Notebookcheck

Double Trouble: HP Omen X 2S 15 Laptop Review

Allen Ngo 👁, 09/13/2019

The HP ScreenPad. Like Asus, HP is convinced that two screens is better than one. While the second screen on the Omen X 2S 15 is definitely crisper than what the Asus VivoBook S15 has to offer, be prepared for a lot of glare and potential brightness issues.

The Apple Touch Bar popularized the concept and potential of having a second screen. Asus expanded upon this idea last year with the ZenBook Pro UX580 by turning the traditional clickpad into a fully realized touchscreen. Called ScreenPad, it made multi-tasking easier even though it also introduced some unique drawbacks for users to overcome.

The Omen X 2S 15 is HP's own take on the secondary screen. Unlike the aforementioned matte Asus ScreenPad, the glossy secondary screen on the HP is positioned closer to the primary screen for improved ergonomics. Meanwhile, the keyboard has been pushed to the front of the laptop a la the Zephyrus GX501 or GX531. HP's approach solves some issues inherent to the ScreenPad while introducing its own set of drawbacks that we will explain in more detail below.

Unlike last year's mid-range Omen 15, the Omen X 2S 15 is an enthusiast product with higher-end specifications. Users can configure with either GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q or RTX 2080 Max-Q graphics, Core i7-9750H or Core i9-9880H CPU, FHD 144/240 Hz or 4K UHD 60 Hz display, up to 2 TB of PCIe storage, and up to 32 GB of DDR4-2666 RAM for a starting price of $1850 USD. The second display remains fixed at 1080p across all SKUs.

Direct competitors to the Omen X2S 15 include other thin 15.6-inch gaming laptops like the high-end Razer Blade 15, Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICH, Gigabyte Aorus 15, MSI GS65, Asus Zephyrus S GX531, and the Dell Alienware m15 R2.

More HP reviews:

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl (Omen X 2S 15 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q - 8192 MB, Core: 885 MHz, Memory: 1500 MHz, GDDR6, 431.86
Memory
24576 MB 
, 16 GB DDR4-3200, 8 GB DDR4-2666, 19-19-19-43 (2x SODIMM)
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, AU Optronics AUO82ED, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00, 1024 GB 
Soundcard
Nvidia TU106 - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
4 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 20Gbps, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo
Networking
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000/2500/5000MBit/s), Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 5
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 19.8 x 362.2 x 261.6 ( = 0.78 x 14.26 x 10.3 in)
Battery
72 Wh Lithium-Polymer, 6-cell
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: FHD
Primary Camera: 2.1 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: Bang & Olufsen Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, Omen Command Center, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.38 kg ( = 83.95 oz / 5.25 pounds), Power Supply: 750 g ( = 26.46 oz / 1.65 pounds)
Price
1900 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The chassis is comprised mostly of matte aluminum for the base and outer lid with some visual similarities to the larger Omen X 17. The section above the keyboard, however, is glossy glass that extends from one side of the keyboard to the other. It's both a stylistic and practical choice because it visually distinguishes the Omen X 2S from most other laptops while protecting the secondary touchscreen.

Looks aside, base rigidity is excellent as it exhibits just slight creaking and flexing when pushing down on the keyboard center. Its lid, however, is much more susceptible to flexing and twisting to be nearly as bad as on the Lenovo Legion Y740-15. Systems like the Razer Blade 15 or even HP's own Spectre x360 15 series have proven that it's possible to have a laptop with both narrow bezels and rigid displays.

Build quality is excellent from top to bottom with no unintended gaps or defects between materials on our unit.

The new Omen design has nearly the same footprint as last year's model but at a significantly thinner profile (19.8 mm vs 25 mm). It's ever-so-slightly heavier than many other narrow bezel 15.6-inch laptops by about 100 g to 200 g including the Razer Blade 15, Lenovo Legion Y740, Alienware m15 R2, and even the last generation Omen 15.

