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



28 Jun
Blog

Asus VivoBook Flip 14 Review: A Fast, Cheap AMD Laptop

Asus Vivobook Flip 14 review 3

Asus VivoBook Flip 14 2021

"The Asus VivoBook Flip 14 is a powerful budget laptop despite the disappointing display and build quality."

  • Outstanding productivity performance

  • Mostly attractive aesthetics

  • Affordable

  • Active pen is bundled

  • Upgradable RAM and storage

  • Mediocre build quality

  • Glossy display

  • Below average battery life

Everyone likes a good budget laptop. They may not seem as exciting as the latest and greatest, but budget-conscious laptops have their place. Not everyone has the resources or the need for a laptop that costs well over $ 1,000, but everyone deserves great things. Finding a diamond in the rough can be a lot of fun.

Most manufacturers have a distinct budget lineup, and in Asus' case, that's the VivoBook. The company recently launched the updated VivoBook Flip 14, an AMD-powered 360-degree convertible 2-in-1 designed to deliver solid performance and an exciting experience at a low laptop price.

I checked the VivoBook Flip 14 configuration for $ 629 (if Asus offers it on their website, it will sell for $ 600) which has an AMD Ryzen 5 5500U CPU, 8GB of RAM, a 512GB PCIe -SSD and a 14-inch IPS Full HD (1,920 x 1,080) display in the increasingly old-fashioned 16: 9 aspect ratio. You can also get a version with a 256GB SSD for just $ 529. Attractive features for the price, but does the VivoBook Flip 14 keep its value proposition?

design

The VivoBook Flip 14 is mostly made of plastic, with the lid lined with an aluminum alloy. You don't have to buy plastic for this price, but it's not uncommon. Unfortunately, the build quality was not up to the usual Asus standard, with a lid that bends with too little force and can cause LCD distortion, quite a bit of flex in the keyboard deck, and a case base that yields to pressure. The similarly priced Acer Swift 3 is more solidly built, and for around $ 300 you can grab the HP Envy x360 13, which is also much better built – unsurprisingly, both machines are on our list of best budget laptops . You won't find many 14-inch 2-in-1s at this price level, so I can't think of a direct comparison that we tested.

Aesthetically, the VivoBook Flip 14 is a little more impressive, if a little strange at the same time. It comes in a “Bespoke Black” color scheme that covers 99% of the chassis. There's a bright silver logo on the lid and some chrome bars around the touchpad, but that's mostly it. It is strange that the Enter key has a lime green border and lettering and stands out rather boldly – but at the same time I would say garish. And it's the only element on the laptop that bears that color, so it's not part of a theme.

If you're usually struggling to find Enter, the bold color scheme helps, but I usually don't run into this predicament so the color scheme detracts from the aesthetic for me. Still, I think the VivoBook Flip 14 looks better than the Swift 3 and is on par with the Envy x360 13. In fact, it's as attractive as a more expensive notebook like the MSI Prestige 14 Evo and has a more distinctive look than the Lenovo Yoga 7i 14 2-in-1, which is also about $ 300 more expensive.

The bezels are a bit big with a screen-to-body ratio of 82%. Premium laptops tend to be 90% or better, but the VivoBook Flip 14 isn't bad for a budget device. That makes the chassis a bit bigger, and it's not the thinnest or lightest 14-inch laptop at 0.72 inches and 3.31 pounds. The Yoga 7i comes in at 0.69 inches and 3.09 pounds, while the MSI Prestige 14 is 0.63 inches thick and weighs 2.85 pounds.

The Acer Swift 5, another 14-inch clamshell, is just 0.59 inches thick and fairly light at 2.31 pounds – it's also twice as expensive. Looking at our budget competition, the Acer Swift 3 is 0.63 inches thick and weighs 2.65 pounds, and the HP Envy x360 13 is 0.65 inches thick and weighs 2.92 pounds. Obviously, the VivoBook Flip 14 doesn't win the thin and easy battle.

Asus built its ErgoLift hinge into the VivoBook Flip 14, which is a nice touch considering the overall complexity of the 360-degree hinge. It works well, raises the keyboard deck to a more comfortable typing angle, and theoretically offers additional space for air to circulate – except there are no vents on the bottom of the laptop. Rather, the air is sucked in via the keyboard, so that the usual thermal advantages are not available. Anyway, the hinge is a bit stiff and the lid takes two hands to open, but it keeps the display in place in clamshell, tent, media, and tablet modes.

Asus has also built in some upgrade options. The SSD slot is easily accessible if you ever want to upgrade the memory, and of the test device's 8 GB of RAM, 4 GB is soldered to the motherboard and the other 4 GB is plugged in. So you can swap this out for an 8 GB chip if necessary and increase your RAM to 12 GB. A maximum of 16 GB is available, which of course has to be configured when ordering the laptop.

Connectivity is good, with a USB-A 2.0 port, a USB-A 3.2 port, a USB-C Gen 2 port, a full-size HDMI 1.4 port, a 3.5mm audio jack and a microSD card reader. A proprietary connector provides power, and given the AMD chipset, there is no Thunderbolt support. Wireless connectivity is a bit behind the times with Wi-Fi 5 and Bluetooth 4.2.

performance

The VivoBook Flip 14 featured the first six-core Ryzen 5 5500U CPU we tested, and I was curious to see how it compares to the various Tiger Lake variants from Intel and the Ryzen 7 series. I got away impressed.

It didn't dominate Geekbench 5, with the lower single-core score typical of AMD chips and the more competitive multi-core score. It landed in third place in the comparison group, behind the Asus ZenBook 13 UM325UA with an eight-core Ryzen 7 5800U, which dominated, and the MSI Prestige 14 Evo with its four-core Intel Core i7-1185G7. In PCMark 10, the VivoBook Flip 14 took second place behind the ZenBook 13 and did particularly well in the content creation of this test. Accordingly, the Ryzen 5 5500U is competitive with Intel's Core i7 and significantly faster than the Core i5.

The VivoBook Flip 14 was particularly convincing in two particularly compute-intensive apps, Handbrake and Cinebench R23. In the Handbrake test, which encodes a 420 MB video as H.265, the Asus was 31 seconds faster than the Prestige 14 Evo and only seven seconds behind the ZenBook 13. The results in the demanding Cinebench R23 test were similar, where At least in multicore mode, the VivoBook Flip 14 took just second place behind the ZenBook 13 and was significantly faster than the Prestige 14 Evo. And the Ryzen 5 5500U is a real step up from the previous generation, making the VivoBook Flip 14 an impressive budget performer.

As with all current Ryzen laptops we tested, the VivoBook Flip 14 excels in CPU-intensive tasks and will go through the typical productivity workflow. It can handle creative applications too, although its Radeon Graphics doesn't offer much in the way of enhancing applications that the GPU can take advantage of. Of course, this also applies to Intel's integrated Iris Xe graphics. In this comparison group, only the HP Envy 14 with its Nvidia GeForce GTX-1650 Ti brings real added value for these applications. Everywhere else, the VivoBook Flip 14 will do exceptionally well, especially given its $ 630 price tag.

Underdog Bench 5
(Single / multiple)		 Handbrake
(Seconds)		 Cinebench R23
(Single / multiple)		 PCMark 10 3DMark time spy
Asus VivoBook Flip 14
(Ryzen 5 5500U)		 1102/5432 131 1180/7579 5191 1099
MSI Prestige 14 Evo (Core i7-1185G7) 1593/5904 162 1479/6680 4866 1465
Acer Swift 3 2020 (Ryzen7 4700U) 1120/4831 152 N / A N / A 975
HP Envy x360 13 (Ryzen 5 4500U) 1101/4485 176 N / A N / A 902
Asus ZenBook 13 UM325UA
(Ryzen7 5800U)		 1423/6758 124 1171/7824 6034 1342
HP Envy 14 2020 (Core i5-1135G7) 1398/4741 190 1343/5028 5178 3147

One area that won't impress is gaming. The 3DMark Time Spy test result is nothing special, and the VivoBook Flip 14 performed poorly in Fortnite. It only managed 25 frames per second (fps) at 1080p and medium graphics, in line with laptops with Intel Iris Xe graphics. It reached 15 fps in epic graphics, which in turn corresponds to Intel's integrated GPU. Simply put, the VivoBook Flip 14 is not a gaming laptop at any cost.

display

Spend $ 630 on a laptop and you'll be giving up on something. There is usually a big tradeoff in display quality and the VivoBook Flip 14 is no exception.

First, it's not very bright at just 230 nits (we like to see 300 nits or more). This is almost identical to the 233 nits of the Acer Swift 3, and so the VivoBook Flip 14 is not alone among budget laptops with a weak display. The contrast is also poor at 720: 1, below the Swift 3's 770: 1 and well below our preferred threshold of 1000: 1. The Lenovo Yoga 7i 14 performs even worse with 690: 1, which shows that it is not only true budget laptops that suffer from poor contrast.

