Gaming Laptop Archives - Page 5 of 15

March 24, 2023

Asus ROG Strix G16 Gaming Laptop Review: Beauty and Brawn

Among Asus’ esports-branded Strix laptop, the 16-inch ROG Strix G16 is the option for those who prefer something smaller. (The Strix G17 and Strix G18 sit above it in size). The ROG Strix G16 features a top-of-the-line Intel Core i9-13980HX Raptor Lake processor and Nvidia’s new GeForce RTX 4070. This marks the second laptop we’ve tested with Nvidia’s Ada Lovelace-based mainstream laptop GPU.

The ROG Strix G16 also represents the latest laptop transitioning from a 16:9 to 16:10 aspect ratio, with a 16-inch 1920 x 1200 (WUXGA) 165 Hz IPS display. This laptop has the goods to contend with some of the best gaming laptops on the market and includes 16GB of DDR5-4800 memory, a 1TB SSD, and a high-quality chassis that we’ve come to expect from Asus ROG.

With a price tag of $1,999 as configured, the ROG Strix G16 offers a lot of competent hardware, but how does it stack up to the competition?

Design of the Asus ROG Strix G16

Asus has completely redesigned the chassis of the ROG Strix G16 for 2023, and I think it looks great. Asus uses aluminum for the lid and plastic for the rest of the chassis. Plastic doesn’t have to mean “cheap,” as the ROG Strix G16 has a high-quality fit and finish throughout, along with a satin-like sheen.

Asus keeps it relatively subtle with the RGB lighting; a thin “under-glow” LED strip runs along the laptop’s front edge and wraps around to the sides and per-key lighting for the keyboard. Each is configurable using Aura Sync in the Asus Armoury Crate software.

Image 1 of 6

Asus ROG Strix G16 — (Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Speaking of the keyboard, Asus added five programmable hotkeys at the top of the keyboard, labeled M1 through M5. By default, they handle functions like volume, microphone on/off, and a shortcut to the Armoury Crate. The ROG Strix G16 does not feature a number pad despite seemingly being large enough to accommodate it.

The right side of the ROG Strix G16 is home to just two USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-A ports. However, the left side features one Thunderbolt 4 port, one USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C port, a 2.5 GbE port, HDMI 2.1 port, a 3.5mm audio jack, and a proprietary barrel-style power port. There are large vents along both sides of the laptop and rear to exhaust heat generated by the Core i9-13980HX and GeForce RTX 4070.

The laptop measures 13.94 x 10.39 x 0.89 inches (354 x 264 x 304 mm) and weighs 5.51 pounds (2.5 kg). That weight compares to 5.73 pounds for the Gigabyte Aorus 15X, 5.2 pounds for the HP Omen 16 and 4.4 pounds for the Razer Blade 15.

Asus ROG Strix G16 Specifications

Swipe to scroll horizontally

CPU	Intel Core i9-13980HX
Graphics	Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 (8GB GDDR6, 2,225 MHz Boost Clock, 140 W Max Graphics Power)
Memory	16GB DDR4-4800 (2x 8GB)
Storage	1TB PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD
Display	16-inch, 1920×1200, 165 Hz, 16:10
Networking	Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211, Bluetooth 5.2
Ports	1x Thunderbolt 4, 1x USB 3.2 Type-C Gen 2, 2x USB 3.2 Type-A Gen 2, 1x HDMI 2.1, 3.5mm headphone jack, 2.5 Gbps Ethernet
Camera	720p
Battery	90 Whr
Power Adapter	280 W
Operating System	Windows 11 Home
Dimensions (WxDxH)	13.94 x 10.39 x 0.89 inches (354 x 264 x 304 mm)
Weight	5.51 pounds (2.5 kg)
Price (as configured)	$1,999

Gaming Performance on the Asus ROG Strix G16

The Asus ROG Strix G16 is a powerful gaming laptop featuring an Intel Core i9-13980HX (8 performance cores, 16 efficiency cores, 5.6 GHz max turbo boost), an Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 GPU, 16GB of DDR5-4800 (two SO-DIMMs) and a 1TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD. The laptop has a somewhat awkward 1920 x 1200 resolution. It’s slightly more pixel-dense than a 1920 x 1080 display but well below the 2560 x 1440 panels we often see in the $2,000 price band for gaming laptops. As a result, all the competitors in this group feature 2560 x 1440 panels because that’s what you’ll typically find in gaming laptops with GeForce RTX 3070/4070-class GPUs these days.

While benchmarking is intriguing, I wanted to spend some time gaming with the ROG Strix G16, so I fired up Overwatch 2. I set all detail settings maxed out at 1920 x 1200 resolution. I maintained 165 fps, matching the 165Hz refresh rate of the display. The 165 fps figure was maintained in just about any scenario while gaming online, even when a lot of action took place on the screen.

In our Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmark, the ROG Strix G16 quickly moved to the head of the class at 1080p with 116 fps, just barely beating out the Gigabyte Aorus 15X (Core i9-13900HX, GeForce RTX 4070). The Razer Blade 15 (Core i7-12800H, GeForce RTX 3070 Ti) and HP Omen 16 (Core i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3070 Ti) tied for third place with 90 fps at 1080p.

Image 1 of 5

Moving to Grand Theft Auto V, the Razer Blade 15 and HP Omen 15 took top honors, hitting 104 fps at 1080p. Unfortunately, the GeForce RTX 4070-equipped ROG Strix G16 and Aorus 15X had to take a backseat. And as you’ll notice, all the other laptops fell significantly in performance at 1440p, which is understandable compared to the ROG Strix’s minimal drop from 1080p to 1200p.

Red Dead Redemption 2 saw the ROG Strix eke out another win at 72 fps over the Aorus 15X at 1080p. However, the Razer Blade 14 and Omen 16 weren’t too far behind. Again, the ROG Strix G16 showed a minimal drop at 1200p, compared to the more precipitous drop for the 1440p laptops.

The ROG Strix G16 and Aorus 15X ran away from their lesser GeForce RTX 3070 Ti-equipped competition in Far Cry 6, with each nearly hitting 100 fps at 1080p. The Razer Blade 15 came in third place with 83 fps, while the Omen 16 pulled up the rear with 66 fps at 1080p.

Finally, our Borderlands 3 test showed an outsized victory for the Aorus 15X, with 151 fps at 1080p. With a stronger CPU and the same GPU, the ROG Strix G16 only mustered 100 fps. We ran this benchmark multiple times to verify our results, but that’s where things stand. The Omen 16 and Razer Blade 15 came in third and fourth place, with 79 and 76 fps, respectively, at 1080p.