Keyboard and touchpad are pushed up front not unlike on the Asus Zephyrus or Samsung Odyssey
Keyboard and touchpad are pushed up front not unlike on the Asus Zephyrus or Samsung Odyssey
Lid opened to maximum angle (~150 degrees)
Lid opened to maximum angle (~150 degrees)
Glossy strip extending from the left edge to the right edge. Expect unsightly fingerprints to accumulate very quickly
Glossy strip extending from the left edge to the right edge. Expect unsightly fingerprints to accumulate very quickly
Dual hinges are satisfactory with uniform rigidity on all angles and minimal teetering
Dual hinges are satisfactory with uniform rigidity on all angles and minimal teetering
Matte base and accented outer lid have a smooth texture and high quality appearance
Matte base and accented outer lid have a smooth texture and high quality appearance
A much stronger visual design than last year's budget mid-range Omen 15 with some elements borrored from the Omen X 17
A much stronger visual design than last year's budget mid-range Omen 15 with some elements borrored from the Omen X 17
390 mm / 15.4 inch 266 mm / 10.5 inch 40 mm / 1.575 inch 2.9 kg6.44 lbs362 mm / 14.3 inch 265 mm / 10.4 inch 25 mm / 0.984 inch 2.3 kg4.97 lbs360 mm / 14.2 inch 263 mm / 10.4 inch 25 mm / 0.984 inch 2.3 kg5.11 lbs362.2 mm / 14.3 inch 261.6 mm / 10.3 inch 19.8 mm / 0.78 inch 2.4 kg5.25 lbs360.5 mm / 14.2 inch 276 mm / 10.9 inch 18.3 mm / 0.72 inch 2.2 kg4.76 lbs355 mm / 14 inch 235 mm / 9.25 inch 17.8 mm / 0.701 inch 2.2 kg4.87 lbs

Connectivity

Port options and positioning have changed dramatically from last year's Omen 15. The mini-DisplayPort, Kensington Lock, and SD card reader have all been dropped in return for Thunderbolt 3 compatibility. All ports are now easier to reach as the rear ports have been moved to the sides instead.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: USB Type-C +Thunderbolt 3, USB 3.1 Type-A
Right: USB Type-C +Thunderbolt 3, USB 3.1 Type-A
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, 2x USB 3.1 Type-A, Gigabit RJ-45, 3.5 mm combo audio
Left: AC adapter, HDMI 2.0, 2x USB 3.1 Type-A, Gigabit RJ-45, 3.5 mm combo audio

Communication

WLAN is provided by an Intel 9560 module with integrated Bluetooth 5. There are no Wi-Fi 6 or Killer options and we experienced no connectivity issues during our time with the test unit.

Performance can be faster than what we've recorded below at up to 1.73 Gbps since our server is limited by a 1 Gbps line.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
688 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
688 MBit/s ∼100%
HP Omen 15-dc1303ng
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi
666 (min: 597, max: 686) MBit/s ∼97% -3%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
646 MBit/s ∼94% -6%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
718 MBit/s ∼100% +10%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
680 MBit/s ∼95% +4%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
654 MBit/s ∼91%
HP Omen 15-dc1303ng
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S CNVi: WiFi
601 (min: 562, max: 639) MBit/s ∼84% -8%

Maintenance

The bottom panel is secured by six T6 Torx screws. Unfortunately, the edges and corners are both sharp and tightly latched to discourage end-user tampering which is a shame because there are two SODIMM slots and two M.2 2280 PCIe x4 slots. LaptopMedia has a quick breakdown on the Omen X 2S 15 here.

Accessories and Warranty

The most notable accessory in the retail packaging is the soft Omen-branded wrist rest to make typing more comfortable. Typing without the wrist rest can be uncomfortable since there are no palm rests on the Omen 2S 15.

The standard one-year limited warranty applies with up to three years of accidental damage protection as optional.

