Notebookcheck Logo

Test: Gigabyte A7 X1 - Spellaptop med stabil och uthållig prestanda (Sammanfattning)

AMD/Nvidia-kombo. I sin A7 X1 kombinerar Gigabyte en lättuppgraderbar laptop med en kraftfull AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX CPU och en Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 GPU. Läs vidare för att få reda på vad denna lovande hårdvaruplattform kan göra för din vardagsgaming.
AMD Gaming Geforce Windows Ryzen (Zen) Laptop / Notebook
Gigabyte A7 X1
Processor
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX 8 x 3.3 - 4.6 GHz, 65 W PL2 / Short Burst, 54 W PL1 / Sustained, Cezanne-H (Zen 3)
Grafikkort
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU - 8 GB VRAM, Kärna: 1560 MHz, Minne: 1750 MHz, 140 W TDP, NVIDIA 471.68, AMD Radeon RX Vega 8
Minne
16 GB 
, Dubbla kanaler
Skärm
17.30 tum 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixlar 127 PPI, AU Optronics AUO8E8D, IPS, glansig: nej, 144 Hz
Moderkort
AMD Promontory/Bixby FCH
Hårddisk
ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4, 512 GB 
, 470 GB ledigt
Ljudkort
AMD Raven/Renoir/Van Gogh/Cezanne/Rembrandt/Raphael - HD Audio Controller
Anslutningar
1 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0, 2 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensingtonlås, Ljudanslutningar: 1x ljud, 1x mikrofon
Nätverk
Realtek RTL8125 2.5GBe Family Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000/2500MBit/s), Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5.2
Storlek
höjd x bredd x djup (i mm) 34 x 396 x 262
Batteri
48.96 Wh Litiumjon
Operativsystem
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webbkamera: 0.9 MP, 16:9 (1280x720)
Övrigt
Högtalare: 2x 2W, Tangentbord: Chiclet, Tangentbordsbelysning: ja, 24 Månader Garanti
Vikt
2.53 kg, Strömförsörjning: 692 g
Pris
1 Kr
Länkar
Gigabyte hemsida
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Testgrupp

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

Storleksjämförelse

❌
396 mm 262 mm 34 mm 2.5 kg399 mm 269 mm 26 mm 2.7 kg396 mm 261 mm 27 mm 2.5 kg395 mm 262 mm 23 mm 2.3 kg395 mm 262 mm 23 mm 2.2 kg297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g
Vänster: Kensington-lås, Nätadapter, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 1, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 2
Vänster: Kensington-lås, Nätadapter, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 1, 1x USB-A 3.2 Gen 2
Höger: 1x Mikrofon, 1x Headset, 1x USB 2.0
Höger: 1x Mikrofon, 1x Headset, 1x USB 2.0
Baksidan: 1x Mini DP 1.4, HDMI, 2.5 Gigabit LAN, 1x USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 (inkl. DP 1.4)
Baksidan: 1x Mini DP 1.4, HDMI, 2.5 Gigabit LAN, 1x USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 (inkl. DP 1.4)
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Medion Erazer Beast X25
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1498 (748min - 1544max) MBit/s +52%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1351 (1239min - 1420max) MBit/s +37%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1350 MBit/s +37%
Average of class Gaming
  (885 - 1412, n=4, last 2 years)
1139 MBit/s +15%
Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
  (447 - 1645, n=127)
1104 MBit/s +12%
Gigabyte A7 X1
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
988 (942min - 1041max) MBit/s
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
 
582 (312min - 680max) MBit/s -41%
iperf3 receive AX12
Gigabyte A7 X1
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1432 (1269min - 1668max) MBit/s
Medion Erazer Beast X25
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1390 (669min - 1618max) MBit/s -3%
Average of class Gaming
  (881 - 1700, n=4, last 2 years)
1379 MBit/s -4%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1370 MBit/s -4%
Average Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
  (523 - 1684, n=128)
1191 MBit/s -17%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1021 (947min - 1109max) MBit/s -29%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
 