In games with DLSS support, such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Red Dead Redemption 2 and Metro Exodus, quality mode upscaling can generally improve performance by 30–50 percent, sometimes more, and the resulting image quality often competes well against native rendering. DLSS 3 Frame Generation, where supported, can artificially boost the rate of frames sent to your display by 50–100 percent, but it causes additional latency and the actual feel of games with DLSS 3 doesn’t improve nearly as much as the higher FPS would indicate. It’s not a bad option to have, but personal preference becomes a real factor in what Frame Generation does to the overall experience.

To stress-test the ROG Strix G16, we ran Metro Exodus on its RTX preset at 1200p for 15 runs, which takes about half an hour. The system ran the game at an average of 79.35 fps, with all runs falling between 79.10 and 79.66 fps. The Core i9-13980HX’s performance cores ran at an average of 3.93 GHz, while the efficiency cores measured 3.3 GHz. The CPU package measured 76 degrees Celsius. Meanwhile, the RTX 4070 ran at an average 1,717 MHz and measured 65.4 C.

Productivity Performance on the Asus ROG Strix G16

Given its Core i9-13980HX processor, the Asus ROG Strix G16 packs some serious firepower for productivity tasks. This is Intel’s flagship Raptor Lake mobile processor, with 24 cores and 32 total threads. The processor performance cores have a maximum turbo clock of 5.6 GHz, while the efficiency cores top out at 4 GHz. Asus then pairs that processor with 16GB of DDR5-4800 memory using two 8GB SO-DIMMs.

Things started strong with Geekbench 5, with the ROG Strix G16 delivering a single-core score of 2,067 and a multi-core score of 18,227. These numbers just slightly outpaced the second-place Gigabyte Aorus 15X. With their less powerful Alder Lake-based processors, the Razer Blade 15 and HP Omen 16 trailed far behind, particularly in multi-core performance.

Image 1 of 3

The ROG Strix G16 came in second place in the file transfer test, which involves copying 25GB of files across the SSD. We measured 1,238.04 MBps during the test, putting it roughly 30 percent slower than the first-place Aorus 15X (1,721.37 MBps). Asus uses a Micron 2400 SSD (MTFDKBA1T0QFM) in the laptop, which isn’t exactly the fastest PCIe 4.0 SSD on the market.

The ROG Strix G16 came in second place in our Handbrake test, which involves transcoding a 4K video to 1080p. It took the laptop five minutes and 5 seconds to complete the task compared to 3 minutes and 55 seconds for the Aorus 15X.

Display on the Asus ROG Strix G16

The Asus ROG Strix G16 features a 16-inch 165 Hz IPS panel with a 1920 x 1200 resolution. Laptops with thisunt of CPU and GPU power typically feature a 2560 x 1440 or 2560 x 1600 display. While our review sample came with a 1920 x 1200 panel, Asus does produce versions of this laptop with a 2560 x 1600 panel, which I think should be the standard here.

I like trying Overwatch 2 when looking at displays because of the bright and colorful palette. The greens and reds popped, and the calming blues of the Greek-focused Ilios map stood out on the ROG Strix G16’s punchy display.

Asus ROG Strix G16

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

For a more grounded take on the display, I watched Throttle House’s magnificent review of the Lotus Emira. The Emira, painted in a gorgeous British Racing Green, was faithfully represented, and the on-location visuals were stunning. I also caught the final trailer for The Super Mario Bros. Movie. Everything from the lava surrounding Bowser’s castle to the pinkish hues of the Sand Kingdom looked faithfully recreated.

In instrumented testing, the ROG Strix G16 wasn’t as vivid as its competitors — namely, the overachieving Razer Blade 15 — but it’s definitely in the running. We measured 75.9 percent of the DCI-P3 and 107 percent of the sRGB color gamuts. Its brightness of 279 nits was enough to score second place behind the HP Omen 16.

Keyboard and Touchpad on the Asus ROG Strix G16

Asus provides a full QWERTY keyboard layout and additional top hotkeys. The hotkeys are programmable and, by default, control volume, microphone, fan settings, and give access to Armoury Crate. You can change the function of the programmable keys using the Armoury Crate software. All of the keys have individual RGB backlighting.

Asus ROG Strix G16

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Asus says the keys offer 2 mm of travel, and I found it easy to type on. My fingers quickly felt at home on the keys, which had a soft finish that made them comfortable to use for hours at a time. My go-to test for keyboards is keyhero.com. As I’ve repeatedly mentioned, I’m not the fastest or most accurate typist, but I scored 67.81 words per minute with an accuracy of 97.1{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}.

Asus ROG Strix G16

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Despite its large 16-inch frame, Asus didn’t find the space to fit in a number pad on the ROG Strix G16, which may be disappointing to some (some of my colleagues, however, are glad to go without it). I occasionally reached for the non-existent number pad, only to be stymied every time. Asus does offer versions of the laptop with a number pad integrated into the touchpad, but my review sample did not have this option.

Speaking of the touchpad, it is large (5.12 inches x 3.5 inches) and glass-covered. Although I prefer to use a mouse when using a gaming laptop, the touchpad proved spacious and allowed me to glide easily, be it in everyday apps in Windows 11 Home or when gaming (though for games you’re far better off using one of the best gaming mice).

Audio on the Asus ROG Strix G16

Asus uses a two-speaker system in the ROG Strix G16, which sounds fine. I decided to queue up “What You Won’t Do for Love,” performed by Bobby Caldwell. Although little bass was represented here, Caldwell’s soulful vocals soared, perfectly complemented by the horns and guitar licks.

Circling back to Throttle House’s review of the Lotus Emira, I instantly honed in on the sound of the 3.5-liter V6 engine. While the engine comes from a lowly Toyota Camry, Lotus massaged it and bolted on a supercharger to add over 100 more horsepower. As a result, I could hear the subtle supercharger whine in the background as the V6 revved to its 6,800 revolutions per minute redline. The crackling and burbling of the exhaust while easing off the throttle also came blaring through the speakers.

The audio while gaming wasn’t exactly the ROG Strix G16’s strong point; again, the lack of bass took a lot of the impact out of explosions in games like Grand Theft Auto V and Overwatch 2. However, I cranked the volume without distortion, which helped to drown out the internal fans.

The Dolby Atmos app can adjust audio profiles, including Dynamic, Game, Movie, Music and Voice. I didn’t notice much difference between the settings, so I just left it on Dynamic, which automatically adjusts based on the content being played.

