Notebookcheck Logo

Gigabyte A7 X1 in review: Gaming laptop offers stable endurance performance

AMD-Nvidia combo. Gigabyte combines a laptop that is easy to upgrade with a powerful AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 in the A7 X1. Read on to find out what this promising hardware platform can do in everyday gaming use.
Gigabyte A7 X1

With the Gigabyte G5 KC, we recently reviewed a laptop from the manufacturer that costs just under 1,000 Euros (~$1,162) but is still a powerful device. With prices around 2,400 Euros (~$2,789), Gigabyte also offers considerably more expensive models, such as the Aero 15 OLED XD.

Our current review sample ranks in the middle in terms of pricing at around 1,800 Euros (~$2,092) and is equipped with an AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070. It also comes with 16 GB of RAM and a 512 GB SSD.

Gigabyte A7 X1
Processor
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX 8 x 3.3 - 4.6 GHz, 65 W PL2 / Short Burst, 54 W PL1 / Sustained, Cezanne H (Zen 3)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU - 8 GB VRAM, Core: 1560 MHz, Memory: 1750 MHz, 140 W TDP, NVIDIA 471.68, AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
Memory
16 GB 
, dual-channel
Display
17.30 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, AU Optronics AUO8E8D, IPS, glossy: no, 144 Hz
Mainboard
AMD Promontory/Bixby FCH
Storage
ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4, 512 GB 
, 470 GB free
Soundcard
AMD Raven/Renoir/Van Gogh/Cezanne/Rembrandt/Raphael - HD Audio Controller
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 2 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 1x audio, 1x microphone
Networking
Realtek RTL8125 2.5GBe Family Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000/2500MBit/s), Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 34 x 396 x 262 ( = 1.34 x 15.59 x 10.31 in)
Battery
48.96 Wh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 0.9 MP, 16:9 (1280x720)
Additional features
Speakers: 2x 2W, Keyboard: chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.53 kg ( = 89.24 oz / 5.58 pounds), Power Supply: 692 g ( = 24.41 oz / 1.53 pounds)
Price
1,800 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Possible contenders in comparison

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Best Price
83.2 %
10/2021
Gigabyte A7 X1
R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
2.5 kg34 mm17.30"1920x1080
85 %
07/2021
Medion Erazer Beast X25
R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
2.3 kg23 mm17.30"1920x1080
85.5 %
07/2021
Medion Erazer Beast X20
i7-10870H, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
2.2 kg23 mm17.30"2560x1440
82.8 %
06/2021
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
i9-11900H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
2.7 kg26 mm17.30"1920x1080
85.1 %
01/2021
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
R7 5800H, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
2.5 kg27 mm17.30"2560x1440

Case - Gaming laptop with replaceable battery

Gigabyte uses a plastic case for the A7 X1, which has a decent build quality and looks sturdy. The display can be opened to a maximum angle of about 135° and is held firmly in every position by the hinges. There are generous air vents at the bottom, and the battery, which can be removed without the need for any tools, is also found here.

In terms of length and width, the Gigabyte A7 X1 doesn't differ much from other 17-inch gaming laptops. However, it's significantly thicker than most competitors at 3.4 cm.

Size comparison

396 mm / 15.6 inch 262 mm / 10.3 inch 34 mm / 1.339 inch 2.5 kg5.58 lbs399 mm / 15.7 inch 269 mm / 10.6 inch 26 mm / 1.024 inch 2.7 kg5.84 lbs396 mm / 15.6 inch 261 mm / 10.3 inch 27 mm / 1.063 inch 2.5 kg5.55 lbs395 mm / 15.6 inch 262 mm / 10.3 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 2.3 kg5 lbs395 mm / 15.6 inch 262 mm / 10.3 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 2.2 kg4.95 lbs

Connectivity - Laptop supports connecting several monitors

The Gigabyte A7 X1 offers a basic assortment of ports. Notable here is the USB-C port at the back, which also supports DisplayPort 1.4. In combination with the Mini DP and HDMI, there are numerous connection options for external displays.