569 (350min - 709max) MBit/s -60%
05010015020025030035040045050055060065070075080085090095010001050110011501200125013001350140014501500155016001650Tooltip
Gigabyte A7 X1; iperf3 receive AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø1432 (1269-1668)
Gigabyte A7 X1; iperf3 transmit AX12; iperf 3.1.3: Ø988 (942-1041)
ColorChecker
18.4 ∆E
19.6 ∆E
22.6 ∆E
20.4 ∆E
19.4 ∆E
17.8 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
27.7 ∆E
19.5 ∆E
16 ∆E
16 ∆E
16.8 ∆E
20 ∆E
21.4 ∆E
19.3 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
18.8 ∆E
27.4 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
11.8 ∆E
20 ∆E
20.4 ∆E
15.6 ∆E
9.8 ∆E
ColorChecker Gigabyte A7 X1: 17.82 ∆E min: 2.33 - max: 27.7 ∆E
313
cd/m²		326
cd/m²		319
cd/m²
319
cd/m²		325
cd/m²		315
cd/m²
315
cd/m²		320
cd/m²		311
cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan
AU Optronics AUO8E8D tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Max: 326 cd/m² (Nits) Medel: 318.1 cd/m² Minimum: 15 cd/m²
Distribution av ljusstyrkan: 95 %
Mitt på batteriet: 325 cd/m²
Kontrast: 1121:1 (Svärta: 0.29 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.33 | 0.5-29.43 Ø5, calibrated: 1.95
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.57-98 Ø5.3
63.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
90.9% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
61.5% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.142
Gigabyte A7 X1
AU Optronics AUO8E8D, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30		Medion Erazer Beast X25
BOE NE173FHM-NZ1 (BOE0884), IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30		Medion Erazer Beast X20
BOE CQ NE173QHM-NY2, IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30		Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
AU Optronics AUI8294 (B173HAN04.9), IPS, 1920x1080, 17.30		SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
BOE NE173QHM-NY2 (BOE0977), IPS, 2560x1440, 17.30
Display
12%
12%
-34%
13%
Display P3 Coverage
61.5
70.4
14%
70.1
14%
40.1
-35%
70.5
15%
sRGB Coverage
90.9
99.8
10%
99
9%
60
-34%
99.5
9%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
63.2
71.6
13%
71.3
13%
41.4
-34%
71.8
14%
Response Times
45%
6%
-105%
1%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
16 ?(7.6, 8.4)
9.2 ?(4.8, 4.4)
42%
16 ?(8.4, 7.6)
-0%
32.4
-103%
16.8 ?(8.4, 8.4)
-5%
Response Time Black / White *
10.8 ?(6.4, 4.4)
5.6 ?(2.8, 2.8)
48%
9.6 ?(4.4, 5.2)
11%
22.4
-107%
10 ?(4, 6)
7%
PWM Frequency
Screen
17%
19%
-11%
19%
Brightness middle
325
329
1%
370
14%
266
-18%
410
26%
Brightness
318
315
-1%
341
7%
264
-17%
381
20%
Brightness Distribution
95
88
-7%
82
-14%
79
-17%
88
-7%
Black Level *
0.29
0.33
-14%
0.42
-45%
0.32
-10%
0.37
-28%
Contrast
1121
997
-11%
881
-21%
831
-26%
1108
-1%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
4.33
2.03
53%
1.76
59%
3.97
8%
2.55
41%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
8.6
5.5
36%
2.88
67%
8.93
-4%
4.33
50%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
1.95
0.82
58%
1.3
33%
3.5
-79%
1.28
34%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
5.5
3.5
36%
1.8
67%
1.8
67%
3.4
38%
Gamma
2.142 103%
2.223 99%
2.176 101%
2.31 95%
2.275 97%
CCT
7893 82%
6526 100%
6543 99%
6754 96%
6637 98%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
41.4
72
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
60
95
Total Average (Program / Settings)
25% / 20%
12% / 15%
-50% / -29%
11% / 15%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

ℹ
Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
   ↔    Response Time Black to White
10.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 6.4 ms rise
↘ 4.4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 24 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21.5 ms).
   ↔    Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
16 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.6 ms rise
↘ 8.4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.2 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 25 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (33.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ
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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 17900 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.

