Power Overwhelming: Dell XPS 15 7590 Core i9 and GeForce GTX 1650 OLED Laptop Review

Dell unveiled its XPS 15 7590 at Computex 2019 as a relatively minor update to last year's XPS 15 9570. Aside from the expected upgrade to Intel 9th gen Core ix and Nvidia Turing GTX options, the latest model addresses the infamous "nose cam" similar to the latest XPS 13 9380 model. Current SKUs range from the Core i5-9300H to the unlocked Core i9-9980HK, 1080p matte to 4K IPS touch or 4K OLED non-touch, and UHD Graphics 630 to the GeForce GTX 1650 GPU. The wide selection of SKUs allows for an equally wide range of prices from $1000 to over $2600 USD.
The configuration we'll be looking at today is the higher-end SKU with the Core i9 CPU, OLED display, and GeForce GTX GPU to represent the best that the XPS 15 7590 has to offer — in theory, at least. Our review below will show why Dell may still be packing in too much power for this aging chassis to handle. We fully intend to check out the Core i5 and Core i7 SKUs as well in the near future to get a bigger picture of the 7590 series and to find out which SKU is the most balanced.
We recommend checking out our existing reviews on the XPS 15 9550, 9560, and 9570 for more information on the chassis, ports, keyboard, speakers, and other physical features since the 7590 is essentially the same design all over again. Our findings and experience with this particular 7590 review unit reflect the following driver versions as noted by the screenshots below.
The XPS 15 series competes directly with other flagship 15.6-inch Ultrabooks including the Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580, HP Spectre x360 15, Gigabyte Aero 15, and the MacBook Pro 15.
See our biggest takeaways between the XPS 15 7590 Core i5 and XPS 15 7590 Core i9 SKUs here.
More Dell XPS 15 reviews:
- XPS 15 9570 (i9-8950HK, 4K UHD IPS, GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q)
- XPS 15 9570 (i7-8750H, 4K UHD IPS, GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q)
- XPS 15 9570 (i5-8300H, FHD, GTX 1050)
- XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, 4K UHD, GTX 1050)
- XPS 15 9560 (i5-7300HQ, FHD, GTX 1050)
- XPS 15 9550 (i5-6300HQ, FHD, GTX 960M)
Please note: We updated this review on 09/26/2019 to our new rating version 7. The former rating according to version 6 was 90%. If you would like to learn more about our new rating system please click here.
Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Wanted:
- Specialist News Writer
- Magazine Writer
- Translator (DE<->EN)
Details here
Join our Support Satisfaction Survey 2023: We want to hear about your experiences!
Participate here
Case
Visually, this is the same chassis that many of us are already familiar with. The magnesium alloy outer lid and bottom base with carbon fiber keyboard deck hold up really well despite launching almost five years ago. The most notable change is the re-positioned webcam along the top edge of the screen instead of the bottom. Dell had to shift the screen slightly lower by a millimeter or two to make room for the camera, but the overall chassis dimensions are identical to the XPS 15 9570/9560.
Top 10 Laptops
Multimedia, Budget Multimedia, Gaming, Budget Gaming, Lightweight Gaming, Business, Budget Office, Workstation, Subnotebooks, Ultrabooks, Chromebooks
under 300 USD/Euros, under 500 USD/Euros, 1,000 USD/Euros, for University Students, Best Displays
Top 10 Smartphones
Smartphones, Phablets, ≤6-inch, Camera Smartphones
Connectivity
Port options are still competitive after all these years. The full-size SD reader in particular is becoming increasingly uncommon on newer Ultrabooks like the Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580 or the HP Spectre x360 15. The Thunderbolt 3 port offers the full four PCIe lanes that eGPU enthusiasts will want to take advantage of.
The battery indicator button is back yet again which we suspect very few users will even use. This is more likely a relic of the past with a high chance of being omitted on future XPS 15 models.
Recharging the system via USB Type-C is possible and we can confirm this when connecting a 130 W Dell USB Type-C charger to the XPS 15 7590.
SD Card Reader
Transfer rates from the integrated SD card reader are some of the fastest on any laptop save for the UHS-III card reader on the Razer Blade Pro 17. Moving 1 GB worth of pictures from our UHS-II test card takes about 6 to 7 seconds compared to ~15 seconds on the Asus ZenBook UX533. Our only complaint is that a fully inserted SD card does not sit flush against the edge making it unsafe for transport in contrast to the spring-loaded SD card reader of the Razer Blade Pro 17.
