Tesla insiders have been doing the opposite. Over the past 12 months, Tesla insiders have sold 28 times and bought zero times. You like to pay attention to insider activity here at The Fool. What do you make of this? Is this a red flag, yellow flag, or something that you can put an asterisk by and justify somehow?
Sanmeet Deo: I think there's no flag on the play, honestly. All these sales were part of a planned or pre-arranged stock option exercise strategy. I like to look at open market buys and open market sales when it comes to insider buying or transactions, and none of the ones I saw were really open market sales. Although there was one open market sale in the past six months from Elon's brother, Kimbal Musk, for 75,000 shares totaling $25.6 million. Maybe he's buying a new house? I don't know. That in itself could possibly be a yellow flag, but all the others I'm not too concerned about.
Mary Long: If he's buying a new house with $25.5 million, I want to see that house. [laughs]
Sanmeet Deo: Absolutely.
Mary Long: Tesla's all-time high was last hit on December 17th when it closed at nearly $480. Today, it's closer to 250, again, it's moving up, so that might change by the end of the day, but that's where it is right around the time we're recording. Breakfast News, which is our daily newsletter here at The Fool. It gives a rundown of daily market happenings. They asked readers this morning in the newsletter when they think Tesla will return to its all-time high, if ever. I'll pose that question to you before we dive into more of the details of this report. When do you think Tesla will hit its all-time high again, if ever? How do you think it gets there?
Sanmeet Deo: I think it's going to hit the all-time on April 23rd, 2030. Now, I'm kidding. [laughs] I think it could be at least five plus years or so, something like that. Usually, when we see these huge massive market corrections, what I've noticed is whether it be the market or certain stocks, they hit highs, they correct heavily, and then it takes a long time to hit that all-time high again at some point. That's assuming the businesses continue to succeed and do well. In order for them to get there, the automotive segment needs to gain its growth momentum, and we're going to talk a little bit about that later, too, about how they could do that. Some positive traction on the fully autonomous driving humanoids, which we'll talk about, too. That could really boost the enthusiasm for the future prospects of the company and the business, and the stock. If they can start making more traction rather than empty promises, then it could hit all-time high again.
Mary Long: The large weak spot in this report was the automotive segment. We were told during the earnings call that, ''Given economic uncertainty, resulting from changing trade policy, more affordable options are as critical as ever.'' The idea of a more affordable Tesla has been teased for a while now, though plans have remained ambiguous, elusive. Growing this segment back and gaining traction here again, a clear path to that seems to be, if you can make this affordable option a reality, that would be a great way to, again, revive this automotive segment. How do you see that playing in? Again, I've mentioned that these plans for an affordable Tesla remain ambiguous. What would you like to see that plan and practice for a more affordable Tesla actually look like?
Sanmeet Deo: I think that affordability is absolutely critical to Tesla's automotive thesis related to their electric vehicles because they're getting heavy competition from Chinese makers. Like I said before, they're producing very cheap cars. Now, whether those cars are just as cheap here in the United States versus those in their home countries is something to wonder. When I think of affordability, when it comes to cars, I think the Gold Standard Hondas and Toyotas. Those are the most affordable that are out there. You see them all over, and they're for the masses. If Tesla can create a car for the masses, I think they need to get it to around $20,000 price point because you have Hondas and Toyotas at their lower base models at around $23,000, $25,000. I think that if they can get to that price point, make it profitable, it could be huge for the automotive segment. Then you'll start seeing Teslas literally everywhere, not just for the high-end. I think, though, they need to create a clear product roadmap and what is going to look like for them to get there, because Musk has the tendency to overpromise and underdeliver, and they need to flip that script and really make it plausible that they can achieve this mass market.
Mary Long: If Tesla can develop this more affordable option, that's one way to revive its automotive segment. But if we see vehicle deliveries truly begin to flatten out, as seems to be happening in this report, what does that mean for the Tesla growth story?
Sanmeet Deo: It's going to be challenging because, again, automotives vehicles are about 80 something percent of their revenues. If that just starts to flatten, that's a majority of their business that's flattening. While energy and storage and services, and all these other great pie-in-the-sky autonomous and humanoids are great. They're not a huge core part of their business. This is vehicles are a core part of their business. If they can't make it work, their business will struggle. Now, that's not to say that autonomous and humanoids can come out of nowhere at some point down the road and make up for all those losses. That could happen, but that's still a very aggressive and far-out into the horizon prospect.