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

Cinebench R15 Multi Uthållighetstest

01102203304405506607708809901100121013201430154016501760187019802090Tooltip
Gigabyte A7 X1 AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX: Ø2064 (2046.66-2087.25)
Medion Erazer Beast X25 AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX: Ø2004 (1981.96-2041.34)
Medion Erazer Beast X20 Intel Core i7-10870H: Ø1321 (1310.36-1336.01)
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM Intel Core i9-11900H: Ø1874 (1698.44-2029.22)
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H) AMD Ryzen 7 5800H: Ø2061 (2036.87-2108.48)
Cinebench R23 | Cinebench R20 | Cinebench R15 | Blender | 7-Zip 18.03 | Geekbench 5.5 | HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 | LibreOffice | R Benchmark 2.5
Cinebench R23
Multi Core
Average of class Gaming
  (2435 - 34613, n=232, last 2 years)
19581 Points +57%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (6622 - 14363, n=30)
12529 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
12476 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
12373 Points -1%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
11739 Points -6%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
11567 Points -7%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
8250 Points -34%
Single Core
Average of class Gaming
  (527 - 2235, n=230, last 2 years)
1816 Points +23%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
1574 Points +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1491 Points +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1479 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (1218 - 1499, n=29)
1471 Points -1%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
1403 Points -5%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
1227 Points -17%
Cinebench R20
CPU (Multi Core)
Average of class Gaming
  (930 - 13769, n=230, last 2 years)
7442 Points +53%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
4850 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (2242 - 5476, n=30)
4847 Points 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
4776 Points -2%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
4510 Points -7%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
4403 Points -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
3027 Points -38%
CPU (Single Core)
Average of class Gaming
  (169 - 855, n=230, last 2 years)
699 Points +21%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
600 Points +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
581 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
580 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (471 - 584, n=29)
573 Points -1%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
540 Points -7%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
470 Points -19%
Cinebench R15
CPU Multi 64Bit
Average of class Gaming
  (400 - 5663, n=235, last 2 years)
3101 Points +49%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
2108 (2036.87min - 2108.48max) Points +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
2087 (2046.66min - 2087.25max) Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (1076 - 2267, n=29)
2050 Points -2%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
2041 (1981.96min - 2041.34max) Points -2%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
2029 Points -3%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
1336 Points -36%
CPU Single 64Bit
Average of class Gaming
  (79.2 - 318, n=234, last 2 years)
268 Points +11%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
241 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
241 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
239 Points -1%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (197 - 243, n=25)
238 Points -1%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
232 Points -4%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
201 Points -17%
Blender - v2.79 BMW27 CPU
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
333 Seconds * -35%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
250 Seconds * -2%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (219 - 442, n=29)
250 Seconds * -2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
246 Seconds *
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
245 Seconds * -0%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
242 Seconds * +2%
Average of class Gaming
  (87 - 1259, n=228, last 2 years)
198.9 Seconds * +19%
7-Zip 18.03
7z b 4
Average of class Gaming
  (11386 - 140932, n=229, last 2 years)
77274 MIPS +40%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
59182 MIPS +7%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
57284 MIPS +4%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (36011 - 62503, n=29)
57266 MIPS +4%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
55231 MIPS
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
50441 MIPS -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
39581 MIPS -28%
7z b 4 -mmt1
Average of class Gaming
  (2685 - 7581, n=229, last 2 years)
6133 MIPS +8%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
5870 MIPS +3%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (4791 - 5905, n=29)
5701 MIPS 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
5681 MIPS
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
5664 MIPS 0%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
5590 MIPS -2%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
5321 MIPS -6%
Geekbench 5.5
Multi-Core
Average of class Gaming
