Notebookcheck

Asus TUF FX705GM (i7-8750H, GTX 1060, FHD) Laptop Review

Florian Glaser, 👁 Florian Glaser (translated by Marius S.), 10/16/2018

A good balance. Despite cutting multiple corners, the Asus TUF FX705 is an interesting gaming notebook with a good balance of cost and performance. Find out in this review where the 17-inch model shines and which weaknesses have to be taken into account.

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Asus TUF FX705GM

Whereas the Asus ROG series is aimed at passionate gamers with a decent budget, the relatively new TUF series (The Ultimate Force) is meant for price-conscious players. Asus has already supplied us with the newcomer FX705 before the official launch date.

In usual Asus fashion, the 17-inch gaming notebook will be available in different variants. Depending on the model, it is equipped with either a 60 or a 144 Hz Full-HD panel. The processor choices are a Core i5-8300H and a Core i7-8750H. Both CPUs are based on Intel's latest Coffee-Lake generation. An Nvidia Pascal chip handles demanding graphics calculations. Unlike the GeForce GTX 1050 and GTX 1050 Ti, both of which can be considered (upper) mid-range, the GeForce GTX 1060 is a high-end card. Please note: According to the data sheet, it has 3 or 6 GB of GDDR5-VRAM, depending on the seller's region.

Unfortunately, it gets even more complicated and confusing for customers. As with the video memory, there are multiple cases as well. Here, the differences are not only limited to the lid (metal vs. plastic), but also extend to the keyboard. Specifically, the "plastic edition" has to make do with red instead of RGB LEDs. The design height is different as well.

Our review is based on the top model FX705GM, which tries to catch the eye of prospective buyers with a Core i7-8750H, a GeForce GTX 1060 with 6 GB of VRAM, an SSD-HDD combo (256 GB SSD +1 TB HDD), a 144 Hz screen and the higher quality chassis.

Asus TUF FX705GM (TUF FX705 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop) - 6144 MB, Core: 1405 MHz, Memory: 8000 MHz, GDDR5, ForceWare 398.35, Optimus
Memory
32768 MB 
, 2x 16 GB SO-DIMM DDR4-2666, dual-channel, all slots occupied
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AU Optronics B173HAN04.0 (AUO409D), IPS, Full-HD, 144 Hz, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G, 256 GB 
, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW, 256 GB NVMe-SSD + Seagate BarraCuda Pro ST1000LM049, 1 TB HDD, 7200 rpm. Slots: 1x M.2 type 2280 & 1x 2.5 inch
Soundcard
Realtek ALC235 @ Intel Cannon Lake PCH
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm audio jack
Networking
Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 27 x 400 x 279 ( = 1.06 x 15.75 x 10.98 in)
Battery
64 Wh, 4240 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0, Keyboard: Chiclet RGB, Keyboard Light: yes, 180-watt power supply, McAfee LiveSafe trial, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.753 kg ( = 97.11 oz / 6.07 pounds), Power Supply: 439 g ( = 15.49 oz / 0.97 pounds)
Price
1499 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The FX705 has a premium appeal thanks to the metal lid. Even though the base unit is made of plastic, it also looks like aluminum due to the brushed finish. The entire chassis receives a positive verdict for sturdiness. The surfaces do not yield, even under a lot of pressure.

We were particularly fond of the thin display bezels that were almost able to reduce the dimensions down to the level of a 15-inch notebook. With a width of 40 cm (~15.8 in) and a depth of 27.9 cm (~11 in), the FX705 is surprisingly compact for a 17-inch device. For comparison: At 41.2 x 28.5 cm (~16.2 x 11.2 in), the competing MSI GS73 8RF is significantly larger. The same holds true for the Schenker XMG A707 (41.9 x 28.9 cm /~16.5 x 11.4 in) and the Acer Predator Helios 300 (43.2 x 29.0 cm /~17 x 11.4 in). The design height tells a different story. While 2.7 cm (~1.1 in) are neither thick by any stretch nor the worst value, by now there are far thinner devices, although this often negatively impacts cooling performance. Likewise, the weight of 2.75 kg (~6 lb) is neither very light nor very heavy.

Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM

As for the design, Asus has made an effort to find a good compromise between playfulness and elegance. Even though the case has numerous pattern and texture accents, the look does not appear too "geeky". We do not have many reasons to complain about the hinges either, since they do a good job (one-handed opening is possible). The workmanship could be better however. As for our press sample, which does not necessarily represent the final level of production, the transition between the lid and the display border was rough. The quality of the case is appropriate with respect to the price however.

Size Comparison

Features

Connectivity

Buyers will have to compromise when it comes to port selection. In order to reduce production costs, Asus not only forgoes a card reader, but also the otherwise common Mini DisplayPort. It also lacks a Thunderbolt 3 port. Even more vexing, the FX705 does not even have a USB type-C 3.1 Gen2 port. The three available USB ports all adhere to the type-A (2x 3.0 and 3.1 Gen1 & 1x 2.0) standard. External displays are connected via the HDMI 2.0 port, headsets and microphones can be connected to the audio jack. There is also an on-board network connection for RJ45 cables.

Right-handed users will be particularly happy about the distribution of ports. Since all of the ports except for the Kensington Lock slot have been placed on the left side, mouse movements are not restricted in any way.

Left side: DC in, RJ45-LAN, HDMI 2.0, USB type-A 2.0, 2x USB type-A 3.0, audio
Left side: DC in, RJ45-LAN, HDMI 2.0, USB type-A 2.0, 2x USB type-A 3.0, audio
Right side: Kensington Lock
Right side: Kensington Lock

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

Communication

Asus deserves praise for the Wi-Fi performance. The FX705 is able to deliver excellent data transfer rates thanks to the brand-new Intel Wireless AC-9560 chip. 700 Mbit/s more or less constitute the peak value that current laptops manage to reach in our Wi-Fi test (at 1m/~3 ft distance to the reference router Linksys EA8500).

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
693 MBit/s ∼100% +2%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
692 MBit/s ∼100% +2%
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
681 MBit/s ∼98%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
657 MBit/s ∼95% -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (141 - 702, n=179)
596 MBit/s ∼86% -12%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
468 MBit/s ∼68% -31%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
692 MBit/s ∼100%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Intel Wireless-AC 9260
670 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
640 MBit/s ∼92% -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (213 - 697, n=179)
536 MBit/s ∼77% -23%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
448 MBit/s ∼65% -35%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
317 MBit/s ∼46% -54%

Software

As far as our test device is concerned, there is significantly less software than on ROG-series representatives. The installed fan controls are among the most important features. Buyers can choose between three different profiles using a shortcut (Fn + F5), namely Silent, Balanced and Overboost. All of the measurements in this article have been made on the medium setting, which is called Balanced. In the other two modes, many results will vary widely (key word noise level).

Accessories

The scope of delivery of the press sample only includes the power supply. The maximum configuration of the TUF FX705 uses a 180-watt model with an approximate weight of 0.4 kg (~0.88 lb) and the dimensions 16 x 7.5 x 2.5 cm (~6.30 x 2.95 x 0.98 in) is used.

Maintenance

Maintenance of the 17-inch model has proven to be anything but exciting. After removing 11 Phillips screws, the entire bottom can be removed with some force (or a small lever tool). On the inside, there are two DDR4-RAM slots (SO-DIMM format), an M.2 slot and a 2.5-inch slot, all of which were occupied on our test device. The cooling solution consists of two fans as well as several metal structures and heat pipes. The heat pipes run across the soldered-on CPU and GPU. As with most Laptops from more recent years, the battery is only accessible from the inside.

Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM
Asus TUF FX705GM

Warranty

In Germany, the warranty period is 24 months.

Input Devices

Keyboard

The keyboard of the FX705 is based on the Scar edition of the more expensive GL504. This not only includes the layout (with, for example, secluded arrow keys), but also the special WASD keys, which are mainly directed at shooter fans. The typing experience is somewhere between soft and hard and primarily reminded us of MSI keyboards. Inputs on GE and GS series notebooks feel very similar.

The FX705 has to concede points when it comes to the lighting. Even though the 17-inch laptop is, as mentioned, equipped with RGB lighting, it is somewhat lacking in terms of intensity and evenness (the F10 key was extremely poorly illuminated), even at the highest setting.