SD Card Reader | |
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB) | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) |
Communication
All current SKUs come standard with a Killer AX1650x WLAN module to be Wi-Fi 6 ready. Intel will be pushing Wi-Fi 6 more heavily onto Ultrabooks soon and so this is simply Dell's way of future-proofing its XPS lineup. The Killer AX1650x is the gaming variant of the Intel AX200 similar to how the Killer 1550 is the gaming variant of the Intel 9560. More details on Killer-specific WLAN features can be found on our review of the Killer 1535 here.
Note that performance can be faster than what we've recorded below since our current server setup is limited by a 1 Gbps line. Unless if you have a compatible router, don't expect to be fully exploiting Wi-Fi 6 speeds anytime soon. We didn't experience any issues related to connectivity during our time with the test unit.
Maintenance
Not much has changed internally over the XPS 15 9570 as expected from a visual standpoint. RAM, WLAN, and M.2 storage are all still upgradeable and a lower battery capacity option (56 Wh) is still available on lesser SKUs for users who want secondary 2.5-inch SATA III storage.
While the cooling solution between the various XPS 15 SKUs may appear mostly identical, the Core i9 7590 SKUs come equipped with copper pipes and fins instead of the usual aluminum. Dell says this change will help cool the demanding hardware more effectively even though our benchmark data below will show that this might not be enough.
Dell has implemented additional cooling measures over the VRM MOSFET components that lie directly above the processors.
Accessories and Warranty
There are no extras in the box other than the usual paperwork. A USB-to-Ethernet adapter or cleaning cloth would have been nice additions.
The standard one-year limited warranty applies. As one of the world's largest OEMs and providers of IT services, Dell also offers a wider range of warranty extensions than most. Buyers can sign up for up to 4 years of premium support and 2 years of extended battery service if desired.
Input Devices
Keyboard and Trackpad
The input devices have not changed since the early XPS 15 9550 days meaning that our 2015 comments still apply here. Since then, however, newer Ultrabooks have come to market with crisper and firmer keys for a less spongy feel. We personally prefer the keyboard on the Spectre x360 15 over the XPS 15 as its keys have stronger and "clickier" feedback when pressed in addition to an integrated NumPad. Meanwhile, the glass clickpad continues to be reliable without any major issues even though it's not as accurate as touchpads with dedicated mouse keys.
Display
All 15.6-inch 4K UHD OLED laptops thus far have been sourcing their panels from Samsung. Thus, they all offer very similar visual experiences between them. In the case of the XPS 15, OLED addresses one of our biggest gripes about the series: slow black-white and gray-gray response times. The IPS panels of XPS 15 laptops have always had very noticeable ghosting especially now that fast 3 ms and 5 ms IPS panels are becoming more commonplace. The glossy OLED panel offers the crispness of 4K UHD IPS with essentially infinite contrast and no ghosting to be the best-looking XPS 15 display yet. It's tough to go back to the "regular" 60 Hz 4K UHD IPS SKU after growing accustomed to 60 Hz 4K UHD OLED.
There are a few drawbacks to the OLED panel. While bright at 400 nits, Dell's baseline 1080p IPS matte option is actually brighter at 500 nits. Secondly, it has the potential to consume more power than IPS depending on what is displayed as shown on our Power Consumption section. Thirdly, OLED is limited to a refresh rate of 60 Hz meaning that 120/144/240 Hz IPS panels, which aren't available on the XPS 15 yet, feel smoother to use. And lastly, only higher-end SKUs of the XPS 15 7590 with Core i7 and discrete GeForce graphics can be configured with OLED.
