Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarSchenker XMG Focus 17 (E23) in review: Gaming laptop with RTX 4070 doesn't skimp on performance
The Schenker XMG Focus 17 E23 gaming notebook (barebone: NP70SNE-G) focuses on the essentials. With the outstanding i9 processor and optionally an RTX 4050, 4060, or 4070 there is enough performance for gaming. The display also offers 240 Hz and a sufficient amount of pixels.
However, there are no extraordinary extras, special features, or the best design. The case has changed compared to our last review of the XMG Focus 17 (Clevo NP70HK) from 2021, so that more detailed information about the case, build, and equipment can be found in this article. Apart from the gaming performance, the laptop is also rather modest. In return, it stays well below 2,000 Euros (depending on the configuration) and is not much more expensive in the top configuration we tested.
The rivals like the Medion Erazer Major X20 or a Lenovo Legion Pro 5 take similar paths and use comparable hardware. However, they do not save as consistently as Schenker's laptop, as our detailed test update shows.
Possible competitors in comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 85.9 % | 06/2023 | SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | 2.9 kg | 29.3 mm | 17.30" | 2560x1440 | |
| 88.4 % | 05/2023 | Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 R7 7745HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | 2.5 kg | 26.8 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 | |
| 89 % | 04/2023 | Medion Erazer Major X20 i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU | 2.4 kg | 29 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 | |
| 87.6 % | 08/2022 | SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 R9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU | 2.8 kg | 27 mm | 17.00" | 2560x1600 | |
| 85.4 % | 03/2023 | HP Omen 17-ck2097ng i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU | 2.8 kg | 27 mm | 17.30" | 2560x1440 | |
| 84.6 % | 05/2023 | Medion Erazer Defender P40 i7-13700HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Laptop GPU | 2.9 kg | 33 mm | 17.30" | 2560x1440 |
Equipment - Everything from TB4 to USB 2.0
Compared to the predecessor, there are many similarities in the ports, but fortunately a few refreshes. There is still a USB 2.0 port, which should still be enough for a mouse or printer. Mini-DP has also been retained.
The simple USB-C connector has been moved to the back and delivers rates up to 10 Gbit/s, but neither PD nor DP is supported. Thunderbolt 4 is on the right, but unfortunately, there is no USB-A port anymore. In addition, the card slot has shrunk to microSD in the current version, which limits the versatility considerably.
SD Card Reader
Our measurements with the reference AV PRO V60 microSD 128 GB card are not quite average but partly a bit better than the competition. That is enough to copy a few thousand pictures in a few minutes.
| SD Card Reader | |
| average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Average of class Gaming (19 - 202, n=101, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
| Average of class Gaming (26 - 269, n=92, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
Communication
The WLAN module Intel AX211 fulfills the expectations. However, the typical average rates are only achieved in a 6 GHz network in our measurements and even slightly exceeded. The slight weakness at 5 GHz is most likely explained by interfering influences of neighboring wireless networks, which we naturally could not deactivate in the test.
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average of class Gaming (648 - 1780, n=129, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211 (464 - 1861, n=142) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (685 - 1890, n=136, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211 (826 - 1890, n=142) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average of class Gaming (843 - 1878, n=65, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211 (713 - 1851, n=149) | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (853 - 1857, n=67, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211 (883 - 1857, n=148) | |
Maintenance
Considerable changes with a view to the XMG Focus 17 from 2021 have been made to the interior. All cooling elements are now made of copper and air can escape to both sides. The outdated SATA port for a 2.5-inch SSD has disappeared. Instead, there is a second slot for an M.2 NVMe SSD.
As expected from Schenker, access to the components is easy. After loosening twelve identical screws, the bottom can be pulled off with little effort starting from the rear cooling. RAM, SSD, WLAN module, and battery are then easily accessible and replaceable.
Display - Strong colors, meager contrasts on the XMG gaming notebook
The matte IPS panel of the XMG Focus 17 meets the expectations of a solid but not outstanding gaming notebook. The QHD resolution comes into its own on the large diagonal of 17,3 inches/In addition, the refresh rate of 240 Hz ensures low latencies even when the frame rate is not reached in games.