Chiclet keyboard ...
Chiclet keyboard ...
... with RGB lighting
... with RGB lighting

Touchpad

As for the mouse substitute, Asus has followed the current trend and installed a ClickPad without dedicated keys in the FX705. Fingers comfortably glide across the touchpad (as long as they are dry and not greasy) due to the smooth surface. The touchpad is also helpful for the supported gestures, which can be used to quickly zoom into and scroll through web pages and documents. We were less pleased with its precision, which could be slightly better. All things considered, the input devices still perform well, even though they do not quite make the very top of the list.

Display

While other budget gaming notebooks only offer a 60 Hz display, the FX705 configuration we tested has a 144 Hz panel installed. The B173HAN04.0 from AU Optronics (AUO409D) has impressively low response times. 7.4 ms gray-to-gray and 10 ms black-to-white are pretty good values for the notebook segment, although the MSI GS73 and the in-house competition Asus GL703 have low switching times as well.

236
cd/m²
246
cd/m²
236
cd/m²
225
cd/m²
234
cd/m²
228
cd/m²
208
cd/m²
225
cd/m²
215
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 246 cd/m² Average: 228.1 cd/m² Minimum: 13 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 205 cd/m²
Contrast: 1170:1 (Black: 0.2 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.16 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2, calibrated: 2.02
ΔE Greyscale 2 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
89% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 58% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.46
Asus TUF FX705GM
AU Optronics B173HAN04.0 (AUO409D), IPS, 1920x1080
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Chi Mei CMN1747 M173JJE-G32, TN LED, 1920x1080
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
CMN N173HHE-G32 (CMN1747), TN, 1920x1080
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPF5 (LGD056D), IPS, 1920x1080
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPF5 (LGD056D), IPS, 1920x1080
Response Times
4%
17%
-281%
-253%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
7.4 (3.8, 3.6)
8.8 (4.4, 4.4)
-19%
7.8 (4.4, 3.4)
-5%
39.2 (20.4, 18.8)
-430%
36 (18.8, 17.2)
-386%
Response Time Black / White *
10 (4.8, 5.2)
7.4 (5.2, 2.2)
26%
6.2 (4.4, 1.8)
38%
23.2 (10.8, 12.4)
-132%
22 (10.4, 11.6)
-120%
PWM Frequency
25510 (15)
25510 (14)
119000 (90)
122000 (95)
Screen
-33%
-15%
-61%
-68%
Brightness middle
234
297.8
27%
262
12%
362
55%
365
56%
Brightness
228
285
25%
261
14%
350
54%
341
50%
Brightness Distribution
85
84
-1%
94
11%
91
7%
89
5%
Black Level *
0.2
0.33
-65%
0.2
-0%
0.29
-45%
0.32
-60%
Contrast
1170
902
-23%
1310
12%
1248
7%
1141
-2%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
2.16
3.68
-70%
3.96
-83%
6.06
-181%
6.51
-201%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
3.39
7.71
-127%
7.29
-115%
11.6
-242%
12.32
-263%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
2.02
2.71
-34%
2.18
-8%
3.13
-55%
2.9
-44%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2
5
-150%
3.09
-55%
7.22
-261%
7.65
-283%
Gamma
2.46 89%
2.06 107%
2.48 89%
2.51 88%
2.64 83%
CCT
6394 102%
6728 97%
6977 93%
7659 85%
8066 81%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
58
84.77
46%
76
31%
55
-5%
56
-3%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
89
99.97
12%
100
12%
84
-6%
86
-3%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-15% / -27%
1% / -10%
-171% / -95%
-161% / -96%

* ... smaller is better

Great: In order to improve color fidelity and color accuracy, Asus has pre-calibrated the panel. While this step improves the image quality out of the box, the tradeoff is a massively decreased luminosity. Just below 230 cd/m² is a very low value and does not make it well-suited to outdoor use, a fact that becomes apparent from the pictures below and one that is further exacerbated in battery mode, where the brightness is even lower.

