10 Aug
Blog

AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT: 1080p Gaming for a 1440p Price

AMD RX 6600 XT sits on a table.

AMD RX 6600 XT

RRP $ 379.00

"The AMD RX 6600 XT is a solid 1080p card at a time when GPU options are few and far between."

advantages

  • Smooth 1080p gaming

  • Doesn't take much strength

  • 1440p gaming possible

  • Support for FidelityFX Super Resolution

disadvantage

  • A little too expensive

  • Poor content creation performance

  • Poor ray tracing performance

Budget and 1080p gamers haven't had many graphics card options in the past few months, and AMD's new RX 6600 XT tried to solve that problem. It's a card that can deliver smooth 1080p gaming at high frame rates, and it uses a stripped-down core to alleviate some supply issues. But its price stretches the definition of what it means to be a budget graphics card.

AMD could have priced the RX 6600 XT almost anywhere for under $ 500 and still selling cards like there's no tomorrow. At $ 379, it nestles in a comfortable spot between Nvidia competition, and if you can get one at list price on launch, you won't find another card that works this well for the cost.

But should you? $ 379 is an attractive price given the current market conditions, but the RX 6600 XT still has to pile up the competition after the market launch boom ended. The Radeon RX 6600 XT is a solid card, but it is flanked by two great Team Green cards that are making their money.

design

AMD does not publish a reference design for the RX 6600 XT, so you are limited to options from board partners. For this test, I got my hands on MSI's RX 6600 XT Gaming X card, which uses a traditional dual-fan design.

AMD has shared designs from other partners, some of which include three fans, but most should come with two. Regardless of the model, the RX 6600 XT uses a single 8-pin power connector and requires at least a 500W power supply.

AMD RX 6600 XT sits on a table.

My device measured 10.88 inches long, which is what the slightly protruding bezel made. Each model is a little different – especially the triple fans – so double check before you pick one up. A standard dual-fan design should be no longer than the length of an ATX motherboard (12 inches).

During the test, the card stayed cool, peaking at around 62 degrees Celsius in Cyberpunk 2077. It is important to mention that in a Be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900 Rev. 2, which is a full tower chassis with a little more space for cooling. Your mileage may vary.

A welcome feature on my review unit was a backplate that was missing from the competing RTX 3060 I tested. At least one board partner design has a backplate based on the images provided by AMD, but this may not apply to all designs.

Specifications

The RX 6600 XT builds on AMD's existing RDNA 2 architecture, which we have seen in action over and over again. However, it is built with the Navi 23 GPU core, which is otherwise only found in AMD's workstation class Radeon Pro W6600 and W6600M. This marks the debut of the Navi 23 for the desktop audience.

An important note about Navi 23 compared to previous versions: It is much smaller. That means AMD can squeeze more GPU dies onto a wafer, which should help with supply. It's still built using chip maker TSMC's 7nm node, but with a smaller size, AMD can make more chips with each manufacturing pass.

Arithmetic units Shading units Game speed Increase speed Storage capacity TDP price
Radeon RX 6600 XT 32 2,048 1.97 GHz 2.59 GHz 8GB DDR6 160W $ 380
Radeon RX 6700 XT 40 2,560 2.32 GHz 2.58 GHz 12 GB DDR6 230w $ 480
Radeon RX 6800 60 3,840 1.82 GHz 2.11 GHz 16GB DDR6 250w $ 580
Radeon RX 6800 XT 72 4,608 2.02 GHz 2.25 GHz 16GB DDR6 300W $ 649
Radeon RX 6900 XT 80 5,120 2.01 GHz 2.25 GHz 16GB DDR6 300W $ 1,000

Regardless, Navi 23 builds on AMD's existing architecture, so we can make many comparisons with the rest of the range. Compared to the next level, the RX 6600 XT saves around 20% of the compute units (CUs) with a price difference of 20%. That would make sense if all the other specs are the same, but they are not. The RX 6600 XT corresponds to the boost clock of the RX 6700 XT, but comes with 4 GB less GDDR6 memory.

The RX 6600 XT shows a decent value compared to similar gaps in the range.

Still, it is better than a few other steps in the series. If you're switching from an RX 6800 to an RX 6700 XT, there's about a 20% price difference for a 40% difference in CUs – and that move also reduces 4GB of RAM. At least according to AMD's own list, the RX 6600 XT shows a decent value compared to similar gaps in the range.

There's no reason to compare it to Nvidia on the spec front – I'll touch on the better brand in the sections to come. However, the price of the RX 6600 XT in comparison to the competition should be emphasized. At $ 380, it's between Nvidia's RTX 3060 for $ 330 and the RTX 3060 Ti for $ 400.