Upgradeability of the Asus ROG Strix G16

I ventured inside the Asus ROG Strix G16 by first removing 11 screws. However, I wasn’t done yet. It takes some careful prying to remove the bottom panel, and I didn’t want to risk damaging the RGB strip that runs along the front of the chassis. So, I started prying near the ethernet port and was able to completely remove the panel.

Asus ROG Strix G16

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

This gave me access to the internals, including the Micron 2400 PCIe 4.0 SSD situated on the right. A second, unused M.2 slot is on the opposite side of the chassis next to the Intel Wi-Fi 6E card. Located toward the center of the motherboard are the two SO-DIMM slots. Our unit came populated with two 8GB DDR5-4800 SO-DIMMs, but the machine is upgradeable to 32GB (2x 16GB). The battery also appears to be easily replaceable.

Battery Life on the Asus ROG Strix G16

Gaming laptops have earned a bad reputation regarding battery life, but the Asus ROG Strix G16 bucks that trend. Compared to the less powerful Razer Blade 14, the ROG Strix G16 lasted nearly four additional hours. The laptop also lasted at least three hours longer than the HP Omen 16 and the Gigabyte Aorus 15X.

Asus ROG Strix G16

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

The performance is even more remarkable compared to the similarly equipped Aorus 15X with a larger 99 Whr battery. However, we must remember that the Aorus 15X drives a 240 Hz, 2560 x 1440 display.

Heat on the Asus ROG Strix G16

To test heat output on the Asus ROG Strix G16 while gaming, we ran our Metro Exodus stress test in a loop. This benchmark gets laptops plenty hot, giving us the perfect opportunity to measure heat levels.

We measured the center of the keyboard between the G and H keys, which reported 94 degrees Fahrenheit (34.4 degrees Celsius). That’s right in line with what we’d expect from a gaming laptop, and some get quite a bit warmer. The touchpad was a comparatively cool 78 F (25.5 C).

Image 1 of 2

The bottom of the laptop measured 109F (42.7 C). The hottest part of the laptop – the underside near the hinge/exhaust – measured 119 F (48.3 C).

The fans are clearly audible during gaming sessions, but the pitch is not objectionable and is easily overpowered by the speakers. If you wear headphones while gaming, the sound from the fans is a non-issue.

Webcam on the Asus ROG Strix G16

Although more gaming laptops are transitioning to 1080p webcams, Asus is, unfortunately, sticking to its 720p guns. There’s no guarantee that a higher resolution camera would translate to an immediate boost in image quality, but the fact that Asus didn’t even try on this laptop is disappointing.

As a result, we’re left with performance that is simply average in this class. Unlike the Gigabyte Aero 15X’s 1080p camera which impressed me with its overall quality and low-light performance, the ROG Strix G16’s camera looked as if it was coated in a thin layer of Vaseline. The fine detail in my mustache and beard stubble was lost in translation and low light caused a considerable increase in background noise.

Software and Warranty on the Asus ROG Strix G16

The Asus ROG Strix G16 comes with the standard bloat included in Windows 11 Home, like Spotify, Kindle, WhatsApp, and various trials of Microsoft Office apps. However, Asus includes its own apps, which are useful for customers.

The aforementioned Armoury Crate allows you to monitor system vitals (temperature, clock speeds, memory, storage, etc.), customize the five hotkeys, adjust the Aura Sync RGB lighting and more. MyAsus provides customer service and warranty information along with social media interactions with Asus. Aura Creator is a utility that allows you to create your own custom lighting schemes that can be synchronized between devices.

Other installed apps include Dolby Access, the Realtek Audio Console, and McAfee LiveSafe.

The ROG Strix G16 comes with a one-year warranty.

Asus ROG Strix G16 Configurations

The Asus ROG Strix G16 is available in multiple prebuilt configurations starting from $1,399. Our $1,999 review sample (G614JI-AS94 (opens in new tab)) features an Intel Core i9-13980HX processor, Nvidia GeForce RTX 4070 GPU, 16GB DDR4-4800 memory, a 1TB SSD, 1200p 165 Hz display and per-key RGB lighting.

All ROG Strix G16 configurations available from Asus come with a Core i9-13980HX processor but are available with GeForce RTX 4050 or RTX 4060 GPUs. Upgraded display options include a 2560 x 1600 display with a 240 Hz refresh rate, and up to a 2TB SSD, taking the price to $2,199.

Bottom Line

Overall, the Asus ROG Strix G16 is a fine entry into the ~$2,000 gaming laptop segment. Its closest competition is the Gigabyte Aorus 15X, which is just $100 more. The Aorus 15X gives you a higher resolution display at 2560 x 1600, but the ROG Strix G16 offers an additional three hours of battery life.

Regarding performance, the Asus ROG Strix G16 is an impressive gaming laptop that continues to show the strength of Intel’s new Raptor Lake mobile processor and Nvidia’s fresh GeForce RTX 40 Series GPUs. The laptop has many other strengths, including its solid build quality, RGB lighting that doesn’t go overboard, and comfortable keyboard.

The ROG Strix G16 didn’t ace our file transfer test, but it got second place and performed well in the other productivity tasks. The 1920 x 1200 resolution is a bit of a bummer given the kind of hardware that this laptop is packing, but customers can upgrade to 2560 x 1600 for some extra cheddar. Asus also skimped out on the speakers and webcam, with the latter being a big miss in this work-from-home climate.

Despite these flaws, the Asus ROG Strix G16 deserves to be on your shopping shortlist as a powerful, 16-inch gaming PC in a premium design.

MORE: How to Buy a Gaming Laptop

MORE: Best Gaming PCs

MORE: Best Ultrabooks and Premium Laptops

March 23, 2023

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 (2023) laptop review: RTX 4090 with a super bright, Mini-LED display

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

5598 (5462.22^min – 5597.85^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +43{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

4842 (4719.64^min – 4842.11^max) MB/s ∼86{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +24{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

4525 (4498.41^min – 4525.41^max) MB/s ∼81{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +16{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(2376 – 5676, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

3917 (3883.93^min – 3916.78^max) MB/s ∼70{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3844 (3257.93^min – 3843.87^max) MB/s ∼69{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -2{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

3764 (3540.2^min – 3763.76^max) MB/s ∼67{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -4{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(834 – 5676, n=187, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

7533 (7482.85^min – 7532.79^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +124{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

4767 (4365.51^min – 4766.62^max) MB/s ∼63{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +42{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

4378 (4355.78^min – 4378.43^max) MB/s ∼58{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +30{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(2461 – 7628, n=23) Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

