Notebookcheck

HP Pavilion Gaming 17 Review: Finally, a Quiet Gaming Laptop

A leaner Omen without the fluff. The Pavilion series isn't exactly home to HP's best laptops and yet the Pavilion Gaming 17 is one of the better gaming laptops we've seen from the manufacturer thus far. The system is surprisingly quiet and even sleek considering its price range.

The extensive HP Pavilion series has always included a few gaming laptops with GeForce and even Radeon graphics to appeal to gamers on tighter budgets. They would complement the flagship HP Omen series which consists of faster, more feature-heavy, and often pricier offerings. The problem with HP Pavilion gaming laptops in the past is that they can often feel like afterthoughts with no real care to the design, cooling, or overall experience. HP would simply slap on a dedicated GPU option for an existing Pavilion chassis design and then call it a day.

The latest Pavilion Gaming 17 is an update of last year's model and it throws us a curve ball with a brand new look not seen on any "ordinary" Pavilion configuration. HP offers a wide variety of SKUs ranging from Core i5-9300H to Core i7-9750H, 60 Hz or 144 Hz 1080p IPS, 8 GB to 32 GB of DDR4 RAM, and either GTX 1050, GTX 1650, or GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q graphics. It's worth noting that HP's official specifications list here omits mentioning "Max-Q" to the chagrin of enthusiasts who understand the importance of Max-Q versus non-Max-Q GPUs.

Our test unit today is the upper mid-range SKU with 9th gen Core i7, GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q graphics, and a 60 Hz display for a retail price of about $1300 USD. Direct competitors include other budget to mid-range 17.3-inch gaming laptops like the Lenovo Legion Y740 17, MSI GP75, Asus TUF FX705, Aorus 7, and the Acer Predator Triton.

More HP Pavilion 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 Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q - 6144 MB, Core: 1140 MHz, Memory: 1500 MHz, GDDR6, 431.36, Optimus
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2666, 19-19-19-43, Dual-Channel, 2x SODIMM
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, BOE0825, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ, 256 GB 
, Secondary: 2 TB WDC WD20SPZX HDD
Soundcard
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Connections
4 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: SD reader
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): 25 x 405 x 282 ( = 0.98 x 15.94 x 11.1 in)
Battery
52.5 Wh Lithium-Polymer, 3-cell
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Additional features
Speakers: B&O, Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.76 kg ( = 97.36 oz / 6.08 pounds), Power Supply: 678 g ( = 23.92 oz / 1.49 pounds)
Price
1300 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

After handling so many Pavilion laptops over the years, we've learned to keep our expectations low for the series in terms of chassis quality. Flexible surfaces, flimsy lids, and cheap-feeling plastics have all become commonplace on the typical HP Pavilion. The Pavilion Gaming 17 bucks this trend with a new chassis that's actually sleeker and stronger than any Pavilion before it. The sharp and angular edges and corners contrast the normally rounder design of older Pavilion systems while the rear corners mimic the "diamond cut" look of the latest Spectre x360 15.

Chassis rigidity is excellent around the base with only minimal creaking and warping when attempting to twist the edges or when applying pressure on the palm rests or keyboard center. The smooth matte plastic and aluminum surfaces exhume a higher level of quality that raises the bar for other Pavilion systems to follow.

There are a couple of weak aspects to the chassis. While the base is strong, the lid is more susceptible to side-to-side twisting and warping down its center when compared to the lids of the Asus TUF FX705 or Razer Blade Pro 17. Secondly, the thin horizontal bars across the rear ventilation grilles (shown below) are very flexible and prone to damage. The hinges are satisfactory but could be firmer when fine-tuning the angle. Overall chassis quality is not as sound as the pricier Omen 17 or Asus ROG G703, albeit it's still stronger than other popular <$1000 alternatives like the Acer Nitro V17 Nitro or MSI GP75.

The Pavilion Gaming 17 is medium-sized machine in its narrow-bezel 17.3-inch category. Alternatives like the Asus TUF FX705 or MSI GP75 are slightly smaller in footprint while the Lenovo Legion Y740 is larger but thinner. It's significantly sleeker and lighter than HP's premier Omen 17.

