Asus TUF Gaming A16 Advantage Edition FA617XS review: The AMD laptop with up to 20-hour runtimes

[Redaktion]

Asus have chosen AMD hardware - a Ryzen 9 7940HS and Radeon RX 7600S - to power the gaming laptop. A quick-reacting 16:10 16-inch screen (WUXGA, 165 Hz, FreeSync) and excellent runtimes complete the setup.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-TUF-Gaming-A16-Advantage-Edition-FA617XS-review-The-AMD-laptop-with-up-to-20-hour-runtimes.724466.0.html

[NikoB]

The price is clearly too high for a processor 2 times weaker than 7945HX, a mediocre screen with an outdated fhd resolution (and even on a larger panel than 15.6, which reduces the already bad ppi for 15.6"), with which it is impossible to eliminate muddy fonts in Chrome, because need ppi above 220-230. With a low response time, i.e. fake "165Hz" and the usual obsolete typical sRGB color coverage.

With a completely insufficient amount of RAM - especially for a "gaming" laptop in 2023, for such a price, with other shortcomings, there should be at least 32GB and a 2TB SSD level of A-Data Legend 960.

Asus has also been greedy at this price by only bringing out 1 of the 2 built-in USB40 ports on the 7940HS. And this potentially reduces the eGPU link (with link aggregation, there are already such) by half. With 2 ports, it would equal the future Intel TB5 in terms of bandwidth.

The heating of the laptop precludes its use when case is closed - most likely the screen panel will simply burn out at such temperatures 50C+.

The author claims that the memory has a normal bandwidth, but this is not the case. Like all AMD memory controllers of the latest series, it significantly loses to Intel controllers in terms of efficiency. 4800x128/8 ~ 76Gbps. Only writing to memory is close to this value. Reading and copying are configured according to the timings in the BIOS disgustingly. It version need DDR5 5600, not obsolete 4800 and 32Gb minimum or 16x1 installed from factory, not 8+8.

The power cord idiotically covers the hot air exhaust on the left. Why couldn't the power input be made in the back?

On the right, it was quite possible to add 2 more usb-a 3.2 ports or bring out just the second built-in USB40 port symmetrically so that you can comfortably use the laptop from usb-c charging on the sofa/bed for both right-handed and left-handed people for light tasks.

As a "gaming" laptop, it no longer pulls some of the releases at 60fps even in fhd resolution, so you have to lower the quality of the graphics. What's the point of buying a new laptop then?

From the point of view of a universal device for work and occasionally games, the screen is mediocre. It was 4k@120Hz, as it was for good as in HP Omen even in 2021, everything was perfect for the clarity of fonts in Chrome, but so the eyes of the buyer of this laptop will definitely suffer from reading sites with not switchable muddy fonts (or use FireFox with switched off antialasing for fonts).

The red price for such a solution is around 1000$, given that the L5Pro, similar in speed, could be taken in the fall of 2022 for 1100$ with a much better screen, but AMD clearly overprices its Zen4 and video chips.

In addition, the author himself noted the poor tactile response of the keyboard (usually Asus has good keyboards for this price level), which also has the usual flaws for most laptops.

Everything will decide the price reduction in the future. In the meantime, I would not spend $1800 on such a morally obsolete screen and a bunch of compromises (even with the latest processor for poor optimization of DDR5 memory in BIOS), when in the fall of 2022, for this money you could easily buy a top-end Legion 7 2022 with 6800H+M6700.

But Asus - keep trying! Your efforts deserve respect.

I would like 18"/4k@120Hz from 2000:1 (Black IPS by LG) solutions without expensive discrete cards (or entry-level like 4050/4060) as working business devices with a really high-quality screen. With a good full-fledged keyboard (a full numpad like TUF, which is so lacking in your current 18" models (and that is stupid decision), as well as a high-contrast 4k screen) and a bunch of expansion ports, convenient for both right-handed and left-handed people. Preferably with a power socket in the back.

p.s.:
I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that, as it turned out recently, in the version with a 2.5k screen, there are Sharp panels that have a backlight resource of only 10k hours, instead of the typical 15k for IPS. It is also worth buying with caution with Sharp 2.5k panels, because. they often have low-frequency PWM for IPS, it makes sense to immediately carry out at least a pencil test at low brightness.

[I_love_fhdscreens]

The price is clearly too high for a processor 2 times weaker than 7945HX, a mediocre screen with an outdated fhd resolution (and even on a larger panel than 15.6, which reduces the already bad ppi for 15.6"), with which it is impossible to eliminate muddy fonts in Chrome, because need ppi above 220-230. With a low response time, i.e. fake "165Hz" and the usual obsolete typical sRGB color coverage.

With a completely insufficient amount of RAM - especially for a "gaming" laptop in 2023, for such a price, with other shortcomings, there should be at least 32GB and a 2TB SSD level of A-Data Legend 960.

Asus has also been greedy at this price by only bringing out 1 of the 2 built-in USB40 ports on the 7940HS. And this potentially reduces the eGPU link (with link aggregation, there are already such) by half. With 2 ports, it would equal the future Intel TB5 in terms of bandwidth.

