Notebookcheck

AORUS X7 DT v8 (i7-8850H, GTX 1080, Full HD) Laptop Review

Florian Glaser, 👁 Florian Glaser, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Alex Alderson), 07/13/2018

Lift-off. The current AORUS X7 DT is one of the fastest gaming laptops on the market. The new model, the X7 DT v8, packs an Intel Coffee Lake hexa-core processor, an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 GPU and a 144 Hz display. Find out in this review whether AORUS has done enough to put the X7 DT v8 at the pinnacle of gaming laptops.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

AORUS X7 DT v8

The only AORUS X7 DT v8 currently listed on price comparison site geizhals.de is our test configuration. This configuration is currently priced at just under 3,100 Euros (~$3631), for which you get a device with an Intel Core i7-8850H processor, an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 GPU, 16 GB DDR4 2666 RAM, a 512 GB NVMe SSD and a 1 TB 7,200 RPM HDD. The i7-8850H is currently the fastest laptop CPU available for consumers. Gigabyte, AORUS’ parent company, has even thrown in a 144 Hz panel to sweeten the deal.

Aorus X7 DT v8 (X7 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop) - 8192 MB, Core: 1582 MHz, Memory: 2500 MHz, GDDR5X, ForceWare 391.34
Memory
16384 MB 
, Two 8 GB SO-DIMM DDR4 2666 modules, Dual Channel. Two of four SO-DIMM slots occupied. Maximum of 64 GB RAM supported.
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AU Optronics B173HAN03.0 (AUO309D), IPS, Full-HD, 144 Hz, G-Sync, X-Rite Pantone , glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, 512 GB 
, SSD & HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630, 1 TB HDD, 7,200 RPM. Two M.2-2280 slots & one 2.5-inch drive bay.
Soundcard
Realtek ALC255 @ Intel Cannon Lake PCH
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 3 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Headphone jack, Microphone jack, Card Reader: SD,SDHC,SDXC, Brightness Sensor
Networking
Killer E2500 Gigabit Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter (b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 25 x 428 x 305 ( = 0.98 x 16.85 x 12.01 in)
Battery
94.24 Wh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: Two 2 W speakers, two 2 W woofers., Keyboard: Chiclet, RGB, Keyboard Light: yes, 265 W power supply, USB key containing software, Feet, Quick Start Guide, Warranty Information, Stickers, Adobe Reader XI, numerous manufacturer tools, Killer Performance Suite, MS Office trial, XSplit Broadcaster trial, XSplit Gamecaster Trial, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
3.374 kg ( = 119.01 oz / 7.44 pounds), Power Supply: 638 g ( = 22.5 oz / 1.41 pounds)
Price
3100 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Most gaming laptops are equipped with either an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 or a GTX 1070, but there are plenty of laptops that are equipped with the GTX 1080 too. We have chosen to compare the X7 DT v8 against other 17-inch gaming laptops that are also under 3.0 cm thick. These are the Razer Blade Pro 2017, the Schenker XMG Pro 17, the Alienware 17 R4 and the MSI GE73 8RF.

AORUS X7 DT v8
AORUS X7 DT v8

Innovations

The X7 DT v8 has changed internally and externally from the last predecessor we tested, the X7 DT v6; we only tested the non-DT variant of AORUS’ v7 series.

Briefly, AORUS has integrated the keyboard into the case as opposed to designing it to look like the keyboard has been added on top as was the case with the X7 DT v6.

Left-hand side: Gigabit Ethernet, 3 x USB 3.1 Type-A Gen 1, headphone jack, microphone jack
Left-hand side: Gigabit Ethernet, 3 x USB 3.1 Type-A Gen 1, headphone jack, microphone jack
Right-hand side: card reader, USB 3.1 Type-C Gen 2, Thunderbolt 3, HDMI 2.0, Mini DisplayPort 1.4
Right-hand side: card reader, USB 3.1 Type-C Gen 2, Thunderbolt 3, HDMI 2.0, Mini DisplayPort 1.4
Rear: power connector, USB 3.1 Type-A Gen 2
Rear: power connector, USB 3.1 Type-A Gen 2

More excitingly, AORUS has modernized the X7 DT v8’s ports from its predecessors. There is a Thunderbolt 3 port, as is befitting of current premium notebooks. Moreover, AORUS has increased the number of USB ports to six, including the Thunderbolt 3 port. The card reader is blazingly fast too.

