Notebookcheck

Aorus 15 (i7-8750H, RTX 2070) Laptop Review

Aura buff. 11 percent smaller, 11 percent lighter, and at least 17 percent faster graphics performance. The Aorus 15 is the long-awaited update to the aging Aorus X5 series albeit with a few auxiliary features missing.

The 15.6-inch Aorus X5 launched in 2015 as Gigabyte's premier ultra-thin gaming laptop for enthusiasts. Its chassis, while super-sleek at the time, had remained essentially the same for years. Competing gaming laptops had evolved in the meantime to be even thinner and smaller than the best that Aorus had to offer. The X5 lineup was in dire need of an overhaul to better challenge the competition.

Aorus delivered in CES 2019 where the OEM proudly showed off its Aorus 15 to supplant the aging Aorus X5. The brand new chassis carries some of the bells and whistles we've come to expect from a mid-range to enthusiast gaming laptop including narrow bezels and a 144 Hz display with fast response times. It competes directly with the growing number of ultra-thin 15.6-inch gaming laptops like the MSI GS65, Asus ROG GL504, Razer Blade 15, Alienware m15, and the Acer Predator Triton 500 just to name a few.

Two initial SKUs are available: the Aorus 15-W9 and the Aorus 15-X9. Both options carry the exact same CPU (Core i7-8750H) and display (matte 1080p144) and they are only separated by the GPU (full-power RTX 2060 or RTX 2070). Be prepared to pay $1700 to $2000 depending on the GPU, storage drives, and RAM. For this review, we'll be comparing the Aorus 15-X9 to all the aforementioned alternatives as well as the older Aorus X5 that it replaces.

More Gigabyte and Aorus reviews:

Aorus 15 X9 (15 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop) - 8192 MB, Core: 1215 MHz, Memory: 1750 MHz, GDDR6, 417.49
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2666, 19-19-19-43, Dual-Channel
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, LG Philips LP156WFG-SPB2, IPS, LGD05E8, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Cannon Lake HM370
Storage
Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8, 512 GB 
, Secondary: 2 TB Seagate ST2000LM015
Soundcard
Nvidia TU106 - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
4 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: MicroSD
Networking
Killer E2500 Gigabit Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW) (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 24.4 x 361 x 246 ( = 0.96 x 14.21 x 9.69 in)
Battery
62 Wh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2x 2 W stereo, Nahimic 3, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, Aorus Control Center, Azure AI, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.4 kg ( = 84.66 oz / 5.29 pounds), Power Supply: 854 g ( = 30.12 oz / 1.88 pounds)
Price
2000 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Aorus laptops revel in sleek and distinctive gamer designs in contrast to the subtler look of Gigabyte systems. The Aorus 15 retains the gamer aesthetic while addressing the two biggest drawbacks of the Aorus X5 chassis: the thick bezels and flimsy lid. The bezels are now significantly thinner without needing to re-position the webcam and lid rigidity is thankfully not adversely affected. It's still more flexible than the lids of the Razer Blade 15, Asus ROG GL504, and Alienware m15, but it is at least an improvement over the outgoing generation. Hinge rigidity is also satisfactory with minimal teetering when adjusting the angle up to 140 degrees.

Construction quality and base rigidity are excellent with no creaking or warping when attempting to twist it. Applying moderate pressure on the palm rests or keyboard center will slightly depress the surface and so it isn't perfect. It still feels stronger than the MSI GS65 and comparable to the Alienware m15 albeit in a thicker and heavier package than both.

The chassis is thicker than the last generation Aorus X5 by almost 1.5 mm, but it makes up for this by being lighter (2.4 kg vs. 2.7 kg) and with a significantly smaller footprint. The massive bezels of the X5 have been trimmed to be more in line with the latest designs from MSI, Alienware, and Razer.

