Asus TUF Gaming A16 Advantage Edition in review: AMD notebook under the auspices of the 7
Unsurprisingly, the brand new TUF Gaming A16 will be available in several variants. Depending on the model, a Ryzen 7 7735HS or a Ryzen 9 7940HS serves as the CPU, while either a Radeon RX 7600S or a Radeon RX 7700S is used as the graphics card. As in the past, the S denotes moderate power consumption. The 16-inch display also lives on: either as a FHD+ panel (1920x1200) with 165 Hz and 100% sRGB coverage, or as a QHD+ panel (2560x1600) with 240 Hz and 100% DCI-P3 coverage. According to the Asus website, the DDR5 RAM ranges from 8 to 32 GB, the storage capacity from 512 GB to 2 TB.
Our review device is one of the cheaper versions and comes equipped with the Ryzen 7 7735HS, the Radeon RX 7600S, an FHD+ panel, 16 GB of RAM and a 1 TB SSD.
Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Wanted:
- News translator (DE-EN)
- Review translation proofreader (DE-EN)
Details here
Competitors of the TUF Gaming A16 primarily include other mid-range notebooks with AMD hardware such as the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ (R7 6800HS & RX 6700S) or the Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 (R9 6900HX & RX 6800S). On the Nvidia side, devices with a GeForce RTX 3060 should be regarded as the main opponents. While the HP Envy 16 h0112nr has an identical maximum TGP of 95 watts, the Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM, for example, boasts a significantly higher TGP of 140 watts - at the expense of energy consumption, of course.
Possible Competitors in Comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
86.2 % v7 (old) | 02 / 2023 | Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 R7 7735HS, Radeon RX 7600S | 2.2 kg | 27 mm | 16.00" | 1920x1200 | |
86.9 % v7 (old) | 09 / 2022 | HP Envy 16 h0112nr i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | 2.3 kg | 19.8 mm | 16.00" | 3840x2400 | |
87.2 % v7 (old) | 03 / 2022 | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | 2.1 kg | 24.95 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
86.4 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2022 | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ R7 6800HS, Radeon RX 6700S | 1.7 kg | 19.5 mm | 14.00" | 2560x1600 | |
89.3 % v7 (old) | 11 / 2022 | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 R9 6900HX, Radeon RX 6800S | 2.2 kg | 16.9 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 |
Case
The case gets a good score. Asus has opted for a combination of plastic (base unit) and metal (cover) and a decent material strength/thickness. The chassis only yields noticeably under heavy pressure. Compared to other devices, the lid is also quite torsion-resistant, although fingerprints quickly collect on the metal cover.
As for the design, Asus manages a successful compromise between subtle and playful. While the dark coloring is rather plain, the manufacturer has been quite creative with some details (power button, function lights, lid shape). The workmanship also leaves no room for criticism. In the case of our review sample, all design elements come together very cleanly.
The A16 is not necessarily one of the lightest and most compact gaming notebooks. At a weight of 2.2 kg, the 16-incher is limited in its suitability for frequent trips, but most competing devices have comparable values here. The height is also a similar story at a maximum of 2.7 cm.
Equipment
Connectivity
According to the Asus homepage, the range of ports varies depending on the model. For example, a USB 4 port is not on board as standard, but only installed in the better or more expensive variants. Our review device has to make do with two USB-A 3.2 Gen1 ports and two USB-C 3.2 Gen2 ports (with the latter supporting DisplayPort). A positive aspect: Power Delivery at up to 100 watts is possible on one of the Type-C ports. The A16 also has an HDMI 2.1 output, an RJ45 port, an audio jack and an opening for Kensington locks. Only a card reader is missing.
The distribution of the connections is designed more for right-handers. Due to the many ports placed on the left, using a mouse on the left side may result in limitations.
Communication
In terms of WLAN performance, the laptop lands in the midfield with send and receive rates of up to 900 MBit/s, which we measured from a distance of one meter to our new Asus Rapture GT-AXE11000 reference router. This is clearly surpassed by the Zephyrus G14 despite a similar MediaTek chip.
Networking | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Average of class Gaming (680 - 1890, n=148, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average MediaTek MT7921 (104.2 - 968, n=18) | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
Average of class Gaming (469 - 1843, n=148, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average MediaTek MT7921 (47.8 - 985, n=18) | |
iperf3 receive AX12 | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Average MediaTek MT7921 (90 - 972, n=16) | |
iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Average MediaTek MT7921 (548 - 985, n=16) |
Webcam
The webcam also delivers mediocre performance. As in most notebooks, it lacks both image sharpness and color accuracy.
Accessories
The only accessories included with our review sample were a few information booklets. The 240-watt power supply unit weighs just over 500 g and measures approx. 16 x 7.5 x 2 cm, so it is neither small nor particularly bulky.
Maintenance
To access the internals of the TUF Gaming A16, a little more than 10 Phillips screws have to be removed from the underside. Then the entire base plate can be levered out of its anchorage with a good deal of effort. Almost all components can be seen, whereby the SSD and RAM modules are hidden behind a plastic film (see photos).