The heating of the laptop precludes its use when case is closed - most likely the screen panel will simply burn out at such temperatures 50C+.

The author claims that the memory has a normal bandwidth, but this is not the case. Like all AMD memory controllers of the latest series, it significantly loses to Intel controllers in terms of efficiency. 4800x128/8 ~ 76Gbps. Only writing to memory is close to this value. Reading and copying are configured according to the timings in the BIOS disgustingly. It version need DDR5 5600, not obsolete 4800 and 32Gb minimum or 16x1 installed from factory, not 8+8.

The power cord idiotically covers the hot air exhaust on the left. Why couldn't the power input be made in the back?

On the right, it was quite possible to add 2 more usb-a 3.2 ports or bring out just the second built-in USB40 port symmetrically so that you can comfortably use the laptop from usb-c charging on the sofa/bed for both right-handed and left-handed people for light tasks.

As a "gaming" laptop, it no longer pulls some of the releases at 60fps even in fhd resolution, so you have to lower the quality of the graphics. What's the point of buying a new laptop then?

From the point of view of a universal device for work and occasionally games, the screen is mediocre. It was 4k@120Hz, as it was for good as in HP Omen even in 2021, everything was perfect for the clarity of fonts in Chrome, but so the eyes of the buyer of this laptop will definitely suffer from reading sites with not switchable muddy fonts (or use FireFox with switched off antialasing for fonts).

The red price for such a solution is around 1000$, given that the L5Pro, similar in speed, could be taken in the fall of 2022 for 1100$ with a much better screen, but AMD clearly overprices its Zen4 and video chips.

In addition, the author himself noted the poor tactile response of the keyboard (usually Asus has good keyboards for this price level), which also has the usual flaws for most laptops.

Everything will decide the price reduction in the future. In the meantime, I would not spend $1800 on such a morally obsolete screen and a bunch of compromises (even with the latest processor for poor optimization of DDR5 memory in BIOS), when in the fall of 2022, for this money you could easily buy a top-end Legion 7 2022 with 6800H+M6700.

But Asus - keep trying! Your efforts deserve respect.

I would like 18"/4k@120Hz from 2000:1 (Black IPS by LG) solutions without expensive discrete cards (or entry-level like 4050/4060) as working business devices with a really high-quality screen. With a good full-fledged keyboard (a full numpad like TUF, which is so lacking in your current 18" models (and that is stupid decision), as well as a high-contrast 4k screen) and a bunch of expansion ports, convenient for both right-handed and left-handed people. Preferably with a power socket in the back.

p.s.:
I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that, as it turned out recently, in the version with a 2.5k screen, there are Sharp panels that have a backlight resource of only 10k hours, instead of the typical 15k for IPS. It is also worth buying with caution with Sharp 2.5k panels, because. they often have low-frequency PWM for IPS, it makes sense to immediately carry out at least a pencil test at low brightness.

While I agree with you for most parts,

I do prefere FHD screen and not higher,
My laptop has 2k screen and it is horrible experience to watch videos below 720p (it would look more blurry compare to the times I wacth the same video using 1080p/1200p screen)

And lower tier GPU cant support above FHD  (in 2k you wont get 60 fps)

My problem with the screen of this laptop is the low brightness for me 500 nit SDR is the minimum, and the GtG, response time, BtB/WtW   should be less than 5.5ms

[Ar,f]

why battery 89/95 %94. it has better battery life than even macbooks, there is nothing better than this

[Neenyah]

Regarding the resolution... TUF line was always and still is aimed at eSports and not AAA gaming. There is not a single professional elite CSGO, Val or LoL player using anything but 1920x1080 and here are top 3 most used monitors in CSGO:

• ZOWIE XL2546K 24.5" 1080p 240 Hz
• ZOWIE XL2566K 24.5" 1080p 360 Hz
• ZOWIE XL2546 24.5" 1080p 240 Hz

prosettings.net/guides/cs-go-monitor/
 
I am pretty sure that the world's best pro players with multi-million $ earnings and strong sponsors are capable to buy any 1440p or 4K monitor - if there was a real point of getting one besides "more is better, less is unusable trash".
 
Now back to this laptop here in the review... Everything looks perfectly good except that price. It's simply unreasonably high for really capable hardware, especially because this is not a member of ROG family but TUF and TUF series was always budget-oriented option. 

[A]

The price is clearly too high for a processor 2 times weaker than 7945HX, a mediocre screen with an outdated fhd resolution (and even on a larger panel than 15.6, which reduces the already bad ppi for 15.6"), with which it is impossible to eliminate muddy fonts in Chrome, because need ppi above 220-230. With a low response time, i.e. fake "165Hz" and the usual obsolete typical sRGB color coverage.

I don't know what you are smoking but the price and specs is what one would expect from a midrange gaming laptop. And it has excellent battery life too. You seem to be under a weird belief that only 1 laptop should exist in the universe and it should have the maxed out specs of everything.

[Neenyah]

I don't know what you are smoking but the price and specs is what one would expect from a midrange gaming laptop. And it has excellent battery life too.