4199 (3998.61^min – 4199.12^max) MB/s ∼56{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +25{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

3365 (3321.68^min – 3365.3^max) MB/s ∼45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(399 – 7889, n=186, last 2 years) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3242 (1498^min – 3241.78^max) MB/s ∼43{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -4{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

11242 (10740.3^min – 11242.2^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +61{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

10774 (9137.92^min – 10774^max) MB/s ∼96{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +54{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(3471 – 12556, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

6988 (5851.89^min – 6987.92^max) MB/s ∼62{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

6872 (4963.33^min – 6872.25^max) MB/s ∼61{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -2{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

6682 (5778.28^min – 6681.95^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -4{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

6550 (5497.59^min – 6549.73^max) MB/s ∼58{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -6{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(1620 – 13195, n=187, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

9942 (9912.92^min – 9941.76^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +93{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

8404 (8165.05^min – 8403.71^max) MB/s ∼85{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +63{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(3537 – 10261, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

5151 (5119.78^min – 5150.82^max) MB/s ∼52{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

4943 (4923.06^min – 4943.2^max) MB/s ∼50{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -4{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

4876 (4374.87^min – 4876.3^max) MB/s ∼49{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -5{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

4244 (427.59^min – 4244.22^max) MB/s ∼43{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -18{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(86.2 – 10261, n=187, last 2 years) Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

95.3 (93.25^min – 95.25^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +29{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

83.1 (79.37^min – 83.07^max) MB/s ∼87{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +12{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(56.2 – 91.2, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

74.3 (71.59^min – 74.33^max) MB/s ∼78{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} 0{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

74.1 (72.59^min – 74.06^max) MB/s ∼78{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(23.3 – 97.4, n=187, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

57.5 (57.09^min – 57.53^max) MB/s ∼60{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -22{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

56.5 (49.8^min – 56.49^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -24{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

264 (263.57^min – 264.44^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +70{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

255 (243.79^min – 255.25^max) MB/s ∼97{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +64{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(134 – 295, n=23) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

220 (56.84^min – 219.56^max) MB/s ∼83{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +41{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

213 (205.52^min – 212.72^max) MB/s ∼81{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +37{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(66.6 – 421, n=186, last 2 years) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

155.5 (148.87^min – 155.46^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

103.7 (103.17^min – 103.74^max) MB/s ∼39{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -33{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

4100 (4085.58^min – 4100.1^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +475{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3111 (2388.54^min – 3111.42^max) MB/s ∼76{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +336{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(713 – 4075, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

2855 (2482.75^min – 2854.87^max) MB/s ∼70{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +300{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(310 – 5829, n=186, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

1469 (1266.81^min – 1469.47^max) MB/s ∼36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +106{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

713 (705.93^min – 712.59^max) MB/s ∼17{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

711 (692.26^min – 710.64^max) MB/s ∼17{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} 0{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

3537 (3519.01^min – 3536.66^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +656{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

2694 (2561.51^min – 2693.92^max) MB/s ∼76{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +476{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(422 – 3531, n=23) Average of class Gaming
(288 – 4383, n=186, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

1424 (1251.47^min – 1423.75^max) MB/s ∼40{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +204{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

1282 (960.6^min – 1281.78^max) MB/s ∼36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +174{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

468 (459.96^min – 467.77^max) MB/s ∼13{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)

350 (343.49^min – 350.45^max) MB/s ∼10{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -25{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(4850 – 9031, n=23) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average of class Gaming
(910 – 10330, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3308 Points ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +110{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(1572 – 3399, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average of class Gaming
(389 – 3629, n=176, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(1081 – 3999, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average of class Gaming
(338 – 5157, n=176, last 2 years) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(2591 – 9971, n=23) Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Average of class Gaming
(925 – 9971, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(1900 – 8590, n=23) Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average of class Gaming
(308 – 8590, n=176, last 2 years) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(49.8 – 84.1, n=23) Average of class Gaming
(20 – 108, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(112.6 – 249, n=23) Average of class Gaming
(18 – 364, n=176, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

2744.3 MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +186{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

2558.72 MB/s ∼93{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +167{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(959 – 2811, n=23) Average of class Gaming
(216 – 2963, n=176, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(567 – 3414, n=23) Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average of class Gaming
(243 – 4381, n=176, last 2 years) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average of class Gaming
(0.02 – 0.23, n=171, last 2 years)

0.05665 ms * ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -183{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(0.018 – 0.078, n=23) Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Average of class Gaming
(0.012 – 0.425, n=176, last 2 years)

0.05613 ms * ∼68{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -181{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0) Average Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
(0.017 – 0.076, n=23) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU603Z
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

* … smaller is better

March 21, 2023

Finally, quiet gaming with the Asus ROG Strix G16

The Asus ROG Stirx G16 is able to extract a lot of performance from its strong hardware. An Intel Core i9 and a Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 ensure high FPS on a 240 Hz panel in many games. But things get really interesting when it comes to the volume.

The Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 is powered by up to 170 watts in the Asus ROG Strix G16. In Turbo mode, the gaming notebook achieves a level of performance that brings it close to devices equipped with the more powerful RTX 4090. While the laptop can be annoyingly loud at 52 dB(A), the ROG Strix G16 can also do things differently: thanks to a massive cooling system consisting of three fans and liquid metal, the laptop is also able to run without much noise. For our review, we took the opportunity to analyze the gaming laptop’s other operating modes and came to an interesting conclusion: gaming with ray tracing is possible with current titles as long as you are willing to forego a few FPS.

Frame rates remain above 60 frames per second in many games, even in UHD resolution at ultra settings. F1 22 is one such example: at just under 40 dB(A) in Silent mode, the ROG Strix G16 manages 72 FPS in the racing game with activated ray tracing. So the Asus ROG Strix G16 can certainly be used for gaming without noise pollution or ANC headphones. Unfortunately, one of the laptop’s problems also becomes apparent in this operating mode. Instead of fan noise, you then hear the laptop’s power supply struggling. Coil whine comes to the fore as soon as the laptop makes use of the boost performance of the Intel Core i9-13980HX and Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080.

We also found a few problems with the chassis in our review of the Asus ROG Strix G16. Nevertheless, the laptop ultimately manages to perform well overall.

ROG Strix G16 - cooling system — ROG Strix G16 – cooling system

More Articles for this Device

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ (ROG Strix G16 Series)

From an early age I liked to thoroughly examine all kinds of devices to see how they worked, which also involved taking my own devices apart and therefore not always to the delight of my parents. Nevertheless, with my grandfather’s support, I became a computer and electronics tinkerer. With the family PC and Lego Mindstorms, my interested in software and programming took off, and I am currently an engineering program student. I enjoy building all sorts of gadgets with Arduino and 3D printers, and I still like to put electronic devices through their paces. By joining the Notebookcheck editorial team, I have been able to turn my hobby into a profession.