Mary Long: Then let's focus on where those other business segments are today. The energy generation and storage segment of Tesla has seen nice steady growth over the past several quarters. This is an area of the business that actually saw notable revenue gains this quarter. Where is that growth coming from?
Sanmeet Deo: They're getting a significant increase in demand for both residential power walls, grid scale, the megapac battery solutions because of things like renewable energy adoption, growing need for grid stabilization, resilience, rising energy costs. They're in a sweet spot of the market where their demand for their products are high.
Mary Long: We had this whole conversation at the top about what it means that Musk is away from Tesla, what it might mean if he returns. What's interesting to me is that we're seeing this growth in the energy segment while Musk is away, running DOGE. Is that a bright spot? Does that mean that, hey, the energy side of the business can actually effectively run itself?
Sanmeet Deo: I think the overall operations, the day-to-day, can probably do a decent job, like we've seen, because of how they've performed on a day-to-day basis without Musk, but the overall vision, strategic direction of the company. I've always thought of Musk and Tesla, you can't get into the mind of Musk, really. But he has some grand vision of how things are going to all piece together when it comes to autonomous and cars and energy, humanoids, all this stuff is going to it's probably altogether in his mind. He's probably having a hard time delivering the message to all of us. That whole vision is needed, and I think him providing that and focusing on that is going to help guide things. Day to day, they can probably do well, but whether they can scale to another level without him, I don't know if that can happen.
Mary Long: A piece of that vision that's long been teased is this idea of the robotaxi and the Cybercab. Musk said on the call that ''We remain on track for the pilot launch of robotaxi in Austin by June.'' June is right around the corner, so that feels very soon. It will be interesting to see if that is indeed something that the company can deliver on. But notably, Musk also says, the purpose-built robotaxi product Cybercab, is scheduled for volume production starting 2026. We throw these terms around a lot, robotaxi, Cybercab. What actually is the difference between the two products, and how do they work together?
Sanmeet Deo: I'm glad you're asking, because that's critical, and I always confused myself before I actually looked into it. The robotaxis, basically, they're going to utilize existing Tesla models, primarily the Model Y, to run the fully self-driving mode. Cybercabs are going to be specifically built cars for the robotaxi service. Its whole purpose is to be used as an autonomous taxi service. The robotaxi service it's a pilot program in Austin. They're going to collect data. They're going to get that experience out there, see how it operates. Then the dedicated cyber calves will come out, start being produced around 2026, which then they'll roll out at some point. On a side note, I was in Phoenix a few weeks ago, and I saw Wemos all over the place, and they're pretty wild. It's very futuristic. That's all I can really say about them.
Mary Long: I'm sure. We'll close out by touching on what I think is your favorite piece of this company, which is the humanoids. Again, this is something that we're still seeing ramp up in production, still in development largely. Musk said, though, on the earnings call that he expects to have thousands of Optimus robots working in Tesla factories by the end of the year, and that he expects to scale Optimus faster than any product he thinks in history, to get millions of units per year as soon as possible. He later clarified that timeline and said that perhaps the company could reach a million bots per year in less than five years, maybe four. Why is Optimus allegedly so easy to scale/do you buy this timeline fully, or is this another example of Musk overpromising and potentially underdelivering?
Sanmeet Deo: [laughs] I love humanoids. I'm a humanoid fan. But I think it's potentially easy to scale because of Tesla's expertise in manufacturing, AI, vertical integration from developing all these, at least the EVs and the software that they build. They can scale it. Whether this timeline is believable, I'm not buying it, because I think that, again, Musk has a tendency to overpromise and underdeliver. Could it happen in 10-20 years? Possibly. Is it going to happen in the next couple of years? Not so sure about Optimus.
Mary Long: Whenever this does happen, Musk has called out that he thinks that the humanoid robots can bring in $10 trillion in revenue for Tesla. What does your analysis say? Regardless of when these robots are actually delivered at the scale that Musk is talking about, do you see the same possibilities in terms of revenue that he does?