Next came the VivoBook Flip 14's colors, which were incredibly narrow. The coverage of the Adobe RGB color space was only 50% and the sRGB color space was only 66%. That's well below the 70% and 95%, respectively, that we normally see minimums on mid-range and premium laptops – and the HP Envy x360 13, which is on our top budget list, scored 71% and 96%, which is much better is. I notice that the Swift 3 was in the same class as the Asus at 48% and 64%, respectively. The VivoBook Flip 14's color accuracy was better than the Swift 3's 4.76 at a Delta E of 2.62 (1.0 or less is considered excellent), while the Envy x360 13 got a lower 2.26.

Subjectively, the VivoBook Flip 14's display wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. It's enough for web browsing and productivity apps, but that's about it. Viewing media on the 2-in-1 device was also not a terrible experience despite the poor colors and contrasts.

Two downward facing speakers provide audio with Harman Kardon tuning. The speakers get loud, but also distorted, with crackling at any volume above 80%. Treble was blown out and mids muffled, which resulted in a tinny sound. Of course there was no question of bass. You'll be fine with system sounds and the occasional YouTube videos, but anything else requires headphones or a pair of bluetooth speakers.

Keyboard and touchpad

The keyboard on the VivoBook Flip 14 is eerily reminiscent of HP's Specter keyboard, which is purposely a good choice. It offers good spacing, large keys with attractive and easy-to-read lettering and a number of Home, PgUp, PgDn, End and Fn keys on the far right. Unfortunately, although it looks like a Specter keyboard, it doesn't feel like it. There's a lot of travel and a nice click to the switches, but the ground motion is too abrupt. There's no crisp jump like HP, and the overall typing experience isn't nearly as comfortable. I would rate this keyboard a few steps behind the Specter and Dell XPS keyboards and way behind Apple's Magic Keyboard on the latest MacBooks. I will notice that the three-level backlight is even and useful.

To be clear, the touchpad is way too small. There's still plenty of room on the keyboard deck for a larger version, and the small size is reinforced by the fingerprint reader in the right corner. The touchpad is a Microsoft Precision version, so it works fine with good support for Windows 10 multi-touch gestures, but it's tiny.

The display is of course touch-enabled, as it is a 2-in-1, and an Asus active pen is included. It supports Windows 10 inking well, with smooth strokes and precise response.

The fingerprint reader mentioned above has Windows 10 Hello support for passwordless login. It was quick and accurate during my tests, and it was welcome on such an inexpensive laptop.

Battery life

Asus only put 42 watt hours of battery into the VivoBook Flip 14, which is not much for a 14-inch display even with Full HD resolution and a powerful CPU. I wasn't expecting great battery life.

Starting with our web browser test that ran through a number of popular websites, the VivoBook Flip 14 lasted nine hours. That's a little less than average for this class of machine, but not a terrible result. The Acer Swift 3 managed just eight hours, while the HP Envy x360 13 managed a little over nine hours. In our video test, which plays a Full HD Avengers trailer until the battery runs out, the VivoBook Flip 14 lasted 12 hours, again slightly less than average, but not too much compared to the Swift 3's 10 hours disappointing. The Envy x360 13 beats both with 13 hours.

The VivoBook Flip 14 lasted just over two hours in the PCMark 10 gaming test, which stresses the CPU and GPU, which is average for the test. The Lenovo Yoga 7i managed just over 2.5 hours, and we didn't test the Swift 3 or the Envy x360 13 with this benchmark. In the PCMark 10 Applications test, which is the best indicator of battery life, the VivoBook Flip was again below average with just over nine hours. That still beats the 8.5 hours of the Yoga 7i.

Overall, the VivoBook Flip 14 was only a hair behind the pack in terms of battery life. It will likely take a full working day if you don't put too much stress on the CPU, but it definitely suffers from the small battery. However, this is again a budget laptop, and so the results are pretty good if you keep the price in mind.

Our opinion

The VivoBook Flip 14 is really very fast for a $ 630 laptop. Its build isn't the best, its battery life is slower, and its keyboard isn't one of my favorites. But a laptop that works like this for so little money shouldn't be neglected.

If you have a demanding productivity workflow or occasionally use creative applications, the VivoBook Flip 14 will give you the performance you are looking for. And nothing else is so bad about the laptop that you shouldn't think twice about it.

Are there alternatives?

I'll start with the Asus ZenBook 13 OLED UM325UA. It's not a 2-in-1, but it costs just $ 170 more for a color-accurate OLED display, a faster AMD Ryzen 7 5800U CPU, 16GB of RAM, and a 1TB PCIe solid-state drive. If your budget isn't that tight and you don't really need a 2-in-1, then the ZenBook 13 is a great option.

If you need a 2-in-1 and your budget is limited, the HP Envy x360 13 is a solid alternative. It's also a little more expensive, but you get better performance, better battery life, and a better display. What do you dislike?

How long it will take?

The VivoBook Flip 14 isn't the most solid notebook we've tested, but it's not bad for a budget device. It won't withstand extreme abuse, but with normal wear and tear at home and in the office, it should last for several years. You won't be surprised by the one-year limited warranty.

Should you buy it?

Yes, if you don't need a color-accurate display and you are short of money. The outstanding performance of the VivoBook Flip 14 makes up for many of its weaknesses.

Editor's recommendations



11 Apr
Blog

Asus ZenBook 13 OLED (UM325) Review: AMD Laptop Perfection?

asus zenbook 13 oled um32 review 1

Asus ZenBook 13 OLED UM325 Review: AMD Laptop Perfection?

"The Asus ZenBook 13 OLED is an indispensable laptop as long as you don't need a headphone jack."

  • Awesome OLED screen

  • Excellent touchpad and keyboard

  • The battery life is spectacular

  • Very thin and light

I may have found the perfect laptop. Or at least something that comes very close.

It's not made by Apple, Microsoft, or even Dell. From the outside, it doesn't even look particularly remarkable. When I pulled the Asus ZenBook 13 OLED out of the box, I fully expected it to be another solid mid-range laptop.

Then I tested the 1080p OLED screen. And benchmarking the AMD Ryzen 7 5800U processor inside. And then he noticed how long it took on a single charge.

The Asus ZenBook 13 OLED has it all. Nearly. Despite a few flaws, the ZenBook 13 OLED (UM325) is a laptop that all potential buyers should consider when it hits general availability in May.

design

The appearance of the Asus ZenBook 13 OLED is the least noticeable feature. It's by no means a bad looking laptop – but if you've seen a ZenBook, you've seen this one. I'm not a big fan of the concentric circle on the lid or the plastered logo on the front, but it's one of the prettier laptops Asus made recently.

This is especially true when you open the lid and see what the laptop has to offer inside. Everything is beautifully laid out, including the oversized touchpad and new keyboard. The layout and keycaps are reminiscent of HP's Specter laptops – but that's not a bad thing. The extra column of buttons under the power button offers some extra functionality, and the font with the keycap feels modern and clean.

At 0.55 inches and 2.5 pounds thick, the ZenBook 13 OLED is both thinner and lighter than most of its competitors, including the Dell XPS 13, HP Specter x360 13, Surface Laptop 3 13, Razer Book 13, and MacBook Pro 13 in. This makes a very portable laptop that is great for on the go. Even if it just moves from room to room, the small footprint comes in handy.

Despite its size, the chassis is robust. You may feel some flexing when applying extra force, but it's not something you will notice in daily use. The hinge opens with one finger and is lifted off the table when it is opened, creating a slight ramp for comfortable typing. I usually don't like these kind of raised hinges, but Asus pulled them off in a way that isn't distracting or ugly.

The aspect ratio of the screen is the main disadvantage of the ZenBook 13 OLED's design. It uses 16: 9, which went out of style in 2021 in favor of larger, more productive sizes like 16:10 or 3: 2. When you go back to 16: 9, the screen feels stocky. More importantly, the screen has a chubby chin bezel due to the size at the bottom. It's not a thorn in the side, it's just not quite as modern as the Dell XPS 13 or the Razer Book 13.

Asus decided that you don't need a headphone jack on your laptop.

My final complaint with the design of the ZenBook 13 OLED is ports. For some reason, Asus decided that you don't need a headphone jack on your laptop. If Asus were going for a more minimalist setup, that would probably make sense. However, the ZenBook 13 OLED has HDMI and USB-A. Yes, it's an odd choice that is likely to piss people off who didn't realize there wasn't a headphone jack until they needed it.

Fortunately, Asus includes an adapter in the box, but it lets you close either of your two available USB-C ports.

Display and speakers

The Asus ZenBook 13 isn't the first 13-inch notebook with an OLED screen – it was the HP Specter x360. However, this laptop is the first to implement a 13-inch 1080p OLED screen. That's a big deal as OLED panels keep getting cheaper – and hopefully reach more people.

It's not that the ZenBook 13 OLED is super cheap, but compared to the 4K models that OLED is exclusive to. What's the big deal with OLED? Well you will tell the difference when you see it in person. With OLED, pixels are rented out individually, which means that black levels and contrast ratio blow conventional LEDs out of the water. It's not even close, especially on a glossy screen like this one.