Not quite convincing are the response times, which are not optimal at over 10 ms, but acceptable. The poor black level prevents a better contrast. A gray haze is visible in very dark scenes with minimal lighting in the room. With a ratio of 623:1 measured by us, the contrast here is only just under half of the value of the Medion Erazer Defender P40 or HP Omen 17-ck. Screen bleeding is also clearly visible.
The illumination could be a bit more even, and the brightness of 320 cd/m² a bit higher. Thus, the display rates are below average compared to many similarly priced models.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 82 %
Center on Battery: 349 cd/m²
Contrast: 623:1 (Black: 0.56 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.08 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5.1, calibrated: 1.08
ΔE Greyscale 1.14 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
84.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
96.6% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.41
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) BOE09F9 NE173QHM-NZ1, IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30 | Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 CSOT T3 MNG007DA1-Q, IPS, 2560x1600, 16.00 | Medion Erazer Major X20 BOE CQ NE160QDM-NZ1, IPS, 2560x1600, 16.00 | SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 BOE0A99, IPS, 2560x1600, 17.00 | HP Omen 17-ck2097ng BOE BOE09BF, IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30 | Medion Erazer Defender P40 BOE CQ NE173QHM-NZ3, IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -14% | -15% | -16% | -17% | -16% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 96.6 | 70.4 -27% | 69.4 -28% | 69 -29% | 67.4 -30% | 68.3 -29% |
| sRGB Coverage | 99.9 | 99.6 0% | 98 -2% | 99.8 0% | 97.6 -2% | 98.1 -2% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 84.5 | 72.6 -14% | 70.9 -16% | 69.6 -18% | 69.6 -18% | 69.8 -17% |
| Response Times | 37% | 26% | 39% | 12% | 15% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 16.4 ? | 7 ? 57% | 13.1 ? 20% | 10.8 ? 34% | 15.6 ? 5% | 14.6 ? 11% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 10.8 ? | 9.1 ? 16% | 7.3 ? 32% | 6.1 ? 44% | 8.9 ? 18% | 8.7 ? 19% |
| PWM Frequency | ||||||
| Screen | 21% | -23% | 9% | -7% | 11% | |
| Brightness middle | 349 | 355.3 2% | 374 7% | 415 19% | 371 6% | 364 4% |
| Brightness | 318 | 340 7% | 357 12% | 399 25% | 350 10% | 343 8% |
| Brightness Distribution | 82 | 91 11% | 92 12% | 90 10% | 90 10% | 86 5% |
| Black Level * | 0.56 | 0.32 43% | 0.33 41% | 0.43 23% | 0.32 43% | 0.28 50% |
| Contrast | 623 | 1110 78% | 1133 82% | 965 55% | 1159 86% | 1300 109% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.08 | 1.13 -5% | 2.43 -125% | 1.44 -33% | 1.74 -61% | 1.67 -55% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.05 | 2.78 9% | 3.97 -30% | 2.33 24% | 3.59 -18% | 2.78 9% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.08 | 0.32 70% | 1.4 -30% | 0.89 18% | 1.01 6% | 1.14 -6% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.14 | 1.4 -23% | 3.1 -172% | 1.8 -58% | 2.8 -146% | 1.4 -23% |
| Gamma | 2.41 91% | 2.24 98% | 2.191 100% | 2.132 103% | 2.19 100% | 2.091 105% |
| CCT | 6687 97% | 6372 102% | 6194 105% | 6327 103% | 6474 100% | 6568 99% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 15% /
16% | -4% /
-14% | 11% /
8% | -4% /
-7% | 3% /
6% |
* ... smaller is better
The color reproduction is very good. The sRGB color space used for games and most non-professional applications is basically completely covered. Even DCI-P3 can be represented to a large extent. Thus, the color reproduction is above average.