Left side: Kensington lock, power supply, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 1, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 2
Left side: Kensington lock, power supply, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 1, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 2
Right side: 1x microphone, 1x headset, 1x USB 2.0
Right side: 1x microphone, 1x headset, 1x USB 2.0
Back: 1x Mini DP 1.4, HDMI, 2.5 Gigabit LAN, 1x USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 (incl. DP 1.4)
Back: 1x Mini DP 1.4, HDMI, 2.5 Gigabit LAN, 1x USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 (incl. DP 1.4)

Communication

The Gigabyte A7 X1 can establish network connections over Gigabit LAN, Bluetooth 5.2, and Wi-Fi 6. In combination with our Netgear Nighthawk AX12 reference router, the latter achieves average speeds of 988 Mb/s for sending data and 1,432 Mb/s for receiving it. While the first value is only sufficient for the penultimate place in our test field, the A7 X1 outperforms our chosen competition devices when it comes to receiving data.

Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Medion Erazer Beast X25
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1498 (748min - 1544max) MBit/s ∼100% +52%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1351 (1239min - 1420max) MBit/s ∼90% +37%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1350 MBit/s ∼90% +37%
Average of class Gaming
  (450 - 1603, n=117, last 2 years)
1164 MBit/s ∼78% +18%
Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
  (447 - 1645, n=127)
1104 MBit/s ∼74% +12%
Gigabyte A7 X1
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
988 (942min - 1041max) MBit/s ∼66%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
 
582 (312min - 680max) MBit/s ∼39% -41%
iperf3 receive AX12
Gigabyte A7 X1
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1432 (1269min - 1668max) MBit/s ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1390 (669min - 1618max) MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1370 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (90 - 1743, n=117, last 2 years)
1219 MBit/s ∼85% -15%
Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
  (523 - 1684, n=128)
1191 MBit/s ∼83% -17%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1021 (947min - 1109max) MBit/s ∼71% -29%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
 
569 (350min - 709max) MBit/s ∼40% -60%
05010015020025030035040045050055060065070075080085090095010001050110011501200125013001350140014501500155016001650Tooltip
; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1432 (1269-1668)
; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø988 (942-1041)

Webcam

Like most other manufacturers, Gigabyte has installed a low-resolution 0.9 MP webcam in the A7 X1. Even in good lighting conditions, the webcam shows blurry images and colors that are too pale.

ColorChecker
18.4 ∆E
19.6 ∆E
22.6 ∆E
20.4 ∆E
19.4 ∆E
17.8 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
19.5 ∆E
16 ∆E
16 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
20 ∆E
21.4 ∆E
19.3 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
18.8 ∆E
27.4 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
20 ∆E
20.4 ∆E
15.6 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Gigabyte A7 X1: 17.82 ∆E min: 2.33 - max: 27.7 ∆E

Accessories

The Gigabyte A7 X1 comes with an appropriate power adapter in addition to the laptop. Other accessories and a replacement battery, for example, can be ordered directly from Gigabyte.

Maintenance

The base cover of the Gigabyte A7 X1 can be taken off after all visible screws have been removed. The interior reveals access to an empty 2.5-inch drive slot. The WLAN module and RAM can also be replaced. In addition, there's a second M.2 slot alongside the one occupied by the factory-installed SSD.

Gigabyte A7 X1 - 2.5-inch slot, WLAN module
Gigabyte A7 X1 - 2.5-inch slot, WLAN module
Gigabyte A7 X1 - RAM slots, free SSD slot
Gigabyte A7 X1 - RAM slots, free SSD slot

Warranty

Gigabyte provides the A7 X1 with a 24-month warranty period.

Input devices - Gigabyte laptop with keyboard backlighting

Keyboard

The keyboard of the A7 X1 provides a good grip for the fingers and is therefore also suitable for entering lengthy text. In addition, the arrow keys are normal-sized, and only the F keys and the number pad keys are a bit narrower. Thanks to the use of a complete keyboard layout, there's no need for double assignments, either.

The keyboard also features backlighting, although the colors can't be customized. The letters are illuminated uniformly and without glare.

Touchpad

Gigabyte has opted for a touchpad with separate mouse buttons as a mouse replacement. While the pad's surface is perfectly suitable for navigating the mouse pointer, the mouse buttons feel a bit soft depending on where you press them. Nevertheless, the pad responds to triggered inputs with an audible click.