The RTX 3060 Ti is also equipped with 8 GB of memory, while the RTX 3060 is equipped with 12 GB. When looking at prices, the way forward is clear. The RX 6600 XT should do a little below an RTX 3060 Ti and about 20% less than the RX 6700 XT. But does it do that?

Games

1080p benchmarks for the RX 6600 XT.

1440p benchmarks for the RX 6600 XT.

The RX 6600 XT is aimed at high refresh rate 1080p monitors. And based on my average frame rates, it hits that brand well. In the five non-ray tracing games I tested, it averaged 117.6 frames per second (fps), making it a great option for 1080p monitors with a 144Hz refresh rate. The 1440p performance is only slightly worse with an average of 86.6 fps.

Before you get to the individual results, it is worth looking at the average values ​​I have collected. At 1080p, the RX 6600 XT sits between the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3060 where it should, and slightly outperforms the last-gen RX 5700 XT. The price difference between the RX 6600 XT and its closest competitor, the RTX 3060 Ti is around 10%.

1440p showed similar results, but with a larger 18% difference between the RTX 3060 Ti and the RX 6600 XT. The RTX 3060 and RX 6600 XT were much closer with only 6% difference. Of course, such averages don't tell the whole story, so let's go through some individual tests to get a clearer picture.

I tested the RX 6600 XT on a machine that rocks an Intel Core i9-10900K, 32GB of RAM, and an Asus Tuf Z490-Plus motherboard. All of my tests were performed on a Crucial MX500 2TB hard drive with the latest version of Windows 10. Unfortunately, I didn't have an AMD processor to test Smart Access Memory, but you can expect a 5-10% increase in support for games if you have a current Ryzen processor.

Starting with the simplest fight, the RX 6600 XT took home a GPU score of 9,644 in 3DMark Time Spy. That's about 11% faster than the RX 5700 XT and RTX 3060, which were only one point apart in this test. As you'll see in other reviews, the RX 6600 XT comes close to the RX 5700 XT in most games. Here it actually shoots forward.

However, the RTX 3060 Ti resets the RX 6600 XT. It got a graphics score of 11,706 – a difference of about 19%. This also applies to the RX 6700 XT, which took the crown in 3DMark with a graphics score of 12,068.

AMD RX 6600 XT installed in a computer.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla is one of the games that preferred the RX 6600 XT over the RTX 3060 Ti. At 1080p with ultra high settings, the RX 6600 XT averaged 83 fps. That is within one frame of the RX 5700 XT, but still five frames ahead of the RTX 3060 Ti. The RTX 3060 and RTX 2060 Super lagged behind the field with 64 fps and 66 fps, respectively, while the RX 6700 XT again with 100 fps was ahead of the pack.

At 1440p Ultra High, the RX 6600 XT and RTX 3060 Ti swapped places. The AMD card reached 60 fps while the Nvidia card came in at 64 fps. The RTX 3060 was significantly lower at 51 fps, while the RX 6700 XT still showed its dominance at 76 fps. I've found similar results at high settings, with the RX 6600 XT outperforming the RTX 3060 Ti at 1080p but falling short at 1440p.

The Vulkan-based Red Dead Redemption 2 painted a slightly different picture, with the RX 6600 XT being closer to the RTX 3060. The RX 6600 XT averaged 68 fps at 1080p Ultra Quality, while the RTX 3060 averaged 65 fps. The RTX 3060 Ti showed a difference of 21% compared to the RX 6600 XT with an average of 84 fps.

I've seen similar performance at 1440p Ultra Quality, with the RTX 3060 Ti leading the way at 70 fps. The RX 6600 XT showed a difference of 24% to the RTX 3060 Ti with an average frame rate of 55 fps. As with 1080p, the RTX 3060 was only slightly behind the RX 6600 XT with a difference of 4%.

AMD has kept its promise to deliver 1080p gaming at high frame rates.

Civilization VI again showed a dominant lead for the RTX 3060 Ti, although the RX 6600 XT came closer than it was in Red Dead Redemption 2. The RX 6600 XT averaged 161 fps at 1080p Ultra settings, while the RTX 3060 Ti averaged 194 fps reached, which corresponds to a difference of about 19%. The RX 6700 XT was ahead of the other cards with an average of 219 fps.

I've seen similar scaling on 1440p Ultra. The RX 6600 XT achieved 137 fps and the RTX 3060 Ti achieved 163 fps, while the RTX 3060 lagged behind at 119 fps. Here the RX 6600 XT sits exactly where it belongs – right between the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3060.

Battlefield V produced similar results. The RX 6600 XT averaged 139 fps at 1080p Ultra settings. The RTX 3060 showed a difference of 12% at 123 fps and the RTX 3060 Ti showed a difference of 9% at 152 fps. The RX 6700 XT was able to prevail again with 164 fps.