  (1946 - 22200, n=234, last 2 years)
13627 Points +79%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
9294 Points +22%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (5057 - 9294, n=27)
8188 Points +8%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
8035 Points +6%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
7725 Points +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
7599 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
6403 Points -16%
Single-Core
Average of class Gaming
  (158 - 2210, n=234, last 2 years)
1811 Points +18%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
1576 Points +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1538 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
1529 Points -1%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (1271 - 1574, n=27)
1517 Points -1%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
1354 Points -12%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
1191 Points -23%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 - 4k Preset
Average of class Gaming
  (3 - 37.6, n=232, last 2 years)
21.3 fps +44%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
15.8 fps +7%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
15.6 fps +5%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (8.26 - 17.1, n=29)
15.2 fps +3%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
14.9 fps +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
14.8 fps
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
10.7 fps -28%
LibreOffice - 20 Documents To PDF
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
56.5 s *
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (44.1 - 87.4, n=29)
53.3 s * +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
52.2 s * +8%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
50.8 s * +10%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
49.3 s * +13%
Average of class Gaming
  (32.8 - 332, n=226, last 2 years)
49.1 s * +13%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
45.8 s * +19%
R Benchmark 2.5 - Overall mean
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H
0.6 sec * -20%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H
0.529 sec * -5%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
0.512 sec * -2%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
  (0.48 - 0.599, n=29)
0.507 sec * -1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
0.502 sec *
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
0.4926 sec * +2%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.3609 - 4.47, n=229, last 2 years)
0.4687 sec * +7%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
2087 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
169 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
241 Points
Hjälp
PCMark 10: Score | Essentials | Productivity | Digital Content Creation
PCMark 10 / Score
Average of class Gaming
  (5235 - 9852, n=200, last 2 years)
7592 Points +10%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
6983 Points +1%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (6875 - 6967, n=4)
6916 Points 0%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
6901 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
6898 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
6842 Points -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
5908 Points -14%
PCMark 10 / Essentials
Average of class Gaming
  (8300 - 12334, n=199, last 2 years)
10731 Points +7%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
10602 Points +6%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (9991 - 10413, n=3)
10170 Points +2%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
10051 Points +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
10018 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
9991 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
8609 Points -14%
PCMark 10 / Productivity
Average of class Gaming
  (6662 - 11833, n=199, last 2 years)
9725 Points +4%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (9301 - 9381, n=3)
9335 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
9324 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9252 Points -1%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
9071 Points -3%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
8849 Points -5%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
7771 Points -17%
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation
Average of class Gaming
  (6462 - 18475, n=199, last 2 years)
11476 Points +20%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
10389 Points +9%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
9561 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (9383 - 9561, n=3)
9446 Points -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9377 Points -2%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
9274 Points -3%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
8367 Points -12%
PCMark 10 Score
6898 poäng
Hjälp
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R7 5800H, Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 500GB
1821 μs * -130%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, i9-11900H, SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N
1399 μs * -77%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
907 μs * -15%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, i7-10870H, Phison E12S-2TB-Phison-SSD-BICS4
844 μs * -7%
Gigabyte A7 X1
GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, R9 5900HX, ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
792 μs *