As far as ultra-thin gaming laptops go, the Aorus 15 is thicker than the GS65, Blade 15, Alienware m15, and even Gigabyte's own Aero 15 by several millimeters. It's a laptop that straddles the line for what we consider to be "ultra-thin". Gigabyte says this was necessary in order to offer uncompromised performance from a standard non-Max-Q RTX 2070 GPU.

Same black metal chassis material as the Aorus X5
Same black metal chassis material as the Aorus X5
Fingerprints will accumulate quickly on the smooth matte surfaces
Fingerprints will accumulate quickly on the smooth matte surfaces
Lid opened to maximum angle (~140 degrees)
Lid opened to maximum angle (~140 degrees)
Sharper design around the edges and corners compared to the Aorus X5
Sharper design around the edges and corners compared to the Aorus X5
390 mm / 15.4 inch 272 mm / 10.7 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 2.7 kg5.84 lbs361 mm / 14.2 inch 246 mm / 9.69 inch 24.4 mm / 0.961 inch 2.4 kg5.29 lbs363 mm / 14.3 inch 275 mm / 10.8 inch 21 mm / 0.827 inch 2.2 kg4.76 lbs358 mm / 14.1 inch 248 mm / 9.76 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 1.8 kg4.05 lbs356 mm / 14 inch 250 mm / 9.84 inch 18.9 mm / 0.744 inch 2.1 kg4.67 lbs355 mm / 14 inch 235 mm / 9.25 inch 17.8 mm / 0.701 inch 2.1 kg4.63 lbs

Connectivity

Port selection has changed slightly from the last generation model. Whereas the Aorus X5 integrates a full-size SD reader with two audio jacks, the Aorus 15 integrates a MicroSD reader with a single audio jack. Everything else remains identical including the lack of Thunderbolt 3. The Aorus brand is supposed to be Gigabyte's premier gaming series and so we're a little baffled to see Thunderbolt support missing here.

Ports are evenly distributed along the rear and sides with the rear ports being more difficult to access. Lenovo has seemingly solved this issue on the competing Legion Y740 series by having LED symbol indicators along the back.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Left: Gigabit RJ-45, USB 3.1 w/ PowerShare, MicroSD reader
Left: Gigabit RJ-45, USB 3.1 w/ PowerShare, MicroSD reader
Rear: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, mini DisplayPort 1.3, USB Type-C Gen. 2, Kensington Lock
Rear: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, mini DisplayPort 1.3, USB Type-C Gen. 2, Kensington Lock
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, 2x USB 3.1
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, 2x USB 3.1

SD Card Reader

Not only has Gigabyte downgraded the card reader to MicroSD, but transfer rates are much slower as well. Transferring 1 GB worth of photos from our UHS-II test card takes about 13 seconds compared to less than half that on the older Aorus X5. Still, this is better than the Blade 15 which has no card reader at all.

A fully inserted MicroSD card protrudes by about 1 mm for easy ejecting.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
200 MB/s ∼100% +152%
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
194 MB/s ∼97% +145%
Dell XPS 13 9380 2019
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
184 MB/s ∼92% +132%
Aorus 15 X9
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
79.3 MB/s ∼40%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
242 MB/s ∼100% +181%
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
240 MB/s ∼99% +179%
Dell XPS 13 9380 2019
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
192.6 MB/s ∼80% +124%
Aorus 15 X9
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
86.13 MB/s ∼36%

Communication

Removable M.2 WLAN module adjacent to the HDD
Removable M.2 WLAN module adjacent to the HDD

The Killer 1550i is capable of theoretical transfer rates of up to 1.73 Gbps and it includes all the auxiliary features as found on the Killer 1535. Gigabyte equips its Aero 15 series with the exact same Killer option. We didn't experience any connectivity issues during our time with the unit. Performance can be faster than what we've recorded below since our server setup is limited by a 1 Gbps line.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
684 MBit/s ∼100% +6%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
678 MBit/s ∼99% +5%
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
673 MBit/s ∼98% +4%
Aorus 15 X9
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
645 MBit/s ∼94%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
680 MBit/s ∼100% +9%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
655 MBit/s ∼96% +5%
Aorus 15 X9
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
622 MBit/s ∼91%
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
587 MBit/s ∼86% -6%

Maintenance

The bottom panel can be removed with a standard Philips screwdriver and a sharp edge in contrast to the Torx screws on the Aorus X5. The latches around the Aorus 15 are quite tight, however, so it may take some practice to safely remove the bottom plate.

