Notebookcheck

Asus TUF Gaming FX705DT (Ryzen 5 3550H, GTX 1650, SSD, FHD) Laptop Review

Sascha Mölck (translated by Greg Williams), 06/03/2019

A co-production from AMD and Nvidia. The hardware spec, comprised of a Ryzen 5 3550H APU and GeForce GTX 1650 GPU, is able to fluidly play all modern and current games on its 17.3-inch, full HD IPS display. The laptop has comparatively low energy consumption and only gets moderately warm. In its favour are also an NVMe SSD, an additional HDD and very good battery life. Not so good is the somewhat miserly connectivity included.

The TUF range from Asus is comprised of comparatively affordable gaming laptops, and we have already reviewed several models from this range. The model on the test bench today, the FX705DT, is already the fourth 17.3-inch device to come through our review labs. The hardware configuration of this unit makes it interesting - Asus has paired a Ryzen APU with a GeForce GPU, and our review will demonstrate whether this pairing works well. As competition we will be comparing it against the Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52, the Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, the MSI GF75 8RD and the Dell G3 17 3779.

As the FX705DT is in terms of build exactly the same as previously reviewed models from the FX705 range, we will not go in-depth into the chassis, general config, display and speakers in this article. For more detail on these areas please refer to our reviews of the FX705GM and FX705DY.

Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T (TUF FX705 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) - 4096 MB, Core: 1395-1560 MHz, Memory: 2000 MHz, GDDR5, 128-bit bus width, Nvidia 430.64, Optimus
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR4-2666, Single channel, two slots (one slot occupied)
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AU Optronics B173HAN04.2, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
AMD CZ FCH
Storage
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G, 256 GB 
, NVMe SSD + Toshiba MQ04ABF100 (1 TB, 5400 rpm), 1100 GB free
Soundcard
Realtek ALC233 @ AMD K17.1 - Audio Processor - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Combo audio jack, TPM 2.0
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 26.6 x 399.8 x 279.4 ( = 1.05 x 15.74 x 11 in)
Battery
64 Wh, 4240 mAh Lithium-Ion, 15.2 V
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Primary Camera: 0.9 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, McAfee LiveSafe (trial version), 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.7 kg ( = 95.24 oz / 5.95 pounds), Power Supply: 442 g ( = 15.59 oz / 0.97 pounds)
Price
1049 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Size Comparison

432 mm / 17 inch 290 mm / 11.4 inch 29 mm / 1.142 inch 2.9 kg6.42 lbs415.4 mm / 16.4 inch 279.2 mm / 11 inch 25 mm / 0.984 inch 3 kg6.53 lbs413 mm / 16.3 inch 305 mm / 12 inch 21.95 mm / 0.864 inch 2.9 kg6.35 lbs399.8 mm / 15.7 inch 279.4 mm / 11 inch 26.6 mm / 1.047 inch 2.7 kg5.95 lbs397 mm / 15.6 inch 260 mm / 10.2 inch 23.1 mm / 0.909 inch 2.2 kg4.85 lbs
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
692 MBit/s ∼100% +222%
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
681 MBit/s ∼98% +217%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Wireless AC 9462
651 (min: 547, max: 681) MBit/s ∼94% +203%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
630 MBit/s ∼91% +193%
Average of class Multimedia
  (44 - 949, n=137)
497 MBit/s ∼72% +131%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Wireless AC 9462
292 (min: 204, max: 344) MBit/s ∼42% +36%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Wireless AC 9462
284 MBit/s ∼41% +32%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
271 (min: 246, max: 281) MBit/s ∼39% +26%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
215 (min: 199, max: 221) MBit/s ∼31%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
692 MBit/s ∼100% +244%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Wireless AC 9462
644 (min: 499, max: 661) MBit/s ∼93% +220%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
640 MBit/s ∼92% +218%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Realtek RTL8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCIe Adapter
579 MBit/s ∼84% +188%
Average of class Multimedia
  (46.1 - 949, n=136)
474 MBit/s ∼68% +136%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
327 (min: 275, max: 394) MBit/s ∼47% +63%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Wireless AC 9462
321 MBit/s ∼46% +60%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Wireless AC 9462
317 (min: 274, max: 362) MBit/s ∼46% +58%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
201 (min: 89, max: 272) MBit/s ∼29%
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690Tooltip
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø214 (199-221)
MSI GF75 8RD-001 Intel Wireless AC 9462; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø291 (204-344)
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072 Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø270 (246-281)
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T Intel Wireless AC 9462; iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø650 (547-681)
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø201 (89-272)
MSI GF75 8RD-001 Intel Wireless AC 9462; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø317 (274-362)
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072 Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø327 (275-394)
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T Intel Wireless AC 9462; iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10; iperf 3.1.3: Ø643 (499-661)

