Acer ConceptD 5 17 inch Review: Creativity in large format

Would you like a little more? Acer's 17-inch notebook is almost a workstation, and it is well-positioned with its i7-9750H and GeForce RTX 2060. The matte display also does not need to hide with its 100% sRGB coverage and a high AdobeRGB percentage.

Sebastian Jentsch, 👁 Sebastian Jentsch, ✓ Stefanie Voigt (translated by Mark Riege), 04/04/2020 🇩🇪 🇪🇸 ...

Acer's ConceptD series for creative professionals: the 17-inch ConceptD 5 CN517

Portable, powerful, and precise – this is how Acer presents its ConceptD series for creative professionals. The ConceptD 3 models represent the entry-level with integrated graphics cards. The ConceptD 9 models are the cutting edge with a technically demanding hinge solution and a Core i9-9980HK processor with a free multiplier. The hinge allows using it as a standing tablet.

The 17-inch ConceptD 5 model is far from such technical wizardry as in the D 9. The hefty standard notebook contains an RTX 2060 graphics card, a Core i7-9750H hexa-core processor, and a 4K panel with 100% AdobeRGB coverage – at least on paper. The colors are Pantone validated, which is supposed to attract image processing professionals who prepare for printing.

As competitors of the 17-inch ConceptD 5, the market also offers the Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 as well as the Dell XPS 15 7590 (both of them 15 inches) with powerful equipment. 17-inch notebooks are rare in the same price and value range. While the Apple and Dell notebooks are even available with the Core i9 9980HK, they have a weaker graphics card. The MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 with 4K, a Core i9-9880H, and an RTX 2070 Max-Q, which is also a 15-inch notebook, is similarly equipped.

Test device courtesy of Acer Deutschland

Download your licensed rating image as PNG / SVG

Rating	Date	Model	Weight	Height	Size	Resolution
84.7 %	04/2020	Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile	2.8 kg	24 mm	17.30"	3840x2160
87.4 %	08/2019	Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 i9-9980HK, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile	2 kg	17 mm	15.60"	3840x2160
87.1 %	02/2020	Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile	1.7 kg	18.7 mm	15.60"	3840x2160
89.4 %	01/2020	Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 i9-9980HK, Radeon Pro Vega 20	1.8 kg	15.5 mm	15.40"	2880x1800
85 %	06/2019	MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 i9-9880H, GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q	1.9 kg	18 mm	15.60"	3840x2160

Case and Equipment - A hefty 2.8 kg (~6.2 lb)

With 2.8 kg (~6.2 lb), the heavy device brings a lot of weight to the scale, and the 600-gram (~1.3 lb) power supply does not improve things. The case offers a decent stiffness overall, but it is still some ways from perfection. It is an aluminum unibody case that is closed up by a plate on the bottom. The keyboard and ports stick out from the case. The lid is also made from this metal, and there is a plastic band on top for the WiFi antenna.

The smooth, metal surface feels comfortably cool, particularly during idle operation. The bottom plate can be removed, giving access to the two RAM slots, the WiFi module, and the SSD.

Acer uses Killer network cards: while the E2500 Gigabit Ethernet and the WiFi 6 AX1650x offer strong connection speeds, the test unit still does not place at the top for WiFi. Here, the Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme is able to achieve more data throughput under equal test conditions, particularly during sending.

Real HDMI 2.0 and Mini DisplayPort 1.4 confirm the (limited) workstation ambitions of the ConceptD 5. Unfortunately, there is only a single USB Type-C connection (with DisplayPort 1.4), but on the other hand, two of the four USB ports support the Gen-3.2 standard. The lack of Thunderbolt 3 is incomprehensible for this price range, and the XPS 15, the MSI P65, and the Macbook Pro 15 naturally have it on board.