Neither the case, nor the connectivity, nor the input devices have changed much between generations. As such, we will not be covering these in this review. Please see our review of the X7 DT v6 for information on these areas.

Size Comparison


Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Aorus X7 DT v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
196 MB/s ∼100%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
180 MB/s ∼92% -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.7 - 202, n=205)
90.1 MB/s ∼46% -54%
Aorus X7 DT v6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
83.25 MB/s ∼42% -58%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
50 MB/s ∼26% -74%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26 MB/s ∼13% -87%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Aorus X7 DT v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
244 MB/s ∼100%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
210 MB/s ∼86% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (13.4 - 257, n=203)
109 MB/s ∼45% -55%
Aorus X7 DT v6
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
90.59 MB/s ∼37% -63%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
52 MB/s ∼21% -79%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
32 MB/s ∼13% -87%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
693 MBit/s ∼100% +6%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
687 MBit/s ∼99% +5%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
671 MBit/s ∼97% +2%
Aorus X7 DT v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
655 MBit/s ∼95%
Alienware 17 R4
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
606 MBit/s ∼87% -7%
Average of class Gaming
  (141 - 702, n=180)
594 MBit/s ∼86% -9%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
662 MBit/s ∼100% +11%
Aorus X7 DT v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
599 MBit/s ∼90%
Alienware 17 R4
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
589 MBit/s ∼89% -2%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
554 MBit/s ∼84% -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (144 - 697, n=180)
534 MBit/s ∼81% -11%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
528 MBit/s ∼80% -12%

Display

The X7 DT v8 has an AU Optronics B173HAN03.0 panel with a 1920x1080 display, which at first seems like a step down from the v6’s 2560x1440 display. However, the X7 DT v8 has a 144 Hz IPS panel to the v6’s 120 Hz TN panel. This means that the v8’s display has stronger viewing angles and a higher refresh rate than its predecessors; this could prove useful when playing games.

287
cd/m²
289
cd/m²
267
cd/m²
306
cd/m²
297
cd/m²
288
cd/m²
275
cd/m²
261
cd/m²
257
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 306 cd/m² Average: 280.8 cd/m² Minimum: 14 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 84 %
Center on Battery: 297 cd/m²
Contrast: 1291:1 (Black: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.19 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.31 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
91% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 59% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.42
Aorus X7 DT v8
AU Optronics B173HAN03.0 (AUO309D), IPS, 1920x1080
Aorus X7 DT v6
AUO1096, TN LED, 2560x1440
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Sharp LQ173D1JW33 (SHP145A), IGZO, 3840x2160
Alienware 17 R4
TN LED, 2560x1440
Schenker XMG Pro 17
AU Optronics B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B), IPS, 3840x2160
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Chi Mei N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN WLED, 1920x1080
Response Times
-15%
-229%
-37%
-126%
-35%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
18 (8.8, 9.2)
21.6 (12.4, 9.2)
-20%
60.8 (28.8, 32)
-238%
30 (18.8, 11.2)
-67%
44 (21.2, 22.8)
-144%
28 (16.4, 11.6)
-56%
Response Time Black / White *
12 (6.8, 5.2)
13.2 (4.4, 8.8)
-10%
38.4 (22, 16.4)
-220%
12.8 (10.8, 2)
-7%
24.8 (11.6, 13.2)
-107%
13.6 (11.8, 1.8)
-13%
PWM Frequency
59.52
204.9 (20)
25000 (14)
Screen
-86%
-51%
-69%
-46%
-23%
Brightness middle
297
339.5
14%
230
-23%
402.3
35%
303
2%
273
-8%
Brightness
281
309
10%
207
-26%
372
32%
287
2%
273
-3%
Brightness Distribution
84
80
-5%
83
-1%
86
2%
83
-1%
90
7%
Black Level *
0.23
0.45
-96%
0.2
13%
0.62
-170%
0.25
-9%
0.26
-13%
Contrast
1291
754
-42%
1150
-11%
649
-50%
1212
-6%
1050
-19%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.19
6.88
-214%
5.62
-157%
5.6
-156%
4.38
-100%
3.52
-61%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
4.81
9.99
-108%
10.24
-113%
9.8
-104%
7.42
-54%
6.34
-32%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.31
6.57
-402%
4.54
-247%
4.7
-259%
5.96
-355%
3.11
-137%
Gamma
2.42 91%
2.04 108%
2.36 93%
2.14 103%
2.31 95%
2.43 91%
CCT
6464 101%
8608 76%
6625 98%
7519 86%
6247 104%
6999 93%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
59
54
-8%
88
49%
53.7
-9%
87
47%
76
29%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
91
82
-10%
100
10%
82.2
-10%
100
10%
100
10%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
2.09
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-51% / -74%
-140% / -80%
-53% / -64%
-86% / -60%
-29% / -25%