Gigabyte A7 X1 - Input devices
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Input devices
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Touchpad
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Touchpad
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Backlight
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Backlight

Display - 144 Hz IPS panel

Screen bleeding
Screen bleeding

The Gigabyte A7 X1's screen consists of a 17.3-inch IPS panel that offers a resolution of 1920x1080 pixels. The average maximum brightness is 318 cd/m², which corresponds to the middle of our test field. On the other hand, the brightness distribution of 95% is the highest among our chosen competitor devices.

No PWM is used for brightness control, which is helpful for users with sensitive eyes.

313
cd/m²
326
cd/m²
319
cd/m²
319
cd/m²
325
cd/m²
315
cd/m²
315
cd/m²
320
cd/m²
311
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
AU Optronics AUO8E8D
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 326 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 318.1 cd/m² Minimum: 15 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 325 cd/m²
Contrast: 1121:1 (Black: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.33 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.3, calibrated: 1.95
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.5
63.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
90.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
61.5% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.142
Gigabyte A7 X1
AU Optronics AUO8E8D, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30
Medion Erazer Beast X25
BOE NE173FHM-NZ1 (BOE0884), IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30
Medion Erazer Beast X20
BOE CQ NE173QHM-NY2, IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
AU Optronics AUI8294 (B173HAN04.9), IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
BOE NE173QHM-NY2 (BOE0977), IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30
Display
12%
12%
-34%
13%
Display P3 Coverage
61.5
70.4
14%
70.1
14%
40.1
-35%
70.5
15%
sRGB Coverage
90.9
99.8
10%
99
9%
60
-34%
99.5
9%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
63.2
71.6
13%
71.3
13%
41.4
-34%
71.8
14%
Response Times
45%
6%
-105%
1%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
16 ?(7.6, 8.4)
9.2 ?(4.8, 4.4)
42%
16 ?(8.4, 7.6)
-0%
32.4
-103%
16.8 ?(8.4, 8.4)
-5%
Response Time Black / White *
10.8 ?(6.4, 4.4)
5.6 ?(2.8, 2.8)
48%
9.6 ?(4.4, 5.2)
11%
22.4
-107%
10 ?(4, 6)
7%
PWM Frequency
Screen
17%
19%
-11%
19%
Brightness middle
325
329
1%
370
14%
266
-18%
410
26%
Brightness
318
315
-1%
341
7%
264
-17%
381
20%
Brightness Distribution
95
88
-7%
82
-14%
79
-17%
88
-7%
Black Level *
0.29
0.33
-14%
0.42
-45%
0.32
-10%
0.37
-28%
Contrast
1121
997
-11%
881
-21%
831
-26%
1108
-1%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.33
2.03
53%
1.76
59%
3.97
8%
2.55
41%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
8.6
5.5
36%
2.88
67%
8.93
-4%
4.33
50%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
1.95
0.82
58%
1.3
33%
3.5
-79%
1.28
34%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.5
3.5
36%
1.8
67%
1.8
67%
3.4
38%
Gamma
2.142 103%
2.223 99%
2.176 101%
2.31 95%
2.275 97%
CCT
7893 82%
6526 100%
6543 99%
6754 96%
6637 98%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
41.4
72
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
60
95
Total Average (Program / Settings)
25% / 20%
12% / 15%
-50% / -29%
11% / 15%

* ... smaller is better

Gigabyte's gaming laptop is also able to lead our test field with a contrast ratio of 1,121:1 and a black level of 0.29 cd/m². The color-space coverage of 90.9% (sRGB) and 63.2% (AdobeRGB) is a bit lower, but images still look vivid.

The CalMAN analysis also shows that colors are displayed with a blue proportion that is too high out of the box. However, this can be corrected almost completely with a calibration. The corresponding ICC file can be downloaded in the window located at the top, to the right of the display's brightness distribution graph.