The OLED panel feels like the future of laptop displays.

397 nits are bright enough to prevent reflections, but it's the colors that really make this display pop. 100% sRGB and AdobeRGB color spaces are unknown on a 1080p screen, and the color accuracy is among the best I've ever tested with a Delta E of 0.49. Photographers may complain about the lack of a 4K option, but they definitely won't complain about the colors.

The display is non-touchable, as is common with 1080p screens.

When it comes to panels and calibration, the ZenBook 13 OLED is the future of laptop displays.

The same is not true of the speakers. The chintzy audio comes from underneath the laptop and points directly at your table or lap. The sound is messed up, especially when compared to all MacBooks. With speakers in this location, this will always be a problem.

Keyboard and touchpad

I am very happy with the inputs on the ZenBook 13 OLED. I've already mentioned the keyboard's appearance, but it's also very precise and comfortable to type. The layout is comfortable and the 1.4mm key travel feels heavenly compared to many of the 1mm keyboards.

The keyboard does not contain a fingerprint reader. This is an odd feature that a premium device left out.

My only problem was the backlight. There are three levels of backlight brightness, but there are some noticeable uneven spots. It's quite light over the middle zone while others are darker. This is a pity.

The touchpad is similarly successful. It's extra wide, but great for rejecting palms when typing. Tracking is smooth, as are gestures. My only sucker? The click is a little louder than I like. This is especially noticeable if you're coming from a MacBook.

The laptop has a sloppy 720p webcam over the display. It's no surprise how bad it is, but this should be reserved for emergencies only. However, it does include a built-in IR camera for Windows Hello facial recognition.

performance

Thanks to the new Ryzen processors from AMD, the Asus ZenBook 13 OLED offers remarkable performance for a laptop of this size. My device came with the Ryzen 7 5800U, an eight-core processor with a base clock of 1.9 GHz. When you add 16 GB of RAM and one TB of SSD storage, you have a pretty powerful little computer.

This is the first laptop I tested with this chip and I was disappointed. This is a significant improvement over last year's Ryzen 4000 processors and a clear head start over what Intel offers. This is especially true of multi-core performance, of course, thanks to the additional cores and threads that AMD's 7nm chips offer.

Geekbench (single / multi) Cinbench R23 (single / multi) PCMark 10 3DMark Time Spy
Asus ZenBook 13 OLED 1423/6758 1171/7824 6034 1342
Dell XPS 13 (Core i7-1185G7) 1549/5431 1399/4585 n / A 1380
HP Specter x360 14 (Core i7-1165G7) 1214/4117 1389/3941 4728 1457
Razor Book 13 (Core i7-1165G7) 1548/5374 1508/4519 4878 1776
MacBook Pro 13 (M1) 1707/7377 1487/7547 n / A n / A
Lenovo Yoga 9i 14 (Core i7-1185G7) 1532/5415 1435/4409 4800 1648

What's the use of this for performance in the real world? All of the laptops listed above are great for everyday work activities such as multitasking, web browsing, office applications, and video conferencing. That is to be assumed.

The reason the Asus ZenBook 13 OLED beats its competitors in PCMark 10 is mainly because of its excellent content creation performance. If you want to run some creative applications like Photoshop or Lightroom on the side, the ZenBook 13 OLED will surprise you how fast it is with these heavier tasks.

The ZenBook 13 OLED remains an undeniable argument for AMD in 2021.

It's even a decent video production machine. It's 41% faster than the Razer Book 13 in H.265 video encoding in Handbrake, which shows the big difference those additional cores make. In Handbrake it is even 7% faster than in the Ryzen 7 4800U from last year when I tested it in the Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7.

Now the ZenBook 13 OLED will obviously never again be compared to a 15-inch laptop with a discrete graphics card in real video editing. Even a modest 15-inch laptop like the HP Specter x360 15 (Core i7-10750H / GTX 1650 Ti) was 45% faster in PugetBench's Adobe Premiere Pro benchmark. This is also where the incredible performance of the MacBook Pro M1 exudes, which is just as fast as that of the Specter x360 15 in the same test.

That said, the ZenBook 13 OLED remains an undeniable argument for AMD in 2021, especially if you're not interested in a move to macOS.

Battery life

Battery life is the final trick in the case of the ZenBook 13 OLED. It took an amazing 15 hours and 46 minutes on our web browser test, which is as good as it gets for a laptop of this type. That was true for last year's AMD laptops, and it is true for this year as well. It beat the HP Specter x360 14 by nearly 9 hours and the XPS 13 by 7.5 hours. In fact, it only takes 19 minutes to keep up with the MacBook Pro!

The ZenBook 13 OLED's lower resolution explains some of this, but even when compared to other 1080p laptops, the ZenBook 13 OLED is way ahead of the competition.

Meanwhile, the ZenBook also lasted 15.5 hours while the video was looping. This is another test in which the MacBook Pro M1 dominates and it lasts over 21 hours. But here, too, the ZenBook 13 OLED is at least 3 or 4 hours ahead of many of the best Intel laptops.

Of course, your mileage can vary depending on how hard you push the system. With the ZenBook 13 OLED as my daily driver for almost a full week, I found it easy to get through a work day without a charge, and there was enough juice left to handle a couple of hours the next morning.

Our opinion

The Asus ZenBook 13 OLED is way ahead of the competition in almost every important category. The OLED screen is a standout feature, as is AMD performance and fantastic battery life. Do I wish it had a headphone jack and a 16:10 screen? Naturally. But the strengths more than make up for these mistakes.

The only caveat is pricing, which is still ongoing. Some international prices suggest the base configuration will be around $ 1,000 while our pimped up model is likely to cost a few hundred more.

Any alternatives?

The best choice is the 13-inch MacBook Pro with the M1 chip. It's cheaper, faster, and has a higher resolution screen. Of course, it has neither an OLED screen nor a USB-A and HDMI connection.

However, if you don't want to upgrade to a Mac, the Dell XPS 13, HP Specter x360 14, and Razer Book 13 offer a competitive package. The XPS 13 is still the prettiest of the range and would still be my pick of the four laptops.

How long it will take?

The Asus ZenBook 13 OLED should last at least four or five years. The 16: 9 aspect ratio will continue to be a bit dated going forward, but the chassis and components are all sturdy and future-proof.

Should you buy it?

Yes. It's one of the most exciting laptops of recent times, especially if you're looking for an AMD device in 2021.

Editor's recommendations




01 Sep
Blog

Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 Review: The AMD Ryzen 4000 Flagship

Lenovo Ideapad Slim 7 review 01

"The Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 is a genre-bending laptop that does anything hard to beat for its price."

  • Incredible performance

  • Tiny footprint

  • Record battery life

  • Can handle light games

  • The screen is a little dark

  • Small palm rests

Disorder. It's not a word I idly use, but what AMD's Ryzen 4000 processors have been doing over the past eight months fits the definition. These chips offer the performance you previously paid dearly for, both in size and price.

So far, however, few laptops have been designed from the ground up to use these chips.

The Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 should always be an example of how disruptive Ryzen 4000 can be. After many months of delay, the time has finally come to attempt a seemingly insurmountable task – being a laptop that can be ultra-slim, extremely powerful, and extremely affordable at the same time.

Have AMD and Lenovo just done the impossible?

design

The IdeaPad Slim 7 revolution is not broadcast high. It's not ugly, but it's also not attention grabbing. It's not far from Lenovo's current crop of conservative, dark gray laptops with rounded edges and an all-metal chassis. The design alone makes it difficult for you to pick this out of the wide range of similar looking laptops from Lenovo. It's reportedly offered in a possibly more eye-catching "Orchid" color option, but I haven't set my eyes on it yet.

In a sense, that's a shame. The Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 surpasses our traditional laptop categories in many ways. This is a tiny laptop. It's only 0.58 inches thick, thinner, and slimmer than the MacBook Air. It weighs only 3.1 pounds and fits the 13-inch MacBook Pro – and yet has an 8-core processor like the gigantic MacBook Pro 16 -Inch. That is the unique offering of this fascinating laptop.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro is possibly the best size comparison. The IdeaPad Slim 7 is a little smaller in almost every dimension, if not by much, and even has the larger 14-inch screen. More importantly, these two laptops share a 25-watt processor. That's 10 watts more power than your standard 13-inch laptop, which contributes to the unique performance of these laptops.

You'll find a healthy selection of ports on the sides of the laptop. On the left side, the IdeaPad Slim 7 has two USB-C ports, HDMI and a 3.5 mm headphone jack. On the right side, the IdeaPad Slim 7 offers two USB-A 3.2 Gen 1 ports, the power switch and a micro SD card slot.

Since this is an AMD laptop, you won't get Thunderbolt 3, a proprietary Intel technology. However, USB-C is still a versatile port. Each USB-C port can be used for charging, connecting to a monitor, transferring files, and connecting peripherals. You can't power an external graphics card, but these ports are very powerful for this laptop.