Sanmeet Deo: Ten trillion does sound like a wild number, probably very unachievable. But if you take a step back and think about it, there's about 128 million households in the United States. Maybe you assume each one purchases at least one. They've been rumored to be about 30,000 once they've brought the cost down to a reasonable amount. That right there is about three trillion in revenues for households, commercial side of humanoid production, could it hit seven trillion? Possibly, you have them in factories, even in businesses, even in restaurants, you have in different places. Then you have to factor in maybe parts or pairs servicing all the revenues that you get from that, as well, because it's not just going to be sales of these humanoids. It's going to be all the other ancillary stuff, too. Ten trillion wild sounds wild. Maybe not that wild.
Mary Long: Over the weekend, humanoid robots raced against actual people in a half-marathon in Beijing. The point of this isn't for humanoids to outrun humans. I saw this all over the news, and I was like, wait, really, what is the point here? It seems to me maybe more like a publicity stunt or just a test case to see, hey, how capable are these robots actually doing human actions? Well, close out on a fun question. Optimus was not in this race, but had it been, how do you think it would have stacked up?
Sanmeet Deo: I think it would have been terrible. If you've ever seen them walk, they walk really slow and really measured, and I don't even know if they can run, honestly. That was funny. The first thing I thought of when I saw that race was, why are humans trying to create something better than us? Why do we do that?
Mary Long: Well, and it misses the point of why people run marathons or half marathons in the first place. We all know that we can't hit the fastest time in the world, but we're about striving to be better and for self-improvement.
Sanmeet Deo: Exactly. I wouldn't be as impressed if a human breaks the fastest speed record versus a human doing it.
Mary Long: For sure. Sanmeet Deo, always a pleasure. Thanks for coming onto the show and for giving us a bit more insight into Tesla Earnings today.
Sanmeet Deo: Thanks, Mary.
Matt: Hello. My name is Matt.
McKinley: I am McKinley. We are the Father-Son team that brings you history dispatches.
Matt: History Dispatches is a short daily history show where we talk about topics from all over the world and all throughout history. We talk about people, places, events, and even objects.
McKinley: While anything is fair game, we have a soft spot for the weird, the wacky, and the obscure things you may have never even heard of.
Matt: Do you have any examples?
McKinley: How about Waj tech, the bear who rose to the rank of corporal in the Polish Army, or the Great Emu War? Or how about the biggest treasure taken in the history of piracy?
Matt: That sounds cool, but do you have a story about the head of Oliver Cromwell? What about the ancient Library of Alexandria? A story about the first woman to climb Mount Everest would be cool.
McKinley: Well, we got those as well. Every weekday, there's something new and fun.
Matt: Sweet. How do I get this trove of goodness?
McKinley: All you have to do is go to historydispatches.com or just look for History Dispatches in your favorite podcast app.
Mary Long: NVIDIA is not the only chip company in town. Up next, Asit Sharma joins me for a look at Advanced Micro Devices, or AMD, the company that's trying to give NVIDIA a run for its money. Asit, despite the fact that semiconductor stocks are largely cyclical, it feels like they've been in the news all the time over the past few years. One of the names that's often in the news nearly every day is NVIDIA, but a competitor that gets a little bit less time in the spotlight is AMD. The news, the media love NVIDIA, you love AMD. Maybe, help us set the table here. These are both chip stocks, but how are they different? What is AMD doing that's different than what NVIDIA is doing?
Asit Sharma: Mary, yes, to full disclosure. I do own both companies. I own AMD, I own NVIDIA. I have both recommended NVIDIA and AMD, and services I personally run, and services that I work on. I like both companies. AMD is a little bit different because it's more of a diversified player in the semiconductor ecosystem. Although I'm sure there's someone out there who's listening right now and saying, wait, NVIDIA is becoming incredibly diversified. It's branching into so many areas. But the traditional way we look at how semiconductor companies operate I think you give AMD the edge in diversification. It plays in the chip market, so it makes chips for servers. It makes embedded chips that go into industrial Internet of Things devices. It makes chips for gaming, GPUs for gaming, like NVIDIA does. It also makes GPU accelerators, which is where all the attention is focused. I didn't know you were saying. It seems like if these are such cyclical companies, why are they always in the news cycle? But I think we're going to be talking about such companies for quite a while.