At 1440p Ultra settings, the RTX 3060 Ti pushed itself even further in front of the RX 6600 XT. AMD's card averaged 100 fps and Nvidia's average 123 fps – almost a difference of 21%. The RTX 3060 was close to the RX 6600 XT at 97 fps, while the last generation RX 5700 XT achieved a slightly higher 110 fps.

AMD RX 6600 XT on a wooden backdrop.

Fortnite showed a closer race between the RX 6600 XT, RTX 3060 and RTX 3060 Ti. The RTX 3060 Ti led at 1080p Epic settings at 143 fps, but the RX 6600 XT was not far behind at 137 fps (only a 4 %). The RTX 3060 lags behind the group with 132 fps. All three cards scored well above the RTX 2060 Super and the RX 5700 XT – both of which never broke 110 fps – and showed some significant improvements over the previous generation.

The 1440p Epic showed a more dominant lead for the RTX 3060 Ti, where it averaged 100 fps. That's about 21% less than the RX 6600 XT, which averaged 81 fps. With an average of 86 fps, the RTX 3060 is a better comparison point to the RX 6600 XT at 1440p.

Overall, you can expect a performance difference of around 10% between the RX 6600 XT and the RTX 3060 cards, as the price suggests. At 1080p, the RTX 3060 Ti and RX 6600 XT are about a 5% price difference for a 10% difference in performance. With the RTX 3060 there is a price difference of 14% for a performance difference of about 11%.

Within AMD's own product range, the RX 6600 XT performs according to the specifications. Even with the memory gap between the two cards, the RX 6700 XT and RX 6600 XT show a difference of around 20%.

However, when I use the previous generation the RX 6600 XT shows some problems. The RX 6600 XT only marginally outperformed the RX 5700 XT in my tests, which was released for $ 399 two years ago. The RX 6600 XT is only $ 20 cheaper and only slightly more powerful. It includes ray tracing that the RX 5700 XT lacked, but that's not exactly the generational improvement I would have liked.

Still, AMD has kept its promise to deliver 1080p gaming at high frame rates, even if there are some slightly better options available from Nvidia at list prices.

Content creation

Gaming is the focus of the RX 6600 XT, so it is not surprising that the card takes a back seat when creating content. Here I ran tests using the Blender and PugetBench benchmarks for Premiere Pro. The RX 6600 XT can run both programs, but there could be a better option if your focus is more on it than gaming.

PugetBench for Premiere Pro benchmarks.

Blender benchmarks.

In Blender I did three test renderings and averaged the times. When it comes to supporting CUDA and OptiX rendering in Blender, the RTX 3060 Ti is unsurprisingly. However, the RX 6600 XT still managed to beat the RTX 3060 by about a 11% difference. Nevertheless, the RTX 3060 Ti and RX 6700 XT showed a clear lead.

PugetBench for Premiere Pro favored the Nvidia cards even more. The RX 6600 XT recently scored a total of 625 points, while the RTX 3060 Ti received 807 points. Note that PugetBench takes into account a number of features in Premiere Pro, so the endnote doesn't just rest on the shoulders of the graphics card.

I was surprised that the RX 6600 XT shows up a bit in my Blender review, but overall it's not a great card for content creation. It's powerful enough to work in apps like Blender and Premiere Pro, but if you use those apps a lot, Nvidia still has the edge.

Super resolution and ray tracing

Normally, Nvidia would have a clear lead over AMD with Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) and ray tracing. This is not the case with this generation. The RX 6600 XT also comes with hardware-accelerated ray tracing and has access to a DLSS-like function in the form of FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR).

I took Control and Cyberpunk 2077 to test ray tracing. I ignored DLSS in all of the testing to see how the RX 6600 XT would hold up in a fair fight. Like other cards in the RX 6000 series, it clearly lagged behind the Nvidia competition.

Cyberpunk 2077 ray tracing benchmarks.

Control ray tracing benchmarks.

In Cyberpunk 2077, the RX 6600 XT showed about a 79% decrease when switching from the Ultra preset to the Ultra RT preset, while the RTX 3060 only saw a 53% decrease. Remember, this is with DLSS disabled. Even without the upscaling advantage, the cards of the RTX-30 series from Nvidia handle ray tracing better than the RX-6000 series.

1440p Ultra RT was not playable on any of the cards I tested. As a reference, the RX 6600 XT only achieved an average of 3 fps in this mode. The most powerful card, the RTX 3060 Ti, averaged just 23 fps.

Ray tracing is challenging regardless of the hardware used, but Nvidia's cards can still handle the heat better than AMD's.

Control was much more forgiving. It's at least playable with ray tracing enabled at 1080p, but the RX 6600 XT still showed a 54% drop and the RTX 3060 only showed a 38% drop.