Fingerprints will accumulate quickly on the matte, slightly rubberized black surfaces
Fingerprints will accumulate quickly on the matte, slightly rubberized black surfaces
Sharp and defined corners separate the Pavilion Gaming from much cheaper Pavilion systems
Sharp and defined corners separate the Pavilion Gaming from much cheaper Pavilion systems
The horizontal bar across the rear ventilation flexes significantly even when pushing gently with a finger
The horizontal bar across the rear ventilation flexes significantly even when pushing gently with a finger
Lid opened to maximum angle (~150 degrees). Bar hinge is adequate with minor teetering and could have been tauter
Lid opened to maximum angle (~150 degrees). Bar hinge is adequate with minor teetering and could have been tauter
423 mm / 16.7 inch 304 mm / 12 inch 33 mm / 1.299 inch 3.7 kg8.06 lbs412.6 mm / 16.2 inch 304.9 mm / 12 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 2.8 kg6.17 lbs405 mm / 15.9 inch 282 mm / 11.1 inch 25 mm / 0.984 inch 2.8 kg6.08 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 269 mm / 10.6 inch 29 mm / 1.142 inch 2.6 kg5.66 lbs395 mm / 15.6 inch 260 mm / 10.2 inch 19.9 mm / 0.783 inch 2.8 kg6.06 lbs

Connectivity

Port options are decent for a 17.3-inch gaming laptop. Gamers who want Thunderbolt 3 and a dedicated mini DisplayPort will have to opt for HP's pricier Omen 17 instead. While port positioning is excellent and more accessible than on the Legion Y740 or Asus Strix G GL731, the ports here are quite close to one another and could have been spaced out a bit wider to avoid clashing cables.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, 2x USB 3.1 Gen. 1 Type-A, AC adapter
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, 2x USB 3.1 Gen. 1 Type-A, AC adapter
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: HDMI, USB 3.1 Ge. 1 (w/ HP Sleep and Charge), Gigabit RJ-45, USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C (10 Gbps, Power Delivery 3.0, DisplayPort 1.4), SD reader
Left: HDMI, USB 3.1 Ge. 1 (w/ HP Sleep and Charge), Gigabit RJ-45, USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type-C (10 Gbps, Power Delivery 3.0, DisplayPort 1.4), SD reader

SD Card Reader

The spring-loaded SD reader offers average transfer rates. Transferring 1 GB of images from our UHS-II test card takes about 14 seconds compared to half that on the Dell XPS 15.

A fully inserted SD card sits almost flush against the edge for safe transporting.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
176.6 MB/s ∼100% +136%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
81.59 MB/s ∼46% +9%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
74.7 MB/s ∼42%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27 MB/s ∼15% -64%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
207.82 MB/s ∼100% +207%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
85.84 MB/s ∼41% +27%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
67.7 MB/s ∼33%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27 MB/s ∼13% -60%

Communication

The Intel 9560 comes standard for Bluetooth 5 connectivity and 802.11ac transfer rates of up to 1.73 Gbps to be 2x faster than the last generation Intel 8265. Most home wireless networks do not yet support >1 Gbps speeds and so users shouldn't worry about the performance differences between newer and older WLAN modules. We experienced no connectivity issues during our time with the test unit.

Removable M.2 2230 WLAN module
Removable M.2 2230 WLAN module
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
690 MBit/s ∼100% +5%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
686 MBit/s ∼99% +5%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
655 MBit/s ∼95%
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
599 MBit/s ∼87% -9%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
215 (min: 199, max: 221) MBit/s ∼31% -67%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
697 MBit/s ∼100% +7%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
676 MBit/s ∼97% +4%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
650 MBit/s ∼93%
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
Killer Wireless-AC 1550i Wireless Network Adapter (9560NGW)
605 MBit/s ∼87% -7%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
Realtek 8821CE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
201 (min: 89, max: 272) MBit/s ∼29% -69%

Maintenance

The bottom panel is secured by only 8 Phillips screws. Serviceability is still more difficult than expected because the edges and corners of the panel are latched very tightly to the chassis. Both patience and a sharp edge are required to service this system. Once inside, users have direct access to two SODIMM slots, two storage bays, and the WLAN module.

The bottom panel can be removed with some patience
The bottom panel can be removed with some patience

Accessories and Warranty

There are no included extras in the box other than the usual warranty card and Quick Start guide. Warranty is the standard one-year limited protection with plenty of extension options if purchased directly from HP.com.