Input Devices

Keyboard

We had low expectations for the keyboard given the poor impressions of the Zephyrus GX501 keyboard. But to our surprise, the keyboard here on the Omen actually feels like a normal keyboard in terms of tactility. Travel and feedback do not appear to be compromised by the unusual positioning to feel closer to a regular gaming laptop. Even so, we would have preferred firmer key feedback like on the Spectre x360 15 especially for the Enter key which feels a bit on the soft side.

One of the worst drawbacks of a front keyboard is the lack of any palm rests when typing. Thus, your palms will be at a lower height than the keyboard base and you would have to compensate by arcing your fingers more when typing. It's recommended to use the included wrist rest for long sessions.

Touchpad

The small Precision-enabled trackpad (~7 x 6.8 cm) offers smooth gliding when moving at medium to fast speeds and some sticking when moving at slower speeds. While reliable and accurate fur cursor movements, the cramped surface area makes it cumbersome to use for long periods especially since there are two screens to work with.

Meanwhile, the dedicated mouse keys have moderate travel, very quiet clatter, and soft feedback when pressed. We still prefer it over integrated clickpad keys as multi-touch actions like dragging and dropping or highlighting are easier.

Per-key RGB lighting with every symbol lit. Special keys above the trackpad will toggle the second screen and control its brightness
Per-key RGB lighting with every symbol lit. Special keys above the trackpad will toggle the second screen and control its brightness
You're going to want an external mouse as the trackpad is way too small for two 1080p displays
You're going to want an external mouse as the trackpad is way too small for two 1080p displays
Key travel feels closer to an actual standard Ultrabook rather than on the Zephyrus GX501. Clatter and feedback, however, are still softer than we would like
Key travel feels closer to an actual standard Ultrabook rather than on the Zephyrus GX501. Clatter and feedback, however, are still softer than we would like
Arrow keys are cramped and uncomfortable to use for games or spreadsheets
Arrow keys are cramped and uncomfortable to use for games or spreadsheets

Display

While the main display is sourced from AU Optronics, HWiNFO is unable to pull the exact panel name. The video controller, however, is AUO82ED which is very common on other 15.6-inch gaming laptops like the Asus ROG Strix GL504 Scar II. Coincidentally, both these HP and Asus systems share similar characteristics like the fast 144 Hz refresh rate, fast black-white response times, and wide reproducible color spaces.

There are a couple of drawbacks to the display even though the underlying AUO panel is of high quality. The first is graininess as the matte screen is slightly grainier than a glossy alternative. It's a very minor disadvantage, but a disadvantage nonetheless especially when compared to the crisp and glossy second screen. The second drawback relates to the poor calibration of the panel out of the box. Temperature appears too cool and both grayscale and colors suffer as a result. This is thankfully addressable with a proper calibration as shown below.

Our test unit exhibits light-moderate uneven backlight bleeding that only becomes noticeable when viewing videos with black borders.