My only real complaint is that you can't charge the laptop from the right as both USB-C ports are on the left. It defeats the point of USB-C's versatility.

performance

A 25-watt, 8-core processor in a small laptop is a fascinating requirement, but only if it can actually deliver significantly better performance. I started my tests with Geekbench 5 and Cinebench R20, two benchmarks that can give a comprehensive picture of the CPU's performance. The IdeaPad Slim 7 particularly impressed with its multi-core performance. Amazingly, Geekbench 5 Multi-Core was only 9% behind the much larger Dell XPS 15 with its 45-watt eight-core processor. In the meantime, it was 23% ahead of the 13-inch MacBook Pro (with a 10th generation Core i5) and 16% ahead of the Acer Swift 3 (with the Ryzen 7 4700U). No laptop in this size class has the cores and threads that fit the IdeaPad Slim 7.

For a more realistic test, I encoded a 4K video in Handbrake, with performance limited to the CPU. Here, too, the IdeaPad Slim 7 and its Ryzen processor with eight cores knocked out the competition. It even beat some 45 watt six-core laptops like the HP Envy 15 or the Asus ROG Strix G15.

(pullqutoe) For a laptop of this size, the IdeaPad Slim 7 belongs to its own performance category. (/ pullquote)

The only place the IdeaPad Slim 7 can't really compete with these larger laptops is in video editing. Normally I wouldn't try Premiere Pro on a laptop this small, but I had to try the IdeaPad Slim 7. It took an hour and 18 minutes to export a two minute 4K project to ProRes 422. The higher clock speeds and discrete graphics of larger laptops like the Dell XPS 15 or MacBook Pro 16-inch help them finish the same test in well under 10 minutes.

This does not mean that the IdeaPad Slim 7 cannot be used for content creation workflows at all. If you are working with lower resolutions, less demanding codecs, or lighter applications, the IdeaPad Slim 7 should work just fine. It's just not a real replacement for one of those larger laptops. If portability isn't important, even a cheap gaming laptop like the Dell G5 SE can handle video editing far better than the IdeaPad Slim 7 for roughly the same price. For a laptop of this size, however, the IdeaPad Slim 7 belongs to its own performance category.

Interestingly, Lenovo also sells an Intel version of the IdeaPad Slim 7. But here's what you get: It's $ 150 more expensive, has half the memory, and only has a quad-core CPU. The only thing the Intel model has on its side is the Nvidia MX350 discrete graphics card, but AMD's built-in Radeon graphics outperform it. There's no reason to buy it through the AMD model.

Apart from the Intel variant, Lenovo does not offer any configurations. That could change in the future, but for now, this model with 8GB of RAM and 512GB SSD is the only option. I really wish a 16GB model was offered to pair it better with the high-core processor.

Game performance

You can play games on this laptop! Yes it's true and it's kind of a miracle. The Ryzen 7 4800U comes with eight Radeon graphics cores. This is easily the best discrete graphic I've ever seen on a laptop. It holds great promise for the future of AMD's Radeon graphics.

In the 3DMark Time Spy benchmark, it is 29% faster than the Dell XPS 13 with its integrated Intel Iris Plus graphics. It even outperforms discrete entry-level graphics such as the Nvidia MX350 in the Asus ZenBook Duo. The result is decent low-end performance in modern games.

These are easily the best discrete graphics I've ever seen on a laptop.

Take Fortnite, for example. As long as you keep the graphics settings at medium or below, the games play pretty smoothly. You'll find it hard to get up to 60 frames per second (fps) without tweaking the 3D resolution slider a bit. For the first time, however, Fortnite can be played without any problems with built-in graphics.

A less GPU-dependent game like Civilization VI will perform even better. The IdeaPad Slim 7 struggled to keep up with the Ultra settings, but averaged 45 fps on Medium. That's still a long way from what 15-inch laptops with discrete graphics can do, but again, you can play Civilization VI without having to resort to low graphics settings. This is really impressive for a laptop with no games.

The only real competition the IdeaPad Slim 7 has in this form factor is the GTX 1650 version of the Razer Blade Stealth. While you can get better frame rates on this computer, it's also far more expensive.

Keyboard and touchpad

This keyboard is not my favorite. The trip feels very short and the buttons have a muddy bottom effect. I prefer the Dell XPS 13, MacBook Air, or HP Specter x360. It didn't take me long to get used to it, however, and I like the curved shape of the keycaps.

The keyboard backlight doesn't have its own key, but Fn + Space is a solid replacement. The backlight is very bright – to the point where I would like a lower brightness setting.

My main problem with the keyboard is its location. The keyboard is farther from the screen than most laptops to make room for the speakers and ports. The result is less space for the touchpad and palm rests underneath. If you have small hands you're fine, but those palm rests were too small for me so I had to dig the edges of the chassis into my palms. It's not a comfortable position to type in for a long time. Laptops like the Samsung Galaxy Book Flex also suffer from this problem.

The touchpad performs better and offers a smooth tracking surface and enough space for swipes and gestures with two fingers. The click feels solid, although it's a little louder than I'd like it to be.

Battery life

When comparing AMD with Intel, there was no clear winner in terms of battery life. Until now. I don't know if it's the big 60 watt battery or the efficient 7 nm processor, but the Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 is an absolute champion when it comes to battery life. This can disappear from the wall all day – and a few more.

In our lightest test of repeating a local video file until it died, the IdeaPad Slim 7 lasted over 18.5 hours. This is one of the best times I've seen on a laptop that isn't a Chromebook or ARM-based laptop.

The real record was set in our web browsing test. The IdeaPad Slim 7 lasted over 16 hours here, which was only surpassed by the Qualcomm-powered Lenovo Flex 5G. That's an insane lifespan for a load.

As my daily driver, I found that the IdeaPad Slim 7 could easily survive a whole working day despite my heavy multitasking, music streaming and countless open apps.

Display and speaker

If the IdeaPad Slim 7 has one notable flaw, it is the screen. It uses a 14-inch 1080p panel that does the job, but not with a lot of grace. The screen is a bit dark and only reaches 247 nits. This is both the 300 nit threshold that I like to see in laptops and the result of strong glare. When watching a movie with dark scenes, the first thing to do is to turn off any light in the room. The contrast is the only bright spot at 1,370: 1.

The display is also a slight shade of green, although it is adequate in terms of gamut and color accuracy. Unfortunately, a 4K 100% AdobeRGB model for professionals is not offered.

I was pleasantly surprised by the speakers. You're right on the keyboard deck, pointing at your ears – which does wonders for the clarity of the audio. These still don't replace a decent bluetooth speaker, but for the occasional music or video watching, they get the job done.

Our opinion

The Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 7 may not be the true flagship AMD wants. Its screen is lackluster and the design is far from remarkable. Thanks to its fantastic performance, long battery life and impressive integrated graphics, the IdeaPad Slim 7 surpasses the possibilities of small laptops.

Are there alternatives?

There are many Ryzen 4000 laptops out there that aren't as powerful as the IdeaPad Slim 7 but are available at a cheaper price. The most obvious option is the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 14, which is not as powerful but is a lot cheaper. The HP Envy x360 13 is another good example of a cheaper AMD laptop with a little less performance.

If you're willing to pay a few hundred more dollars, the Dell XPS 13 is a better designed laptop. Performance and battery life can't quite keep up with the IdeaPad Slim 7, but the small form factor and better display make it worth the additional cost.

How long it will take?

The IdeaPad Slim 7 should last at least three or four years, which is normal for laptops. Due to the limited configuration options, you may want to upgrade the memory or memory yourself in the future, but everything is soldered up.

Lenovo offers a standard one-year warranty. You are on your own past.

Should you buy it?

Yes. It's the best laptop you can buy under $ 1,000.

Editor's recommendations




06 Jul
Blog

HP Envy x360 13 Review: AMD Ryzen Cranks Up the Value

HP Envy x360 13 Ryzen Review 01

HP Envy x360 13 review: AMD Ryzen 4000 increases the value

"The HP Envy x360 13 is a midrange laptop that doesn't compromise despite its low price."

  • Slim and attractive

  • Superior typing experience

  • Excellent performance

  • Balanced port selection

  • Well built

  • Battery life delays

  • Pen not included

Better performance at a lower price? Laptops aren't usually sold like this, but that's exactly what the new HP Envy x360 suggests.

The HP Envy line has played the second violin after the company's premium Specter laptops. It was the option in the middle area and has always led to corner cuts. No more.

The new Envy x360 13 with Ryzen 4000 CPUs is a typical example of this and promises better performance than the corresponding Specter at a lower price. I looked at an $ 860 configuration with a Ryzen 5 4500U CPU, 8 GB RAM, a 256 GB solid-state drive (SSD), and a low-power, Full HD display (1,920 x 1,080).

Although not perfect, I knew that as soon as I held the Envy x360 in my hands, my expectations for a laptop at this price had to change.

design

The Envy x360 13 is an all-metal laptop made of punched aluminum in the elegant color Midnight Black, which is also available with the Specter x360 13. The difference is that the Specter is made of aluminum, but you won't see the difference. Hold them side by side. The build of the Envy x360 exudes quality and thanks to some reductions in the Envy bezel, both feel very small for 13-inch laptops.