Display - IPS-Equipped

Subpixel
Subpixel

The matte 17.3-inch display of the FX705DT has a native resolution of 1,920x1,080 pixels. Brightness (293.8 cd/m²) and contrast (988:1) are fine. Generally we consider values on or above 300 cd/m² and 1000:1 respectively to be good. Positive: The display shows no signs of PWM flickering.

The display is also of the IPS variety, with good viewing angles - the same as in two of its sibling models previously reviewed by us. The values do vary a little, however this is normal - apparently, identical display panels will differ from one another ever so slightly.

275
cd/m²
266
cd/m²
283
cd/m²
300
cd/m²
316
cd/m²
311
cd/m²
290
cd/m²
294
cd/m²
309
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
AU Optronics B173HAN04.2
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 316 cd/m² Average: 293.8 cd/m² Minimum: 18.6 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 84 %
Center on Battery: 316 cd/m²
Contrast: 988:1 (Black: 0.32 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.39 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 2.14
ΔE Greyscale 3.17 | 0.64-98 Ø6.3
89% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 51% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.39
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
MSI GF75 8RD-001
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Asus TUF FX705GM
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Dell G3 17 3779
IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Response Times
6%
7%
15%
20%
6%
75%
10%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
41 (20, 21)
40 (20, 20)
2%
38 (18, 20)
7%
36.8 (18.8, 18)
10%
36 (18.8, 17.2)
12%
39 (21, 18)
5%
7.4 (3.8, 3.6)
82%
38 (18, 20)
7%
Response Time Black / White *
30 (16, 14)
27 (16, 11)
10%
28 (16, 12)
7%
24 (14, 10)
20%
22 (10.4, 11.6)
27%
28 (16, 12)
7%
10 (4.8, 5.2)
67%
26 (15, 11)
13%
PWM Frequency
122000 (95)
Screen
5%
14%
-29%
-30%
4%
13%
-14%
Brightness middle
316
322
2%
356
13%
328.7
4%
365
16%
299
-5%
234
-26%
323
2%
Brightness
294
303
3%
332
13%
318
8%
341
16%
291
-1%
228
-22%
306
4%
Brightness Distribution
84
84
0%
89
6%
91
8%
89
6%
90
7%
85
1%
89
6%
Black Level *
0.32
0.32
-0%
0.27
16%
0.51
-59%
0.32
-0%
0.28
12%
0.2
37%
0.31
3%
Contrast
988
1006
2%
1319
34%
645
-35%
1141
15%
1068
8%
1170
18%
1042
5%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.39
2.97
12%
2.73
19%
4.91
-45%
6.51
-92%
3.02
11%
2.16
36%
4.96
-46%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
5.56
5.08
9%
4.7
15%
10.15
-83%
12.32
-122%
5.27
5%
3.39
39%
8.25
-48%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
2.14
2.29
-7%
2.14
-0%
4.27
-100%
2.9
-36%
2.76
-29%
2.02
6%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.17
2.26
29%
2.38
25%
3.9
-23%
7.65
-141%
2.18
31%
2
37%
5.65
-78%
Gamma
2.39 92%
2.45 90%
2.48 89%
2.13 103%
2.64 83%
2.48 89%
2.46 89%
2.24 98%
CCT
7098 92%
6892 94%
6643 98%
6911 94%
8066 81%
6392 102%
6394 102%
7441 87%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
51
57
12%
59
16%
55.6
9%
56
10%
57
12%
58
14%
58
14%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
89
87
-2%
90
1%
84.7
-5%
86
-3%
87
-2%
89
0%
90
1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
6% / 6%
11% / 13%
-7% / -22%
-5% / -22%
5% / 5%
44% / 22%
-2% / -10%