Top bezel is thicker than expected. There are no glossy or touch options for the main display
Top bezel is thicker than expected. There are no glossy or touch options for the main display
Narrow side bezels have become standard on the latest gaming laptops
Narrow side bezels have become standard on the latest gaming laptops
Subpixels appear slightly grainy
Subpixels appear slightly grainy
Light-moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom edge
Light-moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom edge
283.6
cd/m²
315.5
cd/m²
301
cd/m²
310.8
cd/m²
324.8
cd/m²
327.3
cd/m²
316.7
cd/m²
337
cd/m²
328.4
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
AU Optronics AUO82ED
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 337 cd/m² Average: 316.1 cd/m² Minimum: 18.41 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 84 %
Center on Battery: 324.8 cd/m²
Contrast: 1249:1 (Black: 0.26 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.96 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 3.23
ΔE Greyscale 5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
91.8% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 59.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.21
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
AU Optronics AUO82ED, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
LGD05CE, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Sharp LQ156M1JW03 (SHP14C5), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
Sharp LQ156M1, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
N156HHE-GA1, TN, 15.6, 1920x1080
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
LP156WFG-SPB2, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-169%
10%
6%
46%
-23%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
15.2 (7.6, 7.6)
40 (21.2, 18.8)
-163%
12.8 (6.8, 6)
16%
16.4 (7.6, 6.8)
-8%
8.4 (4.4, 4)
45%
18.8 (11.6, 7.2)
-24%
Response Time Black / White *
10.8 (6, 4.8)
29.6 (17.2, 12.4)
-174%
10.4 (6, 4.4)
4%
8.8 (4.4, 4.4)
19%
5.8 (4.4, 1.4)
46%
13.2 (8, 5.2)
-22%
PWM Frequency
23810 (10)
23810 (24)
25510 (34)
Screen
-23%
19%
-11%
10%
2%
Brightness middle
324.8
251
-23%
293
-10%
324.2
0%
307.1
-5%
320.4
-1%
Brightness
316
232
-27%
270
-15%
304
-4%
276
-13%
298
-6%
Brightness Distribution
84
76
-10%
87
4%
90
7%
80
-5%
85
1%
Black Level *
0.26
0.17
35%
0.29
-12%
0.38
-46%
0.37
-42%
0.42
-62%
Contrast
1249
1476
18%
1010
-19%
853
-32%
830
-34%
763
-39%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.96
6.2
-25%
1.69
66%
5.01
-1%
2.53
49%
3.21
35%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.95
18.6
-108%
3.37
62%
12.7
-42%
4.66
48%
5.54
38%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
3.23
4.8
-49%
1.24
62%
1.64
49%
2.82
13%
2.36
27%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5
4.2
16%
2.3
54%
7.9
-58%
1.7
66%
3.6
28%
Gamma
2.21 100%
2.32 95%
2.3 96%
2.35 94%
2.194 100%
2.27 97%
CCT
7742 84%
7454 87%
6758 96%
8455 77%
6893 94%
6503 100%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
59.8
36.5
-39%
63
5%
60.8
2%
76
27%
59
-1%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
91.8
57.4
-37%
98.5
7%
95.5
4%
100
9%
92
0%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-96% / -45%
15% / 17%
-3% / -8%
28% / 16%
-11% / -2%

* ... smaller is better

Color space covers approximately 92 percent and 60 percent of the sRGB and AdobeRGB standards, respectively, which is common amongst high refresh rate panels. Users who want even wider color coverage would have to opt for laptops with Sharp IGZO or 4K UHD panels that tend to offer both slower response times and refresh rates.

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

Further measurements with an X-Rite colorimeter confirm our suspicions above as color temperature is far too cool at 7742. Grayscale and color balance are therefore off and not as accurate as they could be. Calibration directly addresses the shortcomings for a significantly more accurate display as shown by our results CalMAN results below. Final grayscale and color average deltaE values sit at just 2 and 2.05, respectively. We recommend a calibration if possible to get the most out of the display or users can simply apply our calibrated ICM profile above instead.

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
10.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 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. » 10 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
15.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.6 ms rise
↘ 7.6 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. » 10 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.5 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 9276 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is not any better or worse than most other gaming laptops since our backlight is average for the category at roughly 300 nits maximum. If you intend on using the laptop outdoors frequently, then an Ultrabook or Razer Blade 15 OLED would suit you better. Viewing angles remain wide with shifts in colors and contrast occurring only from unrealistically wide angles.

Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Wide IPS viewing angles
Wide IPS viewing angles

Secondary Touchscreen

What makes the Omen X 2S 15 unique is its sharp glossy second screen. This screen is of the same native 1080p resolution as the main screen for a more natural relationship between the two displays. The second screen has its obvious benefits when multi-tasking and its closer positioning to the main screen makes it less tiring to the eyes when compared to the ScreenPad of the Asus VivoBook S15.

Unfortunately, the advantages end here because there are some major setbacks. Its first drawback relates to glare and brightness because you will always be looking at the screen from an angle. On any IPS display, apparent brightness will drop if you're not looking directly at the screen and this will always be the case on the Omen X 2S. The second drawback is its very poor calibration. Both temperature and RGB balance are way off and so grayscale is horrendous with its average DeltaE value of 14.3. Calibration addresses these issues, but to be so poorly calibrated in the first place is absurd for a ~$2000 laptop. Thirdly, expect to adjust the scaling of the text for more comfortable reading. And fourthly, the color space, response times, contrast, and refresh rate of the second screen are all different from the main screen instead of being 1:1.

