Notebookcheck Logo

Acer Nitro 5 (Core i5-9300H, GeForce GTX 1650) Laptop Review

Midrange through and through.

While OEMs currently reserve Nvidia RTX 20-series GPUs for their more expensive gaming laptops, Acer has chosen to equip its attractively priced Nitro series with GeForce GTX 1600-series chips. Read on to find out how the entry-level model performs in our detailed review.
Update: Affordable Core i7-9750H variant is around 21% faster
Acer Nitro 5

If you want to spend a maximum of 1,500 Euros (~$1,685) on a gaming laptop, then the Acer Aspire Nitro range could be a perfect fit for you. Acer has recently refreshed the series too with an upgraded case and a choice between the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti.

Moreover, Acer has eschewed 8th generation Intel Core processors on which many OEMs still rely for newer 9th generation chips. You can choose between the quad-core Core i5-9300H that powers our review unit or the more powerful, and hexacore, Core i7-9750H. Likewise, you have the option of equipping the Nitro with 8 or 16 GB of DDR4 RAM, although Acer currently only sells the series with a 512 GB SSD. Our test device is the AN515-54-53Z2 for reference, which costs just under 1,100 Euros (~$1,236) on notebooksbilliger.de at the time of writing. Incidentally, our review unit is also the base model of the series.

We have chosen to compare the Nitro 5 against other comparably priced 15.6-inch gaming laptops. Our comparison devices will include the Dell G5 15 5587, the Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH and the Medion Erazer X6805. We shall also compare the GeForce GTX 1650-powered Nitro 5 against its AMD-powered sibling. Please keep in mind that our review unit is the first that we have tested with the GeForce GTX 1650. Our Nvidia-powered comparison devices all have GTX 10-series GPUs for full disclosure.

Update 9.13.2019: Following multiple requests from readers, we have decided to put the Core i7-9750H SKU through our tests. Acer currently charges around €50 (~US$55) more than the Core i5-9300H model. We shall weave our new tests into our existing review, as the two models are identical save for their CPUs.

Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2 (Nitro 5 AN515 Series)
Processor
Intel Core i5-9300H 4 x 2.4 - 4.1 GHz, Coffee Lake-H
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile - 4 GB VRAM, Core: 1395 MHz, RAM: 8000 MHz, GDDR5, ForceWare 417.88, Optimus
Memory
8 GB 
, 2 x 4 GB SO-DIMM DDR4-2666, all slots occupied. Max. 32 GB
Display
15.60 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, LG LP156WFC-SPD1 (LGD0563), IPS, Full-HD, 60 Hz, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G, 512 GB 
, PCIe SSD. Slots: 2 x M.2 2280 & 1 x 2.5-inch
Soundcard
Realtek ALC255 @ Intel Cannon Point-LP PCH - cAVS (Audio, Video, Speech)
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Combined 3.5 mm headphone & microphone jack
Networking
Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit/s), Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/), Bluetooth 5.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 27 x 363 x 255 ( = 1.06 x 14.29 x 10.04 in)
Battery
57 Wh, 3720 mAh Lithium-Ion, 4 cells
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, Quick start guide, Warranty booklet, HDD upgrade cable, various manufacturer tools, Norton Security Ultra, XSplit Gamecaster trial, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.158 kg ( = 76.12 oz / 4.76 pounds), Power Supply: 450 g ( = 15.87 oz / 0.99 pounds)
Price
1100 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Acer has given the Nitro 5 a major design overhaul. While the old model had wide bezels, Acer has jumped on board with the slim side display bezels for this year’s model. The reduction in bezels has also allowed the company to make the new Nitro 5 noticeably more compact than its predecessor. Our review unit is also around 3 cm narrower and 1 cm shorter than its AMD sibling, while it is 200 g lighter too. Overall, the Nitro 5 is comparatively light for a 15.6-inch gaming laptop; only the Legion Y730-15ICH matches our review unit out of our comparison devices here.

Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5

Discounting the slimmer bezels, the Nitro 5 looks remarkably like its predecessor. The device retains the red styling of yesteryear, which Acer continues to apply to the keyboard, the edging around the touchpad and the display hinge cover, the latter of which also has the NITRO branding.

There are some subtle changes though. Acer has changed the shape of the Nitro 5’s ventilation slots and has ditched the textured finish that it previously applied to the top case. The design of the display lid is also more restrained, most of which is plain black plastic. Acer has applied a textured finish to the left and right sides of the lid, but this does not stop the Nitro 5 from looking more discreet and less playful than its predecessor.

The plastic case is sturdy enough too, although not impressively so. The base unit only gives way under intense pressure, but we can temporarily deform the display lid using two hands with relative ease. The display also bounces around a bit, although it has a comparatively large opening angle of approximately 150°.

Size comparison

385 mm / 15.2 in 265 mm / 10.4 in 33 mm / 1.299 in 2.5 kg5.62 lbs390 mm / 15.4 in 266 mm / 10.5 in 27 mm / 1.063 in 2.4 kg5.29 lbs389 mm / 15.3 in 274.7 mm / 10.8 in 24.95 mm / 0.982 in 2.9 kg6.29 lbs363 mm / 14.3 in 255 mm / 10 in 27 mm / 1.063 in 2.2 kg4.76 lbs362 mm / 14.3 in 267 mm / 10.5 in 19.95 mm / 0.785 in 2.2 kg4.85 lbs297 mm / 11.7 in 210 mm / 8.27 in 1 mm / 0.03937 in 5.7 g0.01257 lbs

Connectivity

Ports

Unfortunately, the selection of ports has gotten worse rather than better. Acer has replaced one of the two USB 2.0 ports with a USB 3.0 port and has stuck to four USB ports overall, but it has also inexplicably removed the card reader. Likewise, Acer has persisted with a combined 3.5 mm jack rather than having dedicated headphone and microphone inputs. Also, there is only an HDMI 2.0 port for image output, while there is no USB 3.1 Gen2 or Thunderbolt 3 ports. We welcome the inclusion of an RJ45 port though, but it does not stop us from marking the Nitro 5 down here.

The distribution of ports is lacklustre too. Acer has moved the ventilation grille to the right-hand side of the frame and has brought the headphone jack along with the USB Type-A port forward. The positioning of these three means that you are likely to feel warm air blowing against your hand if you use an external mouse with your right hand, while the mouse will likely catch against any cables you have connected. In short, we do not understand why Acer has made these design decisions because they only serve to reduce the Nitro 5’s functionality.

Left-hand side: Kensington lock, RJ45 LAN, HDMI 2.0, USB 3.0 Type-C, 2 x USB 3.0 Type-A
Left-hand side: Kensington lock, RJ45 LAN, HDMI 2.0, USB 3.0 Type-C, 2 x USB 3.0 Type-A
Right-hand side: 3.5 mm headphone and microphone jack, USB 2.0 Type-A, power connector
Right-hand side: 3.5 mm headphone and microphone jack, USB 2.0 Type-A, power connector

Communication

We have no cause for complaints with our review unit’s Wi-Fi performance though. Acer has equipped the device with an Intel Wireless-AC 9560 module, which achieved exceptional transfer speeds in our iperf3 Client Wi-Fi tests. We conducted these tests with the Nitro 5 approximately 1 m away from our Linksys EA8500 reference router, for reference.

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
721 MBit/s +5%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
684 MBit/s
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
642 MBit/s -6%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
582 MBit/s -15%
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4
520 MBit/s -24%
iperf3 receive AX12
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4
683 MBit/s +2%
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
674 MBit/s 0%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
671 MBit/s
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
619 MBit/s -8%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
485 MBit/s -28%

Software

Acer preinstalled a few pieces of software along with Windows 10 Home 64-bit, which should please people who like to fine-tune their systems. The company’s Nitro Sense program manages the Nitro 5’s power plans and fan control. The software also displays an overview of system information like fan speed along with CPU and GPU temperatures. Acer has bundled its Care Center program too, which provides support information and allows you to download updates or recover the device. Windows Update still downloads other updates regardless though.