CalMAN: Grayscales
CalMAN: Grayscales
CalMAN: Color saturation
CalMAN: Color saturation
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: Grayscales (calibrated)
CalMAN: Grayscales (calibrated)
CalMAN: Color saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: Color saturation (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)

Gigabyte's gaming laptop can definitely be used outdoors as long as areas with shade are favored. The matte screen is not reflective, but the display brightness isn't sufficient to compensate for strong ambient light.

Gigabyte A7 X1 vs. sRGB
Gigabyte A7 X1 vs. sRGB
Subpixel grid
Subpixel grid
Gigabyte A7 X1 vs. AdobeRGB
Gigabyte A7 X1 vs. AdobeRGB
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Outdoor use
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Outdoor use
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Outdoor use
Gigabyte A7 X1 - Outdoor use

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↗ 6.4 ms rise
↘ 4.4 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 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 18 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (22.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
16 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.6 ms rise
↘ 8.4 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 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 19 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (36.2 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 19810 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

The Gigabyte A7 X1's IPS panel is very viewing-angle stable. This allows content to be viewed without distortions or inaccurate colors, even from very flat angles.

Viewing-angle stability
Viewing-angle stability

Performance - Stable even under prolonged load

Gigabyte has equipped the A7 X1 with the latest gaming hardware. Our review configuration comes with a powerful AMD CPU, but this model is also available as the Gigabyte K7 with the Intel Core i7-10870H and the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060.

Gigabyte A7 X1 - GPUz1
Gigabyte A7 X1 - GPUz2
Gigabyte A7 X1 - HWInfo1
Gigabyte A7 X1 - HWInfo2
Gigabyte A7 X1 - CPUz1
Gigabyte A7 X1 - CPUz2
Gigabyte A7 X1 - CPUz3
Gigabyte A7 X1 - CPUz4

Processor

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX used here is a processor with eight cores that can handle up to 16 tasks simultaneously. The clock rates are between 3.3 and 4.6 GHz, with the cooling system and the preset TDP being significantly responsible for performance. Gigabyte chose a long-term TDP value (PL1) of 54 watts. The short-term power consumption (PL2) can reach up to 65 watts.

In our Cinebench R15 continuous load loop, Gigabyte's gaming laptop is able to maintain its CPU performance at a very stable and high level. The A7 X1 shows a good multi-core performance in the individual tests in particular, which is usually sufficient for one of the top places in our test field.