|
Brightness Distribution: 94 %
Center on Battery: 418.4 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.06 | 0.55-29.43 Ø5.1
ΔE Greyscale 2.8 | 0.57-98 Ø5.4
99.6% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
81% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
91.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.6% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
88.1% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.15
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029, OLED, 15.60, 3840x2160 | Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD LQ156D1, IPS, 15.60, 3840x2160 | Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD BOE07D8, IPS, 15.60, 1920x1080 | HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng AU Optronics AUO30EB, IPS, 15.60, 3840x2160 | Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA Samsung SDCA029, OLED, 15.60, 3840x2160 | Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q Sharp LQ156M1JW03 (SHP14C5), IPS, 15.60, 1920x1080 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | -8% | -22% | -18% | -17% | ||
Display P3 Coverage | 88.1 | 79.6 -10% | 67.2 -24% | 68.1 -23% | 66.9 -24% | |
sRGB Coverage | 99.6 | 98.4 -1% | 88.4 -11% | 94.2 -5% | 98.1 -2% | |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 91.8 | 79.7 -13% | 64.6 -30% | 68.4 -25% | 68.5 -25% | |
Response Times | -605% | -1650% | -1785% | 2% | 13042% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 2.3 ? | 52.4 ? -2178% | 45 ? -1857% | 57 ? -2378% | 2.4 ? -4% | 12.8 ? -457% |
Response Time Black / White * | 2.4 ? | 31.6 ? -1217% | 37 ? -1442% | 31 ? -1192% | 2.2 ? 8% | 10.4 ? -333% |
PWM Frequency | 59.5 ? | 1000 ? 1581% | 60 ? 1% | 23810 ? 39917% | ||
Screen | -28% | -18% | -9% | 7% | 8% | |
Brightness middle | 421.2 | 451.9 7% | 311 -26% | 330 -22% | 373 -11% | 293 -30% |
Brightness | 417 | 414 -1% | 303 -27% | 310 -26% | 375 -10% | 270 -35% |
Brightness Distribution | 94 | 81 -14% | 81 -14% | 87 -7% | 93 -1% | 87 -7% |
Black Level * | 0.36 | 0.24 | 0.37 | 0.29 | ||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 6.06 | 5.62 7% | 5.1 16% | 4.03 33% | 3.98 34% | 1.69 72% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 11.89 | 19.1 -61% | 8.91 25% | 6.74 43% | 6.28 47% | 3.37 72% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.8 | 6.9 -146% | 4.93 -76% | 4.49 -60% | 2.81 -0% | 2.3 18% |
Gamma | 2.15 102% | 2.2 100% | 2.44 90% | 2.57 86% | 2.62 84% | 2.3 96% |
CCT | 6235 104% | 6254 104% | 7641 85% | 6744 96% | 6434 101% | 6758 96% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 81 | 71.8 -11% | 58 -28% | 61 -25% | 78 -4% | 63 -22% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 99.6 | 98.5 -1% | 88 -12% | 94 -6% | 97 -3% | 98.5 -1% |
Contrast | 1255 | 1296 | 892 | 1010 | ||
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 2.69 | 2.48 | 1.96 | 1.24 | ||
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -214% /
-147% | -563% /
-270% | -604% /
-284% | 5% /
5% | 4344% /
2796% |
* ... smaller is better
The Samsung panel promises 100 percent DCI-P3 coverage to offer similar color reproduction as many OLED smartphones including the iPhone 8 and Google Pixel 3. Our own independent calculations show 81 percent 3D coverage of the AdobeRGB standard to be wider than on the 4K UHD IPS XPS 15 9570. In other words, it's capable of displaying deeper colors than most other IPS Ultrabooks where ~60 percent AdobeRGB coverage is more common.
X-Rite colorimeter measurements show color temperature to be slightly warmer than expected. Thus, deltaE of colors and grayscale will trend higher when at higher saturation levels. An end-user calibration would address this, but it's not necessary for most users.
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.1 ms rise | |
↘ 1.3 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (22.3 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
2.3 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 1.1 ms rise | |
↘ 1.2 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (35.1 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 59.5 Hz | ≤ 100 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 59.5 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 59.5 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 19035 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. |
After checking out a handful of OLED laptops, we've noticed that they all exhibit unique PWM behaviors not found on standard IPS laptops and the XPS 15 OLED is no different. Our results below show a pulse-width modulation frequency of 59.52 Hz even when at the maximum brightness setting. This frequency changes to 240.4 Hz when the brightness is set to 51 percent or lower not unlike what we discovered on the Razer Blade 15 OLED. Unless if your eyes are super-sensitive to onscreen flickering, however, then you're likely not going to notice.
Outdoor visibility seems better than a typical IPS panel. The bright backlight and very high contrast of OLED help to alleviate washed out colors and text when outside. Viewing from slight angles will introduce a blue hue to impact visibility and colors that would otherwise not occur on an IPS display. This will impact the viewing experience of peripheral users if sharing the laptop outdoors.