Once inside, users have direct access to all three storage bays, both DDR4 SODIMM slots (up to 32 GB), battery, and WLAN module.

Keep in mind that a sticker must first be broken to remove the bottom panel which could impact the limited warranty.

Bottom panel is secured by 11 Philips screws
Bottom panel is secured by 11 Philips screws

Accessories and Warranty

There are no extras in the box other than the Quick Start guide and warranty card. It's quite the barebones unboxing experience.

Gigabyte offers two-year limited warranty as standard for users in the United States. In contrast, most OEMs like Dell or Asus offer a base warranty of just one year.

Input Devices

Keyboard

Keyboard feedback is better than on the Razer Blade 15 with slightly louder clatter than on the MSI GS65. The actuation point doesn't feel as crisp as on an HP Spectre x360 15, but we find the typing experience to be satisfactory nonetheless. A minor annoyance is the extra-small Arrow keys, Backspace key, and Vertical Bar "|" key. All of these keys were much larger on the last generation Aorus X5.

An integrated NumPad is present unlike on most other 15-inch gaming laptops. On the Aorus 15, however, the number keys are narrower and thus more cramped. It's too bad that the laptop does not utilize the empty space along the sides of the keyboard to fit larger NumPad keys.

Aorus has dropped the column of Macro keys as well as the per-key RGB lighting of the Aorus X5 for a more standard three-zone RGB lighting.

Touchpad

We're happy to see that the glossy and sticky touchpad of the last generation Aorus X5 and X7 series is now gone for a more traditional look and feel. Glide is smooth and responsive no matter the cursor speed with just minimal sticking when moving very slowly. Unfortunately, the matte plastic surface will accumulate grease very quickly for an unsightly look after just a few days of use.

Trackpad size (11.5 x 6 cm) is smaller than on both the XPS 15 (10.5 x 8.5 cm) and last generation Aorus X5 (10.6 x 7.8 cm). There is ample space both above and below the trackpad that appears under-utilized.

The integrated mouse keys are a huge improvement over the previous generation. Feedback is much firmer for a satisfying click without being very loud.

Completely different layout to the old Aorus X5. The Arrow keys are smaller, per-key RGB lighting is gone, and the dedicated Macro keys are no more
Completely different layout to the old Aorus X5. The Arrow keys are smaller, per-key RGB lighting is gone, and the dedicated Macro keys are no more
Key feedback remains satisfactory with a good balance between clatter and firmness
Key feedback remains satisfactory with a good balance between clatter and firmness

Display

Gigabyte has switched panel manufacturers from AU Optronics to LG Philips for the Aorus 15. The high quality LP156WFG-SPB2 IPS panel found here was also used on last year's Lenovo Legion Y530. Both systems subsequently share similar characteristics including the fast black-white response times for reduced ghosting, native 144 Hz refresh rate for smoother gameplay, and almost identical color spaces. Contrast ratio, oddly enough, is notably higher on the Aorus. Display brightness is typical of gaming laptops at about 300 nits.

The matte panel is crisp and almost grain-free. Backlight bleeding is also kept to a minimum as it's largely unnoticeable as shown by our picture below.

There are no other display options available at the moment meaning no 4K UHD or touchscreen features. We personally prefer 1080p144 for gaming purposes at this screen size anyway. The system can still output to a 4K UHD monitor at 60 Hz via mini DisplayPort or HDMI 2.0.

