Gaming Laptop Archives - Page 8 of 15

March 2, 2023

Lenovo Legion Pro 7i gaming laptop review

The new Lenovo Legion Pro 7i is an outstanding next-gen gaming laptop. It’s a machine that comes in at a price point that makes the rest of the high-end RTX 40-series look even more ridiculous on their lofty $4,000+ perches. And its RTX 4080 GPU gives it the sort of gaming performance that has me questioning why anyone would want an RTX 4090 machine (opens in new tab).

This is the first gaming laptop I’ve seen using the second-tier Ada Lovelace GPU from Nvidia, and it’s a doozy.

Like the RTX 4090 before it, the numbering system Nvidia is using for its mobile graphics silicon is a step removed from that inside the desktop versions of the same name. While Nvidia might be making a big deal of the fact xx90-class GPUs are going into laptops for the first time, they’re not the same as the graphics chompers in the latest and greatest gaming PCs.

The mobile RTX 4090 uses the same AD103 GPU as the desktop RTX 4080 (opens in new tab), though the mobile RTX 4080 is actually built from a cut-down version of the AD104 used inside the desktop RTX 4070 Ti (opens in new tab).

Legion Pro 7i specs

Lenovo Legion Pro 7i gaming laptop — (Image credit: Future)

CPU: Intel Core i9 13900HX
Cores | Threads: 24 | 32
Boost clock: 5.4GHz
GPU: Nvidia RTX 4080 (150W)
Cores: 7,424
VRAM: 12GB
System Memory: 32GB DDR5-5600
Storage: 1TB NVMe SSD
Screen: 16-inch
Resolution: UHD+ 240Hz
Price: $2,750 (opens in new tab) | £2,800 (opens in new tab)

That means you’re getting 7,424 CUDA cores as opposed to the 7,680 of the desktop GPU. That also puts it a long way behind the mobile RTX 4090 with its 9,728 CUDA cores, which ought to mean the top chip will always have the edge.

I’ve found that’s not always the case given the extreme confines of a gaming laptop chassis, as the constraints those can put on a GPU have really been working in this ones favour. Where the lower power demands of the second-tier chip can allow it to clock up to a much higher level than the more thirsty, bigger chips, that can really affect their relative gaming performance.

The frame rate delta isn’t always as great as you might assume, and sometimes it’s not there at all.

The Legion Pro 7i (opens in new tab) runs its RTX 4080 at a 150W TGP, which is the effective maximum of the GPU. Though manufacturers are given an extra 25W leeway to bulk up their own specs if they feel they can push a little extra juice through their own systems. That’s what has been done with the MSI Titan GT77 (opens in new tab) and Razer Blade 16 (opens in new tab) machines, where their RTX 4090 GPUs have been given the full 175W allowance. Lenovo hasn’t gone down that route, the Legion Pro knows what it likes, and it likes the 150W TGP and no more.

Image 1 of 4

But the power of this machine isn’t all about its GPU. And the confusing component nomenclature isn’t restricted to Nvidia alone, either. The Legion Pro 7i uses a 13th Gen Intel chip—the Core i9 13900HX. If, like me, you were to assume that would essentially be a slightly higher clocked version of the Core i9 13900H Asus has used in its excellent Zephyrus M16 gaming laptop (opens in new tab), then you’d be wrong.

Despite the almost identical name, this is an entirely different, substantially better CPU. Where the one in the Asus is a 14-core design, with six P-cores, this is a 24-core setup with eight P-cores and twice the number of E-cores. They’re both capable of 5.4GHz boost clocks, though inevitably the bigger chip has a higher base TDP of 45W.

System performance

Image 1 of 7

Lenovo Legion Pro 7i benchmarks — (Image credit: Future)

That translates to the actual performance figures though, and shows in just how close it gets to the ever-so-slightly higher clocked Core i9 13950HX used in the Blade and Titan machines.

Then, backing up the key CPU/GPU combination is a 1TB PCIe 4.0 Samsung SSD, and 32GB of DDR5-5600 SK Hynix memory.

The final part of the package is the 1600p 240Hz screen. Which is fine. I fear I’ve been spoiled by the joy of the mini LED backlights used in the last few laptop displays I’ve tested, because this one lacks the punch that I now want from a gaming panel.

What it does have, however, is the 16:10 aspect ratio (opens in new tab) I never knew I needed in a gaming laptop until I started using them on the regular. The 2560 x 1600 native resolution is a great match for the 16-inch screen size the Legion Pro comes rocking. It delivers a better experience when just on the desktop, and gives that little bit of extra screen real estate in games, too. The slight increase in resolution doesn’t impact gaming performance significantly when you’ve got a graphics chip this capable baked into the system.