Nitro Sense
Nitro Sense
Care Center
Care Center

Accessories

Acer includes a quick-start guide, warranty booklet and an HDD adapter in the box. The latter allows you to retrofit a 2.5-inch drive should you wish to do so. There is a 135 W power supply too, although Acer bundles a higher capacity version with more-expensive and powerful models.

Maintenance

Maintenance is a bit more complicated than it was on the Nitro 5’s predecessor. Acer has not included any maintenance flaps this time around, so you must remove the bottom case to access any internal components. Fortunately, you only need a Phillips screwdriver and some brute force to pry the case from the chassis. You then have access to all main components including the battery, drive bays and RAM. You cannot swap the CPU or GPU, but this is common for most laptops, except for something like the Alienware Area-51m.

Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5
Acer Nitro 5

Warranty

The Nitro 5 comes with 24 months limited manufacturer’s warranty. The coverage includes a pickup & returns service, although Acer only extends this internationally for the first 12 months of the warranty period.

Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies & Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices

Keyboard

Acer has made some minor changes to the keyboard between generations, but it still inherits the pros and cons of its predecessor. Typing on our review unit is an unspectacular yet pleasant enough experience, but we have mixed feelings about the keyboard layout. Some buttons are too close to each other for our liking despite the chiclet design, especially the # and Enter keys. The right arrow key also extends into the number pad, which could lead you to accidentally pressing the right arrow key initially instead of the 0 key. We still prefer full-size keys to half-size ones though. Acer has also outlined the arrow keys in red as it has with the WASD keys, a decision that will divide opinion. Aesthetically, they go against the Nitro 5’s relatively understated look, but they stand out nicely when gaming.

The positioning of the power button is an odd one too. Acer has decided to place it at the end of the function keys, which is not in itself a bad idea. However, it does not stand out from the other keys, so we sometimes found it hard to spot. The colour and lettering style of the keys is difficult to read in some lights too.

A look at the keyboard deck
A look at the keyboard deck
And with its backlight enabled
And with its backlight enabled

Trackpad

The trackpad is also a mixed bag. While it has a pleasantly smooth finish, its precision leaves something to be desired. Multi-touch gestures are easy to perform though, especially two-finger gestures such as scrolling or zooming. Acer has opted for an integrated rather than dedicated input device that allows the trackpad to be an enjoyably large 10.5 x 7.5 cm. Including dedicated mouse buttons would have made the trackpad feel a lot smaller, the effect of which would have been compounded by its imprecision.

Display

Acer has equipped our review unit with a 60 Hz 15.6-inch display, specifically the LG Philips LP156WFC-SPD1. We suspect that the company opted for a 60 Hz panel to save on costs. A 144 Hz display would have been a nice addition though.