* ... smaller is better

CalMAN - Color Checker
CalMAN - Color Checker
CalMAN - Greytones
CalMAN - Greytones
CalMAN - Colour saturation
CalMAN - Colour saturation
CalMAN - Color Checker (calibrated)
CalMAN - Color Checker (calibrated)
CalMAN - Greytones (calibrated)
CalMAN - Greytones (calibrated)
CalMAN - Colour saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN - Colour saturation (calibrated)

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
30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16 ms rise
↘ 14 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 73 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
41 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20 ms rise
↘ 21 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 51 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.8 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: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9418 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Performance - AMD/Nvidia Power

With the TUF Gaming FX705DT, Asus presents a 17.3-inch gaming laptop able to competently and fluidly play all modern games. Our reviewed model is available for around 1,050 Euros (~$1,182), and other configurations are available.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
HWInfo
LatencyMon
 

Test Conditions

The pre-installed Armory Crate Control Center provides options for performance and power consumption. Available modes are 'Quiet', 'Balanced', 'Turbo' and 'Windows'. If the latter mode is enabled, Windows takes over power management. This option was chosen for our benchmarking.

Processor

Asus has equipped the FX705DT with a Ryzen 5 3550H (Picasso) APU from AMD, which has a TDP value of 35 watts. The CPU portion of the APU features four cores running at a base clock of 2.1 GHz, which is able to turbo boost up to 3.7 GHz. The CPU also features simultaneous multi-threading, which allows for two threads per CPU core.

The multi-threaded benchmark Cinebench initially ran for a short period at 3.6 to 3.7 GHz, and then dropped down to 3.2 to 3.3 GHz. The single-threaded tests ran at between 1.7 to 3.7 GHz. This was on mains power - in battery mode, the CPU ran at 2.3 to 2.4 GHz (multi-threaded) and 1.4 to 2.4 GHz (single-threaded).

AMDs 3550H APU is a direct competitor to Intel's Core i5 8300H and Core i5 9300H CPUs. In terms of pure CPU performance however, the APU is not quite able to match Intel. The performance difference is more noticeable in the single-threaded benchmarks compared to multi-threaded. The Intel CPUs here benefit from their 10-watt higher TDP.

Multi-threaded (mains power)
Multi-threaded (mains power)
Single-threaded (mains power)
Single-threaded (mains power)
Multi-threaded (battery power)
Multi-threaded (battery power)
Single-threaded (battery power)
Single-threaded (battery power)

By using a looped run of Cinebench R15's multi-threaded benchmark for at least 30 minutes, we test whether or not the CPU is able to sustain longer periods of time with turbo boost. The results dropped somewhat between the 5th and 6th runs and then stayed at a constant level - CPU turbo boost was in operation.