Which brings us neatly to the letters I’ve jammed together to form my thoughts on the Legion Pro 7i’s performance. Inevitably, I’m benching this against the three RTX 4090-based machines I’ve reviewed so far, and I would have assumed that it would be significantly—or at least tangibly—behind the top Nvidia GPU. But, as I’ve said, that’s not the case.

Gaming performance

Image 1 of 14

The Legion Pro 7i manages to outperform both the Razer Blade 16 and the Asus Zephyrus M16 regularly, at both 1080p and 1440p resolutions. Only the chonky boi MSI Titan GT77 is able to utilise its RTX 4090-ish GPU to its fullest potential. And then at the expense of acoustics and potentially your sanity.

I don’t want my laptop to be some monstrous hyper-aggressive looking machine.

And most especially your bank account.

Because that’s the thing I keep coming back to when I’m looking at this Lenovo machine. It’s not the prettiest, but it sure can smash out them high gaming frame rates. And does it for around $2,000 less than the Blade 16. Okay, there’s always going to be a Razer premium for a Blade laptop, but the Zephyrus M16 is still $4,000, which means you’re saving well over a thousand dollars to get the same performance figures and a better CPU. Sure, the laptop screen isn’t mini LED, but that’s a compromise I’m willing to make if I still get to have a 16:10 that still looks good.

I’m talking about compromise here, but there honestly isn’t anything big you’ve really got to compromise on beyond that super expensive screen. And hell, it’s still a 1600p 240Hz panel. The gaming battery life is pretty weak, however, lower than any of the RTX 4090 machines I’ve looked at, but as long as you don’t plan to play without a charging cable it’s much less of an issue.

Image 1 of 6

The actual chassis does look and feel like a Lenovo; more office machine than the sort of hyper angular case you’ll see Asus, Gigabyte, or MSI traditionally wrapping around their gaming laptops. And that’s no bad thing. I don’t necessarily want my laptop to be some monstrous hyper-aggressive looking machine, and it’s got per-key RGB illumination and a light bar up front so you can still get your laptop lit. And, speaking of those keys, the Legion Pro has an excellent keyboard. Like the MSI Titan, you get a numpad, but unlike the MSI Titan it’s actually usable.

I also appreciate the way the cursor keys are separated from the mass of keys, too, and that the slight curl to the edges of the keys actually make them less prone to mis-strikes. At least, that’s what I’ve found with my fat fingers.

So, it feels like a grown up gaming laptop, is eminently usable, has performance in spades—in both CPU and GPU terms—and doesn’t cost anywhere near the same amount as the next-gen machines we’ve already checked out. I mean, it’s not cheap; $2,750 / £2,800 is still a not inconsiderable chunk of change. But that’s not an unexpected price tag for such a high powered notebook, and considering that’s the same price as the RTX 4060-powered Blade 16 it’s better than a lot of the competition. And as much as I’ve loved Razer’s gaming laptops over the years, I would 100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} be buying the Legion Pro 7i instead.

March 1, 2023

This top-rated MSI gaming laptop just dropped under $1000

This top-rated MSI gaming laptop just dropped under 00

When choosing involving gaming notebook bargains, it aids to consider a seem at customer opinions to make sure that you invest in a device which is value your tough-gained money. The MSI Delta 15 AMD Gain Edition falls less than this classification with an normal rating of 4.3 stars out of 5 on Greatest Invest in, and it’s even additional tempting with a $500 price reduction that pulls its selling price down to just $900 from its initial rate of $1,400. Here’s why it’s worth your really hard-acquired money.

Why you must acquire the MSI Delta 15 AMD Edge Version gaming notebook

The AMD and Intel rivalry carries on to intensify, with gaming laptops like the MSI Delta 15 AMD Benefit Version displaying that the when wide hole in between the two models has disappeared. With its AMD Ryzen 7 5800H processor and AMD Radeon RX 6700M graphics card, you will be in a position to smoothly engage in the most effective Computer online games, and its 16GB of RAM is plenty of for most avid gamers, in accordance to our guideline on how a great deal RAM do you have to have. The very best gaming laptops are future-evidence to some extent, and even though the MSI Delta 15 AMD Edge Version is not as potent as the most high-priced types, it need to be ready to take care of all of the approaching releases.