246
cd/m²
228
cd/m²
243
cd/m²
218
cd/m²
238
cd/m²
215
cd/m²
227
cd/m²
203
cd/m²
220
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
LG LP156WFC-SPD1 (LGD0563) tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 246 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 226.4 cd/m² Minimum: 17 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 238 cd/m²
Contrast: 881:1 (Black: 0.27 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.11 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 3.76
ΔE Greyscale 1.78 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
57% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
36% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
39.23% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
57% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
37.97% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.41
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
LG LP156WFC-SPD1 (LGD0563), IPS, 1920x1080
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
LG Philips LP156WF6 (LGD046F), IPS, 1920x1080
Dell G5 15 5587
LGD053F, 156WF6, IPS, 1920x1080
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
BOE NV156FHM-N61, IPS, 1920x1080
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
AU Optronics B156HAN06.0 (AUO60ED), IPS, 1920x1080
Display
56%
0%
61%
61%
Display P3 Coverage
37.97
63.8
68%
38.13
0%
65.9
74%
63.4
67%
sRGB Coverage
57
82.4
45%
56.8
0%
85.5
50%
87.4
53%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
39.23
60.3
54%
39.47
1%
62.5
59%
64
63%
Response Times
0%
16%
-26%
-19%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
42 ?(20.8, 21.2)
38.4 ?(18.8, 19.6)
9%
33 ?(16, 17)
21%
43.2 ?(25.2, 18)
-3%
48.4 ?(24, 24.4)
-15%
Response Time Black / White *
26.8 ?(16, 10.8)
29.2 ?(16.8, 12.4)
-9%
24 ?(14, 10)
10%
40 ?(21.2, 18.8)
-49%
32.8 ?(18, 14.8)
-22%
PWM Frequency
20490 ?(99)
21740 ?(99)
Screen
-6%
-38%
-18%
3%
Brightness middle
238
270
13%
229
-4%
286.5
20%
299
26%
Brightness
226
269
19%
224
-1%
269
19%
284
26%
Brightness Distribution
83
86
4%
87
5%
84
1%
88
6%
Black Level *
0.27
0.32
-19%
0.28
-4%
0.33
-22%
0.24
11%
Contrast
881
844
-4%
818
-7%
868
-1%
1246
41%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.11
5.1
-24%
6.1
-48%
6.3
-53%
4.98
-21%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
6.89
9.25
-34%
12.2
-77%
10.01
-45%
7.67
-11%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
3.76
3.25
14%
6.12
-63%
4.17
-11%
3.7
2%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
1.78
4.16
-134%
5.68
-219%
5.6
-215%
4.58
-157%
Gamma
2.41 91%
2.53 87%
2.4 92%
2.23 99%
2.55 86%
CCT
6311 103%
6860 95%
6989 93%
6822 95%
6397 102%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
36
54
50%
36
0%
55.7
55%
57
58%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
57
82
44%
57
0%
85.1
49%
87
53%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
17% / 6%
-7% / -24%
6% / -5%
15% / 11%

* ... smaller is better

In short, our review unit has a disappointing display. According to X-Rite i1Pro 2, the panel only has an average maximum brightness of 226 cd/m², which is much darker than the displays in most of our comparison devices. Its 57% sRGB and 36% AdobeRGB colour-space coverages are underwhelming too, especially for a gaming laptop.

CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: Colour Saturation
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: Grayscale - calibrated
CalMAN: Grayscale - calibrated
CalMAN: Colour Saturation - calibrated
CalMAN: Colour Saturation - calibrated
CalMAN: ColorChecker – calibrated
CalMAN: ColorChecker – calibrated

The contrast ratio, reaction times and viewing angles are also below par. Most of our comparison devices do not have great contrast ratios either, but that is no excuse for Acer equipping the Nitro 5 with what is, basically, a bargain basement display.

57% sRGB colour-space coverage
57% sRGB colour-space coverage
36% AdobeRGB colour-space coverage
36% AdobeRGB colour-space coverage

Worse still, our review unit suffers from backlight bleeding. The panel is only 83% evenly lit, which leads to bright spots appearing in the top corners of the display when using the Nitro 5 in poorly lit rooms or at night.

Using the Acer Nitro 5 with light shining on the display
Using the Acer Nitro 5 with light shining on the display
Sub-pixel array
Sub-pixel array
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

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
26.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16 ms rise
↘ 10.8 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
42 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.8 ms rise
↘ 21.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Performance

Our review unit with its Core i5-9300H processor and GeForce GTX 1650 GPU sits firmly in the midrange of modern gaming laptops. Its 512 GB PCIe NVMe SSD is comparatively large for a gaming laptop at this price, particularly as there is a second M.2 2280 drive bay and a 2.5-inch bay too. 8 GB of RAM is standard though, and at least Acer has included two SO-DIMM modules so that the system runs in dual-channel mode. The only downside is that you must replace both modules if you ever want to upgrade to 16 GB or beyond, but that is a minor gripe.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
HWiNFO
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
AS SSD Benchmark
CrystalDiskMark
Software
LatencyMon

Processor

The Core i5-9300H succeeds the Core i5-8300H, a popular CPU that found itself in the entry levels of most multimedia and gaming laptops released in the last year. The new processor is more of an upgrade in name only though. Intel has increased the clock speed by 100 MHz, but both CPUs have 8 MB of L3 cache and can process up to eight threads simultaneously. They both have a 45 W thermal design power (TDP) too.