Mary Long: Help me understand this. AMD's biggest customers include Microsoft, Meta, Alphabet, Sony, Oracle, big names. We know a bunch of them. The list also continues beyond those big names. NVIDIA does not publicly disclose its customer list, but it is widely believed that its biggest customers are get ready, Microsoft, Meta, Alphabet, Amazon. There's a lot of overlap between those customer lists. You mentioned that AMD is more diversified. But if I'm the person who works at one of these tech companies and I'm in charge of buying up AI chips, what's getting me to buy AMD chips rather than solely purchasing from NVIDIA?
Asit Sharma: Mary, first, we're going to make a distinction here because you said AI chips, and that signals to me that you want to talk about GPU accelerators, the kinds of chips that are used for artificial intelligence, specifically generative AI that help us use large language models and are being applied to so many different industries. If you are, let's say, a hyperscaler, like an Amazon Web Services, or a Microsoft as your or an Oracle, why would you want to buy these chips? Number 1, it decreases your sole reliance on NVIDIA, which has been leading the charge and really developing the strongest, most powerful chips for the last three years since GenAi exploded onto the scene. But also, there's a growing argument within these companies that we want to be able to offer the ability to use generative AI at a lower cost to our customers and for our own bottom lines. Hence, Oracle just placed an order for about 30,000 MI 355x. I think that's the name of the accelerator, a series from AMD, which is an order worth billions of dollars. This was disclosed just a few weeks ago in Oracle's earnings conference call. Because one of the reasons is that total cost of ownership over time for Oracle is going to be less versus buying similar GPUs from NVIDIA. There's some case where you want to buy NVIDIA's GPUs to offer that power and performance. But there's lots of places in the generative AI world for inference, the outputs of these models and for some training purposes, too, where AMD's chips are just as good for lower cost.
You name NVIDIA as being the player with the strongest, fastest chips. The general consensus is that, OK, AMD creates chips that can compete pretty well with NVIDIA, but they still have to catch up with NVIDIA from a technological standpoint. As retail investors, how can we understand the intricacies of the differences between these technologies? What does that path of catching up to NVIDIA from a technological standpoint actually look like for AMD from the outside? I think in some ways, it's becoming a little bit easier to understand than it used to be. There's one very visible thing that I think so many listeners may have heard of. One of the things that makes NVIDIA's products great not only is the GPU hardware, but it's the software libraries, collectively known as CUDA, that you get when you buy NVIDIA GPUs. Some of these come with the purchase for these big hyperscalers and even, academic institutions. Some of those have higher costs associated with them, but they make those GPUs really powerful, and that's been an edge that NVIDIA has had for a long time. Now, that's a closed system. It's NVIDIA'S own.
AMD has chosen to go another route with ROCM. This is their open-source version of accelerator libraries, which they basically invite the world to come and help improve that. That's getting better and better. One of the things that we need to see out of AMD is not just being able to be within spitting distance on the GPU side, but to have its software libraries become more powerful. To bring down that total cost of ownership, but also just to make their GPUs function at a level that NVIDIA's do. Now, there's another big picture thing for folks to watch in the coming years. NVIDIA is so ahead of the race because it's now moved on from supplying these great GPUs to supplying rack-scale systems. You and I were talking about Vera Rubin a couple of weeks ago. All these crazy names that NVIDIA has that are poetic. What this simply means is that instead of buying GPUs and making them operate, companies that are hyperscale companies or think even enterprise businesses now can connect those GPUs on racks and have those GPUs communicate with each other and become this integrated unit of computation that's much more powerful than just buying them piecemeal and throwing them up on a server rack. Rack Scale means interconnecting a lot of these GPUs. NVIDIA has the connection technology, which is ENV Link, and I have talked about.
They also have these great GPUs. We're going to Asterisk this bit because I know you're going to ask me about an acquisition that AMD made that answer is part of this question, but AMD needs to develop Rack Scale systems to really compete with NVIDIA. These are the two things. Get better in software and migrate to Rack Scale systems. I think between those two things, it can really have a competitive offering. I think we've moved beyond the day where we're always looking at the specs. Like, how fast is this GPU? What's the performance of it? What's the workload? How's it performed vis-à-vis benchmarks? AMD is getting closer and closer on the benchmarks. Now it becomes a question of software and making those GPs talk together.