There are no G-Sync options available at the time of writing.

Top bezel is slight thicker for the webcam
Top bezel is slight thicker for the webcam
First narrow bezels for an Aorus laptop
First narrow bezels for an Aorus laptop
Slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges
Slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges
RGB Subpixel array
RGB Subpixel array
326.3
cd/m²
310.6
cd/m²
327.3
cd/m²
306.2
cd/m²
305.1
cd/m²
283.1
cd/m²
269.6
cd/m²
267.8
cd/m²
256.2
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 327.3 cd/m² Average: 294.7 cd/m² Minimum: 13.04 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 78 %
Center on Battery: 305.1 cd/m²
Contrast: 925:1 (Black: 0.33 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.58 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2, calibrated: 1.33
ΔE Greyscale 3.4 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
95.2% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 60.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.28
Aorus 15 X9
LG Philips LP156WFG-SPB2, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
LG Philips LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Aorus X5 v8
AU Optronics B156HAN07.0 (AUO70ED), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
AUO80ED, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
AU Optronics B156HAN, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-3%
-11%
-9%
-15%
-8%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
15.2 (8.4, 6.8)
16.8 (9.2, 7.6)
-11%
18.8 (10, 8.8)
-24%
16.4 (8.8, 7.6)
-8%
20 (10, 10)
-32%
18 (9.2, 8.8)
-18%
Response Time Black / White *
12.4 (7.6, 4.8)
11.6 (7.2, 4.4)
6%
12 (7.6, 4.4)
3%
13.6 (8.4, 5.2)
-10%
12 (6.8, 5.2)
3%
12 (6.8, 5.2)
3%
PWM Frequency
Screen
-4%
14%
12%
-17%
-24%
Brightness middle
305.1
314.7
3%
271
-11%
250
-18%
250.9
-18%
353.6
16%
Brightness
295
312
6%
259
-12%
235
-20%
257
-13%
346
17%
Brightness Distribution
78
90
15%
87
12%
85
9%
83
6%
86
10%
Black Level *
0.33
0.38
-15%
0.27
18%
0.29
12%
0.32
3%
0.3
9%
Contrast
925
828
-10%
1004
9%
862
-7%
784
-15%
1179
27%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.58
2.56
1%
1.81
30%
1.46
43%
2.77
-7%
4.55
-76%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
4.32
4.89
-13%
3.33
23%
2.47
43%
5.89
-36%
7.91
-83%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.33
1.71
-29%
2.5
-88%
3.37
-153%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.4
3.4
-0%
1.09
68%
1.27
63%
4
-18%
4.1
-21%
Gamma
2.28 96%
2.3 96%
2.45 90%
2.4 92%
2.27 97%
2.27 97%
CCT
6374 102%
6435 101%
6435 101%
6749 96%
6901 94%
7434 87%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60.7
60.7
0%
61
0%
60
-1%
60
-1%
57.9
-5%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
95.2
94.6
-1%
93
-2%
93
-2%
92
-3%
88.9
-7%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-4% / -4%
2% / 10%
2% / 9%
-16% / -17%
-16% / -22%

* ... smaller is better

Color space is approximately 60 percent and 95 percent of the AdobeRGB and sRGB standards, respectively, to be nearly identical to the FHD Aero 15 and many other gaming laptops with fast 144 Hz IPS panels. High refresh rate panels with wider gamuts are still not widely available for this particular screen size.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB

Measurements with an X-Rite colorimeter show a color accurate display out of the box. Nonetheless, we're able to marginally improve the display even further through our own calibration. Our final results bring down the average grayscale and color dE values from 3.4 and 2.58 to 1.0 and 1.33, respectively. 