The last drawback has more to do with Windows than the laptop itself. On a gaming laptop, the idea of playing a game on the main screen while browsing the web on the second touchscreen for guides, videos, items, and chatrooms sounds incredibly useful. As soon as you touch the second screen, however, the main game will minimize, pause or freeze because your window will have shifted focus. The experience is simply not as seamless as gamers would like it to be.

Maximum Brightness Contrast Ratio Minimum Brightness PWM Black-White Response Time Gray-Gray Response Time sRGB Coverage AdobeRGB Coverage 
 476.6 nits 733:1 44.4 nits Yes, 108.7 KHz up to 99 percent brightness 15.2 ms21.2 ms  100 percent74.4 percent


Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade. Expect glare at all times
Outdoors under shade. Expect glare at all times
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Wide IPS viewing angles
Wide IPS viewing angles
Black-white response times
Black-white response times
Gray-gray response times
Gray-gray response times
PWM detected at all brightness levels up to 99 percent
PWM detected at all brightness levels up to 99 percent
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
Second screen on at maximum brightness
Second screen on at maximum brightness
Second screen disabled
Second screen disabled
RGB pixels are crisper than the matte main display
RGB pixels are crisper than the matte main display
Moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the left and right edges
Moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the left and right edges

Performance

The lack of any Core i5 options or GPUs below the GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q positions the Omen X 2S 15 as an enthusiast offering. Nvidia G-Sync comes standard in lieu of Optimus to push the gaming aspect of the system even further.

LatencyMon shows DPC latency issues even when the wireless is disabled.

 
Omen Command Center settings
Omen Command Center settings

Processor

Multi-thread performance is about 10 percent slower than the average Core i7-9750H in our database taken from 40 other laptops to suggest that maximum Turbo Boost potential is very short-lived. When running CineBench R15 Multi-Thread in a loop, performance drops by 10 percent after just the first loop as shown by our graph below. Other gaming laptops with the exact same i7-9750H CPU like the Razer Blade 15 or Alienware m15 R2 are each able to sustain slightly faster clock rates for slightly faster performance.

Users upgrading from quad-core SKUs like the Core i7-7700HQ, i5-8300H, i5-9300H, or the competing AMD Ryzen 7 3750H will see a performance boost of about 30 percent. If you already have a Core i7-8750H laptop, however, then there's no reason to upgrade from a CPU performance perspective.

See our dedicated page on the Core i7-9750H for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

CineBench R15
CineBench R15
CineBench R20
CineBench R20
01020304050607080901001101201301401501601701801902002102202302402502602702802903003103203303403503603703803904004104204304404504604704804905005105205305405505605705805906006106206306406506606706806907007107207307407507607707807908008108208308408508608708808909009109209309409509609709809901000101010201030104010501060107010801090110011101120113011401150116011701180Tooltip
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø968 (959.49-1081.9)
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1056 (1046.13-1175)
Alienware m15 R2 P87F GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0); CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1026 (960.41-1036.48)
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø748 (730.55-769.02)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Intel Core i9-9900K
212 Points ∼97% +17%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
189 Points ∼87% +4%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (170 - 194, n=58)
183 Points ∼84% +1%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
Intel Core i7-9750H
181 Points ∼83%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
Intel Core i5-8300H
173 Points ∼79% -4%
HP Omen 15-dc1303ng
Intel Core i7-8750H
171 Points ∼78% -6%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
171 Points ∼78% -6%
HP Spectre x360 13-ap0312ng
Intel Core i7-8565U
164 Points ∼75% -9%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
162 Points ∼74% -10%
HP Omen 15t-ce000
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼74% -11%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
144 Points ∼66% -20%
CPU Multi 64Bit
MSI GT76 Titan DT 9SG
Intel Core i9-9900K
2022 Points ∼46% +91%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
1721 Points ∼39% +63%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (964 - 1306, n=60)
1186 Points ∼27% +12%
HP Omen 15-dc1303ng
Intel Core i7-8750H
1082 Points ∼25% +2%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
Intel Core i7-9750H
1057 Points ∼24%
HP Omen 15-dc0001ng
Intel Core i5-8300H
805 Points ∼18% -24%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
805 Points ∼18% -24%
HP Omen X 17-ap0xx
Intel Core i7-7820HK
770 Points ∼18% -27%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
769 Points ∼18% -27%
HP Omen 15t-ce000
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
730 Points ∼17% -31%
HP Spectre x360 13-ap0312ng
Intel Core i7-8565U
538 Points ∼12% -49%
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
181 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1057 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
131.26 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