At 1440p, the RX 6600 XT dropped 62% – 47 fps to 18 fps – with ray tracing enabled – while the RTX 3060 dropped 40%. I used the RTX 3060 as a benchmark as it was the closest competitor in these tests, but the RTX 3060 Ti showed similar dips when turning on ray tracing.

The difference here makes sense. Nvidia uses dedicated ray tracing cores, while AMD opts for a "ray accelerator" packed into each computing unit. Ray tracing is tough regardless of the hardware used, but Nvidia's cards can still handle the heat better than AMD's – and the RX 6600 XT doesn't change that.

AMD RX 6600 XT over other graphics cards.

In the case of an Nvidia card, I would point out DLSS to increase ray tracing performance. AMD has an alternative in the form of FSR, but Nvidia usually bundles ray tracing with DLSS, while FSR is a bit scattered. That could change over time, but Nvidia's cards still have the best of ray tracing features.

As my tests show, you really need an upscaling function to run ray tracing at playable frame rates. AMD has this feature now in the form of FSR, but many popular ray tracing titles – including Cyberpunk 2077 and Control – don't yet support the feature.

Nevertheless, FSR is available to you with the RX 6600 XT. As we found in our FidelityFX Super Resolution test, it is a very powerful upscaling feature that can significantly improve your frame rates. Image quality isn't quite as good as DLSS, but the differences are easy to forgive when everything goes well.

Our opinion

In a perfect world with list prices and GPUs on the shelves, I would definitely recommend the RX 6600 XT's RTX 3060 Ti. It's only $ 20 more expensive and performs better almost anywhere. The RX 6600 XT is a bit overpriced at $ 380 – it should be closer to $ 350 given its performance. However, having an extra $ 30 is hard to argue with considering how expensive graphics cards are right now.

Much of this depends on what card you can find and what the price is. When starting at the list price, the RX 6600 XT is a slam dunk in view of the popular graphics cards. When the initial inventory is gone, you should classify the RX 6600 XT between the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 3060 in terms of performance and take the offer price from there.

Is there a better alternative?

Yes, the RTX 3060 Ti is a better alternative. However, given the price of graphics cards and the difficulty of finding them, the list price doesn't say much. If the price of the RX 6600 XT is between the RTX 3060 and the RTX 3060 Ti, it's a great 1080p card for high refresh rate monitors.

The other alternative is the RX 6700 XT, which even outperforms the RTX 3060 Ti, albeit at an additional cost.

How long it will take?

The RX 6600 XT is set to last for the next few years for 1080p gaming. If you want to use features like ray tracing or want to upgrade to a higher resolution, you will probably feel the weaknesses of the RX 6600 XT within a few years.

Should you buy it?

Yes. The RX 6600 XT is about $ 30 too expensive, but still a lot cheaper than any other card you can buy right now. However, if you're missing out on the launch boom, consider upgrading to the RTX 3060 Ti instead if you can find it at a reasonable price.

Editor's recommendations



18 Feb
Blog

MSI GS66 Stealth (2021) Review: 1440p Performance, Tested

msi gs66 stealth 1440p review 09

MSI GS66 Stealth (2021) Review: Peak 1440p Gaming

"The MSI GS66 Stealth brings faster, sharper 1440p gaming to laptops."

  • Incredible gaming performance

  • 1440p 240Hz gaming is an achievement

  • Solid design and build quality

  • Good choice of ports

  • Solid battery life

  • Runs hot

  • Dull keyboard and touchpad

Switching from 1080p to 1440p is not an easy task. Playing games at higher resolutions without sacrificing frame rates requires a massive increase in graphical performance. This is exactly what the new mobile Nvidia RTX 3080 GPU is designed for.

The MSI GS66 Stealth is one of the first gaming laptops to support not only these new graphics, but also a 1440p 240Hz display. Lightning fast updates and high resolutions? Sign me up.

This is a sneak peek as the updated GS66 Stealth has not yet been launched in North America. But even without a confirmed price, my time with the updated GS66 Stealth got me excited for the potential of 1440p gaming laptops.

display

Internally, the display is the biggest change to the MSI GS66 Stealth this year. There is now the option for an IPS screen with a resolution of 2560 x 1440, measured diagonally at 15.6 inches. While 1440p screens are still a rarity on laptops, this is even more true of gaming laptops. The main reason, of course, is that the older GPUs were never capable of moving as many pixels around at frame rates fast enough to please gamers. A refresh rate above 60 Hz would never have made sense.

The MSI GS66 Stealth handles 1440p excellently in most games. 240 Hz is a bit over the top, but much more versatile than the 300 Hz 1080p models.

Since this is a new panel, I also wanted to test the image quality and make sure MSI wasn't cutting corners. There have been some surprises to say the least.