* ... smaller is better

Our test device scored relatively well in our tests too, but it falls short of the competition overall. Our test devices scored an average maximum brightness of 280.8 cd/m² with X-Rite i1Pro 2, which puts the X7 DT v8 in the middle of our comparison devices. A highlight of the display is its X-Rite Pantone certification, which corresponds with the good values that our test device achieved. Our test device achieved a 1,291:1 contrast ratio and a 0.23 cd/m² black value, which is higher than many of our comparison devices.

CalMAN: Grayscale (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Grayscale (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Color Saturation (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Color Saturation (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Grayscale (Native Color)
CalMAN: Grayscale (Native Color)
CalMAN: Color Saturation (Native Color)
CalMAN: Color Saturation (Native Color)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (Native Color)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (Native Color)

Our test device is 91% sRGB and 59% AdobeRGB accurate, which is decent for a gaming notebook. We would recommend that you check out the MSI GE73 or the 4K versions of the Razer Blade Pro or the Schenker XMG Pro 17 if you need a device with a wider color-space coverage.

91% sRGB accuracy
91% sRGB accuracy
Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array
59% AdobeRGB accuracy
59% AdobeRGB accuracy

The average maximum luminosity is adequate for using the X7 DT v8 indoors, but it is rather low for outdoor use.

Unfortunately, there is some backlight bleeding at the bottom of the display, but this phenomenon affects plenty of gaming notebooks.

Positively, the X7 DT v8 does not use pulse-width modulation (PWM) to regulate display brightness. PWM can cause headaches and eye strain in some people, but this will not be a problem with the X7 DT v8.

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
12 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6.8 ms rise
↘ 5.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
18 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8.8 ms rise
↘ 9.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 7 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8933 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Performance

The X7 DT v8 packs plenty of useful manufacturer software, which benefits performance. There is Command & Control, which includes numerous features that are clearly laid out. Additionally, Gigabyte includes a CPU and GPU overclocking utility that we disabled during our tests. There are also several fan modes that range from “Quiet” to “Gaming”.

We set our test device to “Normal” for the purposes of our tests.

OC Gauge
Command & Control
Deep Control

For some reason, the energy-saving options are currently rather buggy. Setting the Windows Power mode to Balanced fixes the CPU clock speed at 2.8 GHz, but this bug is overcome by using Gigabyte’s power settings. We also used the Command & Control utility to adjust settings during our tests.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
HWiNFO
GPU-Z
LatencyMon

Processor

The X7 DT v8 is equipped with an Intel Core i7-8850H processor, which is almost a temporary solution between the release of the Intel Core i7-8750H and the release of the more powerful Intel Core i9-8950HK.

The Core i7-8850H is a Coffee Lake hexa-core CPU with a 2.6 GHz base clock speed that supports Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost. This means that the CPU can execute up to 12 application threads simultaneously and can clock up to 4.3 GHz when required.