PCMark benchmarks show no surprises as scores are within just a few percentage points from other high-performance gaming laptops. We experienced no hardware issues during our time with the unit aside from unusually long wake-from-sleep times of about 6 seconds.

PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Eurocom Sky X7C i9-9900K
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung SSD 970 Pro 512GB (RAID 0)
11191 Points ∼93% +40%
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
8163 Points ∼68% +2%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
7976 Points ∼67%
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8750H, CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
7637 Points ∼64% -4%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (6765 - 8220, n=9)
7300 Points ∼61% -8%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7236 Points ∼60% -9%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
6675 Points ∼56% -16%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
5044 Points ∼42% -37%
Productivity
Eurocom Sky X7C i9-9900K
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung SSD 970 Pro 512GB (RAID 0)
8702 Points ∼90% +16%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
8200 Points ∼85% +9%
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8750H, CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
8092 Points ∼83% +8%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
7510 Points ∼77%
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
7351 Points ∼76% -2%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (6834 - 7695, n=9)
7347 Points ∼76% -2%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
7261 Points ∼75% -3%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
7180 Points ∼74% -4%
Essentials
Eurocom Sky X7C i9-9900K
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung SSD 970 Pro 512GB (RAID 0)
10275 Points ∼93% +5%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
9741 Points ∼89%
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
9486 Points ∼86% -3%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (9140 - 9741, n=9)
9391 Points ∼85% -4%
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8750H, CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
9306 Points ∼85% -4%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
9109 Points ∼83% -6%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
8791 Points ∼80% -10%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
8575 Points ∼78% -12%
Score
Eurocom Sky X7C i9-9900K
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung SSD 970 Pro 512GB (RAID 0)
7171 Points ∼92% +20%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
5991 Points ∼77%
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8750H, CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
5961 Points ∼77% -1%
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5941 Points ∼77% -1%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5839 Points ∼75% -3%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (5439 - 5991, n=9)
5695 Points ∼73% -5%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
5374 Points ∼69% -10%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
4873 Points ∼63% -19%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Eurocom Sky X7C i9-9900K
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung SSD 970 Pro 512GB (RAID 0)
6352 Points ∼97% +7%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
5931 Points ∼91%
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5852 Points ∼90% -1%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5749 Points ∼88% -3%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
5706 Points ∼88% -4%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (4520 - 6035, n=6)
5624 Points ∼86% -5%
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8750H, CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
5574 Points ∼86% -6%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
5107 Points ∼78% -14%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Eurocom Sky X7C i9-9900K
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x Samsung SSD 970 Pro 512GB (RAID 0)
5610 Points ∼92% +11%
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 8750H, CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
5445 Points ∼89% +8%
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5115 Points ∼84% +2%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
5039 Points ∼83%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (3638 - 5661, n=6)
4756 Points ∼78% -6%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
4380 Points ∼72% -13%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, 2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
4207 Points ∼69% -17%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
3691 Points ∼61% -27%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
5039 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5931 points
Help

Storage Devices

Two M.2 2280 slots are available with optional Intel Optane support. Our test unit comes configured with a single 1 TB WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW, but different resellers may have different suppliers.