Translator: Jacob Fisher – Translator – 175 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2022

Growing up in regional Australia, I first became acquainted with computers in my early teens after a broken leg from a football (soccer) match temporarily condemned me to a predominately indoor lifestyle. Soon afterwards I was building my own systems. Now I live in Germany, having moved here in 2014, where I study philosophy and anthropology. I am particularly fascinated by how computer technology has fundamentally and dramatically reshaped human culture, and how it continues to do so.

Please share our article, every link counts!

.170

Posted on March 19, 2023
5 mistakes to avoid with your gaming laptop

Gaming laptops have been expanding in reputation for yrs now, and consumers commit important time, power, and revenue to receive a laptop that operates best for their demands. To give them the merchandise they are entitled to, laptop makers get crafting the excellent moveable gaming equipment quite severely. Loads of analysis, budget, and time goes into the development of a gaming laptop computer that balances electric power with portability and aesthetics.

But the do the job to be certain that you have the finest gaming laptop for the great gaming encounter doesn’t commence and conclusion when you section with your tricky-attained funds both. It’s crucial that you do all the things you can to optimize its overall performance in purchase to carry out the very best in your device.

And in buy to best achieve that, there are a number of issues that you must in no way do with your gaming laptop. By preventing these 5 massive ‘don’ts’ and ‘nevers,’ you are going to be well on your way to getting a gaming laptop computer that reaches its complete likely.

(Image credit history: Upcoming)

1. Never settle for default configurations

The minute you order your gaming laptop computer and plug it in, immediately adjust your performance and battery options. While it seems like a modest adjustment at most effective, leaving your settings at default is a great way to hamper your gaming machine’s general performance, as they’re often intended to restrict its ability to preserve battery daily life.

In Home windows 11, you can alter most of these options by means of the Energy & battery choices. Make sure the mode is established to Overall performance and any slumber alternatives are established to Under no circumstances. Also, go to Display screen options and crank up that refresh charge – you’ll thank me when these Laptop games are working butter clean on your monitor.

In addition, examine if your graphics drivers are adequately up to date. It is simple to think that they’ll be up to date at boot up, but certain you are going to have to have to install at least one particular new update to greatly enhance performance. If you have an Nvidia GPU, download the GeForce Expertise software, and set up the update that way. If you’re making use of an AMD GPU in its place, download the Radeon application from the Drivers + Down load Heart.

(Picture credit score: Long term)

2. Do not allow this Windows safety aspect

Since Home windows 11 initial premiered in 2021, there were previously grievances about the VBS (Virtualization Primarily based Security) interfering with gameplay good quality. But at minimum then, you could conveniently toggle off the function and not be concerned about it slowing down your Computer system online games. However, a the latest discovery from our sister web site Tom’s Hardware observed that, immediately after a new OS update, the placing will toggle by itself again on even if you formerly experienced it turned off. This indicates that you could have been enduring average drops in frame price and performance at about 5{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}, with versions dependent on the recreation of up to 10{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}.

Though these could look tiny, these general performance drops happen even with an Nvidia RTX 4090, at the moment one of the greatest graphics cards on the market. And if you are acquiring a gaming laptop computer that’s tricked out with this kind of a strong home of a graphics card, then possibilities are you never want to see any sort of drop in framerate or overall performance.

If you need to have to flip off VBS (opens in new tab), it is remarkably easy to do. To start with, look for for Core Isolation and click on it, then toggle the Memory Integrity choice off, and restart your personal computer as prompted. To make confident it is off, go to System Details, and check out if ‘virtualization-dependent security’ is set to ’not enabled.’

Many thanks to Microsoft’s ham-fisted dealing with of the function, you might require to repeat this procedure each and every time you update your Computer. But I’ll make certain to go about accurately what went improper with this Windows 11 update in much much more element in a long run story.

(Picture credit history: Shutterstock)

3. Never get it off the AC electrical power

The amount 1 rule for any gaming notebook is that, until you are physically transporting it to yet another area, do not get rid of it from the AC power. Gaming laptops are meant to video game with entry to unrestricted electric power even if you max out the configurations and permit Performance manner, acquiring your rig on battery power will not only drain the most likely mediocre battery in a handful of hours, but it will also negatively influence effectiveness since the notebook is way too occupied trying to continue to keep itself alive to make confident that frame fee is constantly above 100.

It seems counterintuitive, but gaming laptops are not transportable to help gaming on battery electric power at all moments. They are transportable to prevent becoming chained to regardless of what desk it was established up at 1st. The plan is that you can have it to yet another spot, like a friend’s property or an business, and then established it up yet again with small effort. So usually hold that notebook plugged into an outlet.

To aid this together, check out on the Alter innovative energy options in Manage Panel, and make absolutely sure that the following possibilities are set to Under no circumstances for plugged-in: Convert off tricky disk soon after, Switch off Display right after, and Slumber soon after. This prevents your notebook from heading into slumber manner if you leave it idle for as well very long, which would or else interrupt your session.

(Image credit history: Future)

4. Never ever block the air flow ports

Just as essential to functionality as the finest GPU is a solid ventilation technique. If you have an more mature equipment or one particular with inadequate thermals, you’ll find that all round effectiveness will start to put up with since your notebook has no responsible way to expunge all that further heat accumulating in its factors. So it’s totally vital that you study and look at your potential gaming laptop computer to see how a lot of and in which its vents are located.

Place is crucial, simply because you want a laptop that’s in a position to push out heat from locations that will not be simply obstructed. Great spots include things like the sides and back of your laptop computer, due to the fact those people must be very clear sufficient to regularly dissipate that warmth. The bottom is a further common locale for vents due to that place tending to accumulate the most warmth. Even so, if you block any of these spots, then the fans will have to get the job done more challenging, which diverts power from gameplay effectiveness. This usually means no placing merchandise in the vicinity of any facet or back again vents, and no resting your notebook on a blanket or any cloth as that blocks base vents.

(Picture credit rating: Future)

5. Never assume that overclocking will net the very best functionality

The typical strategy of overclocking a gaming Pc or notebook is that by effectively pushing your GPU (or other parts) to its limit, you can net larger efficiency amounts from it, which should really translate to greater and smoother gameplay.