If 'Turbo' mode is selected in the Armory Create Center, the APU deliveres slightly better results due to the fact that it runs at somewhat increased clock rates. The opposite is true if 'Quiet' mode is activated, but with the positive side effect that noise is significantly reduced.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740750760770780790800810820830840850860870880890900910920930940950960970980990100010101020103010401050106010701080109011001110112011301140115011601170118011901200121012201230Tooltip
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Ryzen 5 3550H: Ø709 (702.86-742.45)
MSI GF75 8RD-001 Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø935 (909.48-1089.06)
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø1193 (1158.58-1229.48)
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6 Intel Core i5-8300H, Intel Core i5-8300H: Ø767 (738.02-807.05)
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072 AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Ryzen 5 3550H: Ø710 (704.34-742)
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø1050 (994.7-1115.98)
Asus TUF FX705GM Intel Core i7-8750H, Intel Core i7-8750H: Ø1022 (992.14-1137)
Dell G3 17 3779 Intel Core i5-8300H, Intel Core i5-8300H: Ø759 (750.51-796.5)
CPU clock rates during the CB15 benchmarking runs
CPU clock rates during the CB15 benchmarking runs
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
4606
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
19002
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
8016
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
742 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
144 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
82.11 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼100% +22%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H
173 Points ∼99% +20%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Intel Core i7-8750H
173 Points ∼99% +20%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
173 Points ∼99% +20%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Core i7-8750H
172 Points ∼98% +19%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H
169 Points ∼97% +17%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
144 Points ∼82%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
142 Points ∼81% -1%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (77 - 145, n=5)
130 Points ∼74% -10%
Average of class Multimedia
  (36 - 201, n=364)
127 Points ∼73% -12%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Intel Core i7-8750H
1220 Points ∼100% +64%
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H
1137 Points ∼93% +53%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
1116 Points ∼91% +50%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Core i7-8750H
1089 Points ∼89% +47%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Core i7-8750H
929.34 (min: 909.48, max: 1089.06) Points ∼76% +25%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H
807 Points ∼66% +9%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H
798 Points ∼65% +8%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
742 Points ∼61% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
742 Points ∼61%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (673 - 757, n=5)
734 Points ∼60% -1%
Average of class Multimedia
  (73 - 1550, n=380)
485 Points ∼40% -35%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
7893 Points ∼100% +71%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H
6445 Points ∼82% +40%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
6236 Points ∼79% +35%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (4575 - 7893, n=3)
5691 Points ∼72% +24%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
4606 Points ∼58%
Average of class Multimedia
  (665 - 8906, n=766)
3583 Points ∼45% -22%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
34168 Points ∼100% +80%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H
24718 Points ∼72% +30%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (19002 - 20097, n=3)
19512 Points ∼57% +3%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
19437 Points ∼57% +2%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
19002 Points ∼56%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1568 - 34776, n=763)
9604 Points ∼28% -49%
Cinebench R20
CPU (Single Core)
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
362 Points ∼100% 0%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (361 - 362, n=2)
362 Points ∼100% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
361 Points ∼100%
Average of class Multimedia
  (84 - 457, n=13)
330 Points ∼91% -9%
CPU (Multi Core)
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
1685 Points ∼100% +2%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (1659 - 1685, n=2)
1672 Points ∼99% +1%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
1659 Points ∼98%
Average of class Multimedia
  (160 - 3293, n=13)
1418 Points ∼84% -15%
Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
21635 Points ∼100% +61%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
14437 Points ∼67% +7%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (13474 - 14437, n=2)
13956 Points ∼65% +4%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
13474 Points ∼62%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2385 - 20831, n=109)
7591 Points ∼35% -44%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
3734 Points ∼100% +12%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
3353 Points ∼90% 0%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (3348 - 3353, n=2)
3351 Points ∼90% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
3348 Points ∼90%
Average of class Multimedia
  (445 - 4009, n=109)
2789 Points ∼75% -17%
Geekbench 4.4
64 Bit Multi-Core Score
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
18068 Points ∼100% +52%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
11926 Points ∼66%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1707 - 19416, n=33)
11900 Points ∼66% 0%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (11183 - 11926, n=3)
11484 Points ∼64% -4%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
11344 Points ∼63% -5%
64 Bit Single-Core Score
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H
4692 Points ∼100% +23%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1024 - 5331, n=33)
4027 Points ∼86% +6%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
3807 Points ∼81%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (3623 - 3807, n=3)
3710 Points ∼79% -3%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
3699 Points ∼79% -3%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Average of class Multimedia
  (598 - 23050, n=178)
1892 ms * ∼100% -58%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
1229.2 ms * ∼65% -2%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (1201 - 1229, n=3)
1216 ms * ∼64% -1%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
1201 ms * ∼63%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H (Edge 42.17134.1.0)
1157.1 ms * ∼61% +4%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Core i7-8750H
1129.4 ms * ∼60% +6%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H (Edge 42.17134.1.0)
33833 Points ∼100% +19%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
28917 Points ∼85% +2%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (28324 - 28917, n=3)
28649 Points ∼85% +1%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
28324 Points ∼84%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1895 - 52403, n=174)
25768 Points ∼76% -9%
Speedometer 2.0 - Result
Average of class Multimedia
  (42.1 - 117, n=5)
86.6 runs/min ∼100% +106%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
43.5 runs/min ∼50% +3%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (42.1 - 43.5, n=2)
42.8 runs/min ∼49% +2%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
42.1 runs/min ∼49%
JetStream 1.1 - Total Score
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H (Edge 44)
250.65 Points ∼100% +31%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H (Edge 42.17134.1.0)
241.25 Points ∼96% +26%
Average of class Multimedia
  (36.1 - 352, n=143)
214 Points ∼85% +12%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
  (191 - 210, n=2)
200 Points ∼80% +5%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Edge 44)
190.86 Points ∼76%