CalMAN: Grayscales
CalMAN: Grayscales
CalMAN: Saturation
CalMAN: Saturation
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: Grayscales (calibrated)
CalMAN: Grayscales (calibrated)
CalMAN: Saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: Saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)

The contrast ratio does not warrant criticism. The FX705 easily surpasses the 1000:1-mark, which is not a given. The color space coverage can be considered upper mid-range. At 89% sRGB and 58% AdobeRGB it is slightly ahead of the Schenker XMG A707 and the Acer Predator Helios 300, but behind the Asus Strix GL703GM and the MSI GS73 8RF, both of which cover 100% of the sRGB color space.

Asus TUF FX705GM vs. sRGB (89%)
Asus TUF FX705GM vs. sRGB (89%)
Asus TUF FX705GM vs. AdobeRGB (58%)
Asus TUF FX705GM vs. AdobeRGB (58%)

Users who are worried about screen bleeding can breathe easily: Our test device did not exhibit halation, despite the rather mediocre illumination (85%). As per usual with IPS-displays, the viewing angles were good.

Outdoor use
Outdoor use
Subpixel array
Subpixel 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
10 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 4.8 ms rise
↘ 5.2 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 6 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
7.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3.8 ms rise
↘ 3.6 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8931 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Performance

In its maximum configuration, the TUF FX705 represents a rock-solid gaming notebook. The Core i7-8750H and the 32 GB of DDR4-RAM (which is likely to only be 16 GB at maximum in Germany) come with enough reserves to last for years to come. The GeForce GTX 1060 will likely become obsolete sooner, even though the performance is currently sufficient for high to maximum details - at least at the native Full-HD resolution.

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

Processor

Intel's Core i7-8750H is one of the most popular notebook CPUs. The six-core chip contains 9 MB of L3 cache and is able to process up to 12 threads in parallel thanks to Hyperthreading. The Coffee-Lake chip has a 45-watt TDP.

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

The FX705 left a very good impression in the benchmarks. Both the Cinebench R15 multi-core test and the Cinebench R11.5 multi-core test place the 17-inch device up to 10% above the 8750H-competition.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼100% 0%
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼100%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Intel Core i7-8750H
174 Points ∼99% -1%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H
173 Points ∼99% -1%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Intel Core i7-8750H
168 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (79 - 209, n=419)
152 Points ∼87% -13%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H
1137 Points ∼100%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Intel Core i7-8750H
1132 Points ∼100% 0%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Intel Core i7-8750H
1112 Points ∼98% -2%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Intel Core i7-8750H
1015 Points ∼89% -11%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H
807 Points ∼71% -29%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 1865, n=420)
748 Points ∼66% -34%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H
2 Points ∼100%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.99 Points ∼100% 0%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.98 Points ∼99% -1%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H
1.96 Points ∼98% -2%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.92 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.71 - 2.38, n=408)
1.68 Points ∼84% -16%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.79 Points ∼100%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.33 Points ∼96% -4%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.2 Points ∼95% -5%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Intel Core i7-8750H
11.2 Points ∼88% -12%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H
8.79 Points ∼69% -31%
Average of class Gaming
  (1.13 - 21.2, n=509)
7.28 Points ∼57% -43%

However, Intel's notebook six-cores are infamous for their inability to maintain their automatic turbo's maximum level for more than a short period of time. The Asus computer suffers the same fate. In the first Cinebench loop, the core clock already dropped from 3.9 GHz at the start to 3.0 GHz, leading to an overall score that was around 10% lower. Although as mentioned earlier, the FX705 is not alone in this. Competing devices level off at an even lower average score.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920930940950960970980990100010101020103010401050106010701080109011001110112011301140Tooltip
Asus TUF FX705GM Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø1022 (992.14-1137)
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011 Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø995 (976.78-1132)
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø981 (966-1112.47)
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74 Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø935 (926.78-1026.8)
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
2 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
12.79 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
175 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1137 Points
Help

System Performance

As expected, the system performance is excellent. While the 17-inch model ranges between the Asus GL703GM (5.525 points) and the Schenker XMG A707 (4.734 points) in the PCMark 10 test, it manages to claim first place among its competitors in the PCMark 8 Work test (2nd place @Home test). Since Windows has been installed on a solid-state drive, the operating system feels smooth and mostly reacts lightning-fast.