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

Size Comparison

Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 ❌

Networking
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200	1431 (566^min - 1523^max) MBit/s ∼100% +130%
Average Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW) (554 - 1659, n=24)	1005 MBit/s ∼70% +62%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi	650 (629^min - 713^max) MBit/s ∼45% +5%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)	644 MBit/s ∼45% +4%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)	621 (418^min - 641^max) MBit/s ∼43%
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200	1431 (1279^min - 1644^max) MBit/s ∼100% +55%
Average Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW) (630 - 1885, n=24)	1033 MBit/s ∼72% +12%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)	923 (874^min - 938^max) MBit/s ∼65%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)	674 MBit/s ∼47% -27%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi	490 (376^min - 596^max) MBit/s ∼34% -47%

Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø923 (874-938)

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1431 (1279-1644)

MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø489 (376-596)

Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø621 (418-641)

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1411 (566-1523)

MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10: Ø650 (629-713)

ColorChecker Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA: 20.34 ∆E min: 3.32 - max: 31.71 ∆E

<a href="https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-ConceptD-5-17-inch-Review-Creativity-in-large-format.459844.0.html">Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA</a> — Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA

Input Devices - The ConceptD has small keys

The smooth keys with the rubber dome base impress with a crisp pressure point and a clear and solid stroke. The keys are easy to type on, and due to the large distances between the keys, typing tasks succeed easily. There is also a number block with smaller keys. Unfortunately, Acer does not make use of the full case width for a keyboard with larger keys. The way it is, the arrow keys seem to be squished between the Ctrl and Shift keys and the number block. Other keys such as the Enter and right Shift and Ctrl keys, could have been larger for more typing comfort.

While the 13 cm (5.1 in) wide ClickPad offers a smooth surface for sliding, moist fingers might stumble and not slide easily. There is a clear pressure point, but the stroke is very short and there is hardly any at all in the top third of the pad. The pad can be deactivated via function keys.

Display - A creative PC with 100% sRGB

Pixel grid of the ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA, 17.3 inch, Ultra-HD, IPS

The 17.3-inch display is a high-end 4K panel with 3840 x 2160 pixels. Although the frame rate is only 60 Hz, it has a non-reflective surface, its viewing angles are stable (IPS), and it covers 100% of the sRGB color space.

At 88%, the brightness distribution is fairly even, and we do not detect any halos or lighter spots in a black image. At 707:1, the contrast is not top of the line, but we have to give some credit for its high brightness. The response times of the AUO panel turn out very slow.

By the way, this is the same panel that is also used for the ConceptD 9, but there it is a touchscreen version that can also be operated with a Wacom pen.


412 cd/m²	400 cd/m²	381 cd/m²
367 cd/m²	410 cd/m²	363 cd/m²
361 cd/m²	394 cd/m²	362 cd/m²

Distribution of brightness

AUO B173ZAN03

X-Rite i1Pro 2

Maximum: 412 cd/m² Average: 383.3 cd/m² Minimum: 18.8 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 88 %
Center on Battery: 417 cd/m²
Contrast: 707:1 (Black: 0.58 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.91 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.5, calibrated: 1.09
ΔE Greyscale 3 | 0.64-98 Ø5.7
100% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
87% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
99.13% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
86.19% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.18

Download ICC File (X-Rite i1Pro 2)

	Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA AUO B173ZAN03, IPS, 3840x2160, 17.30	Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029, OLED, 3840x2160, 15.60	Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE NE156QUM-N66, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60	Apple MacBook Pro 15 2018 (2.6 GHz, 560X) APPA040, IPS, 2880x1800, 15.40	MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 AU Optronics AUO41EB, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.60
Display		-2%	-3%	0%	-1%
Display P3 Coverage	86.19	88.11 2%	82 -5%	98.67 14%	84.42 -2%
sRGB Coverage	100	99.6 0%	99.07 -1%	99.95 0%	99.96 0%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage	99.13	91.76 -7%	96.95 -2%	86.6 -13%	98.48 -1%
Response Times		95%	18%	20%	13%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *	55 ?(29, 26)	2.3 ?(1.1, 1.2) 96%	46.4 ?(22, 24.4) 16%	43.2 ?(20.4, 22.8) 21%	51 ?(24, 27) 7%
Response Time Black / White *	38 ?(22, 16)	2.4 ?(1.1, 1.3) 94%	30.4 ?(17.2, 13.2) 20%	31.2 ?(16.4, 14.8) 18%	31 ?(18, 13) 18%
PWM Frequency		59.52 ?(100)		117000 ?(75, 150)
Screen		-44%	-21%	40%	-20%
Brightness middle	410	421.2 3%	464 13%	520 27%	445 9%
Brightness	383	417 9%	448 17%	492 28%	462 21%
Brightness Distribution	88	94 7%	90 2%	88 0%	83 -6%
Black Level *	0.58		0.36 38%	0.39 33%	0.5 14%
Contrast	707		1289 82%	1333 89%	890 26%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *	1.91	6.06 -217%	4.2 -120%	1.2 37%	4.75 -149%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *	4.67	11.89 -155%	11.4 -144%	2.3 51%	7.79 -67%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *	1.09		0.8 27%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *	3	2.8 7%	7.2 -140%	1.3 57%	4.49 -50%
Gamma	2.18 ^101%	2.15 ^102%	2.17 ^101%	2.18 ^101%	2.49 ^88%
CCT	6338 ^103%	6235 ^104%	6345 ^102%	6738 ^96%	7374 ^88%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)	87	81 -7%	85.2 -2%		87 0%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)	100	99.6 0%	99 -1%		100 0%
Total Average (Program / Settings)		16% / -13%	-2% / -13%	20% / 28%	-3% / -12%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

ℹ

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
38 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 22 ms rise
38 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 16 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 95 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (23.8 ms).
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
55 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↗ 29 ms rise
55 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined	↘ 26 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 89 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (37.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17025 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 2500000) Hz was measured.

Using the AdobeRGB profile in the state of delivery, the Acer produces a Delta-E of 3 for the Grayscale, and of 1.9 for colors. While this is not a bad result, particularly since there is also no blue tint, it can be further improved via calibration. With this, the Delta-E drops to 1.0 for the colors and Grayscale similarly. This is therefore a panel with a high color accuracy, which corresponds to the Pantone validated (Delta-E <2) manufacturer specification – even though this is only after the calibration.

However, we do not see the advertised 100% AdobeRGB, but "only" 87%. The 17-incher is delivered with a color profile, and users can choose between Normal and AdobeRGB in the ConceptD color palette. We measured the colors under AdobeRGB in the state of delivery before the calibration.

Outdoors: easily usable thanks to the matte surface and good brightness

Performance - An Acer with a hexa-core Turbo

Specs of the sibling models with a Geforce GTX 1660Ti

Acer offers two models of its ConceptD 5 17-inch notebook: one with a GTX 1660Ti and one with an RTX 2060 (6GB GDDR6). The Intel Core i7-9750H (6x 2.60GHz) hexa-core processor is always included. With 32 GB of DDR4 RAM (2x 16 GB), our test unit has the maximum amount of RAM. There are two differences between the 17-inch and the 15-inch ConceptD: The 15-incher offers only 16 GB RAM and a GTX 1660Ti at most.

The Acer 17-inch notebook is targeted at creative professionals who want to be productive with powerful software such as Adobe Premiere and Photoshop. For this reason, the manufacturer also offers configurations with an ISV certification (Independent Software Vendors).

Processor

The Intel Core i7-9750H has a basic clock speed of 2.6 GHz, and all six cores should also be able to run at Turbo speed, which is even up to 4.5 GHz for the single or dual-core Turbo. Under the single-core load in Cinebench, we are seeing up to 4.4 GHz, but the average is around 3.7 GHz. When all the cores are running simultaneously, the clock speed is 6x 2.6 GHz.