Cinebench R15 Multi endurance test

01102203304405506607708809901100121013201430154016501760187019802090Tooltip
Gigabyte A7 X1 AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX: Ø2064 (2046.66-2087.25)
Medion Erazer Beast X25 AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX: Ø2004 (1981.96-2041.34)
Medion Erazer Beast X20 Intel Core i7-10870H: Ø1321 (1310.36-1336.01)
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM Intel Core i9-11900H: Ø1874 (1698.44-2029.22)
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H) AMD Ryzen 7 5800H: Ø2061 (2036.87-2108.48)
Cinebench R23
Multi Core
Average of class Gaming
  (2435 - 23482, n=205, last 2 years)
12796 Points ∼100% +3%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (6622 - 14363, n=28)
12524 Points ∼98% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
12476 Points ∼97%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
12373 Points ∼97% -1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
11739 Points ∼92% -6%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
11567 Points ∼90% -7%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
8250 Points ∼64% -34%
Single Core
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
1574 Points ∼100% +6%
Average of class Gaming
  (527 - 1936, n=204, last 2 years)
1526 Points ∼97% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1491 Points ∼95% +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1479 Points ∼94%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (1218 - 1499, n=27)
1470 Points ∼93% -1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
1403 Points ∼89% -5%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
1227 Points ∼78% -17%
Cinebench R20
CPU (Multi Core)
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
4850 Points ∼100%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (2242 - 5476, n=28)
4841 Points ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
  (930 - 9042, n=223, last 2 years)
4826 Points ∼100% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
4776 Points ∼98% -2%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
4510 Points ∼93% -7%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
4403 Points ∼91% -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
3027 Points ∼62% -38%
CPU (Single Core)
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
600 Points ∼100% +3%
Average of class Gaming
  (169 - 745, n=223, last 2 years)
584 Points ∼97% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
581 Points ∼97% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
580 Points ∼97%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (471 - 584, n=27)
572 Points ∼95% -1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
540 Points ∼90% -7%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
470 Points ∼78% -19%
Cinebench R15
CPU Multi 64Bit
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
2108 (2036.87min - 2108.48max) Points ∼100% +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
2087 (2046.66min - 2087.25max) Points ∼99%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (1076 - 2267, n=27)
2048 Points ∼97% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (400 - 3652, n=225, last 2 years)
2043 Points ∼97% -2%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
2041 (1981.96min - 2041.34max) Points ∼97% -2%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
2029 Points ∼96% -3%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
1336 Points ∼63% -36%
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
241 Points ∼100% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
241 Points ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
239 Points ∼99% -1%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (197 - 243, n=23)
238 Points ∼99% -1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
232 Points ∼96% -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (79.2 - 282, n=217, last 2 years)
232 Points ∼96% -4%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
201 Points ∼83% -17%
Blender - v2.79 BMW27 CPU
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
333 Seconds * ∼100% -35%
Average of class Gaming
  (144 - 1259, n=224, last 2 years)
278 Seconds * ∼83% -13%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
250 Seconds * ∼75% -2%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (219 - 442, n=27)
250 Seconds * ∼75% -2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
246 Seconds * ∼74%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
245 Seconds * ∼74% -0%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
242 Seconds * ∼73% +2%
7-Zip 18.03
7z b 4
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
59182 MIPS ∼100% +7%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (36011 - 62503, n=27)
57344 MIPS ∼97% +4%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
57284 MIPS ∼97% +4%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
55231 MIPS ∼93%
Average of class Gaming
  (11386 - 88128, n=221, last 2 years)
53331 MIPS ∼90% -3%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
50441 MIPS ∼85% -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
39581 MIPS ∼67% -28%
7z b 4 -mmt1
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
5870 MIPS ∼100% +3%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (4791 - 5905, n=27)
5700 MIPS ∼97% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
5681 MIPS ∼97%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
5664 MIPS ∼96% 0%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
5590 MIPS ∼95% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (2685 - 6582, n=221, last 2 years)
5524 MIPS ∼94% -3%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
5321 MIPS ∼91% -6%
Geekbench 5.4
Multi-Core
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
9294 Points ∼100% +22%
Average of class Gaming
  (1946 - 16925, n=215, last 2 years)
9275 Points ∼100% +22%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (5057 - 9294, n=25)
8130 Points ∼87% +7%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
8035 Points ∼86% +6%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
7725 Points ∼83% +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
7599 Points ∼82%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
6403 Points ∼69% -16%
Single-Core
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
1576 Points ∼100% +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1538 Points ∼98%
Average of class Gaming
  (158 - 1949, n=215, last 2 years)
1532 Points ∼97% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1529 Points ∼97% -1%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (1271 - 1561, n=25)
1513 Points ∼96% -2%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
1354 Points ∼86% -12%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
1191 Points ∼76% -23%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 - 4k Preset
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
15.8 fps ∼100% +7%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
15.6 fps ∼99% +5%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (8.26 - 17.1, n=27)
15.2 fps ∼96% +3%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
14.9 fps ∼94% +1%
Average of class Gaming
  (3 - 26.6, n=225, last 2 years)
14.9 fps ∼94% +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
14.8 fps ∼94%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
10.7 fps ∼68% -28%
LibreOffice - 20 Documents To PDF
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
56.5 s * ∼100%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (44.1 - 87.4, n=27)
53.2 s * ∼94% +6%
Average of class Gaming
  (33.6 - 332, n=219, last 2 years)
52.3 s * ∼93% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
52.2 s * ∼92% +8%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
50.8 s * ∼90% +10%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
49.3 s * ∼87% +13%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
45.8 s * ∼81% +19%
R Benchmark 2.5 - Overall mean
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
0.6 sec * ∼100% -20%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.412 - 4.47, n=220, last 2 years)
0.544 sec * ∼91% -8%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
0.529 sec * ∼88% -5%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
0.512 sec * ∼85% -2%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (0.48 - 0.599, n=27)
0.507 sec * ∼85% -1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
0.502 sec * ∼84%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
0.4926 sec * ∼82% +2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
2087 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
169 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
241 Points
Help

System performance

The Gigabyte A7 X1 achieves a score in the middle of our test field in the PCMark 10 test for evaluating system performance. While it reached first place in the "Productivity" and "Digital Content Creation" subcategories, the modest "Essentials" score brings the overall rating down.