Input Devices

Keyboard

Higher-end HP laptops like the Spectre or EliteBook have some of the better keyboards considering their ultra-thin form factors. To our surprise, the Pavilion keyboard comes close as we find its keys to be firmer and "clickier" than the SteelSeries keyboards on most MSI laptops. On the flip side, key clatter is a bit louder and more noticeable as well.

Users who rely on the NumPad and Arrow keys will discover that these keys are cramped and smaller than the main QWERTY keys. The Enter key could have also been firmer as it feels slightly spongy to press. Like most laptop keyboards, it can take a couple of days before becoming fully accustomed to the layout and feel.

Touchpad

The clickpad (11.5 x 6 cm) is small when considering the large 17.3-inch form factor. Even the clickpads on the 15.6-inch Spectre x360 15 (12 x 6 cm) and Dell XPS 15 (10.5 x 8.5 cm) are larger in surface area. The extra-wide aspect ratio on the HP clickpad feels especially cramped when scrolling vertically. Fortunately, gliding at moderate-to-fast speeds on the surface is super smooth while slower speeds will stick slightly for better accuracy as one would expect.

The integrated mouse keys have a moderately loud audible click when pressed with shallow travel, slightly spongy feedback, and a hollow feel. We do believe that HP could have included dedicated mouse keys or at least a taller clickpad since there is so much unused space above and below the edges of the existing clickpad.

Single-zone green backlight with two levels of brightness
Single-zone green backlight with two levels of brightness
Extra-wide clickpad feels cramped when scrolling vertically
Extra-wide clickpad feels cramped when scrolling vertically
Key feedback is firmer than expected but at the cost of slightly louder clatter. Key travel is moderate
Key feedback is firmer than expected but at the cost of slightly louder clatter. Key travel is moderate
The NumPad and Arrow keys are smaller than the main QWERTY keys
The NumPad and Arrow keys are smaller than the main QWERTY keys

Display

Our base 1080p IPS panel is a no-frills offering as it doesn't have the fast response time or refresh rate features of the latest 3 ms or 144/240 Hz panels commonly found on higher-end laptops. Thus, there is more ghosting and movement doesn't feel as smooth on the Pavilion. This is supposed to be a budget gaming laptop, after all.

There are still a couple of excellent display qualities despite the above. Color coverage, contrast ratio, and color accuracy are as good as many of the aforementioned 3 ms or 144/240 Hz panels for a high quality appearance. Graininess and uneven backlight bleeding are both minimal for a great first impression. Interestingly, HWiNFO is unable to identify the exact panel name, but the BOE0825 controller definitely points to the NV173FHM-N4C as a potential candidate.

Matte panel with no edge-to-edge glass options
Matte panel with no edge-to-edge glass options
Narrow side bezels aren't quite as narrow as on the MSI GS75
Narrow side bezels aren't quite as narrow as on the MSI GS75
Matte subpixel array
Matte subpixel array
Light-moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom corners
Light-moderate uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom corners
297.8
cd/m²
309.7
cd/m²
282.5
cd/m²
283.4
cd/m²
299.6
cd/m²
273.5
cd/m²
275.5
cd/m²
280.6
cd/m²
266.6
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
BOE0825
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 309.7 cd/m² Average: 285.5 cd/m² Minimum: 18.22 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 86 %
Center on Battery: 299.6 cd/m²
Contrast: 908:1 (Black: 0.33 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 3.68 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 3.15
ΔE Greyscale 3.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
89.8% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 58.1% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.12
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
BOE0825, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
AU Optronics B173HAN03.2, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
AU Optronics AUO309D, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
AU Optronics B173HAN04.2, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
Chi Mei N173HCE-G33 (CMN175C), IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
AU Optronics B173HAN04.0, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Response Times
43%
47%
-42%
65%
65%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
31.6 (14, 17.6)
15.6 (8, 7.6)
51%
17.6 (10, 7.6)
44%
41 (20, 21)
-30%
8 (4, 4)
75%
6.8 (3.4, 3.4)
78%
Response Time Black / White *
19.6 (10.8, 8.8)
12.8 (7.6, 5.2)
35%
10 (4.8, 5.2)
49%
30 (16, 14)
-53%
8.8 (4.4, 4.4)
55%
9.6 (5.2, 4.4)
51%
PWM Frequency
25510 (17)
Screen
-11%
5%
8%
22%
11%
Brightness middle
299.6
299.1
0%
343.6
15%
316
5%
420
40%
299.3
0%
Brightness
285
273
-4%
320
12%
294
3%
393
38%
294
3%
Brightness Distribution
86
81
-6%
87
1%
84
-2%
91
6%
94
9%
Black Level *
0.33
0.27
18%
0.34
-3%
0.32
3%
0.32
3%
0.29
12%
Contrast
908
1108
22%
1011
11%
988
9%
1313
45%
1032
14%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
3.68
5.07
-38%
3.74
-2%
3.39
8%
3.04
17%
2.55
31%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.05
10.55
-31%
5.33
34%
5.56
31%
7.22
10%
4.73
41%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
3.15
3.31
-5%
3.49
-11%
2.14
32%
0.89
72%
2.9
8%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
3.8
6.8
-79%
3.7
3%
3.17
17%
3.91
-3%
3.5
8%
Gamma
2.12 104%
2.46 89%
2.36 93%
2.39 92%
2.26 97%
2.28 96%
CCT
7240 90%
7805 83%
6388 102%
7098 92%
7138 91%
7101 92%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
58.1
58.5
1%
58
0%
51
-12%
60
3%
57
-2%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
89.8
89.9
0%
90
0%
89
-1%
95
6%
88.7
-1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
16% / -3%
26% / 12%
-17% / 1%
44% / 28%
38% / 19%