The R15 loop shows the enormous performance difference between the i9-9980HK (Dell XPS, Lenovo TP X1 Extreme, Macbook Pro 15) and our Core i7-9750H. Even though the performance only drops by 3% under constant load, the amount of points are between 20 and 40% below those of the HK processors. However, the reason for this is not any limitation of the CPU (TDPc), and the power limit of our test unit is 45 watts. It never goes below the basic clock speed, so there is no throttling.

Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø1052 (1021.84-1091.58)

Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Intel Core i9-9980HK, Intel Core i9-9980HK: Ø1314 (1090.6-1600.38)

Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø982 (967.16-1074.4)

Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Intel Core i9-9980HK, Intel Core i9-9980HK: Ø1308 (1257.47-1327.02)

MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Core i9-9880H, Intel Core i9-9880H: Ø1439 (1417.84-1545.36)

A glance at the competitors shows that the hexa-core processor is almost at the same level as the i9-9880H and i9-9980HK in the single-core comparison, and the differences are only marginal here. However, the Core i9-9980HK octa-core SoC uses its full advantage in the multi-core comparison, where it moves ahead by 20 to 40%. Eight cores also means sixteen virtual cores who can compute a Cinebench run blazingly fast.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Intel Core i9-9980HK	201 Points ∼74% +9%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Core i9-9880H	196 Points ∼72% +6%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Core i7-9750H	191 Points ∼70% +4%
Average of class Multimedia (126 - 240, n=93, last 2 years)	190 Points ∼70% +3%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Intel Core i7-9750H	184.48 Points ∼68%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H (170 - 194, n=82)	184 Points ∼68% 0%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Intel Core i9-9980HK	181 Points ∼67% -2%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Intel Core i9-9980HK	1600 (1090.6^min, 1367.66^P1 - 1369.3^max) Points ∼16% +47%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 Intel Core i9-9880H	1545 Points ∼16% +42%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Intel Core i9-9980HK	1327 Points ∼14% +22%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H (952 - 1306, n=85)	1182 Points ∼12% +8%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA Intel Core i7-9750H	1091.58 (1021.84^min - 1091.58^max) Points ∼11%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Intel Core i7-9750H	1074 (967.16^min - 1074.4^max) Points ∼11% -2%
Average of class Multimedia (334 - 2154, n=107, last 2 years)	994 Points ∼10% -9%

Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit

184.48 Points

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit

1091.58 Points

Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit

126.61 fps

Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit

99.62 %

Help

... in comparison

System Performance

In the PCMark 10 scores, the competitors are 15, 30, or even 60% ahead of the Acer. For example, in the Digital Content Creation test, the MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 moves ahead, which might be due to its combination of two SSDs, and the Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK also does not need to hide with its advantage of 35%. Apparently, the PCMark rewards the multi-core capabilities of the octa-core competitors in all the sub scores.

PCMark 10
Score
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (4395 - 5997, n=16)	5523 Points ∼63% +26%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i9-9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02	5469 Points ∼62% +24%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, i9-9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)	5211 Points ∼59% +19%
Average of class Multimedia (3028 - 6725, n=86, last 2 years)	4855 Points ∼55% +10%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i7-9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ	4535 Points ∼52% +3%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00	4395 Points ∼50%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Radeon Pro Vega 20, i9-9980HK, Apple SSD AP1024	4305 Points ∼49% -2%
Essentials
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i9-9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02	9701 Points ∼84% +16%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (8361 - 10056, n=16)	9263 Points ∼81% +11%
Average of class Multimedia (6441 - 10539, n=85, last 2 years)	9014 Points ∼78% +8%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, i9-9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)	8961 Points ∼78% +7%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00	8361 Points ∼73%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Radeon Pro Vega 20, i9-9980HK, Apple SSD AP1024	7972 Points ∼69% -5%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i7-9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ	7548 Points ∼66% -10%
Productivity
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i9-9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02	7494 Points ∼67% +23%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (6098 - 8106, n=16)	7382 Points ∼66% +21%
Average of class Multimedia (5448 - 9662, n=85, last 2 years)	7305 Points ∼65% +20%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i7-9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ	6489 Points ∼58% +6%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00	6098 Points ∼55%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, i9-9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)	5986 Points ∼54% -2%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Radeon Pro Vega 20, i9-9980HK, Apple SSD AP1024	5532 Points ∼50% -9%
Digital Content Creation
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, i9-9880H, 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)	7161 Points ∼46% +58%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (4344 - 8069, n=16)	6727 Points ∼43% +49%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i9-9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02	6110 Points ∼39% +35%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i7-9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ	5171 Points ∼33% +14%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 Radeon Pro Vega 20, i9-9980HK, Apple SSD AP1024	4911 Points ∼32% +9%
Average of class Multimedia (2148 - 9415, n=85, last 2 years)	4833 Points ∼31% +7%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, i7-9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00	4521 Points ∼29%