Grayscale before calibration
Grayscale before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
ColorChecker after calibration
ColorChecker after calibration

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
12.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.6 ms rise
↘ 4.8 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. » 11 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.4 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
15.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 8.4 ms rise
↘ 6.8 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 (40.7 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9705 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is not all that different from the Aorus X5. The display is a little brighter this time but it's not enough to make a real difference when under sunlight. Both the matte panel and wide viewing angles help to reduce glare.

Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Very slight changes to contrast if viewing off-centered
Very slight changes to contrast if viewing off-centered

Performance

Unlike the Aorus X5 v8 and Gigabyte Aero 15 with the Core i7-8850H and Core i9-8950HK, respectively, all current SKUs of the Aorus 15 ship with the Core i7-8750H only. This particular Coffee Lake-H CPU is very common amongst mainstream to high-end gaming laptops. There are no Max-Q or RTX 2080 or even Optimus options for now.

 
Gigabyte Command Center stats when running Witcher 3
Gigabyte Command Center stats when running Witcher 3
Handy manual updater for all Aorus software and hardware features
Handy manual updater for all Aorus software and hardware features
Easily toggle system settings
Easily toggle system settings
Three-zone RGB lighting
Three-zone RGB lighting

Processor

CineBench R15
CineBench R15

Multi-thread performance is about 8 percent slower than the average i7-8750H in our database taken from 75 other laptops. This is due to the more limited Turbo Boost potential of the chassis and so the Aorus will generally run at slightly slower clock rates than expected. When running CineBench R15 Multi-Thread in a loop, the initial high score of 1022 points drops to 959 points by the second loop and it never recovers from there. Both the MSI GS65 and Aero 15-X9 are able to run the same processor at slightly faster clock rates for longer periods.

Raw multi-thread performance is still significantly faster than the Core i5-8300H and last generation Core i7-7700HQ by about 30 percent and 45 percent, respectively. Users aiming for stable 144 FPS, however, will want every ounce of CPU power they can get from the i7-8750H.

See our dedicated page on the Core i7-8750H for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

01020304050607080901001101201301401501601701801902002102202302402502602702802903003103203303403503603703803904004104204304404504604704804905005105205305405505605705805906006106206306406506606706806907007107207307407507607707807908008108208308408508608708808909009109209309409509609709809901000101010201030104010501060107010801090110011101120113011401150116011701180119012001210122012301240125012601270Tooltip
Aorus 15 X9 GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø964 (958.5-1022)
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø922 (913.2-999)
Aorus X5 v8 GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1182 (1158.11-1265.98)
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9 GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1095 (1087.31-1156.25)
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø991 (974.33-1083.86)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
203 Points ∼93% +22%
Gigabyte Aero 15-Y9
Intel Core i9-8950HK
193 Points ∼89% +16%
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
182 Points ∼83% +10%
Huawei MateBook 13 i7
Intel Core i7-8565U
175 Points ∼80% +5%
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-8750H
172 Points ∼79% +4%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (163 - 177, n=79)
172 Points ∼79% +4%
Aorus 15 X9
Intel Core i7-8750H
166 Points ∼76%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
162 Points ∼74% -2%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
142 Points ∼65% -14%
Xiaomi Mi Gaming Laptop 7300HQ 1060
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
138 Points ∼63% -17%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
1465 Points ∼33% +43%
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
1265 Points ∼29% +24%
Gigabyte Aero 15-Y9
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1237 Points ∼28% +21%
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-8750H
1218 Points ∼28% +19%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (501 - 1251, n=86)
1099 Points ∼25% +8%
Aorus 15 X9
Intel Core i7-8750H
1022 Points ∼23%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
798 Points ∼18% -22%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
710 Points ∼16% -31%
Huawei MateBook 13 i7
Intel Core i7-8565U
650 Points ∼15% -36%
Xiaomi Mi Gaming Laptop 7300HQ 1060
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
516 Points ∼12% -50%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
2.08 Points ∼85%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (1.89 - 2, n=39)
1.966 Points ∼81%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
1.78 Points ∼73%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.61 Points ∼66%
Xiaomi Mi Gaming Laptop 7300HQ 1060
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
1.56 Points ∼64%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
13.85 Points ∼51%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (9.54 - 13.5, n=40)
12.2 Points ∼45%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
7.48 Points ∼28%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
7.13 Points ∼26%
Xiaomi Mi Gaming Laptop 7300HQ 1060
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
5.93 Points ∼22%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
7682 Points ∼71%
Gigabyte Aero 15-Y9
Intel Core i9-8950HK
7089 Points ∼65%
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
6841 Points ∼63%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (6236 - 6645, n=21)
6478 Points ∼60%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
6115 Points ∼56%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5426 Points ∼50%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
42677 Points ∼86%
Gigabyte Aero 15-Y9
Intel Core i9-8950HK
37099 Points ∼75%
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
36819 Points ∼74%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (29952 - 35307, n=21)
33262 Points ∼67%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
21752 Points ∼44%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
19801 Points ∼40%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
247 s * ∼3%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
205.94 s * ∼2%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (125 - 181, n=6)
158 s * ∼2%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i7-8750H
  (0.7 - 10832, n=53)
3712 Seconds * ∼16%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
638.9 Seconds * ∼3%
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
Intel Core i5-8300H
558.56 Seconds * ∼2%
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
483 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
166 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1022 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
113.22 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