On the other hand, there are lots of elements involved in overclocking which include the approach you opt for, how properly the GPU and CPU engage in alongside one another, and more. And this gen at present appears to be enduring some interesting issues with bottlenecking, mainly since the RTX 4000-sequence GPUs are hampering the efficiency of the 13th-gen Main CPUs.

That claimed, sometimes the finest alternative is to not overclock your gaming notebook, particularly if it’s functioning an RTX 4090. Very first, simply because it is simply not needed. If you have been following all the information in this list, then your notebook really should be already gaming to the greatest of its ability. And second, there look to be instances of even gentle overclocking that negatively has an effect on effectiveness. For instance, the typically properly-executing Lenovo Legion Pro 7i will expertise a substantial fall in body rate if you touch a single selection in the Lenovo computer software that falls under functionality.

Of system, experiment with your gaming rig and see what works ideal for you. But do not be afraid to go away people solutions alone if you discover a reduce in efficiency.

Posted on March 18, 2023
Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI: Gaming laptop impresses in the test with the new Ryzen 9

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

5568 (5541.55^min – 5568.34^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +65{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

4093 (4067.17^min – 4092.59^max) MB/s ∼74{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +21{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3650 (3626.52^min – 3649.67^max) MB/s ∼66{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +8{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3889 (3873.65^min – 3888.73^max) MB/s ∼70{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +15{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(3377 – 4093, n=3) Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3428 (3412.07^min – 3428.49^max) MB/s ∼62{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +2{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3377 (3319.03^min – 3377.04^max) MB/s ∼61{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(834 – 5676, n=187, last 2 years) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

2756 (2741.19^min – 2756.29^max) MB/s ∼49{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -18{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

1870 (1827.25^min – 1869.82^max) MB/s ∼34{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

7531 (7479^min – 7530.7^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +175{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

4250 (4204.35^min – 4249.88^max) MB/s ∼56{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +55{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3798 (3750.39^min – 3798.15^max) MB/s ∼50{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +38{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3416 (3372.4^min – 3415.84^max) MB/s ∼45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +25{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3366 (3313.08^min – 3366.35^max) MB/s ∼45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +23{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(399 – 7889, n=186, last 2 years) Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3243 (3188.93^min – 3243.04^max) MB/s ∼43{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +18{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(2743 – 3416, n=3) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

2743 (2563.98^min – 2742.87^max) MB/s ∼36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

2166 (2094.01^min – 2166.15^max) MB/s ∼29{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -21{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

12556 (4870.54^min – 12556.3^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +150{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

7048 (6068.56^min – 7047.9^max) MB/s ∼56{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +40{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

6810 (6260.27^min – 6809.87^max) MB/s ∼54{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(1620 – 13195, n=187, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

5017 (4534.25^min – 5017.23^max) MB/s ∼40{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} 0{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(5017 – 5023, n=3) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

5018 (4382.25^min – 5017.89^max) MB/s ∼40{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

4239 (3584.87^min – 4239.18^max) MB/s ∼34{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -16{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

10261 (10045.2^min – 10261.4^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +228{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

6004 (5933.65^min – 6004.3^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +92{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

4831 (4610.18^min – 4830.79^max) MB/s ∼47{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +55{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

4426 (4263.58^min – 4426.04^max) MB/s ∼43{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +42{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(86.2 – 10261, n=187, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3429 (3365.09^min – 3429.47^max) MB/s ∼33{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +10{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3387 (3363.41^min – 3386.9^max) MB/s ∼33{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +8{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(3125 – 3429, n=3) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

3125 (3099.17^min – 3124.97^max) MB/s ∼30{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

2982 (2920.07^min – 2981.52^max) MB/s ∼29{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -5{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

79 (77.42^min – 79.03^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +47{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

74.5 (73.46^min – 74.52^max) MB/s ∼94{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +39{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(23.3 – 97.4, n=187, last 2 years) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

64.3 (63.09^min – 64.34^max) MB/s ∼81{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +20{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

62.5 (61.85^min – 62.46^max) MB/s ∼79{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +16{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

61.5 (60.59^min – 61.49^max) MB/s ∼78{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +15{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(53.7 – 62.5, n=3) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

53.7 (52.37^min – 53.65^max) MB/s ∼68{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

52.5 (50.71^min – 52.46^max) MB/s ∼66{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -2{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

30.6 (30.29^min – 30.64^max) MB/s ∼39{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -43{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

280 (267.82^min – 279.79^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +71{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

239 (230.87^min – 239.2^max) MB/s ∼85{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +46{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

236 (223.33^min – 235.64^max) MB/s ∼84{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +44{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

221 (218.91^min – 220.66^max) MB/s ∼79{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +35{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(163.8 – 239, n=3) Average of class Gaming
(66.6 – 421, n=186, last 2 years) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

164.3 (163.26^min – 164.34^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} 0{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

163.8 (162.54^min – 163.76^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

126.7 (123.88^min – 126.69^max) MB/s ∼45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -23{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

116.3 (111.83^min – 116.33^max) MB/s ∼42{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -29{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3203 (3180.36^min – 3203.41^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +274{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(310 – 5829, n=186, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

2148 (1952.04^min – 2148.3^max) MB/s ∼67{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +151{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

1533 (1526.72^min – 1532.76^max) MB/s ∼48{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +79{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

1527 (1525.66^min – 1526.54^max) MB/s ∼48{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +78{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(857 – 1533, n=3) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

1158 (1132.18^min – 1157.71^max) MB/s ∼36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +35{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

857 (717.83^min – 857.03^max) MB/s ∼27{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

843 (833.55^min – 843.1^max) MB/s ∼26{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -2{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

613 (588.72^min – 613.33^max) MB/s ∼19{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -28{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

2783 (2698.54^min – 2783.41^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +812{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

2689 (2088.87^min – 2688.7^max) MB/s ∼97{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +782{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

2209 (1041.25^min – 2208.74^max) MB/s ∼79{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +624{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

2101 (1969.73^min – 2101.4^max) MB/s ∼75{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +589{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(288 – 4383, n=186, last 2 years) Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(305 – 2783, n=3) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N

481 (462.66^min – 481.19^max) MB/s ∼17{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +58{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

441 (428.19^min – 440.55^max) MB/s ∼16{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

305 (269.91^min – 305.05^max) MB/s ∼11{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

288 (123^min – 287.76^max) MB/s ∼10{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -6{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Average of class Gaming
(910 – 10330, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(4118 – 5610, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3490 Points ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +190{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average of class Gaming
(389 – 3629, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(1204 – 1761, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average of class Gaming
(338 – 5157, n=176, last 2 years) Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(2387 – 3010, n=2) Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average of class Gaming
(925 – 9971, n=176, last 2 years) Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(3846 – 4308, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