The low color deviations measured without prior calibration are remarkable. Even the maximum determined DeltaE of just under 3 means that no differences can be detected with the naked eye. Thus, the display does not have to be adjusted afterwards for an optimal display.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 10.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 6.2 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 0.1 (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 (21.8 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 16.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 7.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 9 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 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 24 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (34.3 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 18694 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
With only 350 cd/m², outdoor visibility suffers significantly. Colors can still be recognized well in a shady place. However, if a bit more light falls on the screen, texts can at most still be recognized sufficiently well. This is also true on a cloudy day.
The color reproduction from different viewing directions is expectedly good. The IPS panel does not reveal any color changes and the brightness also remains almost constant, even from a sharp angle.
Performance - Solid gaming with the Focus 17
Especially the strong Nvidia Geforce RTX 4070 determines the application possibilities of the Focus 17 E23. The GPU offers a lot of performance paired with enough VRAM for current titles that can mostly be played at the native QHD resolution and almost all details. This should also apply to upcoming games in the near future.
At the same time, a good working speed is guaranteed thanks to the Intel Core i9-13900HX. Complex applications can be processed quickly. Multitasking does not pose a problem even to a high degree. However, the CPU performance is secondary at best in a gaming notebook.
Test conditions
Four predefined performance modes can be selected in the preinstalled ControlCenter. We always used the "Performance Mode" for our tests and benchmarks, which ensures the highest fan speeds and maximum power supply to the GPU and CPU.
The values are minimally weaker in "Entertainment Mode". Only the CPU's performance is slightly reduced here, so noticeable effects on gaming are hardly to be expected. "Silent mode", on the other hand, restricts the system performance considerably, but the noise development fades into the background, even if it does not disappear completely. Less demanding games remain playable even in this mode. Among others, Witcher 3 reaches more than 60 fps on the highest settings and in Full HD.
The "Power-saving mode" completely disables the dedicated graphics chip and is, according to the current state of affairs, mandatory to achieve halfway acceptable battery runtimes, at least on the system we tested.
Processor
A total of 32 threads and 36 MB Level 3 cache as well as the maximum clock rate of 5.4 GHz indicate it: The Intel Core i9-13900HX is currently one of the best mobile CPUs. It is optimally used for multitasking and computationally intensive applications and leaves the predecessor Intel Core i9-12900HX or an AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX behind.
In the XMG Focus 17, the CPU receives up to 162 W for fractions of a second. At least 135 W can be fed for half a minute. Unfortunately, the cooling cannot quite cope with the high heat development. In the Medion Erazer Major X20, the identical processor remains stable at maximum performance. In Focus 17, the performance drops by over 20% in the Cinebench R15 test. However, the i9 in HP's Omen 17-ck2097ng even loses 30%, so the overall behavior seems acceptable.
The fact that the processor is somewhat overdimensioned becomes apparent when we look at the "Entertainment Mode". The fan remains loud here as well, although the power supply is lowered from 135 W to 55 W. At the same time, we do not measure any serious performance reduction, especially in games. This is because the CPU can only be operated sufficiently stably with this power consumption in the long run. Accordingly, the power mode only has an effect during short-term loads.
Only 15 W are granted in the quiet and energy-saving modes and 30 W for short periods.
More measurements, comparison data, and information can be found in our CPU benchmark list.