* ... smaller is better

System Performance

The FX705DT offers plenty of performance for all daily usage scenarios and the dedicated GPU enables gaming potential. The system runs smoothly and without issue, and no problems were noted by us. This was borne out by the good results in PC Mark - checking the comparison chart, we see that most of the competition do beat out the Asus laptop, which can be attributed to their significantly more powerful Intel CPUs.

Increasing overall performance is possible however by installing a second RAM module. This would enable dual-channel RAM mode. Asus has installed only one module and thus the laptop runs in single-channel mode.

PCMark 7 Score
6405 points
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4593 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
3628 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4898 points
Help
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
6071 Points ∼100% +48%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
5290 Points ∼87% +29%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
5096 Points ∼84% +24%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), 3550H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
4451 Points ∼73% +8%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
4377 Points ∼72% +6%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4110 Points ∼68%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
 
4110 Points ∼68% 0%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1001 - 7161, n=96)
3717 Points ∼61% -10%
Productivity
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
7201 Points ∼100% +9%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
7057 Points ∼98% +7%
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
7025 Points ∼98% +6%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
6724 Points ∼93% +2%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
6619 Points ∼92%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
 
6619 Points ∼92% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), 3550H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
6209 Points ∼86% -6%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1407 - 8020, n=97)
6139 Points ∼85% -7%
Essentials
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
9110 Points ∼100% +12%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
8989 Points ∼99% +10%
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
8791 Points ∼96% +8%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
8149 Points ∼89%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
 
8149 Points ∼89% 0%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
8057 Points ∼88% -1%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), 3550H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
7471 Points ∼82% -8%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2891 - 9829, n=97)
7463 Points ∼82% -8%
Score
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
5169 Points ∼100% +19%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
4982 Points ∼96% +15%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
4975 Points ∼96% +15%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
4437 Points ∼86% +2%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4339 Points ∼84%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
 
4339 Points ∼84% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), 3550H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
4237 Points ∼82% -2%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1144 - 5469, n=97)
3935 Points ∼76% -9%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
5719 Points ∼100% +17%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
5461 Points ∼95% +11%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H, Hynix HFS128G39TND
5347 Points ∼93% +9%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
5340 Points ∼93% +9%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
5317 Points ∼93% +9%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4898 Points ∼86%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
 
4898 Points ∼86% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), 3550H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
4877 Points ∼85% 0%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2213 - 5651, n=279)
4295 Points ∼75% -12%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus TUF FX705GM
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4660 Points ∼100% +1%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4593 Points ∼99%
Average AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
 
4593 Points ∼99% 0%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8300H, Hynix HFS128G39TND
4253 Points ∼91% -7%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
4230 Points ∼91% -8%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8750H, Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
4148 Points ∼89% -10%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), 3550H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
4041 Points ∼87% -12%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
3969 Points ∼85% -14%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1371 - 4693, n=300)
3383 Points ∼73% -26%

Storage

For its system drive the laptop features an NVMe SSD from Western Digital in M.2 2280 format and with 256 GB capacity. With default config and installation, approximately 208 GB is available as the rest is used by the OS installation and recovery partition. Due to its PCI Express connection, the NVMe SSD achieves significantly higher transfer rates than SATA 3 models (which are limited to 600 MB/s). 

In terms of overall capacity, this 17.3-incher has you covered - also to be found in the laptop next to the SSD is a 2.5-inch HDD (1TB, 5400 RPM).