* ... smaller is better

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

* ... smaller is better

CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
AS SSD
DiskSpd
hddimg
ESR512GTLCG-EAC-4
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3473 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2501 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 464.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 579 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1958 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 2128 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 43.51 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 125.1 MB/s

DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8

No graph data
3DMark 11 | 3DMark
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Average of class Gaming
  (1029 - 72070, n=232, last 2 years)
40487 Points +13%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
35909 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
35678 Points -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
34071 Points -5%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (12535 - 38275, n=54)
32331 Points -10%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
25793 Points -28%
3DMark
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
169244 Points +26%
Average of class Gaming
  (15902 - 193851, n=142, last 2 years)
136246 Points +1%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
134236 Points
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (45531 - 179716, n=33)
121367 Points -10%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
110773 Points -17%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
106962 Points -20%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
95835 Points -29%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (781 - 53059, n=236, last 2 years)
29457 Points +14%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
27968 Points +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
26771 Points +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
25849 Points 0%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
25794 Points
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (7178 - 29128, n=52)
24302 Points -6%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
19737 Points -23%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Average of class Gaming
  (224 - 22547, n=234, last 2 years)
12066 Points +14%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
10898 Points +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
10752 Points +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX
10570 Points
Medion Erazer Beast X20
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i7-10870H
9619 Points -9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (2644 - 11019, n=53)
9300 Points -12%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-11900H
7582 Points -28%
3DMark 11 Performance
26404 poäng
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
54931 poäng
3DMark Fire Strike Score
23233 poäng
3DMark Time Spy Score
10315 poäng
Hjälp
The Witcher 3 | Dota 2 Reborn | Final Fantasy XV Benchmark | GTA V | Strange Brigade | X-Plane 11.11
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Average of class Gaming
  (8.61 - 216, n=227, last 2 years)
117.1 fps +22%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
103 (33.5min, 51.4P0.1, 68P1 - 190max) fps +7%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
101 fps +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
97.9 (84min) fps +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
95.9 (80min) fps
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (34.9 - 109, n=52)
91.8 fps -4%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
74 fps -23%
Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking
Average of class Gaming
  (26.9 - 220, n=238, last 2 years)
142.8 fps +26%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
128 (112.9min) fps +13%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
121 (106.3min) fps +7%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (26.9 - 163.9, n=58)
120.7 fps +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
119 (104.1min) fps +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
115 (99.6min) fps +2%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
113 (100.7min) fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality
Average of class Gaming
  (9.13 - 194.9, n=228, last 2 years)
111.4 fps
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
97 fps
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
91.6 fps
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (27.9 - 107, n=49)
86.4 fps
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
72.3 fps
GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x
Average of class Gaming
  (6.38 - 167.7, n=218, last 2 years)
107.4 fps +28%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
97 (8.76min, 66.7P1 - 172max) fps +16%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
91.9 (26.9min, 66.7P1 - 171max) fps +10%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (21.7 - 125.8, n=50)
91 fps +9%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
88.5 (16.4min, 58.8P1 - 182max) fps +6%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
83.6 (9.74min, 58.8P1 - 149max) fps
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
80.4 (8.99min, 55.6P1 - 149max) fps -4%
Strange Brigade - 1920x1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16
Average of class Gaming
  (14.6 - 421, n=226, last 2 years)
207 fps +12%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
185 (39.2min, 139P1 - 321max) fps
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
168 (84.4min, 126P1 - 285max) fps -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
168 (63.8min, 123P1 - 334max) fps -9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (36.2 - 194, n=46)
159 fps -14%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
130 (88.3min, 98.4P1 - 218max) fps -30%
X-Plane 11.11 - 1920x1080 high (fps_test=3)
Average of class Gaming
  (12.4 - 166.2, n=243, last 2 years)
102 fps +41%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
  (12.4 - 118.8, n=61)
81.1 fps +12%
Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
Intel Core i9-11900H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
80.1 fps +11%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
AMD Ryzen 7 5800H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
75.8 fps +5%
Gigabyte A7 X1
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
72.2 fps
Medion Erazer Beast X25
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU
72.1 fps 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X20
Intel Core i7-10870H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU
69.9 fps -3%

The Witcher 3 - FPS-diagram

05101520253035404550556065707580859095Tooltip
Gigabyte A7 X1 R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU: Ø95.1 (87-99)
låg med. hög ultra
GTA V (2015) 174 164 139 83.6
The Witcher 3 (2015) 95.9
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 139 125 119 113
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 98.9 86.8 72.2
Strange Brigade (2018) 311 232 208 185
Cyberpunk 2077 1.0 (2020) 104.5 89.6 77.1 66.3

Ljudnivå

Låg belastning
25 / 29 / 35 dB(A)
Hög belastning
58 / 59 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
tyst
40 dB(A)
hörbar
50 dB(A)
högt ljud
  