Single-core rendering
Single-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
GPU load
GPU load

The X7 DT v8 is faster than all our comparison devices in CPU benchmarks. Our test device averaged 1,276 points in Cinebench R15 multi-core benchmarks, which is significantly higher than much of the competition. The X7 DT v8 is 10% faster than our best comparison device, which is the MSI GE73 with its Core i7-8750H processor. The difference between the Core i7-8850H and the Core i7-7820HK is much clearer though, with our test device scoring between 47% and 65% faster than its Core i7-7820HK-powered counterparts. The Core i7-6820HK and Core i7-7700HQ are far behind the Core i7-8750H too, with the latter outscoring them by 53% and 74%, respectively.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Aorus X7 DT v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
182 Points ∼100%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Core i7-8750H
174 Points ∼96% -4%
Alienware 17 R4
Intel Core i7-7820HK
171 Points ∼94% -6%
Aorus X7 DT v6
Intel Core i7-6820HK
169 Points ∼93% -7%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
159 Points ∼87% -13%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Intel Core i7-7820HK
158 Points ∼87% -13%
Average of class Gaming
  (79 - 209, n=420)
152 Points ∼84% -16%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Aorus X7 DT v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
1276 Points ∼100%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Core i7-8750H
1163 Points ∼91% -9%
Alienware 17 R4
Intel Core i7-7820HK
867 Points ∼68% -32%
Aorus X7 DT v6
Intel Core i7-6820HK
832 Points ∼65% -35%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Intel Core i7-7820HK
771 Points ∼60% -40%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 1865, n=421)
749 Points ∼59% -41%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
732 Points ∼57% -43%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Aorus X7 DT v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
2.07 Points ∼100%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.98 Points ∼96% -4%
Aorus X7 DT v6
Intel Core i7-6820HK
1.92 Points ∼93% -7%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Intel Core i7-7820HK
1.81 Points ∼87% -13%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.79 Points ∼86% -14%
Alienware 17 R4
Intel Core i7-7820HK
1.69 Points ∼82% -18%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.71 - 2.38, n=408)
1.68 Points ∼81% -19%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Aorus X7 DT v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
14.02 Points ∼100%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.49 Points ∼89% -11%
Alienware 17 R4
Intel Core i7-7820HK
9.53 Points ∼68% -32%
Aorus X7 DT v6
Intel Core i7-6820HK
9.14 Points ∼65% -35%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
Intel Core i7-7820HK
8.39 Points ∼60% -40%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.12 Points ∼58% -42%
Average of class Gaming
  (1.13 - 21.2, n=509)
7.28 Points ∼52% -48%

The X7 DT v8 has comparatively impressive Turbo Boost performance too. Our test device maintained around 4.0 GHz throughout our CPU benchmarks. By contrast, CPU performance in other Coffee Lake-powered notebooks typically drops by more than 10% after 30 minutes of CPU benchmarks.
 

010203040506070809010011012013014015016017018019020021022023024025026027028029030031032033034035036037038039040041042043044045046047048049050051052053054055056057058059060061062063064065066067068069070071072073074075076077078079080081082083084085086087088089090091092093094095096097098099010001010102010301040105010601070108010901100111011201130114011501160117011801190120012101220123012401250126012701280Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
2.07 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
14.02 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
182 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1276 Points
Help

System Performance

The premium hardware helps the X7 DT v8 to score highly in our system performance benchmarks. While our test device scored 1% and 21% less in PCMark 10 than the Schenker XMG Pro 17 and the MSI GE73 respectively, it is a clear winner in PCMark 8.

PCMark 10 - Score
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
5465 Points ∼100% +21%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 6959, n=120)
4946 Points ∼91% +9%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
4571 Points ∼84% +1%
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4524 Points ∼83%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, 2x Samsung SSD PM951 MZVLV256HCHP (RAID 0)
3991 Points ∼73% -12%
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5779 Points ∼100%
Aorus X7 DT v6
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK, Samsung SM951 MZVPV512HDGL m.2 PCI-e
5096 Points ∼88% -12%
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
5064 Points ∼88% -12%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, 2x Samsung SSD PM951 MZVLV256HCHP (RAID 0)
4531 Points ∼78% -22%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
4498 Points ∼78% -22%
Average of class Gaming
  (2554 - 6093, n=333)
4222 Points ∼73% -27%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
3635 Points ∼63% -37%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
5779 points
Help

Storage Devices

Our test device is equipped with a 512 GB Toshiba THNSN5512GPU7 M.2-2280 NVMe SSD and a 1 TB HGST Travelstar 7K1000 7,200 RPM HDD. Our test device achieved 2,182 MB/s sequential read and 1,341 MB/s sequential write speeds in AS SSD benchmarks.