SSD included
SSD included
Storage requirements are taken care of with a 2.5 inch HDD
Storage requirements are taken care of with a 2.5 inch HDD
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
Sequential Read: 1408 MB/s
Sequential Write: 1297 MB/s
512K Read: 985.7 MB/s
512K Write: 593 MB/s
4K Read: 37.74 MB/s
4K Write: 130.3 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 316.8 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 233.2 MB/s
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Toshiba KBG30ZMT128G
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Hynix HFS128G39TND
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
SK hynix BC501 HFM128GDJTNG-831
Asus TUF FX705GM
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
Dell G3 17 3779
SK hynix SC311 SATA
Average WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
-23%
-56%
-63%
-10%
-36%
-4%
-60%
-6%
Write 4K
145
72.11
-50%
71.36
-51%
61.88
-57%
107.7
-26%
90.26
-38%
104.2
-28%
62.77
-57%
114 (81.7 - 150, n=10)
-21%
Read 4K
45.28
28.12
-38%
29.98
-34%
22.78
-50%
36.5
-19%
37.03
-18%
41.46
-8%
24.63
-46%
41.8 (34.4 - 46.1, n=10)
-8%
Write Seq
1301
746.4
-43%
129.6
-90%
136.1
-90%
988.2
-24%
320.3
-75%
1295
0%
203.9
-84%
1140 (929 - 1302, n=10)
-12%
Read Seq
1362
833.8
-39%
842.6
-38%
490.1
-64%
1115
-18%
1012
-26%
1325
-3%
549.8
-60%
1241 (1085 - 1388, n=10)
-9%
Write 4K Q32T1
249.1
313.7
26%
88.93
-64%
136.2
-45%
334.9
34%
196.8
-21%
282.8
14%
160.1
-36%
322 (206 - 461, n=10)
29%
Read 4K Q32T1
342.1
348.7
2%
196.4
-43%
208.4
-39%
360.8
5%
271.5
-21%
321.3
-6%
184.3
-46%
307 (231 - 410, n=10)
-10%
Write Seq Q32T1
1301
854
-34%
130.5
-90%
136
-90%
1008
-23%
268.8
-79%
1301
0%
235
-82%
1102 (518 - 1302, n=10)
-15%
Read Seq Q32T1
1732
1587
-8%
1037
-40%
553.1
-68%
1609
-7%
1595
-8%
1704
-2%
553.8
-68%
1727 (1688 - 1751, n=10)
0%

GPU

The TUF Gaming FX705DT is equipped with a GeForce GTX 1650 GPU From NVidia. This GPU belongs to the upper-midrange and is based on the Turing architecture. Compared to other GPUs from the Turing lineup such as the RTX 2000 series, the GTX 1650 does not feature any raytracing support or Tensor cores.

The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 and has a base clock rate of 1,395 MHz. This is able to boost up to 1,560 MHz. This value is however able to be exceeded if power and temperature conditions allow and do not exceed set parameters. We registered a maximum of 1,980 MHz, although this was only achieved for a short time. Our Witcher 3 benchmarking resulted in the GPU running at a constant 1,700 MHz. The GTX 1650 is paired with 4 GB of GDDR 5 RAM.

The 3D Mark benchmarks showed performance in line with expectations for this GPU. As the successor to the GTX 1050, it exceeds that model's performance significantly. The more powerful GTX 1050 Ti is able in less demanding benchmarks such as Sky Diver and Cloud Gate, to keep up with the GTX 1650, but in more intensive benchmarks such as Fire Strike and Time Spy, it falls behind. In terms of where the GTX 1650 falls in the charts, it can be considered to be in-between the GTX 1050 Ti and GeForce GTX 1060.