* ... smaller is better

Color space is typical of most 17.3-inch IPS panels at about 90 percent of sRGB to be more than enough for gaming purposes. Some cheaper panels like the Panda LM156LF on the Asus ROG GA502DU cover only 60 percent of sRGB to offer noticeably shallower colors.

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

While colors are good out of the box with an average DeltaE value of under 3, grayscale is poorer because color temperature is slightly on the cool side. A calibration addresses this directly for more accurate grayscale and colors across the board.

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
19.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10.8 ms rise
↘ 8.8 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. » 22 % 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
31.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14 ms rise
↘ 17.6 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. » 21 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.6 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 9279 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is average at best when under shade and not unlike most other 17.3-inch gaming laptops since a backlight of 300 nits is fairly common. Glare becomes difficult to ignore under most outdoor conditions. Viewing angles are otherwise very wide as one would expect from an IPS panel with no major color or contrast changes.

Outside on a cloudy day
Outside on a cloudy day
Outside under shade
Outside under shade
Outside on a cloudy day
Outside on a cloudy day
Wide IPS viewing angles
Wide IPS viewing angles

Performance

The Core i5-9300H to Core i7-9750H and GTX 1050 to GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q range puts the Pavilion in the budget to mid-range gaming category. Higher-end options like GeForce RTX graphics, 4K UHD, or additional LED lights are not available on the cost-conscious Pavilion series.

Nvidia Optimus is included by default and so G-Sync is not an option.

LatencyMon shows DPC issues even when the wireless is disabled.

Processor

CineBench R15
CineBench R15

CPU performance is exactly where we expect it to be when compared to other laptops in our database sporting the same Core i7-9750H CPU. Users upgrading from Core i7-8750H laptops won't see much of a difference, but those with older i7-7700HQ or i5-8300H laptops will see a significant 40 to 60 percent boost in multi-thread performance since the i7-9750H offers two additional physical cores.

Running CineBench R15 Multi-Thread in a loop shows a 10 percent dip in performance over time to suggest that the CPU is unable to maintain maximum Turbo Boost clock rates indefinitely when under heavy stress. The Asus GL731GU and MSI GF75 with the same i7-9750H CPU are faster and slower, respectively, than our Pavilion after accounting for any throttling.