We should point out that the Nitro 5 supports Nvidia Optimus. This allows the system to switch from its Nvidia GPU to its more-efficient Intel UHD Graphics 630 for undemanding tasks like video-streaming and web-browsing, which reduces power consumption and should help lengthen battery life.

Cinebench R15 Single 64-bit
Cinebench R15 Single 64-bit
Cinebench R15 Multi 64-bit
Cinebench R15 Multi 64-bit
CPU and GPU during a Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark
CPU and GPU during a Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark

We checked the clock speed behaviour of the Core i5-9300H using Cinebench R15. The quad-core chip reaches its maximum potential in the single-core benchmark where it averages 4.1 GHz, but it disappoints in the multi-core version. Our review unit briefly reaches 4.0 GHz before dropping to around 3.3 GHz, a level that it can consistently maintain.

Update 9.13.2019: The Core i7-9750H model achieves scores about 10% more in single-core benchmarks than our first review unit, and 29% more in multicore work. The Core i7-9750H has approximately a 10% higher single-core boost clock than the Core i5-9300H, for reference, which accounts for the uplift in single-core benchmark performance. The Core i7-9750H also has two additional cores and can execute four more threads, so a third better multicore performance is to be expected too.

Better still, the Core i7-9750H model can maintain its improved multicore performance under sustained load. By the end of our CB R15 Multi 64Bit loop, our new review unit still scored approximately 21% more than its Core i5-9300H powered sibling. 

050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900Tooltip
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2 Intel Core i5-9300H, Intel Core i5-9300H: Ø707 (700.72-757)
Dell G5 15 5587 Intel Core i5-8300H, Intel Core i5-8300H: Ø723 (697.18-735.2)
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H Intel Core i5-8300H, Intel Core i5-8300H: Ø823 (815.58-828.24)
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0 AMD Ryzen 7 2700U, AMD Ryzen 7 2700U: Ø658 (642.69-661.47)
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-54-78TL Intel Core i7-9750H, Intel Core i7-9750H: Ø905 (879.91-916.78)

As you can see from the benchmark tables, the Nitro 5 cannot distinguish itself from its Core i5-8300H-powered competitors. What’s more, the Legion Y730 gets around 8% more peak multicore performance with its nominally weaker CPU than our review unit does. The Nitro 5 also only scored approximately 5% higher in CB R15 Multi 64Bit than the G5 15 5587. The Core i7-8750H destroyed the Core i5-9300H too, with the Medion Erazer X6805 scoring 58% more than the Nitro 5 in the same benchmark.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Average of class Gaming
  (191.9 - 318, n=192, last 2 years)
277 Points +57%
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-54-78TL
Intel Core i7-9750H
193 Points +10%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Core i5-9300H
176 Points
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
172 Points -2%
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
Intel Core i7-8750H
171 Points -3%
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
Intel Core i5-8300H
166 Points -6%
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
150 Points -15%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Average of class Gaming
  (905 - 5663, n=195, last 2 years)
3413 Points +351%
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
Intel Core i7-8750H
1196 Points +58%
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-54-78TL
Intel Core i7-9750H
979 Points +29%
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
Intel Core i5-8300H
821 Points +8%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Core i5-9300H
757 Points
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
735 Points -3%
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
661 Points -13%
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
176 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
757 Points
Help

System Performance

Our review unit also sits in the midfield of our PCMark 10 comparison table. Its fast SSD allows Windows 10 to boot quickly and run without issue, but we would have expected a better showing in benchmarks with its comparatively newer CPU and GPU.