Storage Solution

Although the 1-Terrabyte Western Digital storage is by no means slow, its speed is leisurely compared to the competitors. While it is among the top for sequential writes, it places last during 4K read and writes. Overall, the Samsung SSDs from the Lenovo and Dell 15 offer an up to 18% better performance. On the other hand, the Toshiba XG6 in the Dell XPS has to be content with being left behind.

	Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00	Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02	Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ	MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 2x Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ (RAID 0)	Average WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00	Average of class Multimedia
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6		11%	21%	37%	25%	12%
Write 4K	92.28	104.3 13%	148.08 60%	105.6 14%	169 ?(92.3 - 238, n=3) 83%	142 ?(52.1 - 263, n=82, last 2 years) 54%
Read 4K	40.12	45.23 13%	47.31 18%	46.32 15%	47.6 ?(40.1 - 54.7, n=3) 19%	51.5 ?(16.2 - 148, n=82, last 2 years) 28%
Write Seq	2466	1729 -30%	1414.08 -43%	2910 18%	2602 ?(2466 - 2736, n=3) 6%	1664 ?(214 - 4139, n=81, last 2 years) -33%
Read Seq	1983	1861 -6%	1320.24 -33%	2820 42%	2084 ?(1889 - 2381, n=3) 5%	1760 ?(498 - 4133, n=81, last 2 years) -11%
Write 4K Q32T1	249.9	509.2 104%	493.59 98%	545 118%	391 ?(250 - 505, n=3) 56%	425 ?(158 - 697, n=82, last 2 years) 70%
Read 4K Q32T1	375.6	388.5 3%	593.94 58%	632.2 68%	481 ?(376 - 606, n=3) 28%	460 ?(220 - 767, n=82, last 2 years) 22%
Write Seq Q32T1	2791	2813 1%	2969.6 6%	3349 20%	2792 ?(2791 - 2795, n=3) 0%	2083 ?(211 - 5187, n=82, last 2 years) -25%
Read Seq Q32T1	3253	2906 -11%	3471.7 7%	3333 2%	3377 ?(3253 - 3448, n=3) 4%	2848 ?(390 - 7117, n=82, last 2 years) -12%
AS SSD		-18%	9%	-1%	4%	-37%
Seq Read	2827	1723.09 -39%	2352 -17%	2859.65 1%	2873 ?(2796 - 2995, n=3) 2%	2077 ?(341 - 5529, n=83, last 2 years) -27%
Seq Write	2224	1386.27 -38%	2106 -5%	2603.96 17%	2463 ?(2224 - 2640, n=3) 11%	1504 ?(134 - 3886, n=83, last 2 years) -32%
4K Read	40.67	43.25 6%	54.96 35%	45.15 11%	38 ?(22.5 - 50.9, n=3) -7%	47.7 ?(15.9 - 73.9, n=83, last 2 years) 17%
4K Write	99.62	98.3 -1%	138.12 39%	100.19 1%	138 ?(99.6 - 212, n=3) 39%	130 ?(39.9 - 261, n=83, last 2 years) 30%
4K-64 Read	1602.58	1077.98 -33%	1265.43 -21%	1428.27 -11%	1559 ?(1505 - 1603, n=3) -3%	1030 ?(155 - 2209, n=83, last 2 years) -36%
4K-64 Write	1515.11	1456.13 -4%	1952.2 29%	1401.42 -8%	1335 ?(949 - 1540, n=3) -12%	1205 ?(56.6 - 2512, n=83, last 2 years) -20%
Access Time Read *		0.05	0.053	0.049	0.081	0.0709 ?(0.033 - 0.153, n=78, last 2 years)
Access Time Write *	0.037	0.039 -5%	0.027 27%	0.037 -0%	0.0307 ?(0.019 - 0.037, n=3) 17%	0.1203 ?(0.019 - 1.075, n=83, last 2 years) -225%
Score Read	1926	1294 -33%	1556 -19%	1759 -9%	1884 ?(1835 - 1926, n=3) -2%	1286 ?(223 - 2825, n=83, last 2 years) -33%
Score Write	1837	1693 -8%	2301 25%	1762 -4%	1719 ?(1413 - 1907, n=3) -6%	1486 ?(136 - 2923, n=83, last 2 years) -19%
Score Total	4716	3638 -23%	4650 -1%	4411 -6%	4544 ?(4177 - 4739, n=3) -4%	3410 ?(490 - 7069, n=83, last 2 years) -28%
Copy ISO MB/s		3182.39			2212	1613 ?(116 - 2903, n=63, last 2 years)
Copy Program MB/s		983.98			537	578 ?(44.5 - 995, n=63, last 2 years)
Copy Game MB/s		1823.85			1335	1114 ?(74 - 1844, n=63, last 2 years)
Total Average (Program / Settings)		-4% / -5%	15% / 15%	18% / 16%	15% / 13%	-13% / -16%