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

010203040506070809010011012013014015016017018019020021022023024025026027028029030031032033034035036037038039040041042043044045046047048049050051052053054055056057058059060061062063064065066067068069070071072073074075076077078079080081082083084085086087088089090091092093094095096097098099010001010102010301040105010601070108010901100111011201130114011501160117011801190120012101220123012401250126012701280Tooltip
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1077 (1065.56-1205.55)
Asus ROG Strix G GL731GU-RB74 GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1162 (1108.49-1274.58)
HP Omen 15-dc1303ng GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1006 (997.68-1086.13)
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9750H, Crucial P1 SSD CT1000P1SSD8; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø970 (960.59-1110.2)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
203 Points ∼93% +5%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H
193 Points ∼89%
Alienware m17 P37E
Intel Core i9-8950HK
191 Points ∼88% -1%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
189 Points ∼87% -2%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (170 - 194, n=57)
183 Points ∼84% -5%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
172 Points ∼79% -11%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
171 Points ∼78% -11%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
165 Points ∼76% -15%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
Intel Core i7-6820HK
159 Points ∼73% -18%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
156 Points ∼72% -19%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBA-80WY001VGE
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
147 Points ∼67% -24%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
144 Points ∼66% -25%
CPU Multi 64Bit
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
1721 Points ∼39% +47%
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
1465 Points ∼33% +25%
Alienware m17 P37E
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1238 Points ∼28% +6%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (964 - 1306, n=59)
1187 Points ∼27% +1%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H
1172 Points ∼27%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
1074 Points ∼25% -8%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
Intel Core i7-6820HK
807 Points ∼18% -31%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
805 Points ∼18% -31%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
769 Points ∼18% -34%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
733 Points ∼17% -37%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
731 Points ∼17% -38%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBA-80WY001VGE
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
501 Points ∼11% -57%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
2.11 Points ∼86%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (1.96 - 2.19, n=7)
2.09 Points ∼86%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.99 Points ∼82%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
1.94 Points ∼80%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.83 Points ∼75%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
Intel Core i7-6820HK
1.8 Points ∼74%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
1.64 Points ∼67%
CPU Multi 64Bit
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
18.94 Points ∼43%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.88 Points ∼29%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (11.3 - 14.1, n=7)
12.8 Points ∼29%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
9.21 Points ∼21%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
Intel Core i7-6820HK
8.88 Points ∼20%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.17 Points ∼19%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
7.84 Points ∼18%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
7682 Points ∼71%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
6967 Points ∼64%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (6659 - 7214, n=9)
6919 Points ∼64%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
6561 Points ∼61%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
6539 Points ∼60%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
6524 Points ∼60%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5939 Points ∼55%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
4770 Points ∼44%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
42677 Points ∼65%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
42456 Points ∼65%
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (29665 - 36304, n=9)
34247 Points ∼52%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
34184 Points ∼52%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
24623 Points ∼38%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H
22781 Points ∼35%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
21978 Points ∼34%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
20687 Points ∼32%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
231.67 s * ∼3%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
197.075 s * ∼2%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
149.85 s * ∼2%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
118.733 s * ∼1%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i7-9750H
  (0.3 - 11365, n=38)
2393 Seconds * ∼11%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
649.703 Seconds * ∼3%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
590.45 Seconds * ∼3%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Intel Core i7-8750H
524 Seconds * ∼2%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H
476.493 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
193 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1172 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
130.69 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help

System Performance

PCMark benchmarks are nearly identical to the MSI GP75 equipped with the GTX 1660 Ti and same i7-9750H CPU. We did not experience any software or hardware issues during our time with the unit.

PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
8470 Points ∼71% +30%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7530 Points ∼63% +16%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7219 Points ∼60% +11%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
6640 Points ∼55% +2%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
6502 Points ∼54%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4110 Points ∼34% -37%
Productivity
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7679 Points ∼79% +7%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
7482 Points ∼77% +4%
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
7397 Points ∼76% +3%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
7241 Points ∼75% +1%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
7165 Points ∼74%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
6619 Points ∼68% -8%
Essentials
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
9832 Points ∼89% +5%
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
9607 Points ∼87% +3%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
9473 Points ∼86% +2%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
9320 Points ∼85%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
9090 Points ∼83% -2%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
8149 Points ∼74% -13%
Score
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
6053 Points ∼78% +11%
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5939 Points ∼76% +9%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5734 Points ∼74% +6%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
5440 Points ∼70% 0%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5429 Points ∼70%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4339 Points ∼56% -20%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5968 Points ∼92% +14%
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5882 Points ∼90% +13%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5672 Points ∼87% +9%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
5636 Points ∼87% +8%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5222 Points ∼80%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4898 Points ∼75% -6%
Home Score Accelerated v2
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5557 Points ∼91% +34%
Lenovo Legion Y740-17ICH
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
5107 Points ∼84% +23%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
4593 Points ∼75% +11%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
4412 Points ∼72% +6%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
4148 Points ∼68%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3256GJ1
Points ∼0% -100%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4148 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5222 points
Help

Storage Devices

Users can configure a primary M.2 SSD with a secondary 2.5-inch SATA III drive. Our test unit comes equipped with a 256 GB Samsung PM981 NVMe SSD and secondary 2 TB WDC WD20SPZX HDD. Sequential read and write rates top out at about 1700 MB/s and 1350 MB/s, respectively, according to AS SSD to be faster than the less expensive Intel SSD 660p. It's likely that the laptop will ship with different brand drives than what we have here depending on the retailer and configuration.