3D Mark 11 (mains power)
3D Mark 11 (mains power)
3D Mark 11 (battery power)
3D Mark 11 (battery power)
3DMark 05 Standard
24001 points
3DMark 06 Standard
23061 points
3DMark Vantage P Result
27719 points
3DMark 11 Performance
10635 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
58789 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
16079 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
7942 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
3437 points
Help
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Asus GL704GM-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
15436 Points ∼100% +16%
Lenovo Legion Y530-15ICH
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
14569 Points ∼94% +9%
Asus TUF FX705GM
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
13722 Points ∼89% +3%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Dual-Channel)
13417 Points ∼87% +1%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
13337 Points ∼86%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (12388 - 13575, n=14)
13203 Points ∼86% -1%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-9300H
13125 Points ∼85% -2%
Acer Nitro 5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-9300H
13004 Points ∼84% -2%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
9466 Points ∼61% -29%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i5-8300H
9147 Points ∼59% -31%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, Intel Core i7-8750H
8741 Points ∼57% -34%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
8220 Points ∼53% -38%
Dell G3 17 3779
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-8300H
7761 Points ∼50% -42%
Average of class Multimedia
  (352 - 20837, n=634)
2980 Points ∼19% -78%
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (3353 - 3700, n=13)
3508 Points ∼100% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
3506 Points ∼100%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Dual-Channel)
3496 Points ∼100% 0%
Acer Nitro 5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-9300H
3433 Points ∼98% -2%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
2536 Points ∼72% -28%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
1789 Points ∼51% -49%
Average of class Multimedia
  (142 - 4734, n=60)
1627 Points ∼46% -54%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Asus GL704GM-DH74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
12281 Points ∼100% +32%
Lenovo Legion Y530-15ICH
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
11640 Points ∼95% +26%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Dual-Channel)
9332 Points ∼76% +1%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-9300H
9292 Points ∼76% 0%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
9274 Points ∼76%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (8532 - 9536, n=14)
9265 Points ∼75% 0%
Acer Nitro 5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-9300H
9235 Points ∼75% 0%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
7860 Points ∼64% -15%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
7791 Points ∼63% -16%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i5-8300H
7610 Points ∼62% -18%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, Intel Core i7-8750H
7324 Points ∼60% -21%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
6331 Points ∼52% -32%
Dell G3 17 3779
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-8300H
6228 Points ∼51% -33%
Average of class Multimedia
  (337 - 16100, n=408)
2874 Points ∼23% -69%
1280x720 Sky Diver Graphics
Acer Nitro 5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-9300H
31779 Points ∼100% +21%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (26305 - 33028, n=7)
30937 Points ∼97% +18%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H (Dual-Channel)
28187 Points ∼89% +7%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
26305 Points ∼83%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Intel Core i7-8750H
25557 Points ∼80% -3%
Dell G3 17 3779
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), Intel Core i5-8300H
20412 Points ∼64% -22%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop), AMD Ryzen 5 3550H
19091 Points ∼60% -27%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1662 - 46164, n=115)
9902 Points ∼31% -62%

Gaming Performance

The hardware configuration of the Asus TUF is able to play all games in our database fluidly - generally full HD and middle-to-high quality settings can be selected, and in some cases this can also be raised a notch. For resolutions above full HD (for which an external monitor is required) the GPU is not suitable. Only games with very low hardware requirements are able to be played at these resolutions.

Through activation of dual-channel memory mode (by installing another RAM module) further performance gains are possible. An overall estimation of the possible performance gain cannot be made however, as the increase differs from game to game, which resolution is used and the quality settings. The comparison chart shows how much performance gain was realised in the games that we tested. For frequent gamers, investing in a second memory module definitely makes sense.

Our database indicates that the FX705DT produces significantly lower frame rates than the Acer Nitro 5 that is equipped with the same GPU. There are two reasons for this - firstly, the Nitro has two memory modules and runs in dual-channel mode and secondly, it has a stronger CPU. By activating dual-channel mode the gap between the two models narrows noticeably. The higher performance of the CPU in the Nitro 5 is most noticeable at lower resolutions and quality settings.