3951.34 MB/s ∼46{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +117{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Average of class Gaming
(308 – 8590, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(1821 – 2891, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Average of class Gaming
(20 – 108, n=176, last 2 years) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(51.3 – 58.8, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(196.8 – 221, n=2) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Average of class Gaming
(18 – 364, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024

2843.31 MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +270{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

1942.29 MB/s ∼68{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +153{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(216 – 2963, n=176, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(768 – 1272, n=2) Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average of class Gaming
(243 – 4381, n=176, last 2 years) Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(2008 – 2500, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(0.087 – 0.121, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average of class Gaming
(0.02 – 0.23, n=171, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix G18 G814JI
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average of class Gaming
(0.012 – 0.425, n=176, last 2 years)

0.05664 ms * ∼47{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -198{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Razer Blade 18 RTX 4070
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Alienware m17 R5 (R9 6900HX, RX 6850M XT)
SSSTC CA6-8D1024 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N Asus ROG Strix G17 G713PI
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 Average WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00
(0.017 – 0.019, n=2) Asus ROG Strix G16 G614JZ
WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00

* … smaller is better

Posted on March 16, 2023
The Razer Blade 16 is The MacBook Pro of Gaming Laptops

The Razer Blade 16 is finally here, following in the footsteps of Apple after the Cupertino company shifted its MacBook Pro design to a 16-inch model. This lets the high-end gaming laptop continue to claim the “MacBook of gaming laptops” title for another year, but even if Razer hadn’t upped the computer’s screen size, it would be a hard comparison to shake. Just like Apple’s high-end laptops, this is a gorgeous machine with an aluminum unibody design and a trackpad that’s way bigger than it needs to be.

But while Apple’s pro-level laptops are limited to what the M2 Pro and M2 Max can do, the Razer Blade 16 is equipped with the best processors and graphics cards from Intel and Nvidia, respectively. For the unit I got in for review, that means an Intel Core i9-13950HX and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090. But unlike something like the MSI Titan GT77 HX, the focus is on portability rather than raw power, so you’re not getting quite the same level of performance with the Razer Blade 16.

If you’re in the market for a portable gaming laptop that can easily handle most games at 4K without batting an eyelid, the Razer Blade 16 definitely gets the job done. And the bonus is that you won’t look like a gamer when you whip this laptop out at the coffee shop – aside from its copious RGB lighting, of course.

Razer Blade 16

Razer’s new high-end luxury gaming laptop that proves you can have a powerful gaming laptop in a sleek package.

Razer Blade 16

Razer’s new high-end luxury gaming laptop that proves you can have a powerful gaming laptop in a sleek package.

What is it?

Razer’s new flagship gaming laptop

Price

Starts at $2,699, reviewed at $4,299

Like

Performance, design, gorgeous display, portability

Dislike

Palm rejection could be better, high price

Razer still charges an Apple level premium

The Razer Blade 16 is an expensive gaming laptop. The Razer Blade in general has been one of the most expensive gaming laptops on the market for a long time, but the new model takes it to another level. This laptop starts at an eye-watering $2,699, and that model comes equipped with an Intel Core i9-13950HX and an Nvidia RTX 4060.

G/O Media may get a commission

You can upgrade the laptop from there, though every single model comes with the same high-end processor. The price goes all the way up to $4,299, which will get you an RTX 4090, 32GB and two(!!) 1TB SSDs. That’s the model I got in for review, and I can confirm that it’s absolutely overkill for most people.

The happy middle-ground will probably be the model with 16GB of RAM and an RTX 4070, which clocks in at $2,999. That’s still an extremely expensive gaming laptop, but the display is really what you’re paying for here, and there’s nothing else on the market like it.

What’s funny is that even though Razer has had to put up with being compared with one of the most expensive laptops on the market for years now, its flagship Blade laptop is now more expensive to start than the MacBook Pro 16, which starts for $200 less at $2,499. So, maybe now the MacBook Pro is the Razer Blade of professional laptops.

Photo: Jackie Thomas / Gizmodo

The Razer Blade 16 is prettier than most gaming laptops

The Razer Blade 16 is gorgeous. There’s no other way around that. Every single year that Razer puts out a new laptop, it improves upon the already fantastic design to make an even more luxurious gaming laptop, and the Blade 16 does exactly that again.

You’re getting the same aluminum unibody chassis, punctuated by more ports than anyone would expect out of a laptop of this size. You get three USB-A ports, an HDMI connection, 2 USB-C ports with Thunderbolt 4, an SD card reader and a dedicated charging port. This isn’t the thinnest laptop out there, but it’s still way thinner than a gaming laptop with these specs has any right to be, making the port selection more impressive than it would be on other gaming laptops.

The Razer Blade 16 measures in at just 0.87 inches thick, and weighs in at 5.4 pounds. That’s not quite ultrabook-level dimensions, but even after carrying this thing around in my backpack for weeks, I can attest that it feels pretty similar to a specced-out MacBook in my backpack. The only difference is that this can capably run The Witcher 3 after its next-gen update without any issues.

The only thing that really weighs it down from there (literally) is the huge power brick. That’s kind of a necessary evil with all the power-hungry components in this laptop, but if you’re carrying around the charger, it adds a few pounds to the weight. And, trust me, you’re going to be carrying around the charger if you’re going to be working on this thing for any extended period of time.

4K gaming at higher than 60 fps is no problem for the mobile RTX 4090

The mobile Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 is an absolute beast of a graphics card. It doesn’t quite reach the same levels as the desktop version, of course, but this level of GPU performance in a laptop is a big deal.

There are going to be gaming laptops out there that outperform the Razer Blade 16 with a similar graphics card. The MSI Titan GT77, for instance, has much more space for cooling and runs the RTX 4090 at a higher wattage than the Razer Blade 16 does. So, if you’re after raw performance, you’re probably better off getting a bulkier gaming laptop.

But if you’re looking for something that balances portability with gaming performance, you’re in for a treat here. There isn’t a single game in the Gizmodo test suite that the Razer Blade 16 wasn’t able to run way above 60 fps, usually while also running at 4K. The lowest performance was in Metro Exodus, but even that managed 68 fps at 4K, and even when I enabled ray tracing without DLSS, it was able to get around 49 fps. Enable DLSS, and that number goes all the way up to 79 fps.