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm avstånd)   environment noise: 24 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2038.933.836.534.735.344.62535.43532.334.633.138.63145.143.142.442.240.645.64032.13027.128.427.533.85030.724.421.223.822.230.66336.428.822.728.523.937.7804319.217.218.616.542.810029.220.817.91816.330.512532.522.9191716.132.216033.623.721.518.217.834.420034.322.220.221.719.136.125035.723.518.820.216.137.131536.922.416.513.912.538.740039.222.116.612.311.940.550042.723.317.312.212.544.163044.22417.512.311.444.880045.124.717.812.311.245.3100048.627.22013.810.849.112505026.718.413.51249.8160048.726.216.511.911.649.6200047.923.113.912.311.848.6250046.219.41312.31247.4315047.918.614.912.912.348.9400046.618.215.513.812.647.4500042.914.313.613.612.943.4630040.613.713.213.312.941.5800038.313.413.413.312.939.11000034.61313.313.312.734.61250031.812.613.112.912.431.51600028.412.312.812.512.125.5SPL58.334.728.225.424.558.9N12.11.910.70.612.7median 40.6median 22.2median 16.5median 13.3median 12.5median 41.5Delta6.542.61.71.17.4hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseGigabyte A7 X1
Hög belastning
 41 °C42 °C44 °C 
 40 °C43 °C42 °C 
 35 °C39 °C34 °C 
Max: 44 °C
Medel: 40 °C
49 °C42 °C42 °C
38 °C40 °C41 °C
36 °C39 °C34 °C
Max: 49 °C
Medel: 40.1 °C
Strömförsörjning (max.)  54 °C | Rumstemperatur 22 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 40 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 40.4 °C / 105 F, ranging from 21.2 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49 °C / 120 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.1 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 33.8 °C / 93 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 40.6 °C / 105 F, compared to the device average of 33.8 °C / 93 F.
(-) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 41 °C / 105.8 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (-12.1 °C / -21.8 F).
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.337.42533.136.33140.644.54027.533.75022.228.36323.928.88016.523.910016.320.412516.121.816017.823.820019.132.625016.148.431512.558.740011.957.550012.564.163011.466.680011.275100010.882.612501272.8160011.666.6200011.871.125001272.3315012.372.6400012.671.3500012.964.6630012.966.7800012.968.11000012.761.51250012.459.91600012.157.7SPL24.585.2N0.659median 12.5median 64.6Delta1.111.123.725.520.821.425.931.316.827.113.635.914.332.312.831.312.826.213.336.716.246.312.855.311.962.2126310.666.21169.49.973.410.474.811.871.410.969.611.369.611.575.812.272.812.767.812.768.313.464.113.271.213.275.413.36912.57111.956.124.283.70.560.6median 12.2median 6916.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseGigabyte A7 X1SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Gigabyte A7 X1 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (85 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 30.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (23.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 83% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 12% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 66% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 27% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H) audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 69% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 15% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Strömförbrukning
Av/Standbydarklight 0.7 / 3 Watt
Låg belastningdarkmidlight 12 / 14 / 19 Watt
Hög belastning midlight 118 / 229 Watt
 color bar
Förklaring: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Currently we use the Metrahit Energy, a professional single phase power quality and energy measurement digital multimeter, for our measurements. Find out more about it here. All of our test methods can be found here.
Gigabyte A7 X1
R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU		Medion Erazer Beast X25
R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU		Medion Erazer Beast X20
i7-10870H, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU		Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
i9-11900H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU		SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
R7 5800H, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU		Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
-41%
-15%
17%
-12%
-20%
Idle Minimum *
12
22
-83%
13
-8%
10.3
14%
13
-8%
13.8 ?(2 - 64, n=179, last 2 years)
-15%
Idle Average *
14
26
-86%
18
-29%
13.1
6%
16
-14%
19.2 ?(8 - 67, n=179, last 2 years)
-37%
Idle Maximum *
19
34
-79%
32
-68%
14.1
26%
26
-37%
27 ?(9 - 101.1, n=179, last 2 years)
-42%
Load Average *
118
120
-2%
106
10%
110
7%
125
-6%
111.3 ?(32.1 - 202, n=178, last 2 years)
6%
Witcher 3 ultra *
205
189
8%
192
6%
138
33%
187
9%
Load Maximum *
229
231
-1%
232
-1%
190
17%
259
-13%
251 ?(64.5 - 418, n=177, last 2 years)
-10%