low med. high ultra
StarCraft 2 (2010) 267.9125123.7102.2fps
Diablo III (2012) 139.5123.7122.9103.3fps
Counter-Strike: GO (2012) 200.8182.6162.1130fps
BioShock Infinite (2013) 184.216014977fps
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014) 136123.184.269.3fps
GTA V (2015) 99.193.667.738.2fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 134.997.959.133.3fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 90866845fps
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 75.869.163.358.5fps
World of Warships (2015) 124.7105.984.684.2fps
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) 46.440.636.5fps
Civilization VI (2016) 111.48359.453.7fps
Team Fortress 2 (2017) 92857775fps
Destiny 2 (2017) 85.475.172.762.4fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 6747.733.6fps
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 56.950.544.5fps
World of Tanks enCore (2018) 256.5131.669.5fps
Far Cry 5 (2018) 64484944fps
Forza Horizon 4 (2018) 84646548fps
Assassin´s Creed Odyssey (2018) 45383522fps
Darksiders III (2018) 96.864.857.452.3fps
Far Cry New Dawn (2019) 59474440fps
Metro Exodus (2019) 67.740.530.424.9fps
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019) 145.781.468.942.1fps
The Division 2 (2019) 81544635fps
Anno 1800 (2019) 49.245.23821.7fps
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
43 (min: 39, max: 46) fps ∼100% +29%
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
36.5 fps ∼85% +10%
Acer Nitro 5
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
35.5 (min: 28) fps ∼83% +7%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
35.4 (min: 28) fps ∼82% +6%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (30.4 - 38.1, n=15)
35 fps ∼81% +5%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
34.2 fps ∼80% +3%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
33.3 fps ∼77%
Acer Predator Helios 300 PH317-52-51M6
Intel Core i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
26 fps ∼60% -22%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
26 fps ∼60% -22%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
25.8 fps ∼60% -23%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop)
21.7 fps ∼50% -35%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop)
21.6 (min: 13, max: 26) fps ∼50% -35%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2.9 - 80.8, n=97)
19.4 fps ∼45% -42%
BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (68.5 - 90.8, n=9)
81.6 fps ∼100% +6%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
77.8 fps ∼95% +1%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
77 fps ∼94%
Lenovo Legion Y730-17ICH, i7-8750H
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
74.5 fps ∼91% -3%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
72.2 fps ∼88% -6%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop)
64.3 fps ∼79% -16%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop)
53 fps ∼65% -31%
Average of class Multimedia
  (3.62 - 149, n=220)
28.5 fps ∼35% -63%
Far Cry 5 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
53 fps ∼100% +20%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (44 - 53, n=3)
47.3 fps ∼89% +8%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
44 fps ∼83%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
42 fps ∼79% -5%
Dell G3 17 3779
Intel Core i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop)
33 (min: 29, max: 38) fps ∼62% -25%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop)
33 fps ∼62% -25%
Average of class Multimedia
  (6 - 74, n=21)
28.8 fps ∼54% -35%
Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (58.5 - 89.9, n=6)
76.7 fps ∼100% +31%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
68.9 fps ∼90% +18%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop)
60.7 fps ∼79% +4%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
58.5 fps ∼76%
Average of class Multimedia
  (13.9 - 117, n=33)
54 fps ∼70% -8%
Anno 1800 - 1920x1080 Medium Graphics Quality (DX11)
Acer Nitro 5
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
69.8 (min: 60) fps ∼100% +54%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
60.8 fps ∼87% +35%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (45.2 - 69.8, n=3)
58.6 fps ∼84% +30%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
45.2 fps ∼65%
Average of class Multimedia
  (8.1 - 60.8, n=7)
34.4 fps ∼49% -24%
Assassin´s Creed Odyssey - 1920x1080 High Preset
Acer Nitro 5
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
53 (min: 28) fps ∼100% +51%
Asus TUF FX705GM
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
52 fps ∼98% +49%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
47 fps ∼89% +34%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (35 - 53, n=3)
45 fps ∼85% +29%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
40 fps ∼75% +14%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
35 fps ∼66%
Average of class Multimedia
  (8 - 52, n=13)
27.7 fps ∼52% -21%
Far Cry New Dawn - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset
Acer Nitro 5
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
56 (min: 44) fps ∼100% +40%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
53 (min: 37) fps ∼95% +33%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (40 - 56, n=6)
49.8 fps ∼89% +25%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) (Dual-Channel)
48 fps ∼86% +20%
MSI GF75 8RD-001
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
43 (min: 33, max: 53) fps ∼77% +8%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
40 fps ∼71%
Asus TUF FX705DY-AU072
AMD Ryzen 5 3550H, AMD Radeon RX 560X (Laptop)
33 fps ∼59% -17%
Average of class Multimedia
  (12 - 48, n=7)
32.9 fps ∼59% -18%

In order to test whether or not the laptop is capable of keeping frame rates in games at a constant level, we run the game "The Witcher 3" for around 60 minutes in full HD and at maximum quality settings. During the entire test, the player character is not moved. We did not notice any drop in performance over this time.

051015202530354045