Compared to competitors in its price range, the Envy x360 stands out. The materials are far better than a laptop like the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 14 made of plastic (and much larger). Although this laptop is about $ 200 cheaper, it uses the same Ryzen 5 processor and has the same 2-in-1 functionality.

The Envy x360 is also fairly thin and light. At 0.65 inches, it's thinner than the Specter x360 at 0.67 inches and at 2.92 inches, slightly heavier than 2.88 pounds. The Envy x360 is smaller than the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5, which is 0.82 inches thick and 3.3 pounds. And compared to the previous version of the Envy, HP has done a remarkable job by squeezing more computers into a thinner case – the Envy definitely intervenes in the Specter x360's space when you look at the overall design.

As a 2-in-1 device, the Envy x360 feels robust in all four modes – clamshell, tent, media and tablet. The hinge works smoothly, but holds the screen in place with little wobble when you move it. It's not quite as tight as the Specter x360, but it's better than the IdeaPad Flex 5. Again, the delta between the Premium Specter x360 and the Envy x360 is smaller than expected in the middle.

The HP Envy x360 13 isn't nearly as extravagant as the gem-cut Specter, but it's still an attractive laptop. Let's call it elegant rather than luxurious – its lines are clean and streamlined, giving it a coherent design that looks great from every angle. Compared to the boring Lenovo Flex 5 14 Ryzen, the Envy is the more sophisticated laptop.

Connectivity is about what to expect from a thin and light machine. There are two USB-A 3.1 ports to support older devices that are easy to get, as well as a microSD card reader and a USB-C 3.2 port (which charges the laptop despite the proprietary connector).

performance

AMD's Ryzen 4000 chips were very impressive. Every laptop we tested with the CPU, including some budget models, performed much better than the 10th generation Intel alternatives. Whether you're talking about Ice Lake or Comet Lake, there's a Ryzen 4000 chip that does it – you need to jump on 45-watt Intel parts to get better performance.

The HP Envy x360 13 also performed well, though not as quickly as some other Ryzen machines. In Geekbench 5, for example, 1,101 points were scored in the single-core test and 4,485 points in the multi-core test. This is comparable to the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 with the same Ryzen CPU from 1,096 and 4,543. In comparison, the Acer Spin 3 with a 10th generation Intel Core i5-1035G1 scored 1,215 and 3,615 points, which is slightly faster in single-core mode and much slower in multi-core mode. The Specter x360 13 with a Core i7-1065G7 scores 1,164 and 3,981 points and makes the Envy the faster sibling.

The Envy x360 13 isn't the fastest Ryzen 4000 system, but it still beats most Intel systems.

When switching to our handbrake test, which encodes a 420 MB video as H.265, the Envy x360 13 took just under three minutes. It's quick, even though the IdeaPad Flex 5 was 16 seconds faster. I tried HP Performance Mode in the Command Center utility and found that the IdeaPad only takes five seconds less time. Compare these results to laptops like the Microsoft Surface Book 3 13 with a Core i7-1065G7 that took about four and a half minutes. Note that the Acer Swift 3 with the Ryzen 7 4700U was only about 10 seconds faster, which means that the Ryzen 5 4500U is a good sweet spot for this kind of performance. When comparing the Envy x360 with the Specter x360, the Envy was even a full minute faster, even when the Specter was running in performance mode.

The Envy x360 13 may not be the fastest Ryzen 4000 system we've tested, but it still beats most Intel systems. You will find it great for demanding productivity work and even for some creative apps if necessary. Just don't plan on gaming – you get performance that is little better than Intel's new Iris Plus graphics and far less than a discrete GPU.

display

HP equipped my test device with its energy-saving 400-nit Full HD IPS display (1,920 x 1,080). This is an upgrade of $ 50 over the standard-performance 300-nit Full HD display. You can spend $ 60 more on the latest HP screen technology that hides the screen from the sides. I like the display that HP chose for the Envy x360 13. It is bright at 399 nits and has a large contrast at 1110: 1 (we like to see a contrast at 1000: 1 or more). The color gamut is only average at 71% sRGB and 96% sRGB – for premium laptops – and the accuracy is not the best at 2.26 (1.0 or less is considered excellent).

This is much better than the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 with an accuracy of 47% AdobeRGB, 63% sRGB and 3.0. This display was also weak at 242 nits and suffered from poor contrast at 770: 1. The display alone is one reason why you want to spend the additional $ 200 on the Envy x360 13 over its Ryzen 4000 competitor.

The Envy's display isn't quite as good as some other laptops. For example, the Full HD display of the Dell XPS 13 Clamshell had better colors at 77% AdobeRGB and 97% sRGB, more accurate colors at 1.53 and a higher contrast ratio of 1440: 1. At 377 nits, however, it was not quite as bright can get the same display as the Envy of the Specter x360 13, and the premium device also offers a 4K OLED display with absolutely spectacular colors and contrasts. This is a checkbox that the Envy x360 cannot tick.

I enjoyed this display in everyday use. It was bright enough and the contrast made black text stand out against a white background. Colors may not be good enough for professional photo and image editors, but they don't prevent me from viewing pictures or viewing Netflix.

After all, the speakers shooting down were surprisingly loud without distortion. That was a nice surprise. The bass was missing, but the mids and highs were clear, and I could rely on the speakers when I listened casually. I pulled out my headphones for action films and music – but that applies to almost all laptops with the exception of Apple's MacBooks.

Keyboard and touchpad

The keyboards of the HP Specter x360 laptops are my second favorite behind Apple's fantastic new Magic keyboard on the latest MacBooks. They have plenty of travel and nice big keycaps well spaced, and the mechanism has a click that avoids any hint of bottoming. I can type on these keyboards as quickly as I can on any other keyboard, including Apple's. Why do I mention the more expensive Specter keyboard? Because as far as I can tell, the Envy x360 is exactly the same keyboard. HP has again removed a key differentiator between these two computers.

The Envy x360's touchpad is also similar to that of the Specter, although its surface is not quite as smooth. However, it does support Microsoft's Precision Touchpad protocol, so multi-touch gestures work perfectly. Interestingly, I prefer the click of the Envy touchpad to that of the Specter – it's softer and more confidence that a button was actually pressed.

The Envy x360, of course, has a touch display that's 2-in-1, and it works almost always. It also supports the latest pen protocol from Microsoft, which promises a longer battery life (up to 30 days) and a more natural tilt function for the 4,096 pressure sensitivity levels. And yes, you guessed it, that's something the Specter doesn't have – even though the pen isn't included in the Envy.

Finally, next to the arrow keys, there is a fingerprint scanner in the keyboard that works perfectly. However, Windows Hello about facial recognition is not included, as is the case with more expensive laptops. The Envy x360 has a privacy screen for the webcam. Unlike the Specter, however, it is a physical cover that is activated by pressing a special key on the keyboard. It is neat to see how the cover appears when you press the button.

There is also a special button to mute the microphone, another data protection function that has been taken over by the Specter line.

Battery life

The jury is not yet sure how efficient the Ryzen 4000 is, but it looks like the Intel chips haven't hit yet. The Envy x360 13 has a battery life of 51 watt-hours and a low-power display that has given some other laptops a spectacular battery life. Still, the results of envy weren't at the top of our list.

In the web browser test, which is the best indicator of how long the battery is performing typical productivity tasks, the Envy lasted just over nine hours. That's a good score, but well below the 12 hours of the Dell XPS 13. The Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5, which lasted almost eight hours, was outperformed.

The Envy lasted almost four hours in our demanding Basemark web benchmark test. This is also a strong score, but was solidly beaten by the 4.7 hours of the XPS 13. The IdeaPad Flex 5 lasted only eight minutes less. In our video test, which replayed a local video clip, the Envy lasted 13 hours compared to the 14.5 hours of the XPS 13 and the 11 hours of the IdeaPad Flex 5. This is the only test in which the low-power Display demonstrated its worth.

Overall, the Envy x360 13 is likely to give you full-day productivity as long as you don't put too much strain on the Ryzen CPU. I suspect the 10th generation Intel CPUs are a bit more efficient than the Ryzen 4000 series, but I can't prove that – we still don't have enough data.

Our opinion

The HP Envy x360 13 creates a mystery for HP. It's faster than the more expensive Specter x360 13 and almost as well built. If you're not looking for a 4K display, I can't give a good reason to spend more on a Specter. That's a relatively high praise for the Envy and makes it a great 2-in-1 device at a medium price.

The Envy really doesn't have many weaknesses, although battery life wasn't the greatest strength and it's a shame that the pen isn't included. It's simply a well-designed 2-in-1 device that meets the needs of most people who want to spend around $ 1,000 on a machine. You can even configure up to $ 550 if you really want to save costs.

Are there alternatives?

The Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 is a close competitor and costs around $ 200 less. It has the same Ryzen CPU and slightly faster performance. However, the battery life is not that long and the screen quality is lower.