Viewing angles are better than IPS in that contrast and grayscale remain almost the same from extreme angles whereas an IPS panel will have slight but noticeable shifting. Unique to OLED, however, is that extreme angles (~150 degrees or more) will introduce a rainbow banding effect that impacts colors as shown by a screenshot below. This thankfully does not occur when looking directly at the screen from a normal angle.
Performance
The XPS 15 series has always been about offering high performance Ultrabooks with Intel Core H-series CPUs and dedicated GPU options. However, Dell may be packing in *too* much performance for the higher-end SKUs as our results below will show. With that said, very few ultra-thin alternatives exist with the same unlocked Core i9 CPU and GTX 1650 graphics options as found on our specific configuration.
LatencyMon shows poor interrupt times yet again despite what Dell may have suggested in the past. The issue occurs more frequently when the wireless is enabled and so we recommend disabling the wireless if low latency is priority.
Processor
CPU performance is not very consistent. Scores will look excellent if you're only running benchmarks once and then call it a day, but weaknesses become apparent when running CPU heavy tasks for extended periods. As shown by our CineBench R15 Multi-Thread loop graph below, the Dell system is unable to maintain high Turbo Boost clock rates for very long at all with noticeable performance drops of about 15 percent to 20 percent almost immediately. After accounting for throttling, raw multi-thread performance is only about 15 percent faster than the older Core i9-8950HK in the XPS 15 9570. Our thicker Schenker gaming laptop equipped with the same unlocked i9-9980HK as our XPS 15 7590 is able to maintain higher Turbo Boost clock rates over time for roughly 12 percent faster performance.
The tendency for the Core i9 CPU in the XPS to throttle sooner also means that it is the slowest iteration of the i9-9980HK we've seen thus far. Results are about 15 percent slower than the average i9-9980HK in our database. If you want the best that the 9th gen Core i9 has to offer, then you would be better off with the much larger MSI GE75 or Schenker.
Undervolting by 0.115 V will produce better scores on average much like what we discovered on the last generation XPS 15 9570. We're able to record a stable performance boost of about 8 to 15 percent when undervolted. Pushing our luck even further to -0.125 V would result in a system crash.
Since the high Turbo Boost clock rate is so short-lived on the XPS 15, the Core i9 SKU will most benefit users who want that short burst of CPU power instead of performance sustainability.
See our dedicated page on the Core i9-9980HK for more technical information and benchmarks.
Cinebench R11.5 | |
CPU Single 64Bit | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (2.25 - 2.4, n=3) | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 | |
Eurocom Sky X4C | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T | |
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD | |
CPU Multi 64Bit | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (14.8 - 18, n=3) | |
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T | |
Eurocom Sky X4C | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD |
Cinebench R10 | |
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (39440 - 50439, n=4) | |
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing | |
Eurocom Sky X4C | |
Dell G5 15 5590 | |
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
Rendering Single 32Bit | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (7709 - 9734, n=4) | |
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing | |
Eurocom Sky X4C | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Dell G5 15 5590 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T | |
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD |
wPrime 2.10 - 1024m | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
Eurocom Sky X4C | |
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK (110.4 - 120.2, n=2) |
* ... smaller is better
System Performance
PCMark results are consistently higher than what the last generation XPS 15 9570 was able to offer and even many gaming laptops with GeForce RTX graphics. The only exception is in the Digital Creation benchmark which favors systems with higher-end GPUs.
We didn't experience any wake-sleep fan issues that some last generation models suffered from including on our last XPS 15 9570. We will say, however, that power consumption when in Sleep mode would sometimes be as high as 9 W to 19 W likely due to Microsoft's Modern Standby mode. Even the bottom of the notebook would grow warm just by being in Sleep mode. When most other laptops are in Sleep mode, consumption would be just under 2 W.
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3799 points | |
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4762 points | |
PCMark 10 Score | 5469 points | |
Help |
Storage Devices
The three XPS 15 9570 SKUs we tested last year all came with three different SSDs from Samsung, Lite-On, and Toshiba. It's more than likely that Dell sources multiple OEMs for all its storage needs in contrast to Razer and its exclusive Blade 15/17 Samsung SSD offerings. This approach can make it challenging for users who may prefer a specific brand of SSD when purchasing an XPS.