PCMark results are about where we expect them to be considering the CPU and GPU. The exception is its Digital Content Creation score which is particularly high at 16 percent over the similarly equipped Asus ROG GL704.

PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Aorus 15 X9
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
8408 Points ∼75%
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
8033 Points ∼72% -4%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (6161 - 8408, n=4)
7133 Points ∼64% -15%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
6708 Points ∼60% -20%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
6618 Points ∼59% -21%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
5605 Points ∼50% -33%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5452 Points ∼49% -35%
Productivity
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
8399 Points ∼87% +15%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7547 Points ∼78% +3%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
7315 Points ∼75% 0%
Aorus 15 X9
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
7299 Points ∼75%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (7113 - 7331, n=4)
7240 Points ∼75% -1%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
7037 Points ∼73% -4%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
6938 Points ∼72% -5%
Essentials
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
9377 Points ∼88% +5%
Aorus 15 X9
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
8943 Points ∼84%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (8277 - 8980, n=4)
8745 Points ∼82% -2%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
8600 Points ∼81% -4%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
8517 Points ∼80% -5%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
8429 Points ∼79% -6%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
7200 Points ∼67% -19%
Score
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
6154 Points ∼79% +5%
Aorus 15 X9
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
5870 Points ∼76%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (5138 - 5870, n=4)
5494 Points ∼71% -6%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5416 Points ∼70% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
5353 Points ∼69% -9%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
4966 Points ∼64% -15%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
4646 Points ∼60% -21%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5953 Points ∼91% +2%
Aorus 15 X9
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
5828 Points ∼89%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5731 Points ∼88% -2%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
5645 Points ∼87% -3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (5338 - 5828, n=3)
5610 Points ∼86% -4%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5607 Points ∼86% -4%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
4418 Points ∼68% -24%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5773 Points ∼95% +19%
Aorus 15 X9
GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
4843 Points ∼79%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
4676 Points ∼77% -3%
Average Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (3662 - 4861, n=3)
4455 Points ∼73% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
4338 Points ∼71% -10%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
4150 Points ∼68% -14%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
3631 Points ∼60% -25%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4843 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5828 points
Help

Storage Devices

There are three internal storage bays (2x RAID-compatible M.2 2280 PCIe x4 slots + 1x 2.5-inch SATA III) compared to four on the Aorus X5 (3x M.2 2280 + 1x 2.5-inch SATA III). While Xotic PC offers a bevy of capacities and combinations, it's simple enough to access the drives and upgrade on your own if desired.