The Lenovo Yoga C640 is another great option from just $ 600. The Intel Core i3 is a pretty big step back in terms of performance, but in return you get a significantly better battery life.

The HP Specter x360 13 offers improved aesthetics and the ability to configure a 4K display. As configured (though with a slower Intel CPU and 512 GB of memory), it's about $ 300 more expensive, and adding the 4K display adds another $ 200 to the price.

How long it will take?

The Envy x360 13 is built well enough to last as long as you need it, and its performance will keep up for years to come. By integrating Thunderbolt 3, you can connect modern peripheral devices. However, the 1 year warranty is typical and disappointing.

Should you buy it

Yes. The Envy Envy x360 13 is a slim, well-built and fast 2-in-1 device that feels far more valuable than the price suggests.

Editor's recommendations




27 Jun
Blog

Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 14 Review: AMD Nails It Again

Lenovo Ideapad Flex 5 14 Review Ryzen 01

"The Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 offers incredible value and solid performance with few compromises."

  • Exceptional performance for an affordable laptop

  • Comfortable keyboard and touchpad

  • Active pen included

  • Excellent value for money

  • Solid speakers

  • Mediocre display

  • Boring look

Laptops with AMD's Ryzen 4000 chips seem too good to be true. The specifications are incredibly powerful and cheaper than Intel's.

Take the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 14, for example. It is the latest in a range of Ryzen-based budget laptops. This comes with a Ryzen 5 4500U with six cores and 16 GB RAM and costs only $ 600. Due to the technical data alone, a better performance value for the price is hard to imagine.

Is there a catch?

design

The IdeaPad Flex 5 is a plastic laptop. Lenovo calls it "normal" plastic at the top and "stable PC / ABC" at the bottom. Aside from the chemistry lesson, this means the laptop case is relatively sturdy. Don't expect it to be as robust as a unibody MacBook Pro or even the Lenovo Yoga C640 for $ 600. The lid, the keyboard deck and the case back are all somewhat flexible. However, it is not outrageous. Low prices and flexible laptops no longer necessarily go hand in hand.

Another indication of the budget status of the Flex 5 is its stature. It's pretty thick at 0.82 inches and heavy at 3.3 pounds. Compare that to the Yoga C640 at 0.67 inches and 2.98 pounds and the HP Specter x360 13 at 0.67 inches and 2.88 pounds. The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Yoga is available at 0.59 inches and 2.99 pounds. The display bezel of the Flex 5 is also not tiny, especially at the top and bottom, which means that the entire case is also more extensive. No matter how you cut it, this is not a small 2-in-1.

It's a rather nondescript design that doesn't catch the eye – like many Lenovo laptops lately.

The hinge of the Flex 5 is firm. The small wobble when moving the laptop does not distract excessively. Most importantly, the tight hinge allows for smooth transitions through the various 2-in-1 modes, including clamshell, tent, media and tablet. The 14-inch display and the resulting housing obviously result in a rather large and unwieldy tablet. You just don't want to try holding a 3.3-pound tablet in one hand for too long.

Aesthetically, the IdeaPad Flex 5 is an attractive dark gray all around. The only chrome is the border around the Lenovo logo on the lid and the keyboard deck. Ultimately, it is a rather nondescript design that – like many Lenovo laptops lately – is not noticeable, but still looks good. The Specter x360 13 with its gem design is at the other end of the attention-grabbing spectrum, and the Yoga C640 is very similar in aesthetics to the IdeaPad.

An advantage of the Flex 5's thickness is that it offers a good level of connectivity. There are two USB-A 3.1 ports, a USB-C 3.1 port, a full-size HDMI 1.4 port, and a 4-in-1 SD card reader. Although Thunderbolt 3 is missing, many will appreciate the inclusion of some of these older ports that come in handy. Wireless connectivity is still limited to Wi-Fi 5 and not the newer Wi-Fi 6 standard, and Bluetooth 4.2 is on board.

performance

The IdeaPad Flex 5 doesn't look like a cheap laptop and doesn't work like one either. The Ryzen 5 chips from AMD keep proving that it is one of the best bargains. In this case, the Ryzen 5 4500U comes with six cores and six threads. It's the same chip that you can find in other cheap laptops like the Acer Swift 3 for $ 650. This option used the Ryzen 7 4700U CPU with eight cores and eight threads for the power supply. Interestingly, the processor performance of the Flex 5 is quite competitive with this chip.

First, it did well in the synthetic Geekbench 5 benchmark, reaching 1,096 in the single-core test and 4,543 in the multi-core test. In the multi-core test, it was 20% faster than the Acer Spin 3, a similar Intel Core i5 notebook. It is clear that the AMD chips perform well when multitasking, even though they have two fewer threads.

The IdeaPad Flex 5 is an extremely fast laptop for only $ 600.

Speaking of which, I then ran our handbrake test, which encodes a 420MB video as H.265 and uses as many cores and threads as a CPU has to offer. The Flex 5 took just over two minutes to complete the test, just eight seconds longer than the Swift 3. The Surface Book 3 13 took four minutes. Compared to the Dell XPS 13, a very fast laptop with the Core i7-1065G7, the Flex 5 was finished in 38 seconds less.

The fantastic performance of the Flex 5 is supported by 16 GB of RAM, which is surprising with such an inexpensive computer. All of this results in an extremely fast laptop for only $ 600, which is characterized by high productivity in multitasking and migration by demanding tasks such as photo and video editing. The laptop slows down when measured with Intel Core i7 laptops that have more threads, especially 45-watt parts. Compared to the typical Intel CPUs that you see in laptops at this price, AMD rules apply.

The Flex 5 also includes built-in AMD Radeon graphics, which according to 3DMark are slightly faster than Intel's Iris Plus graphics. That means you can get a little boost in creative apps that can use the GPU and play light games with lower resolutions and graphics settings. A game like Rocket League plays decently, but anything that is more intense will suffer.

Battery life

The IdeaPad Flex 5 has a battery capacity of 52.5 watt hours, which is not much for a 14-inch laptop. I therefore had little hope of longevity.

The Flex 5 was an average performer. In our web browser test, it took eight hours compared to the Yoga C640 with its CPU with lower performance of over 10.5 hours. The Acer Swift 3 lasted six minutes less than the Flex 5, suggesting that the AMD Ryzen CPUs aren't the most energy efficient. The Dell XPS 13 with a 1080p display and the Core i7-1065G7 lasted 11.5 hours.

For a lower load, I looped a local video clip, and the Flex 5 lasted 11 hours. That's not a bad thing, but it's far less than the spectacular 23 hours of the Yoga C640 and the powerful 14.5 hours of the XPS 13. Last, I took the machine through our most demanding battery test, the Basemark Web Benchmark. This replicates battery life in heavier applications. It took three and a half hours, similar to laptops like the Yoga C640.

No, it's not a leader in battery life. Unlike many budget laptops of the past, however, the IdeaPad Flex 5 should survive most of a working day on a single charge.

display

So far nothing on the IdeaPad Flex 5 screams "cheap". Then there is the display.

It's not that this display is bothering you when you work or even watch movies. Actually, this display would have been pretty good five years ago. Although the contrast is not as high as with better displays, black text is displayed on a white background without major quality problems. And colors may be limited and inaccurate when measured with a colorimeter – as creative types do – but they are neither unnatural nor do they interfere with everyday image viewing and web browsing. This isn't a terrible display, it just doesn't go well with the performance that this affordable laptop can offer.

However, according to my colorimeter, Lenovo had to use a cheaper panel. It is a 1080p IPS display, but it has a narrow color gamut (only 47% of AdobeRGB and 63% of sRGB). The screen is limited to only 242 nits of brightness, and even the contrast is low at 770: 1. It's a glossy screen, so glare issues may occur in brighter environments.

The lackluster picture quality is a shame. Otherwise, the Flex 5 would have been a powerful little photo editing device. We have seen the same panel in many budget laptops, but there are notable exceptions like the Lenovo Yoga C640.

And the audio was a plus, with high-profile speakers next to the keyboard that offer a lot of volume without distortion. The bass was missing as always, but mids and highs were good for music and occasional YouTube videos. You can even bathe Netflix with these speakers as long as you listen.

Keyboard and touchpad

If you've used one of Lenovo's yoga or IdeaPad keyboards, you're familiar with it. It's relatively flat with a lot of space and a precise mechanism, which means that it disappoints those who travel a lot but can otherwise be serviced. I was able to type fast enough at full speed, and although it is nowhere near the Magic Keyboard of the much more expensive MacBook range or even the Specter x360 13's second-best (in my opinion) keyboard, it's a solid keyboard that most works users will enjoy.

The touchpad is also comfortable and of average size for a modern Windows 10 laptop. It supports Microsoft's Precision Touchpad drivers and provides smooth and precise Windows 10 multi-touch gestures. No complaints there.

As a 2-in-1 device, the Flex 5 naturally has a touch-capable display that works as usual. Lenovo also includes an active stylus that supports 4,096 pressure sensitivity levels. This makes it a great option for anyone who wants to illustrate the display or take detailed notes. Many inexpensive 2-in-1 devices either do not include the pen (the Yoga C640 is an example) or do not support it. It's a real plus if it's in the box.