Update: 9.13.2019: System performance benchmarks only split the two models by 2%, with the Core i5-9300H model even taking the lead in some tests. Benchmarks like PCMark measure more than just CPU performance though, so it is unsurprising to see two devices that share the same SSD, RAM and GPU score roughly the same here.

PCMark 10 - Score
Average of class Gaming
  (5776 - 9852, n=166, last 2 years)
7789 Points +57%
Dell G5 15 5587
GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i5-8300H, SK hynix SC311 M.2
5483 Points +10%
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, i7-8750H, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5234 Points +5%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i5-9300H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4973 Points
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-54-78TL
GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, i7-9750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4885 Points -2%
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, i5-8300H, Intel Optane 16 GB MEMPEK1J016GAL + HGST ST1000LM049 1 TB HDD
4527 Points -9%
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), R7 2700U, SK Hynix HFS128G39TND
3763 Points -24%

Storage Devices

Acer has equipped our review unit with a 512 GB WDC PC SN520 SSD that delivered excellent transfer speeds in benchmarks like AS SSD. The drive is considerably faster overall than those in our comparison devices, with only the Erazer X6805 and its Samsung PM961 coming close to the transfer speeds that the WDC PC SN520 achieves.

Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
Medion Erazer X6805-MD61085
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Dell G5 15 5587
SK hynix SC311 M.2
Lenovo Legion Y730-15ICH i5-8300H
Intel Optane 16 GB MEMPEK1J016GAL + HGST ST1000LM049 1 TB HDD
Acer Nitro 5 AN515-42-R6V0
SK Hynix HFS128G39TND
AS SSD
-7%
-70%
-48%
-73%
Seq Read
1572
1653
5%
511
-67%
736
-53%
470.8
-70%
Seq Write
1374
1262
-8%
243.7
-82%
156.1
-89%
126.8
-91%
4K Read
45.59
44.29
-3%
24.44
-46%
94.2
107%
23.64
-48%
4K Write
115.1
100.9
-12%
62.2
-46%
45.63
-60%
54.5
-53%
Score Read
1240
1565
26%
240
-81%
290
-77%
274
-78%
Score Write
1550
762
-51%
199
-87%
239
-85%
194
-87%
Score Total
3423
3113
-9%
557
-84%
692
-80%
600
-82%
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 1739 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1455 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 317.9 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 287.8 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1421 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1457 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 42.05 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 109.1 MB/s

Graphics Card

One of the most exciting things about the Nitro 5 is its GPU. The device is the first that we have tested with the GeForce GTX 1650, which succeeds the popular GeForce GTX 1050 Ti. Nvidia has delivered a decent performance boost between generations, which it has achieved by increasing the shader count from 768 to 1,024 among other improvements. The GeForce GTX 1650 theoretically has around a 100 MHz lower base clock and a 60 MHz lower boost clock than the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti. However, the speeds that individual cards can reach in practice depend largely on the cooling system with which they are paired.

3DMark 11 Performance
11828 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
8073 points
Help

In short, the Nitro 5 manages its GPU clock speeds well. The GeForce GTX 1650 averaged 1,710 MHz during Unigine Heaven 4.0 and 1,650 MHz in The Witcher 3 when set to Full HD and ultra-graphics, both of which are respectable. Our review unit also maintained peak frame rates throughout an hour-long play-through of The Witcher 3 with no disturbing peaks or troughs.

Update 9.13.2019: Most modern games are GPU heavy, so upgrading your CPU will only yield performance improvements if it is bottlenecking your system. Even CPU-intensive games like The Witcher 3 cannot make use of the additional performance that the Core i7-9750H brings, with our new review unit averaging the same FPS on the High and Ultra presets as its Core i5-9300H sibling. Both CPUs maintain roughly the same clock speeds during our The Witcher 3 loop too.