SSD
SSD
SSD
SSD
HDD
HDD
HDD
HDD

This is much faster than the MSI GE73 8RF, which uses a slower SATA III SSD. However, the Toshiba NVMe SSD cannot compete in benchmarks with its Samsung-made competitors like the SM951 or the 960 EVO.

Alternatively, you could use the 1 TB HDD if storage runs low on the 512 GB SSD. The 1 TB HDD will be a lot slower than the SSD in daily use, so you will see better system performance if you primarily store things on the SSD rather than the HDD.

Aorus X7 DT v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Aorus X7 DT v6
Samsung SM951 MZVPV512HDGL m.2 PCI-e
Razer Blade Pro 2017
2x Samsung SSD PM951 MZVLV256HCHP (RAID 0)
Alienware 17 R4
SK Hynix PC300 NVMe 512 GB
Schenker XMG Pro 17
Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
Toshiba HG6 THNSNJ256G8NY
AS SSD
26%
7%
-5%
57%
-63%
Score Total
2539
2695
6%
2715
7%
2072
-18%
4093
61%
881
-65%
Score Write
981
665
-32%
676
-31%
858
-13%
1558
59%
254
-74%
Score Read
1058
1353
28%
1414
34%
831
-21%
1711
62%
417
-61%
4K Write
89.94
149.13
66%
104.44
16%
113.36
26%
154.21
71%
38.34
-57%
4K Read
23.28
48.93
110%
37.57
61%
35.61
53%
45.58
96%
14.07
-40%
Seq Write
1341.67
1493.99
11%
587.97
-56%
734.8
-45%
1672.86
25%
425.71
-68%
Seq Read
2182.48
1971.14
-10%
2599.35
19%
1752.03
-20%
2746.35
26%
511.18
-77%
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2414 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1562 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 366.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 305.7 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1362 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1340 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 30.76 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 88.55 MB/s

Graphics Card

The X7 DT v8 is equipped with an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080, which is currently the most powerful consumer laptop GPU on the market. The GPU has 2,560 shader units, 8 GB GDDR5X RAM and supports DirectX 12.

Our test device performs similarly to other GTX 1080-equipped laptops in benchmarks, with 3DMark Fire Strike and 3DMark 11 throwing up no surprises.

3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Aorus X7 DT v6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
21928 Points ∼100% +5%
Alienware 17 R4
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
21846 Points ∼100% +5%
Aorus X7 DT v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
20813 Points ∼95%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
18879 Points ∼86% -9%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
17980 Points ∼82% -14%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
17216 Points ∼79% -17%
Average of class Gaming
  (385 - 40636, n=448)
10263 Points ∼47% -51%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Aorus X7 DT v6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
27135 Points ∼100% +4%
Alienware 17 R4
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
26438 Points ∼97% +1%
Aorus X7 DT v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
26201 Points ∼97%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
24868 Points ∼92% -5%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
23261 Points ∼86% -11%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
22804 Points ∼84% -13%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=521)
11899 Points ∼44% -55%

The GTX 1080 has a 1,582 MHz base clock speed that can increase up to 1,896 MHz when required. Our test device performed well in GPU benchmarks, with the GPU maintaining a 1,810 MHz clock speed in Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark.

3DMark 11 Performance
20577 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
177420 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
39020 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
18006 points
Help

3D performance over an extended period is fine too. Our test device can play The Witcher 3 for an hour at 1920x1080 in full details without a problem; the CPU and GPU maintained their boost clock speeds throughout this test.

01234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162636465666768697071727374757677787980Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra

Gaming Performance

The X7 DT v8 makes good use of its 144 Hz display. Our test device easily runs every game against which we tested it in 1920x1080 at maximum details.

Our test device regularly exceeded 100 FPS in games, which looks smooth on the 144 Hz display. The only game that maintains 60 FPS is The Crew 2. However, this game has a 60 FPS lock, so feasibly the X7 DT v8 could run the game at a higher FPS if this limitation was removed by the developers.