* ... smaller is better

CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6

AS SSD

DiskSpd

WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-1T00

CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3253 MB/s

CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2791 MB/s

CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 375.6 MB/s

CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 249.9 MB/s

CDM 5 Read Seq: 1983 MB/s

CDM 5 Write Seq: 2466 MB/s

CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 40.12 MB/s

CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 92.28 MB/s

Graphics Card

The GeForce RTX 2060 rocks in the 3DMark. In the Fire Strike Graphics, it almost reaches the RTX 2070 Max-Q of the MSI P65 Creator. However, this should be expected, since the average Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 is still 3% faster. Anyways, the GeForce GTX 1650 competitors are left in the dust, only reaching about half the amount of points.

3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (14768 - 18358, n=43)	16301 Points ∼100% +4%
MSI P65 Creator 9SF-657 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, Intel Core i9-9880H	16100 Points ∼99% +3%
Acer ConceptD 5 CN517-71-74YA NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, Intel Core i7-9750H	15651 Points ∼96%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2019 i9 Vega 20 AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, Intel Core i9-9980HK	9108 Points ∼56% -42%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, Intel Core i9-9980HK	8532 Points ∼52% -45%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme 2019 20QV000WGE NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, Intel Core i7-9750H	7741 Points ∼47% -51%
Average of class Multimedia (920 - 23674, n=92, last 2 years)	6696 Points ∼41% -57%

3DMark Fire Strike Score		13933 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The current games pose no problem for the GeForce RTX 2060, as long as you forgo the 4K resolutions. The slightly aged "Witcher 3 (2015)" runs at a steady 28 fps in this maximum setting with HBAO+ and Hairworks activated. The chart below shows "Witcher 3 Ultra" in Full HD resolution.

The analysis shows stable GPU clock speeds at almost 1300 MHz. At around 40 minutes, they briefly dropped, since we pulled the plug and the game ran in battery operation. However, after several minutes, the clock speed stabilizes at its previous level, offering 28 fps again ("Witcher 3," 4K Ultra settings).