Cinebench R15 Multi loop
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
| Cinebench R23 / Multi Core | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (24270 - 32623, n=22) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (2435 - 34613, n=237, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Cinebench R23 / Single Core | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (1867 - 2105, n=19) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (527 - 2169, n=235, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (9152 - 12541, n=20) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (930 - 13769, n=235, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (722 - 810, n=20) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (169 - 825, n=235, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (3913 - 4970, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (400 - 5663, n=241, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (247 - 304, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Average of class Gaming (79.2 - 312, n=240, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Average of class Gaming (87 - 1259, n=233, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (101 - 153, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (90675 - 127283, n=20) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (11386 - 140932, n=232, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| 7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (6340 - 7177, n=20) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Average of class Gaming (2685 - 7581, n=233, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (17614 - 21075, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (1946 - 22200, n=239, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (1345 - 2093, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Average of class Gaming (158 - 2139, n=239, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (23.5 - 34.4, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (3 - 37.6, n=236, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (32.8 - 332, n=231, last 2 years) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (32.8 - 51.1, n=20) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (0.375 - 4.47, n=233, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| MSI Titan GT77 12UHS | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (0.375 - 0.4564, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (17589 - 27615, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (2585 - 60169, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (88686 - 137015, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (12439 - 252486, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (4362 - 7029, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (629 - 10389, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (125644 - 141385, n=21) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (15371 - 200651, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (12334 - 17179, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (2137 - 32988, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (43850 - 69202, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (7135 - 134044, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (89413 - 237881, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average of class Gaming (18146 - 328679, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (1284 - 1958, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average of class Gaming (150.9 - 2409, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (9481 - 15279, n=21) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (1437 - 31796, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (42994 - 51994, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (8341 - 60161, n=230, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
System performance
Many processor cores, a lot of RAM with fast access, and a fast SSD drive the system in every situation. Even a game paused in the background only slows down a little. From extensive multitasking with open video editing software to countless browser tabs, hardly anything causes Focus 17 serious problems.
Although it is relatively far behind in the field of rivals with similar hardware, it nevertheless achieves a more than the solid rating that promises more than enough performance for demanding tasks.
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
| PCMark 10 / Score | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (6956 - 8153, n=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (4477 - 9852, n=200, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (9865 - 11653, n=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (7334 - 12334, n=199, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (9470 - 9850, n=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (6161 - 11833, n=199, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (9776 - 13370, n=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (5288 - 18475, n=199, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| CrossMark / Overall | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (1842 - 2029, n=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (974 - 2295, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| CrossMark / Productivity | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (1700 - 1872, n=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (907 - 2166, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| CrossMark / Creativity | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (2088 - 2316, n=3) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average of class Gaming (1027 - 2514, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average of class Gaming (1029 - 2275, n=160, last 2 years) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Laptop GPU (1557 - 1752, n=3) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 6956 points | |
Help | ||
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (67716 - 78835, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (18074 - 88014, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (73998 - 88462, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Average of class Gaming (20318 - 89096, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (65472 - 77045, n=21) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Average of class Gaming (15975 - 103259, n=229, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| Average Intel Core i9-13900HX (80.4 - 91.1, n=21) | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Average of class Gaming (76.2 - 136.8, n=226, last 2 years) | |
* ... smaller is better
DPC latencies
Other gaming notebooks with the same CPU perform much worse than the XMG Focus 17. It does not achieve an optimal result but should work satisfactorily in most tasks where a smooth process is needed. It can do even better, but it should only be of secondary importance for most users.
The biggest difficulties are caused by the graphics card driver from Nvidia, which will hopefully be improved via an update in the future. Also praiseworthy and by no means the norm is the smooth video playback in 4K without dropped frames. Thus, the present build and the driver equipment seem to harmonize.
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
* ... smaller is better
Mass storage
The installed M.2 SSD Crucial P5 Plus is not a premium model. However, it achieves good transfer rates via PCIe 4.0 and remains very stable in the long-term test, which is due to the additional cooling in the gaming laptop's base plate.
Thus, no obstructions or delays during loading, program execution, etc. are to be expected from the mass storage.
| DiskSpd | |
| seq read | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Crucial P5 Plus 1TB CT1000P5PSSD8 (2945 - 3972, n=4) | |
| Average of class Gaming (1291 - 6045, n=199, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| seq write | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |
| Medion Erazer Defender P40 | |
| Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16ARX8 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 M22 | |
| SCHENKER XMG Focus 17 (E23) | |
| Average Crucial P5 Plus 1TB CT1000P5PSSD8 (2991 - 4252, n=4) | |
| Average of class Gaming (535 - 9108, n=199, last 2 years) | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| seq q8 t1 read | |
| Medion Erazer Major X20 | |
| HP Omen 17-ck2097ng | |