The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
78.1 fps ∼100% +9%
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
71.4 fps ∼91%
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
64.9 fps ∼83% -9%
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
62.9 fps ∼81% -12%
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
61.4 fps ∼79% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.6 - 115, n=224)
44.5 fps ∼57% -38%

The X7 DT v8 also supports Nvidia G-Sync, which ensures that games play smoothly and without screen tearing. The device does not support Nvidia Optimus technology though, which would allow the system to switch between the low-power Intel UHD Graphics 630 and the GTX 1080-dedicated GPU. Optimus technology allows systems with Nvidia GPUs to draw less power when they do not need it.

low med. high ultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 14171.4fps
The Division (2016) 128100fps
Mirror's Edge Catalyst (2016) 130121fps
Battlefield 1 (2016) 156141fps
Dishonored 2 (2016) 11596.4fps
Watch Dogs 2 (2016) 10472.8fps
Destiny 2 (2017) 165144fps
The Crew 2 (2018) 6060fps

Emissions

Fan Noise

Typically, the X7 DT v8 gets very loud when gaming. While our test device achieved a relatively modest 43 dB(A) in 3DMark06, fan noise reached 53 dB(A) in The Witcher 3 and a maximum of 54 dB(A).

Noise level: At idle
Noise level: At idle
Noise level: Under load
Noise level: Under load
Noise level: Speakers
Noise level: Speakers

Fan noise is relatively loud at idle too, with our test device averaging 36 dB(A) and reaching a maximum of 41 dB(A). You could set the fan to Quiet for a quieter experience, or even manually control the fan within the Deep Control utility.

Overall, the fan noise is comparable to many other gaming laptops, but it is significantly louder than slimmer devices.

Noise Level

Idle
35 / 36 / 41 dB(A)
HDD
33 dB(A)
Load
43 / 54 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 29 dB(A)
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
Aorus X7 DT v6
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
Average of class Gaming
 
Noise
0%
5%
1%
2%
6%
9%
off / environment *
29
28.6
1%
30
-3%
28.2
3%
29
-0%
30
-3%
29.4 (27.7 - 32, n=227)
-1%
Idle Minimum *
35
32.2
8%
30
14%
35.6
-2%
32
9%
32
9%
31.5 (28 - 41.7, n=650)
10%
Idle Average *
36
35.2
2%
31
14%
35.6
1%
33
8%
33
8%
32.8 (28 - 46.6, n=650)
9%
Idle Maximum *
41
35.2
14%
33
20%
35.7
13%
35
15%
34
17%
34.7 (28 - 50.4, n=650)
15%
Load Average *
43
51.7
-20%
43
-0%
50.2
-17%
50
-16%
41
5%
40.4 (30.3 - 58, n=651)
6%
Witcher 3 ultra *
53
55
-4%
50.2
5%
52
2%
50
6%
Load Maximum *
54
55.7
-3%
58
-7%
50.2
7%
56
-4%
54
-0%
47.6 (38.9 - 64, n=651)
12%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

The X7 DT v8 is a very hot device under load. Our test device reached a maximum of 51 °C on the top case and 63 °C on the bottom case under maximum load. Maximum surface temperatures were slightly lower when playing The Witcher 3 at 47 °C and 59 °C, respectively, but these are hot nonetheless. Surface temperatures averaged 45.2 °C during The Witcher 3 and 48.7 °C under maximum load, but these are both too hot for gaming with the device on your lap.

Idle temperatures are much better though, with our test device averaging 26.3 °C on its top case and 26.8 °C on the bottom case. Maximum surface temperatures at idle are marginally higher too at 27 °C and 28 °C, respectively.

The Witcher 3
The Witcher 3
FurMark & Prime95 stress test
FurMark & Prime95 stress test
Heat-map of the top case under load (Optris PI 640)
Heat-map of the top case under load (Optris PI 640)
Heat-map of the bottom case under load (Optris PI 640)
Heat-map of the bottom case under load (Optris PI 640)

Internal temperatures are hotter still but without thermal throttling. The CPU and GPU core temperatures sat at just below 90 °C during our 60-minute combined FurMark and Prime95 stress test.