Mary Long: If you're an outside investor, one of the ways that you might measure AMD's progress in those two areas is not just listening to what the company actually says, but also keeping tabs on their R&D numbers. Between 2021 and 2022, AMD nearly doubled its R&D spend. It's continued to tick up in the years since, but at a slower pace than that interval. We haven't yet seen that payoff in AMD's margins. Operating margin was north of 22% in 2021. It's under 8% in 2024. For comparison, NVIDIA's operating margin was nearly 62.5% for fiscal 2025. You're seeing foundation being laid by AMD to try to catch up with NVIDIA. When and how will investors be able to tell whether those R&D investments are actually paying off for the company?
Asit Sharma: One of the things I want to point out before I answer that question, Mary, is that NVIDIA's operating margin of 62.5% is an unfair comparison, not just to AMD, but to any major company. This is probably the first or second-highest operating margin in the S&P 500. If you think about the biggest and baddest US companies, this is NVIDIA riding a wave of demand in which it's exercising a lot of pricing power. Historically, NVIDIA's operating margin is healthy because it's more of a GPU-dominant business. It can range between 15 and 30% in good times. But it's a company that also has negative operating margins at the bottom of the cycle, we've seen that too, out of NVIDIA. Right now, it's taking that advantage and exercising the fact that its products are so in demand. As an NVIDIA investor, I watch that as one of the things that's going to come back down to earth, what should be an operating margin for AMD in a good part of the cycle? To me, it should be somewhere around 20% above. You mentioned it was hitting that in 2021. Again, it's a more diversified business. It has different paths to win.
I think we're seeing that R&D investment paying off this year in 2025. We should see operating margin move up to around 10% this year. The cadence looks like it's going to hit somewhere between 12 and 14% in 2026 and should hit around 20% in 2027. Only now we're seeing the investment in that R&D payoff, but that was a lot of quick-turn investment where AMD pivoted to the accelerator space because they saw the opportunity. Recall something that Lisa Su did when she first took over at AMD in October of 2014, which is to say, guys, we're going to innovate. We're not going to worry too much about the outside world, and we're going to make great products. It took two or three years for those investments to pay off, but it became look a leader in the chip space. This year, it displaced Intel for CPU coverage in data centers. I think as these years play out, the next three years, we're going to see that operating margin climb all the way up to 20% by 2027.
Mary Long: You teased out news about this recent acquisition that AMD has pursued and followed through on. If you're one way to play catch-up in this chip race is to build things in-house, another way to grow your company might be to acquire businesses that are doing work that you're already doing or that you haven't yet touched. AMD earlier in August of last year, announced that they would be pursuing an acquisition of ZT Systems. They're a service maker. AMD shelled out nearly $5 billion for that company, paid about 75% of that price tag in cash. What does ZT Systems do, and how is that going to expand AMD's potential?
Asit Sharma: ZT Systems is a designer of server systems, rack systems that I was just referring to in data centers. It not only designs them, but it manufactures them. AMD, yeah, shell out that $5 billion. Interestingly enough, Mary, it's going to actually sell off the manufacturing portion of ZT Systems because at its heart, AMD is a design company. They design chips. They don't really manufacture them. TSMC is one of its partner companies that actually manufactures chips. It's going to do the same thing here. That will help it also keep from maybe competing with some of its own suppliers. But I like this a lot because it lets AMD take a technology of its own, which is called Infinity Fabric, and basically replicate what NVIDIA is doing with its rack-scale systems. We should see in a system that's called the MI 4,000 sometime in 2026, AMD's first real convincing answer to NVIDIA's dominance. My thesis all along is that AMD doesn't have to displace NVIDIA, just needs a few billions off the top. NVIDIA is rolling with tens of billions of dollars of GPU revenue every quarter. Just give AMD a few billions of that, and this company is going to see a great boost to its margins in free cash flow. Free cash flow, I should mention, is going to more than double this year, even after AMD has announced a tariff hit from export controls on a lower-level chip it was designing for the Chinese market. It's still going to double its free cash flow this year, and it's on its way to a triple probably by 2028 in terms of free cash flow.
Mary Long: Throughout this entire conversation, we've been making the comparison between NVIDIA and AMD and you just pulled out some numbers stating that, AMD's free cash flow is going to double, potentially triple relatively soon. If you look back from where we are now over the past year, whereas NVIDIA shares are up nearly 30% in that year-long time frame, shares of AMD have fallen over 40% in the same time period. What gives? It sounds like you're laying out a very compelling case for AMD and its growth path forward. Why does the current share price not seem to reflect that?