The 512 GB NVMe Intel drive on our test unit is a notable improvement over the NVMe Toshiba drive on the Alienware m15 and our last Aorus X5 v8. In particular, sequential write rates are now much faster and closer to a Samsung PM981. Note that Gigabyte utilizes a similar Intel SSD for its Aero 15 series as well.

Optane does not appear to be an option.

See our table of HDDs and SSDs for more benchmark comparisons.

2.5-inch SATA III bay underneath the right palm rest
2.5-inch SATA III bay underneath the right palm rest
Dual M.2 2280 slots
Dual M.2 2280 slots
AS SSD
AS SSD
CDM 5 (Primary SSD)
CDM 5 (Primary SSD)
CDM 5 (Secondary HDD)
CDM 5 (Secondary HDD)
HD Tune
HD Tune
Aorus 15 X9
Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Aorus X5 v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Gigabyte Aero 15-X9
Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW010T8
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV512G
AS SSD
38%
-34%
-6%
-23%
-27%
Copy Game MB/s
1070.93
1200.14
12%
936.25
-13%
706.3
-34%
Copy Program MB/s
404.34
525.53
30%
362.56
-10%
431.54
7%
Copy ISO MB/s
1328.83
1974.98
49%
1863.91
40%
642.49
-52%
Score Total
2544
4079
60%
2515
-1%
2722
7%
2039
-20%
2667
5%
Score Write
859
2010
134%
954
11%
957
11%
802
-7%
862
0%
Score Read
1116
1362
22%
1061
-5%
1180
6%
815
-27%
1221
9%
Access Time Write *
0.031
0.033
-6%
0.044
-42%
0.034
-10%
0.045
-45%
0.063
-103%
Access Time Read *
0.049
0.047
4%
0.166
-239%
0.114
-133%
0.071
-45%
0.116
-137%
4K-64 Write
584
1717.43
194%
773.05
32%
702.74
20%
570.49
-2%
655.5
12%
4K-64 Read
868.5
1125.76
30%
856.23
-1%
913.55
5%
610.88
-30%
995.38
15%
4K Write
119.55
110.72
-7%
84.51
-29%
107.12
-10%
83.83
-30%
93.41
-22%
4K Read
56.55
52.31
-7%
23.21
-59%
55.04
-3%
43.09
-24%
29.17
-48%
Seq Write
1553.41
1822.26
17%
965.76
-38%
1471.06
-5%
1474.76
-5%
1135.14
-27%
Seq Read
1912.12
1839.67
-4%
1813.23
-5%
2112.83
10%
1612.2
-16%
1967
3%

* ... smaller is better

Intel SSD 760p SSDPEKKW512G8
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2981 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1592 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 597.6 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 530.5 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 2602 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1573 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 63.65 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 147.2 MB/s

GPU Performance

This is our fifth laptop equipped with RTX 2070 graphics and 3DMark benchmarks show it to be within just 1 to 2 percentage points of our average. In other words, Gigabyte has not artificially throttled or reduced the performance of the GPU in any way. Owners can expect 6 to 10 percent slower performance than the RTX 2080 Max-Q and a 30 to 35 percent boost over the standard laptop RTX 2060. Anyone upgrading from the older GTX 1060 will see a massive gain of about 65 percent.