Finally, Windows 10 Hello login without a password is supported by a fingerprint reader in the upper right corner of the keyboard deck. It's fast and accurate, and again a bonus for a $ 600 laptop. However, there is no infrared camera for facial recognition.

Our opinion

The Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 is a spectacularly fast laptop for $ 600 with a build quality that finally deserves the price. The configuration is impressive too – you don't often get a 256GB PCIe SSD and 16GB RAM for nearly that price. If your goal is a budget performer, this is a great laptop.

However, the display is disappointing, which means that all of the power that might target creative types is wasted. This is a shame and holds the Flex 5 back.

Are there alternatives?

The Lenovo Yoga C640 is a bit smaller, has a much better battery life, and a better display. It also costs $ 600, but offers less storage space and a much slower CPU.

For just $ 50 more, you can choose the even faster Acer Swift 3. It is well built, looks good, and is the fastest budget notebook we've tested. But it also has a mediocre display.

For the same price, consider considering a Chromebook route. The Google Pixelbook Go for $ 650 is an excellent choice, with an excellent display and portability.

How long it will take?

The Yoga IdeaPad Flex 5 is durable enough to last as long as you'd expect from a $ 600 machine. And it's fast enough to keep up with your workflow for years. There is no Thunderbolt 3 support, so expansion is limited, but this is expected at this price. The 1 year warranty is typical and disappointing.

Should you buy it

Yes. The Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5 is a very competent, affordable laptop that demonstrates the strength of AMD processors.

Editor's recommendations




21 May
Blog

Dell G5 SE Gaming Laptop Review-In-Progress: Peak AMD

Dell G5 Se Gaming Laptop Review 02

Dell G5 SE gaming laptop in progress: Peak AMD

"The Dell G5 SE is an extremely competitive midrange gaming laptop."

  • Excellent CPU performance

  • Great gaming performance for the price

  • Solid value across configurations

  • Bulky

  • The benefits of AMD Smartshift are opaque

Nvidia does not manufacture PC processors. Intel doesn't make PC graphics cards – at least not yet. AMD is the only company that does both, and hopes that a more harmonious relationship between CPU and GPU can lead to additional performance.

The Dell G5 SE offers our first glimpse of this potential. It is equipped with both a Ryzen 7 4800H and the Radeon RX 5600M graphics card, the latest and greatest AMD it has to offer. Does it last?

performance

On the outside there is not much to say about the Dell G5. It looks like it used to – robust and armor-like. It's the opposite of slim in almost every way.

The "SE" refers to what happens under this conservative exterior. Thanks to the Ryzen 7 4800H, this laptop offers eight cores and 16 threads of computing power. It also has 36 processing units and GDDR6 memory in the RX 5600M GPU. My test device was also equipped with 16 GB RAM, a 512 GB SSD and a 144 Hz screen with 1080p – all for a cool $ 1,200. That is a very attractive price.

This is a gaming laptop, so I started with 3DMark. The results in Time Spy were very encouraging for AMD. It missed a midrange version of the Dell G7 that I tested in late 2019 and that was powered by a 9th generation Nvidia RTX 2060 and an Intel Core i7-9750H. A 5% gain isn't much in benchmarks, but a profit is a gain.

It's going crazy here. The G5 SE has managed to develop the best thin gaming laptops like the Razer Blade 2019, which we tested with the RTX 2070 Max-Q from Nvidia. This is impressive. The G5 SE is a chunky laptop by comparison, but it's also a lot cheaper.

The processor performance is strong in itself, but who is surprised with eight cores and 16 threads? AMD's mobile Ryzen blows Intel's 6-core gaming chips in Cinebench R20 and Geekbench 5 out of the water. Here, too, the Razer Blade beats Cinebench Multi-Core by 49% and Handbrake by the same amount in video coding. I'm not surprised, especially after reviewing other Ryzen 4000 laptops like the ROG Zephyrus G14 or Acer Swift 3.

However, the actual story is not just about these components. The real magic comes from working together.

Gaming performance

Playing is a good place to start. Games strain the GPU more than the CPU, but it's a combined effort that requires a balance between the components.

I tested three games: Civilization VI, Fortnite and Assassins Creed Odyssey.

Civilization VI is a CPU-intensive game, and this is where a Ryzen 4000 laptop can shine. There were only a few FPS (frames per second) behind the Razer Blade with an Nvidia RTX 2070, which reached 79 FPS in ultra settings. Compared to the Nvidia RTX 2060 in the Dell G7 I tested, you still see 19% better frame rates.

This trend continued in Fortnite. The AMD-powered G5 delivers 85 FPS with Epic settings, slightly behind the RTX 2060 in the G7 and the Zephyrus G14. You should probably set the settings to "High" to take better advantage of the laptop's refresh rate of 144 Hz. There the G5 SE achieved an average of 105 FPS.

The final challenge was Assassin's Creed Odyssey, a game that brought even the most powerful gaming laptops to a standstill. The gameplay was pretty smooth with an average of 53 FPS. With high quality – the middle setting of the game. At Ultra High, you drop to 44 FPS, which is still playable but a bit choppy.

All games were of course played at 1080p as this is the native resolution for the Dell G5 SE. As you can see, the RX 5600M isn't the most powerful graphics card in the world and sits comfortably between the Nvidia GTX 1660 Ti and the Nvidia RTX 2060. Fortunately, you can purchase a basic configuration of the G5 SE for as low a price as $ 880 that always still comes with the same GPU. This is great value compared to what you get from Nvidia at this price.

SmartShift in action

In addition to the new GPU and CPU, the Dell G5 SE also introduces AMD technology, which connects the two. It's called SmartShift, a way of organically sharing the energy between the two components. Every laptop has an upper limit on the performance it can play with. SmartShift uses AMD's InfinityFabric on both ends to transfer more power to the CPU or GPU when the thermal headroom allows – even beyond standard performance. According to AMD, SmartShift can lead to an up to 10% improved frame rate in games.

The problem is that SmartShift cannot be turned off. So I can't prove it works. My last attempt to test SmartShift was video rendering in Adobe Premiere Pro. I loaded a 2 minute 4K video clip and exported it to the ProRes 422 codec, carefully observing the power distribution between the CPU and GPU. Rendering video in Premiere is a task best suited for a processor with a high number of cores. However, you can also tap the graphics card. This way you can see how smart SmartShift really is.

The Dell G5 SE didn't share as much power as I expected. The GPU was only occasionally tapped to keep the processor in the spotlight. The rendering time of the Dell G5 SE was good and the export was completed in just under 8 minutes. This happens fairly quickly and beats Intel laptops like the Razer Blade. More expensive options like the Dell XPS 15 or Microsoft Surface Book 3 surpass it by a few minutes.

SmartShift is said to work with an automated algorithm that determines the best performance allocation from moment to moment. However, according to Dell, AMD must also whitelist applications to better optimize their performance.

Battery life, display and more

There's more to tell about the G5 SE, including battery life and display quality. I will continue my in-depth testing and will update this review soon.

While the effects of SmartShift remain opaque, the Dell G5 SE is still an example of how dominant AMD processors have become in consumer hardware. While the company's top-end GPUs still can't compete with Nvidia, the Dell G5 SE is a competitive mid-range gaming laptop for its price.

The Dell G5 SE was available for sale on the Dell website on May 21, starting at $ 880. The start configuration has a Ryzen 5 4600H with six cores, 8 GB RAM, an SSD with 256 GB and the same RX 5600M graphics card as in my test device.

Editor's recommendations




30 Mar
Blog

Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 Review: AMD Drops the Mic

Asus Rog Zephyrus G14 Rating 07

Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 review: AMD drops the microphone

"With an eight-core processor and a shockingly small chassis, the Zephyrus G14 is in a class of its own."

  • Excellent slot machine

  • Thin, small and light

  • Game-changing CPU performance

  • Responsive touchpad

  • Unique lid design

  • Noisy at idle

  • Mushy keyboard

  • No webcam

The ROG Zephyrus G14 is unlike any gaming notebook you have ever owned. Although it contains an Nvidia RTX 2060, it only weighs 3.5 pounds. It's not much bigger than a 14-inch laptop that you would see at work.

How is that possible? A very special component is the heart of the G14: the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS. The magic lies in this chip with eight cores and sixteen threads.

The Zephyrus G14 has developed a new class of gaming laptops and is already priced at $ 1,050. But is this new generation of gaming laptops what people want?

Size and portability

Asus and AMD want the G14 to be a laptop that's as portable as any other laptop – a laptop that you can take to school, take to work, and play anywhere in between.

Laptops like the Razer Blade and the MSI GS65 have tried to reduce the thickness of their machines, but they have kept a large screen size – 15 and 17 inches, respectively. Here the G14 deviates.