PCMark 10 - Score
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5525 Points ∼100% +7%
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
5169 Points ∼94%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 6959, n=119)
4945 Points ∼90% -4%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO 256GB
4734 Points ∼86% -8%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
5719 Points ∼100%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5528 Points ∼97% -3%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO 256GB
5389 Points ∼94% -6%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H, Hynix HFS128G39TND
5347 Points ∼93% -7%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5323 Points ∼93% -7%
Average of class Gaming
  (2484 - 6515, n=314)
4926 Points ∼86% -14%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5371 Points ∼100% +15%
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4660 Points ∼87%
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4393 Points ∼82% -6%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H, Hynix HFS128G39TND
4253 Points ∼79% -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (2554 - 6093, n=332)
4222 Points ∼79% -9%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO 256GB
4196 Points ∼78% -10%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4660 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5719 points
Help

Storage Solution

The storage solution has a big surprise in store. The FX705 is one of the first devices to receive a Western Digital SSD. The aforementioned company has made a name for itself with HDDs in the past. The 256 GB model chosen by Asus is called PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G-1002 and comes in the M.2-2280 format.

SSD
SSD
SSD
SSD
HDD
HDD
HDD
HDD

The solid-state drive easily outperforms SATA-III models thanks to PCIe and NVMe technology (see results of the Acer Predator Helios 300). The WDC model has a much harder time against other PCIe drives. Here, it achieves a lower final score in the AS SSD benchmark than both the Samsung PM961 (Asus GL703 & MSI GS73) and the Samsung 970 EVO (Schenker XMG A707). Subjectively however, buyers will likely notice little to no difference.

Asus TUF FX705GM
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
Samsung SSD 970 EVO 256GB
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Hynix HFS128G39TND
AS SSD
8%
12%
34%
-61%
Score Total
2458
3075
25%
3083
25%
3291
34%
811
-67%
Score Write
1082
825
-24%
906
-16%
1592
47%
196
-82%
Score Read
913
1520
66%
1456
59%
1153
26%
414
-55%
4K Write
101.9
88.38
-13%
98.36
-3%
112.28
10%
62.73
-38%
4K Read
38.49
35.76
-7%
42.81
11%
52.84
37%
26.5
-31%
Seq Write
1236.46
1031.3
-17%
1172.8
-5%
1448.94
17%
128.2
-90%
Seq Read
1571.32
1993.13
27%
1749.34
11%
2588.72
65%
512.95
-67%
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 1704 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1301 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 321.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 282.8 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1325 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1295 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 41.46 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 104.2 MB/s

Graphics Card

If you wish to play current triple-A games with good graphics, you should choose the FX705 with the GTX 1060 instead of the GTX 1050 (Ti). The DirectX-12 model from Nvidia's Pascal generation comes with 1,280 shaders and marks the beginning of the high-end segment. It accesses its 6 GB GDDR5-VRAM through a 192-bit interface.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI GS73 Stealth 8RF-011
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
18349 Points ∼100% +34%
Asus Strix GL703GM-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
14528 Points ∼79% +6%
Asus TUF FX705GM
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
13722 Points ∼75%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=520)
11894 Points ∼65% -13%
Schenker XMG A707 Coffee Lake
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
9332 Points ∼51% -32%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
9147 Points ∼50% -33%

Even though the clock speed behavior does not show any anomalies, the 3D performance is ever so slightly worse than on other laptops with an i7-8750H and a GTX 1060. The Asus GL703GM, for example, manages a 6% higher GPU score in 3DMark 11 (the installation of 3DMark 13 kept crashing with an error message). The deficit of the FX705 might be connected to the preinstalled driver, which may not have been perfectly optimized.

3DMark 11 Performance
13450 points
Help

The 17-inch notebook was able to complete the gaming stress test without any issues. The core clock of the GeForce GTX 1060 was at 1,645 MHz after running The Witcher 3 for 60 minutes. We measured the same average value in the Unigine Heaven 4.0 benchmark. The turbo spectrum of the GTX 1060 under load ranges from 1,405 MHz (base clock) to up to 1,911 MHz (maximum overclock).

0102030405060