Some gamers are compelled to get from keep an eye on promotions since the screens of their gaming laptops are too smaller with small refresh fees. That will not be a dilemma with the MSI Delta 15 AMD Edge Edition, which is geared up with a 15.6-inch show with Entire Hd resolution and a refresh rate of up to 240Hz. The machine also will come with a 1TB SSD, which is massive ample to put in numerous AAA games, and a free of charge thirty day period of Xbox Recreation Pass Ultimate.

Not all notebook specials cater to avid gamers, and these that do don’t often give terrific price for cash. That’s not the circumstance with the MSI Delta 15 AMD Gain Version, which is a powerful gaming laptop computer that you can at the moment get from Very best Get for just $900, for financial savings of $500 from its sticker value of $1,400. This offer is predicted to expire soon, so it’s really proposed that you add it to your cart and look at out straight away.

Editors’ Tips

Posted on February 27, 2023
Razer Blade 14 gaming laptop with RTX 3080 gets 35{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} price cut

The Razer Blade 14 configuration with an RTX 3080 has been put on sale for US$1,000 off MSRP (Image: Razer)

The powerful 14-inch gaming laptop originally carried a price tag of way above US$2,500, but thanks to a new clearance sale, the RTX 3080-powered model variant of the Razer Blade 14 has now dropped below the US$2,000 threshold.

With the emergence of the mobile RTX 4090, RTX 3080 Ti-powered gaming laptops no longer find themselves in the top spots of most performance charts and benchmarks. However, as most their successors debut at insanely high prices, previous generation models such as the Razer Blade 14 are getting significant price cuts which arguably make them worth a look from a price-performance perspective.

For example, the reputable American gaming specialist has now put the aforementioned Razer Blade 14 with the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX and Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 with 8GB of VRAM on sale for US$1,799, which is a whopping 35 percent or US$1,000 discount relative to the original list price of US$2,799. The 14-inch gaming laptop is further equipped with 16GB of DDR4 memory, a large 1TB SSD and a beautiful 165Hz QHD display. At just 3.92 lbs, the Razer Blade 14 is also surprisingly light considering its powerful components.

We recommend prospective buyers check out our detailed written and video review of a slightly different configuration of the Razer Blade 14. Among other strong suits, we were impressed by the high-end gaming laptop’s colorful IPS display and the well-built aluminium chassis, while the cooling system of our RTX 3070-equipped test unit was surprisingly quiet under load. Assumably, this RTX 3080 configuration of the Razer Blade 14 offers even a bit more performance, and considering the steeply discounted deal price, it may be worth a look for gaming enthusiasts who value the portability of a 14-inch machine and don’t want to exceed a budget of US$2,000.

Working For Notebookcheck
Are you a techie who knows how to translate? Then join our Team!
Details here

Disclaimer: Notebookcheck is not responsible for price changes carried out by retailers. The discounted price or deal mentioned in this item was available at the time of writing and may be subject to time restrictions and/or limited unit availability.

Top 10 Laptops
Multimedia, Budget Multimedia, Gaming, Budget Gaming, Lightweight Gaming, Business, Budget Office, Workstation, Subnotebooks, Ultrabooks, Chromebooks

under 300 USD/Euros, under 500 USD/Euros, 1,000 USD/Euros, for University Students, Best Displays

Top 10 Smartphones
Smartphones, Phablets, ≤6-inch, Camera Smartphones

Enrico Frahn – Tech Writer – 1629 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2021

My fascination for technology goes back a long way to the Pentium II era. Modding, overclocking and treasuring computer hardware has since become an integral part of my life. As a student, I further developed a keen interest in mobile technologies that can make the stressful college life so much easier. After I fell in love with the creation of digital content while working in a marketing position, I now scour the web to bring you the most exciting topics in the world of tech. Outside the office, I’m particularly passionate about motorsports and mountain biking.

Please share our article, every link counts!