Asit Sharma: I think the market's concerns are legitimate. The market is saying, look, if you are so great, AMD, then why didn't we see you explode in GPU sales in the first year after you said you were also going to play in this business? They did get off to a slow start out of the gate. There are questions about execution. Companies want to know if AMD really can provide that cost advantage. The other thing, I think, that poses a cloud over AMD is just this comparison. I've argued all along that AMD doesn't need this business to succeed as a company, but the market sees it very much as a race between the two most capable makers of GPUs, and NVIDIA is today been so far ahead that I think it suffers from that comparison. There's execution risk, and there's also this, I think, slightly unfair comparison that AMD suffers under, but that's actually a good place to be. AMD loved that position when it was just a shadow beneath Intel and took over that business. I'm not trying to forecast that it's going to take over NVIDIA's business.
Again, I love both companies but I do think there's room in a company that now seems relatively cheap versus its future potential for it to grab some of that market share. I think the order that Oracle made that I mentioned at the beginning of this conversation is one of the first indications that the cost proposition is making sense to companies that don't want to keep spending indefinitely year after year at the pace that NVIDIA is rolling out as innovations. Remember, you and I were chatting about NVIDIA trying to have a new better product every 12 months. That's great until people's appetite and capital propensity starts to really push up against this. I liken it to people who have sort of free money and can keep buying the latest either car or stereo equipment, and then suddenly, when that money is tight, you start to really love what you've got. I like this vehicle. Sometimes those people turn into, and I have friends like this from trading out cars and leases to, I'm going to drive this car into the ground. I paid it off. I get that. AMD can really benefit from a world in which some of these hyperscalers are like, hey, I want to run some of these GPUs into the ground.
Mary Long: As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and are not approved by advertisers. With the Motley Fool Money team, I'm Mary Long. Thanks for listening. We'll see you tomorrow.
Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Asit Sharma has positions in Advanced Micro Devices, Amazon, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Oracle. Mary Long has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Sanmeet Deo has positions in Alphabet, Amazon, and Tesla. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Advanced Micro Devices, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, and Tesla. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
The creators of Halo and Destiny are finally ready to show off their next big project: Marathon. It’s a long-awaited title from Bungie and revives the classic Marathon IP in the form of a PvPvE extraction shooter. After a teaser nearly two years ago, the Sony-owned studio just spent an hour showing off Marathon gameplay and game mechanics and revealed the game will launch on September 23rd on PS5, Xbox Series S / X, and PC, with full cross-play and cross-save. There’s even an alpha test for fans to try out the game later this month, ahead of its full debut this year.
Marathon is set in a sci-fi universe in 2850, in the remains of Tau Ceti IV, which Bungie describes as a lost colony whose inhabitants disappeared without a trace. Rival factions have hired Runners to scavenge for what’s left behind, and anyone who signs up to be a Runner has given up their human form for a biosynthetic shell with unique abilities and stats.
As a Runner, you fight in a crew of up to three players across a variety of zones and points of interest. You can face rival runners in maps of up to 18 players, so up to six teams, in a bid to grab as much loot as possible and get out. While Marathon is designed to be played in crews, with contextual pings and shared objectives, you can also play solo instead of having to form a dedicated three-person team.
In Marathon runs, there will be what Bungie calls security forces, PvE enemies that roam the world. There are also creatures on these planets that are a threat when you’re navigating toward points on a map. You’ll have to choose whether it’s worth engaging with these enemies and risk revealing your location to rival teams or use a strategy of avoiding these threats in this PvPvE environment.
The maps are filled with bold and vibrant artwork and weapons, materials, and equipment that can be scavenged. Before a run, you build a loadout and select the Runner that fits your play style. In the alpha test, which starts on April 23rd, there will be four runners to choose from, including the stealthy Void character that can go invisible much like a Hunter from Destiny 2.
There’s also a Glitch runner that has fast-paced abilities and, like its name implies, can glitch out enemies. If you’re more of a run-and-gun type of player, Locus has a shield ability and looks similar to the slide and shotgun play of a Titan from Destiny 2. The final runner in the alpha test is Blackbird, designed for recon and scanning the area around you. While there are four runners in the alpha test, there will be six to choose from when Marathon launches in September.