Warranty
In Germany, the warranty extends beyond 24 months. This may differ in other countries, so buyers should double-check with the seller before purchasing.
Input Devices
Keyboard
Asus could improve the keyboard a little. Although the keyboard generally cuts a decent figure, a few weaknesses and inconsistencies appear upon closer inspection. Starting with the typing feel, which feels a little spongy in terms of pressure point and stroke. We would have preferred crisper or harder feedback here.
The layout is also debatable. In addition to the F keys, the directional arrows are also very small. The fact that some functions (e.g. Enter/Del) are combined is, in the author's opinion, inconvenient. In addition, the lettering is relatively weak, so that the white backlight, which can be adjusted in several steps, should also remain active during the day. The full numpad and the four special keys, including volume control, should be regarded as plus points.
Touchpad
The touchpad is impressive almost all across the board. In addition to its dimensions (approx. 13 x 7.5 cm), its gliding properties are also pleasing. Extremely fast inputs are possible thanks to the smooth surface. Further praise goes to the touchpad for its precision and clean gesture support. However, the click buttons at the bottom are not quite perfect. These could be a little more stable and less rickety
Display
The TUF Gaming A16 offers a matte 16-inch display in 16:10 format. Our review model was powered by a 165 Hz panel with a resolution of 1,920 x 1,200.
|
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 308 cd/m²
Contrast: 1339:1 (Black: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.47 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 1.02
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
70.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
97.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
69.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.228
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 NE160WUM-NX2 (BOE0B33), IPS-Level, 1920x1200, 16" | HP Envy 16 h0112nr Samsung SDC4174, OLED, 3840x2400, 16" | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM TL156VDXP0101, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ BOEhydis NE140QDM-NX1, IPS, 2560x1600, 14" | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 BOE CQ NE160QDM-NY1, IPS, 2560x1600, 16" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 23% | -3% | 21% | 1% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 69.4 | 99.3 43% | 66.4 -4% | 97.6 41% | 69.8 1% |
sRGB Coverage | 97.8 | 100 2% | 97 -1% | 99.9 2% | 98.1 0% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 70.9 | 88 24% | 68.5 -3% | 85.6 21% | 71.9 1% |
Response Times | 85% | 20% | 46% | 7% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 17 ? | 2 ? 88% | 5.6 ? 67% | 8.3 ? 51% | 10 ? 41% |
Response Time Black / White * | 10.1 ? | 1.9 ? 81% | 12.8 ? -27% | 6 ? 41% | 12.8 ? -27% |
PWM Frequency | 240.4 ? | 26191 ? | |||
Screen | -6% | -3% | -20% | 1% | |
Brightness middle | 308 | 328.8 7% | 353.7 15% | 500 62% | 492.4 60% |
Brightness | 293 | 332 13% | 340 16% | 470 60% | 471 61% |
Brightness Distribution | 90 | 97 8% | 89 -1% | 85 -6% | 90 0% |
Black Level * | 0.23 | 0.34 -48% | 0.42 -83% | 0.4 -74% | |
Contrast | 1339 | 1040 -22% | 1190 -11% | 1231 -8% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.47 | 1.53 -4% | 1.74 -18% | 2.45 -67% | 1.9 -29% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.98 | 6.04 -103% | 3.63 -22% | 5.34 -79% | 3.81 -28% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.02 | 0.5 51% | 1.2 -18% | 0.99 3% | |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.2 | 1.3 41% | 2.1 5% | 3.1 -41% | 1.7 23% |
Gamma | 2.228 99% | 2.18 101% | 2.3 96% | 2.213 99% | 2.36 93% |
CCT | 6228 104% | 6362 102% | 6257 104% | 7251 90% | 6497 100% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 34% /
18% | 5% /
1% | 16% /
-2% | 3% /
2% |
* ... smaller is better
If you disregard the poor brightness (only 293 cd/m² on average), the IPS screen shows almost no weaknesses. A black value of 0.23 cd/m² should satisfy most buyers, as should a contrast ratio of more than 1,300:1. In addition, response times (10 ms black-to-white, 17 ms grey-to-grey) are decent, and the good color reproduction does not require calibration.
For the color spaces, our measuring device registered 98% for sRGB, 71% for AdobeRGB and 69% for P3 - usable values for a gaming notebook. The viewing angles conform to the typical IPS standard, so they are quite good, even from steep angles.
For outdoor use, higher brightness levels would be desirable. In addition, our review device struggled with halos at the bottom edge (only visible with dark content).
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
10.1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5.4 ms rise | |
↘ 4.7 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 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 24 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
17 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 8 ms rise | |
↘ 9 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 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 28 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
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
The TUF Gaming A16 is in the mid-range segment in terms of equipment. Passionate gamers who want to play at maximum details for years should look elsewhere for more powerful hardware.