Max. Load
 45 °C
113 F
51 °C
124 F
49 °C
120 F
 
 43 °C
109 F
47 °C
117 F
46 °C
115 F
 
 39 °C
102 F
39 °C
102 F
38 °C
100 F
 
Maximum: 51 °C = 124 F
Average: 44.1 °C = 111 F
63 °C
145 F
62 °C
144 F
52 °C
126 F
63 °C
145 F
62 °C
144 F
53 °C
127 F
42 °C
108 F
43 °C
109 F
39 °C
102 F
Maximum: 63 °C = 145 F
Average: 53.2 °C = 128 F
Power Supply (max.)  60 °C = 140 F | Room Temperature 24 °C = 75 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 44.1 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 51 °C / 124 F, compared to the average of 39.3 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 63 °C / 145 F, compared to the average of 41.7 °C / 107 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.3 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 41.2 °C / 106 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 39 °C / 102.2 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.7 °C / 83.7 F (-10.3 °C / -18.5 F).
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
Aorus X7 DT v6
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
Average of class Gaming
 
Heat
5%
-13%
0%
4%
-3%
2%
Maximum Upper Side *
51
45.4
11%
53
-4%
49.6
3%
55
-8%
47
8%
45.6 (28 - 68.8, n=615)
11%
Maximum Bottom *
63
58.2
8%
53
16%
56
11%
56
11%
49
22%
49.1 (25.9 - 78, n=613)
22%
Idle Upper Side *
27
27.4
-1%
35
-30%
29.6
-10%
25
7%
32
-19%
30.8 (21.6 - 46.8, n=566)
-14%
Idle Bottom *
28
27.2
3%
37
-32%
29.2
-4%
26
7%
34
-21%
31.6 (21.1 - 50.3, n=564)
-13%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.543.4253538.13130.930.94034.536.55027.828.66326.630.98028.643.910028.359.112525.551.516022.74720024.95625023.65731520.660.540019.364.950018.368.463017.772.280017.569100017.876.3125017.474.616001771.8200017.169.1250017.371.6315017.171400017.364.750001766.8630017.169.7800017.265.31000017.263125001758.51600016.951.8SPL29.882.8N1.356.2median 17.4median 65.3Delta1.95.738.440.5323228.431.233.338.136.638.42741.225.848.930.451.524.949.524.957.824.963.424.16822.271.219.869.919.472.119.177.418.975.518.470.618.57018.474.118.472.518.771.619.170.719.166.119.458.719.554.919.755.320.35920.948.120.750.931.583.11.656.2median 19.5median 681.97.6hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAorus X7 DT v8Razer Blade Pro 2017
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Aorus X7 DT v8 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.6% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 27% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 65% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 10% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Razer Blade Pro 2017 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | reduced highs - on average 7.5% lower than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 43% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 21% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

The X7 DT v8 has high power consumption, as may be expected by its powerful hardware. Our test device consumes a minimum of 23 W at idle, which is considerably lower than other GTX 1080-powered devices but is higher than GTX 1070-powered competitors. We recorded a 37 W maximum power draw at idle, which is closer to other GTX 1080-powered devices than the minimum value. Overall, the X7 DT v8 consumes just over 10 W more than GTX 1070-powered devices.

As expected, power consumption ramps up under load. Our test device draws an average of 115 W under load, which can increase up to 281 W. This maximum value is higher than all our comparison devices and is higher than the included 265 W power supply. It is worth noting that the power supply provides 255 W to the notebook and uses 10 W for its USB port.

This maximum value should not be a problem for charging though as our test device consumed 225 W while playing The Witcher 3. This should mean that the device will not lose charge while gaming.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 1.2 / 1.4 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 23 / 33 / 37 Watt
Load midlight 115 / 281 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
Aorus X7 DT v6
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
-20%
-7%
-11%
29%
25%
21%
Idle Minimum *
23
31.5
-37%
31
-35%
37.5
-63%
13
43%
15
35%
20.1 (3.9 - 113, n=610)
13%
Idle Average *
33
33.9
-3%
36
-9%
37.6
-14%
19
42%
20
39%
25.7 (6.8 - 119, n=610)
22%
Idle Maximum *
37
34.6
6%
44
-19%
37.6
-2%
26
30%
26
30%
30.7 (8.3 - 122, n=610)
17%
Load Average *
115
205.6
-79%
107
7%
122.4
-6%
95
17%
97
16%
104 (14.1 - 319, n=601)
10%
Load Maximum *
281
250.8
11%
258
8%
277.4
1%
220
22%
239
15%
166 (21.9 - 590, n=600)
41%
Witcher 3 ultra *
225
212
6%
180.3
20%
179
20%
186
17%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

The X7 DT v8 has a 94 Wh battery, which is on par with other GTX 1080-powered devices. Despite this, our test device has only a mediocre battery life, potentially because of the lack of Nvidia Optimus graphics-switching technology.