During our test period, the system ran very smoothly and responded extremely quickly to inputs. Both applications and folders were launched and opened without delays.

PCMark 10 / Score
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
6983 Points ∼100% +1%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (6875 - 6967, n=4)
6916 Points ∼99% 0%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
6901 Points ∼99% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
6898 Points ∼99%
Average of class Gaming
  (4477 - 8636, n=178, last 2 years)
6851 Points ∼98% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
6842 Points ∼98% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
5908 Points ∼85% -14%
PCMark 10 / Essentials
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
10602 Points ∼100% +6%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (9991 - 10413, n=3)
10170 Points ∼96% +2%
Average of class Gaming
  (7334 - 11205, n=177, last 2 years)
10056 Points ∼95% +1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
10051 Points ∼95% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
10018 Points ∼94% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
9991 Points ∼94%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
8609 Points ∼81% -14%
PCMark 10 / Productivity
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (9301 - 9381, n=3)
9335 Points ∼100% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
9324 Points ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9252 Points ∼99% -1%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
9071 Points ∼97% -3%
Average of class Gaming
  (6161 - 10932, n=177, last 2 years)
9046 Points ∼97% -3%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
8849 Points ∼95% -5%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
7771 Points ∼83% -17%
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
10389 Points ∼100% +9%
Average of class Gaming
  (4716 - 14291, n=177, last 2 years)
9680 Points ∼93% +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
9561 Points ∼92%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (9383 - 9561, n=3)
9446 Points ∼91% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9377 Points ∼90% -2%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
9274 Points ∼89% -3%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
8367 Points ∼81% -12%
PCMark 10 Score
6898 points
Help

DPC latencies

In our test configuration, the Gigabyte A7 X1 shows very low latencies in the LatencyMon test. This makes it well suited for real-time applications.

Gigabyte A7 X1 - LatencyMon (stats)
Gigabyte A7 X1 - LatencyMon (stats)
Gigabyte A7 X1 - LatencyMon (drivers)
Gigabyte A7 X1 - LatencyMon (drivers)
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
1821 μs * ∼100% -130%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
1399 μs * ∼77% -77%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
907 μs * ∼50% -15%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
844 μs * ∼46% -7%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
792 μs * ∼43%

* ... smaller is better

Storage

The SSD used by Gigabyte in our test configuration shows very good read and write rates, which are only slightly surpassed by the rest of our test field in most cases.

For a comparison with other mass storage devices, see our HDD/SSD Benchmarks article.