The color saturation is the real shock. With 100% sRGB and 98% AdobeRGB, this panel is significantly more colorful than your average 1080p gaming screen. Without the poor color accuracy, this would be a good photo and video editing machine. However, with a Delta E of 6.67, it is better calibrated for bold and bright colors in games than for precise color corrections.

I wish it was a little brighter which would help with the contrast as well. With 291 nits of brightness and a contrast ratio of 870: 1, it is a bit behind competitors like the Razer Blade.

Game performance

A faster screen is great, but without components to use it, it's useless. The GS66 Stealth has the Intel Core i7-10875H processor and the Nvidia RTX 3080 as well as 32 GB RAM and a 512 GB SSD. How does this deal with the promise of 1440p games? Let's just say there wasn't a title in our series of test games that I preferred to play in 1080p.

I saw some great results testing the game in the 3DMark Time Spy benchmark. The system achieved 9,907 points, which is a solid 18% ahead of the previous year's model with the RTX 2080 Super. This goes far beyond a normal increase in performance compared to the previous year. It was also only 8% behind the desktop version of the RTX 2070 Super that I tested in 2020. This is because the mobile RTX 3080 is technically the same GPU as the desktop RTX 3070.

At 1440p, it even beats the desktop RTX 2070 Super in some games.

I tested the game Battlefield V Next up, the GS66 Stealth impressed again, especially at higher resolutions. In this game, last year's model has already surpassed the Razer Blade. Now an average of 94 frames per second (fps) is displayed with 1440p Ultra settings or 126 fps with Medium. At 1440p, it even outperforms the desktop RTX 2070 Super – and keep in mind that this is a 215-watt desktop graphics card that costs $ 500 alone. This comparison did not apply to all games, especially CPU-bound games like Civilization VI. But Battlefield V was a notable high point for the GS66 Stealth.

The advantage in Fortnite wasn't that big, at least not compared to the desktop RTX 2070 Super. But take that comparison out of the equation for a moment and enjoy the glory of 1440p games at well over 60 fps. The MSI GS66 Stealth achieved an average of 81 fps in Epic settings and 115 fps in high with 100% 3D rendering. If you lower the resolution to 1080p, you get an additional 30 to 60 fps. Regardless, you never have to settle for less than 60 fps.

That was true of all of the games I tested, with the exception of Assassin's Creed Valhalla. With the in-game benchmark, Valhalla reached a top speed of 55 fps in Epic 1440p. The gameplay still looked smooth, but it barely fell below the 60 fps threshold. But in a game more known for immersive worlds and storytelling, I still preferred to prefer the sharper experience of playing in 1440p.

During long gaming sessions, surface temperatures remain manageable, resulting in a more comfortable gaming experience than on laptops like the Razer Blade. In contrast to this laptop, the MSI GS66 Stealth keeps the palm rests and keyboard cool even under less load. On the other hand, like the Zephyrus G14, the MSI GS66 Stealth always runs with a slight hum.

Ray tracing performance

Much has been said about the ray tracing capabilities of this new RTX 3080 graphic, but the performance loss is still too high in the two games I tried. Fortnite has a number of robust ray tracing features, including global lighting and shadows, each with different levels of detail. Unfortunately, despite the low setting, the game struggled to get smooth frame rates.

Heavy ray tracing effects aren't ready for prime time on gaming laptops just yet.

Of course, I also tried ray tracing along with DLSS, Nvidia's upscaling feature, to improve frame rates. DLSS helps a lot, even though I couldn't achieve the average frame rate over 60 fps even in performance mode. That was tested at 1080p Epic settings. In 1440p the situation is even worse.

I also wanted to try some ray tracing that was a little more subtle. Battlefield V was one of the first games to announce support for ray tracing and DLSS, and the effect isn't nearly as pronounced as it is in Fortnite. The MSI GS66 Stealth did a bit better here, but reaching 60 fps at 1080p Ultra was still unattainable without resorting to lower graphics settings. Story-driven or exploration games like Cyberpunk 2077 or Minecraft are slightly better suited for this performance compromise, but even there, strong ray-traced effects on gaming laptops aren't ready for prime time.

Creative achievement

The MSI GS66 Stealth uses a thoroughly boring, but satisfactory 10th generation Intel processor. The Core i7-10870H has eight cores and 16 threads with a boost clock rate of 5.0 GHz. Of course, the chip usually runs closer to its base clock of 2.2 GHz, except for burst workloads. As a gaming processor, it's more than capable and happy to leave the heavy lifting to Nvidia. However, this is a slightly slower processor than the Core i7-10875H used in the previous GS66 Stealth I tested in 2020.