Our test device lasted 3 h 48 m in our Wi-Fi battery test, during which we run a script that simulates the load required to render websites. We set the display brightness to 150 cd/m² for this test.

Battery runtimes are equally mediocre during our idle and load battery tests too. Our test device lasted for 4 h 56 m while idling with display brightness set to a minimum and Wi-Fi switched off. Likewise, the battery only lasted 80 minutes with the device operating at full load with the brightness set to maximum.

It is worth noting that gaming performance dropped by around 40% in The Witcher 3 when we were gaming on battery to when we were gaming on mains power.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
4h 56min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
3h 48min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 20min
Aorus X7 DT v8
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H, 94.24 Wh
Aorus X7 DT v6
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK, 94 Wh
Razer Blade Pro 2017
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, 99 Wh
Alienware 17 R4
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK, 99 Wh
Schenker XMG Pro 17
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 66 Wh
MSI GE73 8RF-008 Raider RGB
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, 51 Wh
Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
-19%
-9%
-14%
15%
-23%
7%
Reader / Idle
296
182
-39%
253
-15%
276
-7%
397
34%
303
2%
332 (39 - 1174, n=598)
12%
WiFi v1.3
228
144
-37%
197
-14%
181
-21%
218
-4%
186
-18%
251 (78 - 622, n=272)
10%
Load
80
94
18%
81
1%
69
-14%
91
14%
38
-52%
78.7 (18 - 202, n=564)
-2%
H.264
204
222
193
244 (88 - 506, n=124)

Verdict

Pros

+ optional CPU & GPU overclocking
+ excellent selection of ports
+ fast card reader
+ good Turbo Boost
+ sturdy case
+ practical manufacturer tools
+ 144 Hz display
+ NVMe SSD

Cons

- high temperatures and fan noise
- the insides get dusty quickly
- meager battery life
- average sound quality from speakers
The AORUS X7 DT v8 in review. Test device courtesy of Gigabyte Germany.
The AORUS X7 DT v8 in review. Test device courtesy of Gigabyte Germany.

The AORUS X7 DT v8 continues Gigabyte’s tradition of producing smartly designed and high-performance gaming laptops.

The X7 DT v8 scores well for its sturdy metal case, its decent selection of input devices and for its high-contrast, 144 Hz, and Full HD IPS display.

The combination of an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 GPU, a 144 Hz display and Nvidia G-Sync ensure a smooth gaming experience that few laptops can match. The hexa-core Intel Core i7-8850H processor should be plenty powerful for many years to come, while the 16 GB of DDR4 RAM and the NVMe SSD ensure that the X7 DT v8 has smooth system performance regardless of the application thrown at it.

These high performance components come at a cost to surface temperatures, fans noise and battery life. The X7 DT v8 feels hot to the touch under load, with fans getting correspondingly loud. This high power consumption and lack of graphics-switching technology results in mediocre battery life even with the huge 94 Wh battery. Speaker quality is second rate too and should be better, given the X7 DT v8’s price tag.

Overall, the AORUS X7 DT v8 is an excellent gaming laptop that will deservedly sit in our top 10 list. Gigabyte has done just enough for us to score the X7 DT v8 higher than both the GTX 1080-equipped Alienware 17 R4, and 4K Razer Blade Pro and the GTX 1070-equipped Schenker XMG Pro 17 and MSI GE73 8RF

Aorus X7 DT v8 - 07/10/2018 v6
Florian Glaser

Chassis
82 / 98 → 83%
Keyboard
81%
Pointing Device
78%
Connectivity
71 / 81 → 88%
Weight
54 / 10-66 → 79%
Battery
74%
Display
90%
Games Performance
99%
Application Performance
100%
Temperature
77 / 95 → 81%
Noise
59 / 90 → 65%
Audio
74%
Average
78%
87%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > AORUS X7 DT v8 (i7-8850H, GTX 1080, Full HD) Laptop Review
Florian Glaser, 2018-07-13 (Update: 2018-07-17)