Gigabyte A7 X1
ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
Medion Erazer Beast X25
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
Average ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
14%
3%
18%
27%
3%
Write 4K
125.1
129.7
4%
155.5
24%
168.8
35%
206.1
65%
131.7 ?(125.1 - 137.6, n=4)
5%
Read 4K
43.51
62.4
43%
47.96
10%
72
65%
53
22%
45.4 ?(43.5 - 46.9, n=4)
4%
Write Seq
2128
2436
14%
1591
-25%
3018
42%
2303 ?(2128 - 2509, n=4)
8%
Read Seq
1958
2354
20%
1371
-30%
2575
32%
1716 ?(1052 - 2209, n=4)
-12%
Write 4K Q32T1
579
512
-12%
532
-8%
459.5
-21%
535
-8%
525 ?(374 - 601, n=4)
-9%
Read 4K Q32T1
464.4
436.2
-6%
627
35%
473.1
2%
608
31%
581 ?(464 - 677, n=4)
25%
Write Seq Q32T1
2501
3541
42%
3017
21%
3129
25%
3242
30%
2515 ?(2501 - 2536, n=4)
1%
Read Seq Q32T1
3473
3568
3%
3440
-1%
3529
2%
3617
4%
3417 ?(3372 - 3473, n=4)
-2%
AS SSD
16%
15%
10%
26%
6%
Seq Read
2859
2591
-9%
2849
0%
2837
-1%
3020
6%
2643 ?(2048 - 2972, n=4)
-8%
Seq Write
1530
1900
24%
2831
85%
1565
2%
2631
72%
2134 ?(1530 - 2403, n=4)
39%
4K Read
41.47
53.9
30%
51.3
24%
55.4
34%
60.3
45%
48.3 ?(41.5 - 55.7, n=4)
16%
4K Write
133.9
112.6
-16%
106.3
-21%
152.9
14%
171.6
28%
116.4 ?(98.8 - 133.9, n=4)
-13%
4K-64 Read
1218
1335
10%
1763
45%
1327
9%
1410
16%
1586 ?(1218 - 1775, n=4)
30%
4K-64 Write
2108
2966
41%
2010
-5%
1922
-9%
2324
10%
1975 ?(1473 - 2267, n=4)
-6%
Access Time Read *
0.098
0.038
61%
0.093
5%
0.035
64%
0.045
54%
0.09975 ?(0.079 - 0.131, n=4)
-2%
Access Time Write *
0.028
0.036
-29%
0.035
-25%
0.028
-0%
0.024
14%
0.03325 ?(0.028 - 0.039, n=4)
-19%
Score Read
1545
1648
7%
2099
36%
1666
8%
1773
15%
1899 ?(1545 - 2128, n=4)
23%
Score Write
2395
3269
36%
2399
0%
2232
-7%
2759
15%
2305 ?(1815 - 2598, n=4)
-4%
Score Total
4666
5733
23%
5573
19%
4695
1%
5429
16%
5151 ?(4645 - 5698, n=4)
10%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
15% / 15%
9% / 10%
14% / 13%
27% / 27%
5% / 5%

* ... smaller is better

ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3473 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2501 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 464.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 579 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1958 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2128 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 43.51 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 125.1 MB/s

Continuous load read: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8

No graph data

Graphics card

An Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 is responsible for rendering demanding image content in the A7 X1. The latter can operate with a TDP of 140 watts, thereby achieving very good results in the 3DMark tests, which are just slightly short of one of the top places in our test field. On the other hand, the Gigabyte laptop can lead our test field when it comes to the 3DMark 11 benchmark.

To see how other graphics cards perform in comparison, see our GPU Benchmarks article.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
35909 Points ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
35678 Points ∼99% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
34071 Points ∼95% -5%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (12535 - 38275, n=52)
32240 Points ∼90% -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (1925 - 45050, n=203, last 2 years)
31732 Points ∼88% -12%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
25793 Points ∼72% -28%
3DMark
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
169244 Points ∼100% +26%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
134236 Points ∼79%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (45531 - 179716, n=32)
120407 Points ∼71% -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (16443 - 192950, n=156, last 2 years)
115939 Points ∼69% -14%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
110773 Points ∼65% -17%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
106962 Points ∼63% -20%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
95835 Points ∼57% -29%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
27968 Points ∼100% +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
26771 Points ∼96% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
25849 Points ∼92% 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
25794 Points ∼92%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (7178 - 29128, n=50)
24216 Points ∼87% -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (1360 - 34993, n=223, last 2 years)
23746 Points ∼85% -8%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
19737 Points ∼71% -23%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
10898 Points ∼100% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
10752 Points ∼99% +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
10570 Points ∼97%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
9619 Points ∼88% -9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (2644 - 11019, n=51)
9272 Points ∼85% -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (429 - 13554, n=222, last 2 years)
9235 Points ∼85% -13%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
7582 Points ∼70% -28%
3DMark 11 Performance
26404 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
54931 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
23233 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
10315 points
Help

Gaming performance

The Gigabyte A7 X1 consistently achieves smooth and high frame rates at Full HD resolution and maximum details in the games that we tested. This means that both recent and upcoming titles will run without any problems. Compared with our test field, the rates achieved are at a medium level and a bit below the average of other gaming laptops with the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 at times.

Our GPU Benchmarks article shows the performance that can be expected from the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 in other games.