During its livestream, Bungie published a nearly 20-minute video of highlights from 40 creators it says it recently invited to try the game.
If you die, you’ll drop your gear. But if you survive, your loot moves with you to future runs so you get more powerful gear and level up. Teammates can also revive you if you fail a mission.
Bungie isn’t putting a limit on team compositions, so that means everyone on a three-person team can select the same runner. There will be end-game challenges, ranked play, seasonal storytelling, community events, and more.
Bungie has even produced an original short cinematic that’s set in the Marathon universe. Written and directed by Alberto Mielgo (Love, Death, and Robots), this nearly nine-minute short will have Bungie fans poring over it for days to discover every little detail about the Marathon universe.
While Marathon is very slick-looking, there’s a lot riding on this game. It’s entering a crowded market of shooters and live-service games that have tried and failed to break through in recent years. Concord, also from a PlayStation studio, was the biggest example of a shooter that failed to take off recently, forcing Sony to take the game offline less than a month after launch and eventually shut down the studio behind it.
Spectre Divide, a Valorant-like free-to-play shooter, also shut down just months after its launch, with the developer behind the ambitious shooter shutting down, too. These high-profile failures add to the pressure that Marathon is already under on the back of Bungie’s success with Halo and Destiny and Sony’s ambitious live-service game effort that it has been scaling back recently.
The Marathon alpha test will be an opportunity for Bungie to show the world exactly how its latest game will stand out from the competition, and whether it does enough to tempt people away from hero shooters or Call of Duty and Fortnite into the extraction shooter genre that Escape from Tarkov has popularized.
The big question left for Bungie to answer is how much Marathon will cost. It’s not a free-to-play game, but the studio isn’t ready to talk about exact pricing just yet. Destiny 2 is technically free-to-play with an optional season pass, but a lot of additional content requires payment for access to raids, dungeons, and even some of the story content. It’s been a confusing model for new players over the years, so I’m hoping Bungie lands on a clear pricing structure for Marathon.
Marathon debuts on PS5, Xbox Series S / X, and PC on September 23rd. You can sign up for the Marathon closed alpha test on Bungie’s website or on Discord.
The stock market has become highly volatile following President Donald Trump's tariff announcements and heightened trade tensions with China. Stocks had some of their worst sessions since the COVID-19 pandemic five years ago. Yet, as the recent rally -- one of the market's best days ever -- showed, these moments can be great opportunities to buy high-quality stocks at lower prices.
Investors are not out of the woods yet. Although the broader market is currently off its lows, things could remain bumpy.
Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More »
Right now, there are some bargains in the technology sector. Nvidia (NASDAQ: NVDA), Taiwan Semiconductor (NYSE: TSM), and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) (NASDAQ: AMD) are proven winners down between 27% and 57% from their highs. Three Fool.com contributors circled them as top tech stock buys in this volatile market.
Here are the pitches for each:
Jake Lerch (Nvidia): My choice is Nvidia. As of this writing, Nvidia is down more than 27% from its all-time high. That means that Nvidia has shed nearly $1 trillion in market cap value in the last three months alone.
Clearly, the stock's decline this year has been severe. Yet, for the savvy investor, it is important to remain clear-eyed about the company's long-term prospects.
Granted, trade uncertainty and fears of a possible recession are hanging over the market, making it difficult to evaluate any company's prospects, let alone Nvidia's. The company is at the forefront of the artificial intelligence (AI) boom, so it's logical to fear that Nvidia's business could slump if the ongoing trade war were to bring on a global recession.
Nevertheless, smart buy-and-hold investing requires investors to set aside the latest headlines, which will come and go, and instead concentrate on the trends that will last. One of those unrelenting trends is the growth of AI. Remember, innovation cannot be stopped. It relentlessly marches on, leaving old forms of technology behind. See the typewriter, the slide rule, and the horse and buggy for proof of this.
So, if Nvidia's core investment thesis (the growth of AI) remains intact, how should investors view its stock right now? In my opinion, the stock looks cheap at current prices.
For example, as of this writing, Nvidia's price-to-earnings (P/E) multiple is 39x. That may seem expensive, but consider the stock's 10-year average.