Despite the high clock rates, the system doesn't look good in single-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23, almost all 25-watt Tiger Lake processors beat the GS66 Stealth and show how inefficient the old 14 nm processors from Intel are in comparison. This discrepancy was even shown in PCMark 10's Essentials test, which rates simple tasks such as surfing the Internet, video conferencing and word processing. Even these smaller and more efficient laptops – like the Razer Book 13 or the HP Specter x360 14 – outperform it.

The GS66 Stealth makes up for it in multi-core tests, scoring 6,133 in Cinebench R23 and 6,140 in Geekbench 5. You can thank the eight cores for that. The additional cores also mean this laptop does well on multithreaded tasks like content creation. The CPU-only video encoding performance in Handbrake is good, but does not get any advantage over previous iterations of the laptop. Laptops like the Dell XPS 17 or Ryzen-based system are even faster in this test.

If you really want to edit or stream video on the MSI GS66 Stealth, the performance of the RTX 3080 can save the day. The 7,949 points are a great score on the PCMark 10 Creation test, a big step up from what was possible with older gaming laptops.

Like many of its competitors, the GS66 Stealth is running hot.

Like many of its competitors, the GS66 Stealth is running hot. It's not uncommon for 97 degrees Celsius to be reached on cranking, resulting in an inevitable thermal throttling. If you want to avoid this problem, consider opting for a bulkier chassis with better airflow.

Fortunately, this isn't a huge problem in most games as the processor shares more of the available power with the GPU.

design

The MSI GS66 Stealth was an early adopter of the thin-and-light gaming laptop trend. When the design first hit the market, the 4.6 pound weight and 0.71 inch thickness were revolutionary. In 2021, it's a little more common. The Razer Blade is a bit lighter, as is the Asus ROG Zephyrus G15. There are now new ultra-thin gaming laptops such as the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 or the Acer Predator Triton 300 SE, which are the maximum for the RTX 3060.

The look of the laptop itself doesn't attract too much attention. It's a black aluminum plate with very few flourishes. Even the dragon logo on the lid is only visible when light is reflected from it.

However, MSI has cut a few more vents in the case than in the Razer Blade. There are some on either side of the laptop as well as on the top. That makes for a slightly less elegant appearance, although it certainly helps to keep temperatures lower.

The touchpad and keyboard are some of my least favorite aspects of the laptop. In an attempt to maximize the size of the touchpad, MSI made it significantly wider than normal. I would normally welcome this attempt. But, like in the past, it is unsettling when most of your palms are resting on the touchpad. I have encountered the problem of accidental touchpad clicks more than once.

The keyboard has some usability problems for me too. The layout is abnormal and changes the default positioning of the Fn, Ctrl, Atl, and Windows keys. Fiddling with the keyboard is never fun, and I've done that quite a bit here.

The buttons themselves are fine, but the action is a bit sloppy. The keystrokes lack the precise speed that many modern keyboards have assumed, although this style is still common on gaming laptops.

As for the ports, the MSI GS66 Stealth throws in the sink. These include HDMI 2.0, USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 (Thunderbolt 4), USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 and three USB-A 3.2 Gen 2 ports. The Thunderbolt 4 port can be used for both display input and charging. However, while you're playing, you'll want to take advantage of the full power of the old-school keg plug. The laptop even manages to push in an RJ45 Ethernet socket.

Unfortunately, the bandwidth of HDMI 2.0 is limited to 144 Hz at 1440p. So if you are planning on docking with a gaming monitor, this is something to consider. Currently there are very few monitors and laptops that support HDMI 2.1, which increases this bandwidth significantly.

Battery life

I never go into a gaming laptop review with high expectations for battery life. However, the MSI GS66 Stealth always had the best battery life of any gaming laptop I have ever tested. The introduction of a higher resolution screen made me fear that he might lose that crown.

Instead, the opposite happened. This year's model improved battery life in both tests, despite having the same 99 watt hour battery. With local video playback, the system lasted just under eight hours, which is almost an hour and a half longer than the previous model. That also beats the Razer Blade by half an hour.

For a more realistic workflow, I used a macro to automate light web browsing. In this test, the GS66 Stealth stayed alive for seven hours and 12 minutes, once again overtaking both last year's model and the Razer Blade. That easily makes it the 15-inch gaming laptop with the best battery life.

Laptops without powerful discrete graphics cards naturally have a much better battery life. However, I'm encouraged these high refresh rate 1440p screens don't take an even bigger toll.

Our opinion

There is no doubt that 1440p is the future of laptop gaming. More than ray tracing, higher fidelity makes every game you play look sharper, smoother, and more immersive. The MSI GS66 Stealth is finally a gaming laptop that can run at 1440p at reasonable frame rates. It might not be my favorite gaming laptop design, but the combination of a super fast, high resolution screen and great gaming performance makes it one of the best gaming laptops you can buy.