The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
103 (33.5min, 51.4P0.1, 68P1 - 190max) fps ∼100% +7%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
101 fps ∼98% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
97.9 (84min) fps ∼95% +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
95.9 (80min) fps ∼93%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (34.9 - 109, n=50)
91.5 fps ∼89% -5%
Average of class Gaming
  (8.61 - 130.6, n=217, last 2 years)
90 fps ∼87% -6%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
74 fps ∼72% -23%
Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
128 (112.9min) fps ∼100% +13%
Average of class Gaming
  (22 - 170.5, n=233, last 2 years)
123.2 fps ∼96% +9%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
121 (106.3min) fps ∼95% +7%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (26.9 - 163.9, n=55)
119.6 fps ∼93% +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
119 (104.1min) fps ∼93% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
115 (99.6min) fps ∼90% +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
113 (100.7min) fps ∼88%
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
97 fps ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
91.6 fps ∼94%
Average of class Gaming
  (9.13 - 140.6, n=190, last 2 years)
88.2 fps ∼91%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (27.9 - 107, n=47)
86.1 fps ∼89%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
72.3 fps ∼75%
GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
97 (8.76min, 66.7P1 - 172max) fps ∼100% +16%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
91.9 (26.9min, 66.7P1 - 171max) fps ∼95% +10%
Average of class Gaming
  (4.18 - 139.2, n=195, last 2 years)
90.6 fps ∼93% +8%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (21.7 - 125.8, n=48)
90.1 fps ∼93% +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
88.5 (16.4min, 58.8P1 - 182max) fps ∼91% +6%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
83.6 (9.74min, 58.8P1 - 149max) fps ∼86%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
80.4 (8.99min, 55.6P1 - 149max) fps ∼83% -4%
Strange Brigade - 1920x1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
185 (39.2min, 139P1 - 321max) fps ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
168 (84.4min, 126P1 - 285max) fps ∼91% -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
168 (63.8min, 123P1 - 334max) fps ∼91% -9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (36.2 - 194, n=44)
158.2 fps ∼86% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (10.9 - 224, n=189, last 2 years)
156.1 fps ∼84% -16%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
130 (88.3min, 98.4P1 - 218max) fps ∼70% -30%
X-Plane 11.11 - 1920x1080 high (fps_test=3)
Average of class Gaming
  (12.4 - 127, n=232, last 2 years)
81.7 fps ∼100% +13%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
80.1 fps ∼98% +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (12.4 - 118.8, n=57)
79.7 fps ∼98% +10%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
75.8 fps ∼93% +5%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
72.2 fps ∼88%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
72.1 fps ∼88% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
69.9 fps ∼86% -3%

Our endurance test with The Witcher 3 also shows that performance doesn't suffer noticeably even during long gaming sessions, and that the system is able to compensate well for fluctuations.

The Witcher 3 FPS diagram

05101520253035404550556065707580859095Tooltip
Gigabyte A7 X1 R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU: Ø95.1 (87-99)
low med. high ultra
GTA V (2015) 174 164 139 83.6
The Witcher 3 (2015) 95.9
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 139 125 119 113
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 98.9 86.8 72.2
Strange Brigade (2018) 311 232 208 185
Cyberpunk 2077 (2020) 104.5 89.6 77.1 66.3

Emissions - The laptop can also run quietly

Noise emissions

Noise
Noise

When the Gigabyte A7 X1 is only used to run the browser and perform office tasks, the laptop is usually silent, and the fans seldom rise to a quiet 35 dB(A). Under load and in gaming mode, however, the noise level can get considerably louder and more annoying with up to 59 dB(A).

We weren't able to detect any other background noise, such as coil whine or the like.

Noise Level

Idle
25 / 29 / 35 dB(A)
Load
58 / 59 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 24 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2038.933.836.534.735.344.62535.43532.334.633.138.63145.143.142.442.240.645.64032.13027.128.427.533.85030.724.421.223.822.230.66336.428.822.728.523.937.7804319.217.218.616.542.810029.220.817.91816.330.512532.522.9191716.132.216033.623.721.518.217.834.420034.322.220.221.719.136.125035.723.518.820.216.137.131536.922.416.513.912.538.740039.222.116.612.311.940.550042.723.317.312.212.544.163044.22417.512.311.444.880045.124.717.812.311.245.3100048.627.22013.810.849.11250