.170

Posted on February 26, 2023
MSI Katana 17 B13V laptop review: Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060 makes its debut

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

5598 (5462.22^min – 5597.85^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +117{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

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

5568 (5541.55^min – 5568.34^max) MB/s ∼99{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +116{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

4272 (1951.61^min – 4271.9^max) MB/s ∼76{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +66{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

3889 (3772.15^min – 3889.15^max) MB/s ∼69{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +51{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

3101 (2775.37^min – 3100.52^max) MB/s ∼55{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +20{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(834 – 5598, n=174, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

2578 (2552.79^min – 2578.03^max) MB/s ∼46{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(2460 – 2578, n=2) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

7533 (7482.85^min – 7532.79^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +142{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

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

7531 (7479^min – 7530.7^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +142{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

4579 (4190.54^min – 4578.92^max) MB/s ∼61{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +47{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

4394 (4343.95^min – 4393.95^max) MB/s ∼58{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +41{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(399 – 7889, n=173, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

3115 (2904.62^min – 3115.38^max) MB/s ∼41{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(2991 – 3115, n=2) Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

2749 (2612.84^min – 2749.11^max) MB/s ∼36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -12{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

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

12556 (4870.54^min – 12556.3^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +166{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

11242 (10740.3^min – 11242.2^max) MB/s ∼90{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +138{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

7032 (6100.58^min – 7031.96^max) MB/s ∼56{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +49{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

6697 (5704.17^min – 6696.63^max) MB/s ∼53{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +42{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

6319 (1848.3^min – 6318.66^max) MB/s ∼50{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +34{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(1620 – 13195, n=174, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

4719 (4052.12^min – 4719.01^max) MB/s ∼38{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(4633 – 4719, n=2) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

10261 (10045.2^min – 10261.4^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +183{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

9942 (9912.92^min – 9941.76^max) MB/s ∼97{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +174{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

5259 (5245.4^min – 5258.61^max) MB/s ∼51{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +45{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

4956 (4523.11^min – 4956.35^max) MB/s ∼48{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +37{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(86.2 – 10261, n=174, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

3629 (3402.12^min – 3628.58^max) MB/s ∼35{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

3613 (3580.5^min – 3612.97^max) MB/s ∼35{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} 0{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(3415 – 3629, n=2) Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

86.5 (85.74^min – 86.52^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +129{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

83.1 (79.37^min – 83.07^max) MB/s ∼96{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +120{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

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

79 (77.42^min – 79.03^max) MB/s ∼91{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +110{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

76.7 (73.36^min – 76.74^max) MB/s ∼89{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +103{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

69.8 (68.67^min – 69.84^max) MB/s ∼81{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +85{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(23.3 – 97.4, n=174, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

37.7 (37.23^min – 37.65^max) MB/s ∼44{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(35.5 – 37.7, n=2) Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

391 (373.18^min – 391.21^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +37{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

286 (269.48^min – 285.84^max) MB/s ∼73{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

263 (255.65^min – 263.15^max) MB/s ∼67{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -8{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(181.3 – 286, n=2) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

221 (218.91^min – 220.66^max) MB/s ∼57{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -23{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

213 (195.99^min – 212.69^max) MB/s ∼54{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -26{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

213 (205.52^min – 212.72^max) MB/s ∼54{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -26{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(66.6 – 421, n=173, last 2 years) Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

3551 (3544.16^min – 3551.38^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +28{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

3222 (3204.74^min – 3221.65^max) MB/s ∼91{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +16{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

2861 (2814.76^min – 2861.3^max) MB/s ∼81{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +3{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(2025 – 2769, n=2) Average of class Gaming
(310 – 4483, n=173, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

2148 (1952.04^min – 2148.3^max) MB/s ∼60{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -22{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

1469 (1266.81^min – 1469.47^max) MB/s ∼41{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -47{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

3576 (3480.8^min – 3575.55^max) MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +36{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH

2700 (2613.77^min – 2699.68^max) MB/s ∼76{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +2{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM

2635 (2459.5^min – 2634.95^max) MB/s ∼74{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR

2623 (2563.77^min – 2622.75^max) MB/s ∼73{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} 0{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(2291 – 2635, n=2) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

2101 (1969.73^min – 2101.4^max) MB/s ∼59{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -20{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Average of class Gaming
(288 – 4383, n=173, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB

1424 (1251.47^min – 1423.75^max) MB/s ∼40{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} -46{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average of class Gaming
(910 – 9510, n=165, last 2 years) Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(5903 – 6311, n=2) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(2348 – 2446, n=2) Average of class Gaming
(389 – 3629, n=165, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average of class Gaming
(338 – 4522, n=165, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(2404 – 2658, n=2) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 Average of class Gaming
(925 – 9971, n=165, last 2 years) Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(3920 – 3977, n=2) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 Average of class Gaming
(308 – 8590, n=165, last 2 years) Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(3007 – 3021, n=2) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average of class Gaming
(20 – 108, n=165, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(49.3 – 58.8, n=2) Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(152.8 – 249, n=2) Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average of class Gaming
(18 – 364, n=165, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