With a 14.0-inch display and thin bezels on the top and on the sides, a considerable amount is cut directly out of the laptop's housing. That means the G14 is smaller than most gaming laptops in almost every way, including weight. At 3.5 pounds, it's 19% lighter than the 16-inch MacBook Pro and 24% lighter than the Razer Blade 15. The small size helps with weight, as does the magnesium alloy case, which is much lighter than full aluminum.

As someone who mainly uses a 13-inch laptop every day, I was shocked by the space requirements of the G14 when I opened the box. At just 12.8 x 8.7 inches, its footprint is about 5% smaller than that of a 13-inch MacBook Pro.

It's also thin, though it matches the current Razer Blade at 0.70 inches. When open, the G14 feels thicker than it should due to the raised hinge, which adds an additional 0.6 inches and improved airflow.

The only gaming laptop that can keep up with the size of the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 is Razers Blade Stealth, a 13-inch laptop with up to a GTX 1650 GPU. It's significantly smaller, but the graphics and CPU options are also much more limited. The Zephyrus G14 is in a class of its own.

Processor power

The device I've tested costs $ 1,450 and is right in the middle of the configuration stack. The Zephyrus G14 is the launch vehicle for AMD's Ryzen 4000 chips. In particular, the eight-core chips of the Ryzen 9 H series are intended for powerful laptops and gaming machines.

The Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 does not use the standard 45 watt CPU, but a special 35 watt variant called Ryzen 9 4900HS with 16 GB RAM (configurable up to 32 GB). The "S" stands for slim and can therefore be cooled in the small chassis of the Zephyrus G14.

Do not worry. This does not mean that performance is affected. This Ryzen processor is incredibly fast, especially if you give it a task that can use its eight cores and 16 threads. This includes the creation of content, regardless of whether it is 3D modeling or video editing.

For this type of workload, it's hardly worth comparing it to other gaming laptops, most of which use an Intel Core i7-9750H with six cores. You just can't keep up. The 8-core i9-9880HK is a better competitor, although it's mainly reserved for laptops designed to create high-end content like Dell XPS 15, MacBook Pro 16-inch or ThinkPad X1 Extreme.

For such a small and light laptop, the G14 offers record performance.

But here's the crazy thing. Whether in benchmarking or in real tests – the Asus G14 still convinces laptops with an Intel Core i9-9880HK processor. It surpasses the 16-inch MacBook Pro in Cinebench R20 Multi-Core by a whopping 25%. It even encrypted a 4K file in Handbrake 11% faster, which is equivalent to the performance of the Dell XPS 15.

With the Core i9, you will find more power in thicker workstation machines, but the G14 is a record-breaker for such a small and light laptop.

However, there is a reason why companies don't put expensive, sultry Core i9s in any old laptop. First, all eight cores cannot be used efficiently by most games, so you are not doing much good. Then there is an obvious thermal problem that Asus and AMD have not properly addressed. The Zephyrus G14 is a loud little notebook. Playing games or running heavy applications will distract you. But this is forgivable.

My problem is that fans of the Zephyrus G14 keep whirring even when idling (and in silent mode). The result is an irritating coil whine that never goes away. This reduces my desire to use the G14 as a laptop that I want to use every day.

Gaming performance

My Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 review device has an Nvidia RTX 2060 for graphics with options for the GTX 1660 Ti and GTX 1650 in cheaper configurations. The G14 is the smallest laptop with an RTX 2060, a graphics card that is roughly as powerful as a GTX 1070 desktop graphics card. The result is smooth, responsive gaming in almost every title I've tried.

Battlefield V, Fortnite and Civilization VI were all played at well over 60 frames per second (FPS) in 1080p at maximum setting. This is comparable to laptops like the Dell G7 15, which is 2 pounds heavier. It beat the same RTX 2060 in the ROG Zephyrus M in every game, although it was lighter and smaller in almost every way.

If you decrease the settings a bit, the performance really lights up. Fortnite landed at 118 FPS while Civilization VI reached 132. There is a constant 10 FPS behind the Razer Blade, which we tested with a more powerful GPU, the RTX 2070 Max-Q.

Fast shooters like Battlefield V go well with the Zephyrus G14, which has a fast 120 Hz refresh rate. And 98 FPS on medium and 70 at Ultra in Battlefield V don't look bad. The G14 even makes a tough game like Assassins Creed: Odyssey playable and manages 64 FPS at high settings.

The importance of this for AMD cannot be overstated. The company isn't often represented in such powerful or ambitious laptops.

Design and display

Asus ROG Zephyrus laptops of recent years share one look. They are black and chunky and loaded with a hint of RGB throughout.

The Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 stands out. At CES 2020, the laptop made headlines with its AniMe Matrix display design on the cover, where LEDs illuminate the display lid of the laptop with patterns and designs. You can even customize it to display text, animations, or logos of your choice.

It's a cool feature that costs you an additional $ 500 and my test unit didn't include it. But the white standard version without the AniMe Matrix Display is also beautiful. The dot matrix adds a touch of interest, and the white color is still unique in itself.

However, the design of the G14 doesn't feel coherent. The lid is white, the keyboard cover and the housing are gray and the frames around the display are black. It feels like parts of a couple of different laptops put together into one device. The completely gray option is a little better.

The speakers could have used a little more enthusiasm.

The display is an IPS panel with a resolution of 1,920 x 1,080. It's nothing special in terms of contrast brightness, but it doesn't have any major weaknesses either. Following the trend we've seen recently, it offers accurate colors and a decent range of colors that show 77% of the AdobeRGB color space.

However, the speakers could use a little more enthusiasm. I had high hopes because the G14 includes a pair of upward tweeters and two woofers on the hinge. They are loud enough, but a modern iPhone sounds better. Between the speakers and the whine of the coil, you should pair the G14 with decent headphones.

Keyboard and touchpad

The inputs are a mixed bag. Let's start with the good things. The touchpad is excellent, which surprised me. Such a good touchpad in a gaming laptop is difficult to find, as many manufacturers assume that you are using an external mouse. Not here. This is a good call because the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 is small enough to be used as an everyday laptop.

Typing on the Zephyrus is not a problem, but there is room for improvement.

The keyboard is also spacious and offers the typical ROG layout. Keys such as the volume control are located above the function line. Larger ROG laptops have additional keys on the right side, but have been omitted here. This is wise because I prefer a comfortable layout rather than a button to scroll up and down.

While typing is not a slog, there is definitely room for improvement. Key presses have a lot of leeway, but the bottom-out action is mushy. This creates an inaccurate typing experience that gets tired over time. The keyboard backlight is also limited. It's a single zone that's not customizable, which is rare in a gaming laptop these days. The backlight is uneven and illuminates some keys better than others.

The power switch is located above the standard layout and has an integrated fingerprint reader. This is important because, strangely, the Zephyrus G14 does not have a built-in webcam. That means no Windows Hello face detection and no zoom calls. I have the idea – this is not a laptop for video calls. Still, given the potential crossover appeal as content creation and business laptop, it's a strange thing to omit this.

Battery life

Gaming laptops are not known for their battery life, even when you are not playing. The Zephyrus G14 doesn't change this, even though it lasts longer than other gaming laptops. The G14 managed almost 6 hours under a light load from surfing the Internet. This is not a good comparison with a modern ultrabook like the XPS 13 or HP Specter x360, which can take up to 10 hours with the same test.

However, it is one of the best in its class for a gaming laptop. It's half an hour longer than the Dell G7 gaming laptop and Razer Blade, and hours before laptops with G-Sync like Zephyrus M and Alienware M15.

The Zephyrus G14 performs even better in CPU-intensive tests. The Basemark battery test lasted 4 hours. It provides an overview of battery life in heavier applications. Adding 10 hours of local video playback on one charge gives you the best battery life you can get with a gaming laptop.

Our opinion

The Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 challenges other thin gaming laptops like the Razer Blade. The G14 offers more than enough performance for most PC gamers. In addition, thanks to its 8-core processor, it is one of the best content creation and editing laptops you can buy at this price.

Does it also work as a standalone laptop? The constant hum of the fans and the lack of a webcam are not ideal for everyday laptop use. However, the sufficient battery life and the display of the G14 make it a good choice for work and travel.

Are there alternatives?

No gaming laptop is as small and powerful as the Zephyrus G14. As you become less powerful and even smaller, you can opt for something like the Razer Blade Stealth.

When you step into the world of 15-inch laptops, your options expand quickly. The Razer Blade 15 and MSI GS65 are as thin as the G14, although it's heavier and bigger. They are also significantly more powerful and offer graphics options up to the RTX 2080 Max-Q. The closest price alternative is that Predator Helios 300, which offers a similar configuration, but with fewer processor cores and a much larger housing.

If you need a 15-inch content creation laptop that can be played on the side, I recommend the Dell XPS 15. It's not as powerful a slot machine as the G14, but it's a more balanced content creation option.

How long it will take?

The G14 should have at least three or four years of gaming performance before showing its age. It is well built, current and powerful. Unfortunately, Asus only offers a one-year warranty to cover defects, including the battery. After that you are alone.

Should you buy it

Yes. It is an extremely powerful laptop in a surprisingly small design.

Editor's recommendations