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

AS SSD
AS SSD
CDM 5.5 (Primary SSD)
CDM 5.5 (Primary SSD)
CDM 5.5 (Secondary HDD)
CDM 5.5 (Secondary HDD)
HD Tune (Secondary HDD)
HD Tune (Secondary HDD)
Secondary 2.5-inch SATA III bay sits adjacent to the primary M.2 2280 PCIe slot
Secondary 2.5-inch SATA III bay sits adjacent to the primary M.2 2280 PCIe slot
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
HP Omen 17t-3AW55AV_1
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-256G
Asus ROG GA502DU
Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 1TB
AS SSD
8%
-35%
-30%
51%
Copy Game MB/s
1107.07
874.69
-21%
379.65
-66%
818.54
-26%
1042.83
-6%
Copy Program MB/s
588.74
481.13
-18%
114.05
-81%
496.94
-16%
452.13
-23%
Copy ISO MB/s
1284.28
1080.01
-16%
697.75
-46%
905.3
-30%
2030.84
58%
Score Total
2909
4142
42%
1869
-36%
1641
-44%
5529
90%
Score Write
1476
2147
45%
664
-55%
927
-37%
2590
75%
Score Read
951
1304
37%
803
-16%
459
-52%
1953
105%
Access Time Write *
0.034
0.047
-38%
0.034
-0%
0.045
-32%
0.028
18%
Access Time Read *
0.073
0.071
3%
0.113
-55%
0.064
12%
0.031
58%
4K-64 Write
1232.96
1866.02
51%
436.61
-65%
735.67
-40%
2190.3
78%
4K-64 Read
730.81
1124.72
54%
611.97
-16%
321.47
-56%
1650.96
126%
4K Write
108.22
84.44
-22%
109.22
1%
98.74
-9%
134.74
25%
4K Read
49.73
31.66
-36%
36.54
-27%
47.26
-5%
27.86
-44%
Seq Write
1344.71
1962.09
46%
1181.67
-12%
926.26
-31%
2650.29
97%
Seq Read
1708.98
1472.55
-14%
1546.12
-10%
906.87
-47%
2738.85
60%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB256HAHQ
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3184 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1428 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 644.8 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 567.5 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1617 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1337 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 63.67 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 135.3 MB/s