2914.54 MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +46{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(1901 – 1995, n=2) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Average of class Gaming
(216 – 2963, n=165, last 2 years) MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

2915.33 MB/s ∼100{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1} +38{b7c9e2c88beb1a84f22d94ab877a147f4adc4b3519717f3f957a0f34e16918d1}

MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average of class Gaming
(243 – 4008, n=165, last 2 years) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(1949 – 2108, n=2) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10 MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(0.05 – 0.094, n=2) Average of class Gaming
(0.022 – 0.23, n=160, last 2 years) MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Average Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM
(0.096 – 0.105, n=2) MSI Katana 17 B13VFK
Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM MSI Pulse GL76 12UGK
Micron 3400 1TB MTFDKBA1T0TFH Average of class Gaming
(0.012 – 0.425, n=165, last 2 years) Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 SE G733CX-LL014W
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB Acer Predator Helios 300 (i7-12700H, RTX 3070 Ti)
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR Gigabyte G7 KE
Gigabyte AG470S1TB-SI B10

* … smaller is better

Posted on February 25, 2023
HP just slashed the price of this gaming laptop to $650

Mark Coppock/Electronic Traits

HP is continuing its operate of terrific notebook deals with $250 off the HP Victus gaming notebook. Usually priced at $900, it now costs $650 so there’s a sizeable preserving to be enjoyed listed here. Element of HP’s Presidents Day sales, this is a single of a expanding range of gaming notebook offers that aren’t going to previous. If you are in the sector for a new gaming laptop computer, go through on though we get you through what you need to have to know about the HP Victus, then hit the purchase button rapidly.

Why you should obtain the HP Victus gaming laptop

Mark Coppock/Digital Developments

As just one of the finest laptop computer models, HP is familiar with what it’s undertaking. This HP Victus gaming notebook presents a 12th-technology Intel Core i5 processor alongside with 8GB of memory and 256GB of SSD storage. We’d have favored to see additional storage place but at this rate, it helps make feeling. You’ll still be equipped to install a number of online games at when and just need to retain an eye on substantial game titles like Phone of Obligation: Modern Warfare II. For the graphics card, there’s an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650. Once again, it’s aging know-how but it’s still extra than capable of managing games if you really don’t thoughts tweaking the detail level. Crucially, at this price, it’s a correctly easy to understand compromise to make.

The display screen pairs well with the 15.6-inch complete High definition screen that has a refresh charge of 144Hz and a response time of 9ms. 250 nits of brightness could be improved but once more, it is the variety of selling price variety wherever you should not be anticipating the finest gaming laptops possible.

As an alternative, you’re finding a superior stability of capabilities. The HP Victus requires up a smaller sized footprint than you would assume for a gaming laptop when supplying up to 6 hrs of battery lifestyle. It also has an up to date thermal layout so overheating will not be an issue in this article, as well as it has a keyboard designed with gaming in brain. The Omen gaming Hub gives you some control about the hardware, although there’s an HP 720p Wide Eyesight Hd digital camera for having video clip calls. This is a strong all-rounder at this value.

Ordinarily priced at $900, the HP Victus is down to $650 for a confined time only when you purchase direct from HP. A reminder you can get a spending budget gaming laptop for less than you’d believe, it is perfect for occasional gaming or any individual on a tight budget. Acquire it now right before the offer ends soon.

Modern tech news, curated and condensed for your inbox

Look at your inbox!

Please present a valid electronic mail address to proceed.

This email address is currently on file. If you are not receiving newsletters, make sure you check out your spam folder.

Sorry, an mistake transpired all through subscription. Please try out yet again afterwards.

Editors’ Suggestions

Posted on February 24, 2023
Seriously, what’s the point in an RTX 4090 gaming laptop if a cheaper RTX 4080 can beat it?

Graphics cards are straightforward, right? You buy the bigger number, you spend more, you get higher gaming performance. That’s how it works on the desktop, but it’s not necessarily the way things work in gaming laptop land. It’s confusing, frustrating, and kinda disingenuous.

I’ve spent a lot of time recently checking out next-gen gaming laptops, and it’s been a trip. So far they’ve all been RTX 4090-based machines costing $4,000+, y’know that whole ultra-enthusiast schtick I so love (opens in new tab). And there’s only really been one that I liked (opens in new tab), and even then there’s no chance in hell I’d ever consider buying it at that price.

And now, having tested an RTX 4080-based machine I can say, with absolute, total clarity, no-one should.