The 1 TB WDC PC SN720 is a fast NVMe drive with sequential read and write rates of over 2100 MB/s and 2400 MB/s, respectively, according to AS SSD to be even faster than the Samsung PM981 commonly found on high-end systems like the Razer Blade series. You'll have to choose your storage options carefully as adding a second drive may prove difficult as mentioned above.

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

AS SSD
AS SSD
CDM 5.5
CDM 5.5
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
2x Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV512G (RAID 0)
MSI GT63 Titan 8RG-046
CUK Cyclone 500GB M.2 NVMe
Lenovo Legion Y740-15ICHg
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
AS SSD
-7%
-1%
-15%
-8%
-20%
Copy Game MB/s
1853.64
907.05
-51%
976.6
-47%
1426.35
-23%
1164.53
-37%
Copy Program MB/s
896.18
392.55
-56%
496.53
-45%
576.02
-36%
478.19
-47%
Copy ISO MB/s
2249.66
1417.66
-37%
2082.66
-7%
2073.16
-8%
1872.47
-17%
Score Total
4743
4323
-9%
4221
-11%
3633
-23%
3040
-36%
3230
-32%
Score Write
1951
1901
-3%
2102
8%
1481
-24%
902
-54%
1752
-10%
Score Read
1840
1619
-12%
1394
-24%
1407
-24%
1433
-22%
985
-46%
Access Time Write *
0.102
0.032
69%
0.034
67%
0.108
-6%
0.042
59%
0.043
58%
Access Time Read *
0.046
0.084
-83%
0.05
-9%
0.065
-41%
0.05
-9%
0.077
-67%
4K-64 Write
1592.91
1538.26
-3%
1807.21
13%
1135.27
-29%
647.89
-59%
1500.92
-6%
4K-64 Read
1604.27
1282.6
-20%
1159.06
-28%
1177.33
-27%
1144.38
-29%
756.72
-53%
4K Write
108.74
118.58
9%
108.34
0%
108.86
0%
87.67
-19%
88.05
-19%
4K Read
25.01
40.56
62%
52.08
108%
37.2
49%
49.17
97%
33.2
33%
Seq Write
2493.16
2439.74
-2%
1864.07
-25%
2371.22
-5%
1664.55
-33%
1629.24
-35%
Seq Read
2105.41
2955.46
40%
1832.18
-13%
1924.95
-9%
2399.1
14%
1952.51
-7%

* ... smaller is better

WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-1T00
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3415 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2796 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 522.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 446.7 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1576 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2500 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 41.37 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 137.4 MB/s