* ... smaller is better

Energiförbrukning: The Witcher 3 - stress-test

0153045607590105120135150165180195210Tooltip
Gigabyte A7 X1: Ø205 (200-212)
Batteritid
WiFi Websurfing
4tim 40min
Hög belastning (maximal ljusstyrka)
1tim 12min
Gigabyte A7 X1
R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, 48.96 Wh		Medion Erazer Beast X25
R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU, 91 Wh		Medion Erazer Beast X20
i7-10870H, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, 91 Wh		Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM
i9-11900H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, 90 Wh		SCHENKER XMG Neo 17 (Early 2021, RTX 3070, 5800H)
R7 5800H, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU, 62 Wh		Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
30%
63%
86%
-33%
24%
WiFi v1.3
280
410
46%
373
33%
454
62%
208
-26%
368 ?(57 - 745, n=182, last 2 years)
31%
Load
72
81
13%
138
92%
151
110%
44
-39%
84.1 ?(36 - 173, n=144, last 2 years)
17%

För

+ Riktigt bra servicemöjligheter
+ Stabil prestanda även vid tung belastning
+ Inga verktyg behövs för att byta batteriet

Emot

- Måttfull batteritid
- Kraftigt hölje

Omdöme - Kraftfull och uppgraderingsbar

Recension av Gigabyte A7 X1. Recensionsex från Gigabyte Germany.
Recension av Gigabyte A7 X1. Recensionsex från Gigabyte Germany.

Läs den fullständiga versionen av den här recensionen på engelska här.

I fråga om utseende är Gigabyte A7 X1 verkligen inte en trendig, tunn och ultramobil spellaptop. Men den gör vad den ska riktigt bra, nämligen att visa upp spel smidigt på sin skärm. Tack vare ett välventilerat hölje kan både processorn och dess GeForce RTX 3070 släppa lös sin fulla prestanda utan begränsningar.

Gigabyte A7 X1 tar moderna spel och visar dem smidigt på sin skärm samtidigt som den erbjuder utmärkta servicemöjligheter.

En annan fördel med den rejäla konstruktionen är att många komponenter lätt kan uppgraderas eller bytas ut. Som exempel går det att byta ut batteriet helt utan verktyg, det går att komma åt RAM och WLAN-modul och det finns dessutom lediga platser för lagringsenheter på insidan.

Tycker du att A7 X1 är för kraftig kan du ta en titt på 15-tumsmotsvarigheten Gigabyte G5 KC, som kommer med en Intel CPU. Schenker XMG Neo 17 är lite tunnare men också dyrare.

Gigabyte A7 X1 - 10/13/2021 v7
Mike Wobker

Design
80 / 98 → 82%
Tangentbord
81%
Mus
78%
Anslutningar
62 / 80 → 77%
Vikt
60 / 10-66 → 89%
Batteri
62 / 95 → 65%
Skärm
84%
Spelprestanda
98%
Programprestanda
94%
Temperatur
85 / 95 → 90%
Ljudnivå
57 / 90 → 63%
Audio
72%
Camera
34 / 85 → 40%
Medel
73%
83%
Gaming - Vägt medel

More articles related to this device

Gigabyte A7 X1 (A7 Serie)

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Bärbara datorer, laptops - tester och nyheter > Tester > Test: Gigabyte A7 X1 - Spellaptop med stabil och uthållig prestanda (Sammanfattning)
Mike Wobker, 2021-10-25 (Update: 2021-10-25)