Photo: Jackie Thomas / Gizmodo

Far Cry 5 shows just how much of a 4K powerhouse this gaming laptop is, with the laptop managing 94 fps at the native resolution of 3,840 x 2,400. Even in games that aren’t part of our usual test suite, this is one of the gaming laptops to beat. I took the Razer Blade 16 with me to MagicCon Philly, and basically spent an evening playing the Witcher 3 next-gen update at 1600p. At that resolution, and with all the eye candy turned way up, I was able to get a solid 80 fps.

That’s less than the 2400p native resolution, but the Witcher 3 next-gen update is notoriously hard to run and I notoriously don’t compromise on visual quality for nothing. The Razer Blade 16 enables my bullshit pickiness with PC game graphics, and I love it for that.

The Razer Blade is still one of the best gaming laptops for productivity

Even beyond gaming performance, the Razer Blade 16 is a beast of a laptop. The laptop manages a Geekbench 5 score of 19,820 in multi-core and 1,975 in single-core. That’s less than the fully unlocked MSI Titan, but again, the cooling allows the MSI laptop to push the CPU harder than the Razer Blade 16.

In Blender, the Razer Blade 16 is able to push through the BMW demo in just 1 minute and 27 seconds, which actually beats out the Titan in the same test. It does fall behind the Titan in Handbrake, but not by much, processing the same video file in 2 minutes and 50 seconds, just 6 seconds slower than MSI’s flagship.

The sleek design of the Razer Blade 16 makes it less obnoxious in the office, and if you need a high-power workstation as a creative professional, I’d be hard pressed to find something more fitting for your needs – at least without forking over the cash for an actual professional workstation like .

Photo: Jackie Thomas / Gizmodo

The keyboard and trackpad are a weak link

The Razer Blade 16 has a fairly average chiclet keyboard, backed with some juicy RGB lighting. I was able to keep my unimpressive 89 WPM typing speed with no errors, so you don’t have to worry about repeat key presses or anything.

One thing that has come up in my time with the Razer Blade 15 is the large trackpad. It’s nice having a huge space for Windows 11 gestures as such, but the palm rejection really should be better for a trackpad that takes up so much of the chassis.

While working on this device, I’ve regularly accidentally triggered the touchpad, losing my place in documents or even clicking into an entirely different tab or window. You can get over this by using a gaming mouse and disabling the trackpad, but you really shouldn’t have to do that when you’re spending this much on a gaming laptop.

One of the Razer Blade 16’s biggest selling points, and probably a huge reason behind the high price, is the display. You’re getting a 16-inch mini-LED display with a ‘dual refresh rate.’ Basically what this means is that, at the native resolution of 3,840 x 2,400, you’re getting a 120Hz refresh rate. But if you lower the resolution to 1,920 x 1,200, you can up the refresh rate to 240Hz. This is great news for esports gamers that might want to use the laptop’s horsepower to drive high framerates in games like Valorant or Overwatch.

The only catch is that, to switch between these two modes, you can’t simply navigate to the Windows 11 Display Settings page and change the resolution there. Instead, you need to go into Razer Synapse, look under its display tab, and change the “Native Display Mode” to your desired resolution and refresh rate. Then, you need to restart the system.

It’s not the biggest deal in the world, but it would have been nice if you could have switched between the two resolutions on the fly when you’re playing different games. Maybe in a future release.

The display itself is gorgeous, however. The mini-LED technology that drives it allows for incredible color accuracy with some of the deepest blacks I’ve ever seen in a laptop display. It gets pretty bright, too, measuring in with a peak brightness of 473 nits. That’s not quite as high as something like the MacBook Pro, but it’s more than you’ll find on most gaming laptops.

If the luxe chassis design isn’t enough to sell you on the high price tag, the display might just be the thing that convinces you to drop thousands of dollars on the Razer Blade 16. Especially for creative professionals that’ll want the power of the RTX 4090 behind a display that can keep up with their Adobe needs.

The Razer Blade 16‘s speakers make gaming headphones optional

To test the audio, I pulled up “Heart & Feather” by Twin Tribes, and the Razer Blade 16 passed with flying colors. Unlike a lot of Windows laptops, the Razer Blade 16 has two giant speaker grilles on either side of the keyboard, each of which is equipped with a tweeter and a woofer.

It’s not going to be the same as a dedicated set of computer speakers or anything, don’t get me wrong. But it’s still more than enough for room-filling sound with actually audible bass. This means that even though the fan can get extremely loud under heavy load, you don’t need to break out a gaming headset just to play some games.

Even at max volume, there’s no hint of cracking or shaking, even in bass-heavy tracks. This is yet another way the Razer Blade just exudes luxury out of every pore.

Photo: Jackie Thomas / Gizmodo

Less than 4 hours of battery life on video alone

The Razer Blade 16 is a gaming laptop, packed with the most powerful and power-hungry components on the market today, so from the get-go, the outlook for battery life isn’t great.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not like the Razer Blade 16 is going to die after an hour of browsing Chrome. But at the same time, I wouldn’t trust it to get through a workday without packing the charger. In Gizmodo’s simple video playback battery test, where we stream a YouTube video at 200 nits, the Razer Blade 16 lasts just 3 hours and 43 minutes. That’s enough to get through most movies in one charge, so it’s not the end of the world.

But with so many laptops able to hit the 10 or 12 hour mark these days, the Razer Blade 16 simply isn’t the laptop to get if you’re looking for a device that will last through a long flight without having to break out a charger.

Unfortunately the charger is a bit of a chore to carry around, too. Because of the requirement for a 330W GAn charger, the power brick is huge and heavy. So, while the laptop itself weighs just over 5lb, if you’re going to be carrying it around with its power brick, the total weight comes in closer to 8lb. That’s not a deal breaker by any means, just something to be aware of if you plan on commuting with the thing.

Photo: Jackie Thomas / Gizmodo

The Razer Blade 16 is gorgeous, luxurious and powerful. That’s enough to get a lot of people on its side, but all of that comes with a dark side: the price. This is one of the most expensive gaming laptops on the market, even with its base configuration. You can absolutely get the same level of performance for less money elsewhere, and you probably should if all you care about is your raw frame rate in PC games.

But, like the MacBook Pro, if you want a nice looking product that you can carry around everywhere you go and not get awkward stares, the Razer Blade 16 is hard to beat. It’s a quality machine that will last you years before it starts to have trouble running the latest PC games. And the dual display mode means that even if you do have to shift down to 1080p in the distant future, you’re at least going to be getting a better refresh rate out of the deal.

Posts pagination

Previous page Page 1 … Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 … Page 15 Next page