Our 7590 SKU comes equipped with a 1 TB Toshiba XG6 NVMe M.2 drive which is an upgrade from the Toshiba XG5 as found on one of our last XPS 15 9570 SKUs. The XG6 offers about the same theoretical sequential read speeds over the XG5 (3180 MB/s vs. 3000 MB/s) but with much faster sequential write speeds (2960 MB/s vs. 2100 MB/s). CDM 5.5 results show write speeds to be faster than the XG5 especially when writing at smaller block sizes.
Note that results will vary between different storage capacities especially since there could be multiple SSD manufacturers involved.
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02 | Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR | Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G | HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 | Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
AS SSD | -4% | -22% | -45% | -4% | |
Seq Read | 1723 | 1320 -23% | 579 -66% | 2018 17% | 2095 22% |
Seq Write | 1386 | 1500 8% | 411.8 -70% | 773 -44% | 1464 6% |
4K Read | 43.25 | 30.73 -29% | 41.81 -3% | 24.62 -43% | 56.8 31% |
4K Write | 98.3 | 94.4 -4% | 131.6 34% | 92.8 -6% | 109.8 12% |
4K-64 Read | 1078 | 1453 35% | 975 -10% | 845 -22% | 871 -19% |
4K-64 Write | 1456 | 1815 25% | 1047 -28% | 957 -34% | 773 -47% |
Access Time Read * | 0.05 | 0.061 -22% | 0.08 -60% | 0.147 -194% | 0.045 10% |
Access Time Write * | 0.039 | 0.044 -13% | 0.027 31% | 0.057 -46% | 0.033 15% |
Score Read | 1294 | 1616 25% | 1075 -17% | 1071 -17% | 1137 -12% |
Score Write | 1693 | 2059 22% | 1220 -28% | 1127 -33% | 1029 -39% |
Score Total | 3638 | 4507 24% | 2845 -22% | 2684 -26% | 2732 -25% |
Copy ISO MB/s | 3182 | 2577 -19% | 1652 -48% | ||
Copy Program MB/s | 984 | 515 -48% | 328.5 -67% | ||
Copy Game MB/s | 1824 | 1120 -39% | 700 -62% |
* ... smaller is better
GPU Performance
The Turing GTX 1650 offers 15 to 50 percent faster graphics performance over the Pascal GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q as found on last generation XPS 15 9570 SKUs. As mentioned before, Turing GPUs are highly optimized for DX12 meaning that you'll have to be playing DX12-compatible games if you want that massive 50 percent boost over the GTX 1050 Ti. If you plan on mainly playing DX11 titles or older or running other applications that don't utilize DX12, however, then you won't be exploiting all the benefits of the GTX 1650. Users can expect gaming performance to be about 10 to 25 percent slower than the popular mobile GTX 1060.
When compared to the average GTX 1650 GPU in our database taken from 11 other laptops, the XPS 15 9570 comes out at the bottom to be about 4 to 8 percent slower than expected.
Dell says it has no plans to introduce faster GTX 1660 Ti or GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q SKUs at the moment. The GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GPU has a 10 W higher power envelope than the GTX 1650 and such a configuration would be straining the XPS 15 cooling system even more than it already is.
3DMark 11 Performance | 12340 points | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 30573 points | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 7356 points | |
3DMark Time Spy Score | 3676 points | |
Help |
Gaming Performance
Real-world gaming performance paints a similar picture to the above findings, if not worse. When compared to other laptops with the same GTX 1650 GPU, frame rates on the XPS 15 7590 would be about 15 to 25 percent slower. This means that the performance delta between the GTX 1650 and last generation GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q are much narrower than anticipated. In other words, you can still game on the XPS 15, but don't expect it to be that much better than on last year's model. A "proper" gaming laptop with the exact same GTX 1650 GPU like the MSI GF75, for example, is able to deliver up to 30 percent faster frame rates than our XPS 15 in Shadow of the Tomb Raider.
Idling on Witcher 3 shows consistent frame rates throughout with no recurring dips. There is no throttling behavior to speak of on our unit; instead, performance is just slower than average for this particular GPU.
See our dedicated page on the GeForce GTX 1650 for more technical information and average benchmark comparisons.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Highest Preset AA:T | |
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080 | |
MSI GE75 9SG | |
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2060 | |
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA | |
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl | |
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC | |
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile (34 - 47, n=15) | |
Asus Zephyrus S GX531GM | |
Asus G752VY | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 | |
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T |
Rocket League - 1920x1080 High Quality AA:High FX | |
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile (96.4 - 162.2, n=6) | |
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng | |
Asus GL703GE-ES73 | |
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 |