Testing Conditions
Various performance profiles and GPU modes can be selected in the pre-installed Armory Crate, which sometimes appears overloaded and confusing due to the many functions. Unless otherwise stated, all our tests were carried out in Performance mode with the GPU mode set to Standard. Although Turbo mode would tease out a few more percentage points (note the Cinebench loop and the 3DMark scores), this comes at the cost of disproportionately higher noise levels.
Silent Mode | Performance Mode | Turbo Mode | |
CPU PL1 | 75 watts | 105 watts | 120 watts |
CPU PL2 | 90 watts | 114 watts | 144 watts |
Processor
The Ryzen 7 7735HS is an eight-core processor equipped with 16 MB of L3 cache, is manufactured via the 6 nm process and can process up to 16 threads in parallel via SMT. The base clock is 3.2 GHz, with up to 4.75 GHz possible under load. The TDP ranges from 35 to 54 watts, depending on the notebook. Thanks to graphics switching, the TUF A16 can automatically switch between the dGPU and the Radeon 680M integrated in the processor, which is definitely sufficient for less demanding games.
In the long-term test with Cinebench R15, the Ryzen 7 7735HS delivers pleasingly stable performance values without drops, which also applies to most of the competitors. The speed is consistently on par with the Lenovo Legion S7 (R9 6900HX) and HP Envy 16 (Core i7-12700H).
Cinebench R15 Multi Sustained Load
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
Performance Rating | |
Average of class Gaming | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
Average of class Gaming (4986 - 60169, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (12718 - 17161, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
Average of class Gaming (25360 - 252486, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (81722 - 105483, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
Average of class Gaming (1339 - 10389, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (2818 - 3494, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr |
AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
Average of class Gaming (50699 - 200651, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (90101 - 108729, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
Average of class Gaming (4800 - 32988, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (11441 - 13097, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr |
AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average of class Gaming (12321 - 134044, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (44756 - 58232, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Average of class Gaming (19065 - 328679, n=183, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (49927 - 137629, n=13) | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 |
AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
Average of class Gaming (373 - 2409, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (651 - 906, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ |
AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
Average of class Gaming (2540 - 31796, n=183, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (1459 - 9094, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
Average of class Gaming (10805 - 60161, n=184, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (19153 - 30542, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ |
System Performance
In the system tests, the Gaming A16 comes in last place in the comparison field (just behind the Zephyrus G14), but 7,332 points in PCMark 10 is still a good result. Somewhat annoying is the fact that the system, in its delivery state, sometimes freezes or hangs for seconds when opening programs. This is due to the Smart Access Graphic option in the Armoury Crate software, which is responsible for the GPU switch.
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
PCMark 10 / Score | |
Average of class Gaming (5776 - 9852, n=164, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () |
PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Average of class Gaming (9057 - 12334, n=163, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ |
PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
Average of class Gaming (6662 - 14612, n=163, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
Average of class Gaming (6703 - 18475, n=163, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr |
CrossMark / Overall | |
Average of class Gaming (1247 - 2344, n=147, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 |
CrossMark / Productivity | |
Average of class Gaming (1299 - 2204, n=147, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 |
CrossMark / Creativity | |
Average of class Gaming (1275 - 2660, n=147, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 |
CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
Average of class Gaming (1030 - 2330, n=147, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 |
PCMark 10 Score | 7332 points | |
Help |
AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
Average of class Gaming (21842 - 94222, n=183, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (30324 - 52012, n=13) | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ |
AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
Average of class Gaming (23681 - 99713, n=183, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (33938 - 51856, n=13) |
AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
Average of class Gaming (22986 - 108954, n=183, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (33175 - 55284, n=13) |
AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
Average of class Gaming (59.5 - 259, n=183, last 2 years) | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (78.2 - 109.7, n=13) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM |
* ... smaller is better
DPC Latency
Although the latencies are by far the best in the test field, the LatencyMon tool foresees possible problems in real-time processing of audio content or the like, which should only affect a fraction of buyers.
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 |
* ... smaller is better
Storage Devices
Asus provides our review configuration with a M.2-based 1 TB SSD. The NVMe drive offers a solid performance for PCIe standards with almost 4,000 MB/s in sequential read and around 3,000 MB/s in sequential write (AS SSD benchmark). A bonus: One M.2 slot is still free in the case.
* ... smaller is better
Sustained Read Performance: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
Graphics Card
Asus installs a mid-range GPU to match the mid-range CPU. The Radeon RX 7600S offers 1,792 shader units and a game clock of 1,865 MHz. The 8 GB GDDR6 video memory is only 128 bits, which is a bit tight by today's standards.
The RX 7600S performs more than well enough in the benchmark chart. In 3DMarks, the graphics card is roughly on the same level as the old RX 6800S (but with better ray tracing performance). An RTX 3060 with identical TGP is occasionally greatly outperformed.
3DMark Performance Rating - Percent | |
Average of class Gaming | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 (Turbo Mode) | |
Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr -1! |
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
Average of class Gaming (1029 - 72178, n=182, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 (Turbo Mode) | |
Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S (33037 - 35278, n=4) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
HP Envy 16 h0112nr |
3DMark 06 Standard Score | 46893 points | |
3DMark Vantage P Result |