The price remains the last important piece of information in evaluating this laptop. I will update this review once pricing is confirmed.

Are there alternatives?

Few gaming laptops have announced 1440p models, and only the Razer Blade 15 matches the MSI in refresh rate. The right configuration of the Razer Blade costs $ 2,900. So, you can expect the MSI model to be just a few hundred dollars below if it follows historical pricing patterns.

The Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 combines its 1440p screen with a Ryzen processor and its refresh rate is limited to 165 Hz. Based on the games I tested, 165Hz is very fast when playing in 1440p. This means 1080p gaming is a little more limited, but it's likely fast enough for everyone but the most serious competitive gamers. At $ 2,500, the Zephyrus G15 may be a bit cheaper than the MSI GS66 Stealth.

How long it will take?

As with most laptops, you can expect the MSI GS66 Stealth to last four to five years. The high-end graphics card and the higher-resolution screen are future-proof, as are the Thunderbolt 4 ports. The lack of HDMI 2.1 is the only flaw in this regard.

Should you buy it?

Yes. As one of the few laptops with a 1440p screen and a refresh rate of 240 Hz, it offers one of the best gaming experiences you can get with a laptop.

Editor's recommendations




25 Sep
Blog

Lenovo Legion Y27q-20 Review: 1440p Gaming Done Right

Lenovo Legion y27q 20 review y20q 10

"The Lenovo Legion Y27q-20 offers fluid, ultra-fast gaming in an elegant design."

  • Simple, lightweight design

  • 165Hz refresh rate

  • Excellent ergonomics

  • Decent value for 1440p

  • 1 ms response time

  • No speakers

  • Bad contrast

  • Frustrating controls

It's an ideal time to upgrade to higher resolution games, but you will likely need a new game monitor. That doubles when you've updated your PC's graphics card, whether it's a lower-priced RTX 20 series or one of the new 30 series cards.

The Lenovo Legion Y27q-20 offers a resolution of 1440p and a refresh rate of 165 Hz and is in every way an upgrade of your old 1080p monitor. It is quickly becoming a crowded space, however, and $ 430 isn't the cheapest price out there. Does the Legion Y27q-20 have the picture quality and gaming performance to secure it?

design

While nothing special, the Legion Y27q-20 is not devoid of embellishments, including Lenovo's signature circular cheese grater design on the back of the case. Oddly enough, it's not dissimilar to Apple's Mac Pro or Pro Display XDR. For a gaming peripheral, it's rather sleek and not as bulky as some Acer Predator or Asus ROG monitors.

But don't get too excited. Like most gaming monitors, the Legion Y27q is mostly made of plastic and has a large lower bezel. The HP Omen 27 gaming monitor has more class in my book, but the Legion undercuts the price of this monitor considerably. Fortunately, the stand is made of metal, which offers a lot of stability.

The Legion Y27q's screen, base, and stand are individually wrapped, but I got them assembled in seconds thanks to the monitor's simple VESA mount. The entire package weighs just 14.7 pounds, which makes it even easier to set up. The Acer Nitro XZ272U is lighter at just 11 pounds, but the Y27q isn't far away.

After setting it up, I was delighted to discover how adjustable the Legion Y27q is. With tilt, turn, height and swivel adjustment, you are sure to find something that meets your needs. Switching from landscape to portrait is a notable addition that gaming monitors like the Predator XB273U and Dell S-Series monitors lack.

Ports

The connections are on the back and face down. You won't find any surprises here – just a DisplayPort 1.2 and HDMI 1.4. These are older port standards, but for a 1440p gaming monitor, they're all you need.

The Legion Y27q-20 even has additional USB connectivity to sweeten business. On the back, you'll find a USB-B 3.1 upstream port and a USB-A port, while two USB-A ports flank the side. You will also find a headphone / microphone jack here. These are nice additions to an otherwise fairly simple gaming monitor that turns into a USB hub.

The monitor is supplied with power via the rectangular “Trim Yellow” power connector from Lenovo next to a relatively small external power supply module.

Unfortunately, Lenovo didn't think the Legion Y27q-20 needed speakers. Lenovo sells a separate model with a cone-shaped speaker in the base, but it's missing here. That's a shame. I still think most monitors should include speakers, even if they're not the largest in the world. Yes, most people use headphones or external speakers, but for the rare occasional time you want them, they're missing.

Buttons and Menus

The on-screen menu is accessed using the six buttons just below the control panel. There are no fancy joysticks or buttons behind the screen.

Once you are in the menu, you can adjust settings like brightness and contrast as well as switch between different game settings and color profiles. Lenovo offers genre-specific profiles for first-person shooters, strategy games, and more. You can also switch to "Extreme" mode, which takes you from three milliseconds to one.