GPU Performance

The GPU is performing where we expect it to be at within 4 percent of the average RTX 2070 Max-Q in our database taken from 16 other gaming laptops. Users can expect 15 to 20 percent slower performance than a regular mobile RTX 2070 or just 5 to 10 percent faster than a regular mobile RTX 2060. Users upgrading from the older mobile GTX 1060 will see a more significant graphics boost of 50 to 80 percent. We recommend enabling DX12 when gaming as Nvidia has optimized its Turing series for Microsoft's latest API.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Time Spy
Time Spy
DLSS 4K
DLSS 4K
Port Royal
Port Royal
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Balanced Fan mode
Fire Strike Balanced Fan mode
Fire Strike Maximum Fan mode
Fire Strike Maximum Fan mode
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop), 2700X
11294 Points ∼77% +76%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H
9480 Points ∼65% +48%
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z 8G
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
9236 Points ∼63% +44%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
8342 Points ∼57% +30%
Eurocom Nightsky RX15
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK
7754 Points ∼53% +21%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (5948 - 7105, n=19)
6530 Points ∼45% +2%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
6419 Points ∼44%
Asus Strix Hero III G731GV
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 9750H
5913 Points ∼40% -8%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
5043 Points ∼34% -21%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H
3565 Points ∼24% -44%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
3485 Points ∼24% -46%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
2805 Points ∼19% -56%
3840x2160 Fire Strike Ultra Graphics
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop), 2700X
6513 Points ∼64% +71%
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z 8G
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
5450 Points ∼54% +43%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
5059 Points ∼50% +33%
Eurocom Nightsky RX15
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK
4705 Points ∼47% +24%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (3752 - 4281, n=13)
3970 Points ∼39% +5%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
3799 Points ∼38%
Asus Strix Hero III G731GV
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 9750H
3472 Points ∼34% -9%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
2686 Points ∼27% -29%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
2582 Points ∼26% -32%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
2253 Points ∼22% -41%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H
1790 Points ∼18% -53%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop), 2700X
27620 Points ∼68% +68%
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z 8G
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
22999 Points ∼57% +40%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H
22820 Points ∼56% +38%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
21758 Points ∼54% +32%
Eurocom Nightsky RX15
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK
20434 Points ∼50% +24%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (11563 - 20201, n=22)
17020 Points ∼42% +3%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
16483 Points ∼41%
Asus Strix Hero III G731GV
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 9750H
15696 Points ∼39% -5%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
13188 Points ∼32% -20%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
11326 Points ∼28% -31%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
9537 Points ∼23% -42%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H
9536 Points ∼23% -42%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Eurocom Nightsky RX15
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK
16253 Points ∼72% +30%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H
15274 Points ∼68% +23%
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z 8G
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
13644 Points ∼60% +10%
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop), 2700X
13644 Points ∼60% +10%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
12458 Points ∼55%
Asus Strix Hero III G731GV
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 9750H
12260 Points ∼54% -2%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
12175 Points ∼54% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (9107 - 15962, n=21)
11907 Points ∼53% -4%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
10230 Points ∼45% -18%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
9459 Points ∼42% -24%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H
7595 Points ∼34% -39%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
6017 Points ∼27% -52%
1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop), 2700X
37989 Points ∼75% +106%
HP Omen 17-cb0020ng
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H
31826 Points ∼62% +73%
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z 8G
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop), 2700X
31260 Points ∼61% +70%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
28369 Points ∼56% +54%
Eurocom Nightsky RX15
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK
26582 Points ∼52% +44%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (14723 - 25259, n=21)
21637 Points ∼42% +17%
Asus Strix Hero III G731GV
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 9750H
20765 Points ∼41% +13%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
18434 Points ∼36%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
17457 Points ∼34% -5%
HP Omen 17-w100ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6300HQ
14642 Points ∼29% -21%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9300H
13447 Points ∼26% -27%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
12193 Points ∼24% -34%
3DMark 11 Performance
16707 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
33377 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
14914 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
6349 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The RTX 2070 Max-Q is powerful enough to play any title at the target 1080p resolution at 60 FPS or more. Reaching a stable 144 FPS will be easier on undemanding titles like Fortnite, Rocket League, or Overwatch, but you'll have to turn down more than a few settings on demanding titles like Witcher 3 or Shadow of the Tomb Raider. Keep in mind that you can still exploit the fast refresh rate of a 144 Hz panel with lower frame rates if need be.

See our dedicated page on the GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q for more gaming benchmarks. Idling on Witcher 3 shows no frame dips to suggest no interrupting background activity while gaming.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Highest Preset AA:T
MSI RTX 2080 Gaming X Trio
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop)
110 fps ∼100% +33%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
109 fps ∼99% +31%
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z 8G
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop)
104 fps ∼95% +25%
Eurocom Nightsky RX15
Intel Core i9-9980HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
97 fps ∼88% +17%
Alienware m15 R2 P87F
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
87 fps ∼79% +5%
HP Omen X 2S 15-dg0075cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
83 fps ∼75%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
  (57 - 84, n=8)
76.8 fps ∼70% -7%
Asus Strix Hero III G731GV
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
70 fps ∼64% -16%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
64 fps ∼58% -23%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
49 fps ∼45% -41%
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
45 fps ∼41% -46%
010203040506070