When compared to our RTX 2070 desktop reference, however, the RTX 2070 in our Aorus is about 10 to 15 percent slower.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Time Spy
Time Spy
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Ultra
Port Royal
Port Royal
DLSS test (1440p)
DLSS test (1440p)
3DMark
2560x1440 Port Royal Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
5852 Points ∼98% +37%
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H
4655 Points ∼78% +9%
Aorus 15 X9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H
4276 Points ∼72%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (4102 - 4276, n=5)
4176 Points ∼70% -2%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H
3679 Points ∼62% -14%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
3020 Points ∼51% -29%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
10720 Points ∼75% +38%
Asus ROG Strix RTX 2070 OC
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
9364 Points ∼66% +21%
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H
8512 Points ∼60% +10%
Aorus 15 X9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H
7754 Points ∼55%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (7422 - 7815, n=5)
7642 Points ∼54% -1%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H
6728 Points ∼47% -13%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
5783 Points ∼41% -25%
3840x2160 Fire Strike Ultra Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
5993 Points ∼59% +30%
Asus ROG Strix RTX 2070 OC
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
5501 Points ∼54% +20%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (4476 - 4721, n=4)
4616 Points ∼46% 0%
Aorus 15 X9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H
4596 Points ∼45%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H
4124 Points ∼41% -10%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
3351 Points ∼33% -27%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
27080 Points ∼67% +34%
Asus ROG Strix RTX 2070 OC
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
23373 Points ∼58% +16%
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H
21515 Points ∼53% +6%
Aorus X7 DT v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
20813 Points ∼51% +3%
Aorus 15 X9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H
20227 Points ∼50%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (19236 - 20759, n=6)
19935 Points ∼49% -1%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H
18153 Points ∼45% -10%
Aorus X5 v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
17257 Points ∼42% -15%
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
16010 Points ∼39% -21%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
15731 Points ∼39% -22%
Aorus x3 Plus v7
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7820HK
12298 Points ∼30% -39%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
17290 Points ∼76% +98%
Asus ROG Strix RTX 2070 OC
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
13950 Points ∼62% +60%
Aorus X5 v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
12471 Points ∼55% +43%
Aorus X7 DT v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
12036 Points ∼53% +38%
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H
11825 Points ∼52% +36%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (8716 - 15617, n=7)
11538 Points ∼51% +32%
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
11407 Points ∼50% +31%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H
10749 Points ∼48% +23%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
9099 Points ∼40% +4%
Aorus 15 X9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H
8716 Points ∼39%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
38485 Points ∼75% +44%
Asus ROG Strix RTX 2070 OC
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
31595 Points ∼62% +19%
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H
29453 Points ∼58% +11%
Aorus 15 X9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 8750H
26645 Points ∼52%
Aorus X7 DT v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8850H
26201 Points ∼51% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (24172 - 26975, n=7)
25680 Points ∼50% -4%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H
22723 Points ∼45% -15%
Aorus X5 v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
21823 Points ∼43% -18%
Alienware m15 GTX 1070 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
20573 Points ∼40% -23%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
20157 Points ∼40% -24%
3DMark 11 Performance
19143 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
31987 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
16211 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
7490 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Performance in Witcher 3 is where we expect it to be in relation to other RTX 2070 laptops we've tested. It is unfortunately closer to an RTX 2070 Max-Q than it is to a proper desktop RTX 2070. The RTX 2080 Max-Q can be up to 14 percent faster depending on the laptop in question.

Idling on Witcher 3 shows no recurring dips in frame rates to suggest no interrupting background activity when gaming.

See our full review on the RTX Turing series for more technical information and our dedicated page on the GeForce RTX 2070 for more benchmark comparisons.

The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
101.1 fps ∼100% +41%
Asus ROG Strix RTX 2070 OC
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop)
87 (min: 72, max: 100) fps ∼86% +21%
Asus Zephyrus S GX701GX
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
81.7 (min: 68) fps ∼81% +14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
  (70.9 - 73, n=6)
72.2 fps ∼71% +1%
Aorus 15 X9
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
71.8 fps ∼71%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2070 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
68.9 fps ∼68% -4%
Gigabyte Aero 15-Y9
Intel Core i9-8950HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
65.7 fps ∼65% -8%
MSI GL73 8SE-010US
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
55.1 fps ∼55% -23%
MSI GS65 Stealth Thin 8RE-051US
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
40 fps ∼40% -44%
Huawei MateBook 13 i7
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
11.9 fps ∼12% -83%
01020304050607080