GPU Performance

The GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q performs identically to the Asus GA502DU equipped with the exact same GPU according to 3DMark benchmarks. The notable exception is Cloud Gate because the quad-core Ryzen CPU in the Asus has issues maintaining very high frame rates beyond 60 FPS in contrast to our hexa-core Intel-powered HP. Overall GPU performance is about 18 percent slower than a desktop GTX 1660 Ti graphics card and about 45 to 55 percent faster than the mobile GTX 1650.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Time Spy
Time Spy
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
8844 Points ∼60% +75%
Eurocom Nightsky RX17
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
8000 Points ∼55% +59%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop), 2700X
6131 Points ∼42% +22%
Aorus 15 W9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
6007 Points ∼41% +19%
Alienware 17 R5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
5689 Points ∼39% +13%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H
5657 Points ∼39% +12%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
5043 Points ∼34%
Asus ROG GA502DU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 3750H
4867 Points ∼33% -3%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
4708 Points ∼32% -7%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
3510 Points ∼24% -30%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H
3506 Points ∼24% -30%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
2805 Points ∼19% -44%
2560x1440 Time Spy Score
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
8460 Points ∼62% +61%
Eurocom Nightsky RX17
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
7863 Points ∼58% +50%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop), 2700X
6405 Points ∼47% +22%
Aorus 15 W9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
5984 Points ∼44% +14%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H
5743 Points ∼42% +9%
Alienware 17 R5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
5640 Points ∼41% +8%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
5245 Points ∼39%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
4856 Points ∼36% -7%
Asus ROG GA502DU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 3750H
4547 Points ∼33% -13%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
3559 Points ∼26% -32%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H
3437 Points ∼25% -34%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
2949 Points ∼22% -44%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
23032 Points ∼57% +75%
Eurocom Nightsky RX17
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
21138 Points ∼52% +60%
Alienware 17 R5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
17792 Points ∼44% +35%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop), 2700X
16024 Points ∼39% +22%
Aorus 15 W9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
15501 Points ∼38% +18%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H
15088 Points ∼37% +14%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
14724 Points ∼36% +12%
Asus ROG GA502DU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 3750H
13355 Points ∼33% +1%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
13188 Points ∼32%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
10970 Points ∼27% -17%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
9537 Points ∼23% -28%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H
9274 Points ∼23% -30%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Eurocom Nightsky RX17
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
135881 Points ∼74% +52%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
124764 Points ∼68% +39%
Alienware 17 R5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
115714 Points ∼63% +29%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H
103428 Points ∼56% +16%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
101453 Points ∼55% +13%
Aorus 15 W9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
97729 Points ∼53% +9%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop), 2700X
91194 Points ∼49% +2%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
89505 Points ∼48%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
79420 Points ∼43% -11%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
61392 Points ∼33% -31%
Asus ROG GA502DU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 3750H
44557 Points ∼24% -50%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H
38016 Points ∼21% -58%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop), 2700X
13940 Points ∼62% +14%
Eurocom Nightsky RX17
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
12512 Points ∼55% +3%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H
12441 Points ∼55% +2%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
12175 Points ∼54%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
12170 Points ∼54% 0%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
12069 Points ∼53% -1%
Alienware 17 R5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
11288 Points ∼50% -7%
Aorus 15 W9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
9981 Points ∼44% -18%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
9459 Points ∼42% -22%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
8788 Points ∼39% -28%
Asus ROG GA502DU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 3750H
6644 Points ∼29% -45%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H
6528 Points ∼29% -46%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 9750H
30910 Points ∼61% +77%
Eurocom Nightsky RX17
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9750H
26752 Points ∼52% +53%
Alienware 17 R5
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
23414 Points ∼46% +34%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop), 2700X
22128 Points ∼43% +27%
Aorus 15 W9
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
20464 Points ∼40% +17%
MSI GP75 Leopard 9SD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop), 9750H
20181 Points ∼40% +16%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
19187 Points ∼38% +10%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
17457 Points ∼34%
Asus ROG GA502DU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 3750H
17170 Points ∼34% -2%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
13871 Points ∼27% -21%
Asus TUF FX705DT-AU068T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 3550H
13337 Points ∼26% -24%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
12193 Points ∼24% -30%
3DMark 11 Performance
16005 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
35562 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
11904 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
5245 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Real-world performance in games is about 18 percent slower than a desktop GTX 1660 Ti as predicted by 3DMark above. Results are just shy of the last generation GTX 1070 Max-Q but still powerful enough to play the latest demanding titles on High settings at 1080p. G-Sync would have paired very well with the Pavilion since frame rates tend to teeter in the 40 to 60 FPS range on certain titles where the Nvidia technology excels.

It's interesting to note that Shadow of the Tomb Raider runs 30 percent to 100 percent faster than the Asus ROG GA502DU equipped with the same GPU but a Ryzen 7 3750H CPU instead. Titles optimized to use as many threads as available will run faster on the hexa-core i7-8750H or i7-9750H compared to the quad-core Ryzen 7 3750H, i5-8300H, or i5-9300H.

See our dedicated page on the GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider
1920x1080 Highest Preset AA:T
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
109 fps ∼100% +70%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop)
76.7 fps ∼70% +20%
Asus ROG Strix G GL731GU-RB74
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop)
70 fps ∼64% +9%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
64 fps ∼59%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
61 fps ∼56% -5%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
49 fps ∼45% -23%
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
45 fps ∼41% -30%
Acer Aspire Nitro 5 AN515-54-53Z2
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
44 (min: 9) fps ∼40% -31%
1280x720 Lowest Preset
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
146 fps ∼100% +16%
Asus ROG Strix G GL731GU-RB74
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Laptop)
135 fps ∼92% +7%
HP Omen 15-dc0015ng
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
130 fps ∼89% +3%
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
128 fps ∼88% +2%
Zotac GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6 GB
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop)
126.8 fps ∼87% +1%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
126 fps ∼86%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
62 fps ∼42% -51%
0102030405060