Navigating the menu with the buttons is a frustrating experience.

The problem? Navigating the menu with the buttons is a frustrating experience.

For starters, the button furthest to the right is the power button, but it feels identical to the other buttons. Accidentally turning off your monitor during a game is no fun. This can happen if you reach for brightness controls while gaming in a darker environment, especially because the monitor lacks adaptive brightness.

The symbiology used on the buttons and in the menu is also confusing. What looks like a back button is actually a select button that is disoriented while navigating the menu. It would have been a good idea to do some additional user testing on these.

Game performance

The Legion Y27q-20 uses a 27-inch panel with a 2560 x 1440 resolution. Playing games at 1440p is great. It's not quite 4K, but it's also not nearly as demanding when you have more of a mid-range system. The RTX 2070 Super I tested it with push games like Battlefield V and Fortnite well over 100 frames per second, even at maximum settings.

Thanks to the refresh rate of 165 Hz, the gameplay feels incredibly smooth. Sure, there are 240Hz, 300Hz, or even 360Hz monitors out there – but unless you want to be a professional gamer (and maybe even then) 165Hz should work fine. This is especially true if you are playing in 1440p.

This is not true G-Sync.

Nvidia G-Sync stickers are placed all over the Legion Y27q-20, but it's not a real implementation. Instead of a physical G-Sync module, it is certified by a solution that Nvidia calls "G-Sync Compatible". Essentially, this means it's a Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) monitor that Nvidia checked for flickering, ghosting, and tearing. This is not true G-Sync.

And yet the gaming experience on the Legion Y27q-20 is super fluid. As soon as you jump into the Nvidia control panel and change the refresh rate to 165 Hz, you'll immediately notice the smooth animations, even of your cursor, as you move it across the screen. Next, you want to enable the Extreme setting to achieve the specified response time of one millisecond.

Response time is about how quickly the pixels on your monitor can change color. There is no agreed measure of response time, so the difference between 1 ms and 3 ms can be inconsistent depending on the monitor. However, with the Legion Y27q-20, you can tell the subtle difference in responsiveness when you switch between the two settings.

picture quality

Thanks to the IPS display (In-Plane Switching), the Legion Y27q-20 can also be used for activities outside of the game. It's pretty bright with a maximum of 415 nits, and the color saturation isn't bad either. With 99% of sRGB and 77% of AdobeRGB, the Legion Y27q is as colorful as you can expect from a gaming monitor.

Many inexpensive or medium-sized gaming monitors opt for VA panels (vertical orientation) or TN panels (twisted nematic). These screens tend to have worse viewing angles, so I am pleased that Lenovo has chosen IPS.

However, it wasn't perfect. The contrast was low at only 650: 1, which was affected by the flat black values. The images look a bit washed out next to other displays. For comparison: the Acer Nitro XZ27 has a size of 1,060: 1, which leads to much richer images and colors.

The Legion Y27q is a hit or miss in terms of image quality.

The second problem was color accuracy. With an average Delta-E of 3.07, the color accuracy is surprisingly poor for 202o. The Nitro XZ272U, for example, has an average of 1.23. Again, this isn't the biggest issue for gamers, but there's no reason a $ 430 monitor should be so poorly calibrated.

I tried calibrating the screen myself to see if I could improve some of these numbers with my Spyder5Elite. The gamma has been corrected from 2.1 to 2.2 and the color accuracy has been reduced to 1.85. Both are positive improvements in image quality, which shows that this panel could have used an additional factory calibration. However, contrast and black levels were not helped.

The Legion Y27q is a hit or miss in terms of image quality. It's not a screen that you want to perform precise color grading or watch movies all the time.

Our opinion

With RTX 30 series graphics just around the corner, gaming monitors like the Lenovo Legion Y27q-20 will soon become important. There are some cheaper options that result in higher resolutions and refresh rates, but the Legion Y27q-20's looks and responsiveness make it a solid option for a monitor upgrade.

Are there alternatives?

The Acer Nitro XZ272U is only $ 330, though it's also a 27-inch 165Hz gaming monitor. It uses a VA panel and has a response time of 4 ms instead of 1 ms. It even has a curved screen.

Another option is the Asus TUF VG27 gaming monitor, which is available for $ 479. Finally, the $ 400 Dell S2719DGF is another great option. It has a 1ms response time and 155Hz refresh rate, but uses a cheaper TP panel.

How long it will take?

The Lenovo Legion Y27q-20 should last around five years. The standard warranty is three years, but with the refresh rate of 165 Hz and the resolution of 1440p you are equipped for PC games longer.

Should you buy it?

Yes. The Legion Y27q-20 combines features, design and performance in one affordable package.

Editor's recommendations