NVDA PE Ratio data by YCharts. PE Ratio = price-to-earnings ratio.
As you can see, Nvidia's 10-year average P/E ratio is 60x. What's more, over the last five years, Nvidia's P/E ratio has dipped below this average only a few times, most of which were during the bear market of 2022.
So, for investors who still believe in AI's long-term growth and Nvidia's role in the next chapter of innovation, right now seems like a smart time to consider Nvidia stock.
Justin Pope (Taiwan Semiconductor): Investors love semiconductor stocks for a good reason. Chips are essentially the building blocks of technology, making AI and other new industries possible. Taiwan Semiconductor could be my favorite stock to profit in a world constantly demanding more chips.
You may not know it, but most chip companies, like Nvidia, don't build their chips. Instead, they outsource to foundries (companies that manufacture chips). Taiwan Semiconductor is the world's leading foundry, and it's not even close. Counterpoint Technology Market Research estimates that Taiwan Semiconductor manufactured approximately 67% of the world's chips in the fourth quarter of 2024, up from 58% in mid-2023. In other words, Taiwan Semiconductor is pulling away from its competitors.
Taiwan Semiconductor's dominance gives it competitive advantages. It has higher production capacity and the best equipment, meaning it's the clear choice for most chip designers, especially high-end chips like those Nvidia is selling for AI data centers. Taiwan Semiconductor should remain busy for the foreseeable future as AI grows and new industries, including humanoid robotics and self-driving vehicles, continue to fuel robust chip demand.
The caveat with Taiwan Semiconductor is its proximity to China, which has long claimed Taiwan as a province. The escalating China-U.S. tensions could shine an uncomfortably bright spotlight on Taiwan Semiconductor, a strategic chess piece for the U.S. The company has expanded into America and Europe, but the situation is still complicated.
While owning the stock comes with geopolitical risks, Taiwan Semiconductor's valuation could be too compelling to ignore. The stock's P/E ratio has slipped to less thanr 22, a steal for a dominant business that analysts believe will grow earnings by nearly 30% annually over the long term. Assuming geopolitical tensions don't boil over, Taiwan Semiconductor should make buyers at these levels very happy.
Will Healy (Advanced Micro Devices): Investors may not know what to make of AMD. The company is a leader in central processing units (CPUs) and GPUs, fueling its success in the gaming and PC segments. While its data center segment has also experienced rapid growth, it lags far behind market leader Nvidia in the AI accelerator market. Additionally, AMD's embedded segment is coming out of a downcycle.
At the same time, gaming has suffered since Microsoft and Sony have not updated their gaming consoles in years. More recently, concerns about tariffs and worries over price wars with Intel have further spooked investors.
Amid that news, investors have primarily focused on the negative, and AMD stock recently traded at 57% below its all-time high in March 2024.
Still, investors have plenty of reasons to expect a recovery. For one, the data center and client (PC) segments grew revenue in 2024 by 94% and 52%, respectively. That allowed AMD to increase its overall revenue by 14% during the year.
With more muted declines in the embedded sector and optimism about gaming, these business segments are finally coming out of a downcycle. Thus, analysts forecast revenue growth of 23% in 2025, leaving it on track for higher growth despite concerns about the company.
Its forward valuation also seems to confirm that the selling is overdone. The P/E ratio of almost 100 appears elevated as some business segments come out of a downcycle. Nonetheless, the forward P/E ratio of approximately 20 essentially makes AMD a value stock if current trends continue.
Admittedly, catching up to Nvidia in the data center market appears unlikely, and tariff worries add to uncertainty. Still, one cannot dispute that AMD has rapidly grown its data center revenue despite challenges. Moreover, with its lagging segments coming out of a downcycle, investors should consider taking advantage of the discounted stock price and low valuation.
Before you buy stock in Nvidia, consider this:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Nvidia wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.
Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $495,226!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $679,900!*
Now, it’s worth noting Stock Advisor’s total average return is 796% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 155% for the S&P 500. Don’t miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor.
*Stock Advisor returns as of April 10, 2025
Jake Lerch has positions in Nvidia. Justin Pope has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Will Healy has positions in Advanced Micro Devices and Intel. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Advanced Micro Devices, Intel, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft, short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft, and short May 2025 $30 calls on Intel. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Login