Somehow there’s really not a lot in it. On paper, the RTX 4090 and RTX 4080 silicon is supremely different, with Nvidia using separate GPUs for each mobile graphics card, yet I’ve been surprised just how close the cheaper chip gets to the top of Nvidia’s gaming laptop stack.

Sometimes even beating it.

The mobile RTX 4090 isn’t really an RTX 4090 (opens in new tab) as we know it on the desktop; it’s sporting the exact same AD103 silicon as the desktop RTX 4080 (opens in new tab). Which still makes it a potentially very powerful GPU. Then the mobile RTX 4080 uses the same GPU as the RTX 4070 Ti (opens in new tab), but with a slightly different, lower specification.

Instead of 7,680 CUDA cores, you get two SMs fewer with a total of 7,424 CUDA cores. That means you’re also losing out on a couple of RT Cores and a bunch of Tensor Cores, too. You still get the full 12GB GDDR6 complement, and in the end actually a whole lot of speedy graphics processing silicon goodness.

And that speedy silicon means you’re getting gaming performance close to that of the $5,300 MSI Titan GT77 (opens in new tab) in something like the Lenovo Legion Pro 7i (opens in new tab) that comes in at just $2,750. Yes, I know, that’s still a huge amount of cash to drop on a gaming laptop, but it’s coming back down to a more reasonable high price. If that makes any sense.

1440p gaming performance

Image 1 of 5

(Image credit: Future)

And it’s all down to just how different mobile GPU performance can be between systems, in a way that you just don’t get on the desktop. Sure, you can get overclocked versions of graphics cards, but the performance differences are minimal, to say the least.

On a laptop, however, you’re talking about an entirely enclosed system. And with thermals being so intrinsically linked to GPU performance, the sort of cooling your wee notebook can offer will have a huge impact on your frame rates. That’s whether or not you’re rocking a 175W RTX 4090 or a 150W RTX 4080.

This is the situation I’m in here with this Lenovo machine that’s actually sometimes capable of beating a Razer Blade 16 (opens in new tab) that’s supposed to be using the most powerful mobile GPU known to humankind, using an entirely second-tier graphics chip.

System performance

Image 1 of 2

(Image credit: Future)

The Blade 16 is a relatively slim machine, though is certainly chunkier than its Blade 15 progenitor, but even so it’s holding back the top Nvidia silicon inside it. With an average clock speed, measured in Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition, of just 1,708MHz that’s a lot lower than the potential 2,040MHz peak Nvidia puts out in the RTX 4090 spec sheet.

That’s also a chunk lower than the 1,922MHz I measured the same 175W RTX 4090 averaging inside the even heftier MSI Titan. But neither can hold a candle to the clock speed the 150W RTX 4080 manages in the Lenovo I’m typing away on now. This machine is posting an average of 2,361MHz, which is actually higher than Nvidia rates this chip at.

That’s not an odd occurrence in desktop terms, but seemingly out of place here alongside the numbers the supposed top GeForce mobile GPU is offering in either of the most expensive gaming laptops I’ve ever tested.

The combination of higher clock speed and a slightly thicker chassis than the Blade 16 has allowed the Lenovo Legion Pro 7i to deliver RTX 4090-beating performance from a system that costs near $2,000 less than the Blade 16.

4K gaming performance

Image 1 of 5

(Image credit: Future)

This is but a 1600p machine, however, and doesn’t have the 4K panel of either the MSI or Razer RTX 4090 laptops. But if you thought the 16GB of the top card would deliver it a greater performance delta at 4K than the 12GB RTX 4080 can, you’d be mistaken. I plumbed the Lenovo into a 4K screen and I’m still seeing times where it beats the Blade 16’s RTX 4090.

(Image credit: Future)

There’s is one argument you could make, and that’s about professional usage. The core count of an RTX 4090 vs an RTX 4080 does actually make a difference when it comes to creation tasks, such as rendering in Blender. But when we’re talking specifically about gaming laptops the argument just isn’t there for the pricier GPU.

This is absolutely not a situation that you’d expect, or ever really want to happen. I get that performance isn’t the only reason you pay more for a high-end notebook, but it definitely is the reason you’d pick an RTX 4090 system over an RTX 4080 one.

But this time around you shouldn’t need to make that choice, because I guess you really don’t need an RTX 4090. So, er… do we call this a consumer win from Nvidia? Its second-tier GPU performs as well as its top one in actual retail units. Great, I guess.

Posts pagination

Previous page Page 1 … Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 … Page 15 Next page