It honestly is some 300€ too high at this point. A year ago ROG of similar specs would go for 100€ more than this and TUF is a "poor man's ROG" when ASUS is in question. It will be a nice purchase when discounts kicks in though :)

You seem to be under a weird belief that only 1 laptop should exist in the universe and it should have the maxed out specs of everything.

Yep, and for 1000€ max. It's fully binary in his comments, 1 or 0, great or trash. I mean he said this:

...this is not a "gaming" laptop. If there is no 4090 card.

...for a laptop with R7 7745HX + 4070 that's comfortably pushing Cyberpunk in fully maxed details at 99 fps 1080p and 58 fps 1440p. No 4090 = no gaming laptop :)

[NikoB]

I don't know what you are smoking but the price and specs is what one would expect from a midrange gaming laptop. And it has excellent battery life too. You seem to be under a weird belief that only 1 laptop should exist in the universe and it should have the maxed out specs of everything.

I also don't know what you are smoking on your Linux (apparently something is hard), but if they didn't read me diagonally (and didn't scoff like clowns), you would understand that I'm trying to point potential buyers to obvious and visible shortcomings for the indicated price. Where the addition of some improvements costs a penny in reality (like the second USB40 port, for which buyers ALREADY paid for as part of the 7940HS), and somewhere the improvements in price are not significant, but the effect will be amazing - like with a 4k@120Hz panel, which decides everything at once problems with blurry fonts in chrome under Windows.

At the price indicated on this site - this model is definitely not worth the money.

It would be worth the money with 64GB of RAM and 2TB of disk out of the box

Or 4k@120hz panel +32Gb/1tb

Or other combinations that improve the capabilities and ergonomics of the model.

But it costs no more than 1100, at best, against the background of what was sold in the fall of 2022.

So far, It's only regretful.

In my country, such a model with 7940HS+4070 16/512 2560x1440 (Sharp IPS) 165Hz / 100% DCI-P3/85% AdobeRGB 310-320 nit with contrast for it according to tests is about 600:1 in total, which is very bad, costs about $1800 at the current exchange rate. There are very small amount buyers who want to buy it, as when the 2021 model was swept away. Sales are rare...

I've seen a lot of TUF 2021 in workplaces (because it have full keyboard like legion's series 2021+). It was taken because of its cheapness and versatility.

Now there is no cheapness, and the price implies a panel of a much higher class.

Now, for such a price, buyers want 17.3"-18" at least 2.5k with 1500:1+ 165Hz/DCI-P3 100% 500 nit, but better all the same 4k@120Hz - it more universal for video content/games (easy switch from 4k to ideal fhd mode by pixel sharpness) and very clear text (with ppi 220+). Always work in perfectly clear 4k with text, and play games if there is not enough fps in perfectly clear fhd mode.

[LL]

I don't know what you are smoking but the price and specs is what one would expect from a midrange gaming laptop

Since when?
Is this  much better than a Legion with 5800H RTX3060 100% sRGB 300 nits screen still being sold today at 990 euro (and that includes a 23% tax)?

[NikoB]

Please note that even in the Strix(Scar) 17-18" series, the contrast of 2.5k panels is very poor - in the region of 1000:1-1100:1. And this is confirmed by reviews here and in other independent reviews.

Asus needs to more carefully select panels by contrast from suppliers, aiming for a minimum of 1500:1+.

The screen is the main thing, you look at it for years. And only this already repels from their models.

If it were excellent in contrast (1500:1+, and better new LG Black IPS 2000:1 panels - no need to install a buggy miniLED or AMOLED even more harmful to the eyes) and with a high ppi (4k @ 120) - people would buy such laptops despite some shortcomings. At least in home use.

[NikoB]

By the way, I want to make a remark - I found reviews of this model here, but with i7 13700H (ADL core). And here's what's interesting....this model has the same characteristic problems with the bandwidth of RAM, but only read speed is acceptable there (above 70Gbyte/s), and copy/write to memory is disgustingly slow - 60Gb/s and even worse. The AMD version has memory writes above 70Gb/s, while reading and copying mode is disgustingly bad - around same 60Gb/s. Although we know from other series that the ADL controller is able to work even with DDR5 4800 with an efficiency above 90% theoretical bandwith.

It gets the impression that Asus deliberately set such timings to show high series owners that their memory runs faster...

Obviously, in the case of Zen4 Phoenix, there should already be only DDR5600 32Gb for such a price from factory box for 1800$.  Which will give us already 90GB/s of theoretical limit. And with the correct timings in the BIOS, at least 72Gb/s+  for reading/writing/copying even with AMD, which will naturally speed up igpu and improve system/software response especially since the L3 cache on AMD is 1.5 times faster than in AlderLake/Raptor in terms of latency, which is a proven fact.

[A]

I don't know what you are smoking but the price and specs is what one would expect from a midrange gaming laptop

Since when?
Is this  much better than a Legion with 5800H RTX3060 100% sRGB 300 nits screen still being sold today at 990 euro (and that includes a 23% tax)?

Easily yes.

Cpu rating
Asus TUF - 7940hs = 74 pt
Legion - 5800h = 55.5 pt

3d mark rating
Asus TUF - rx 7600s = 91.7 pt
Legion - rtx 3060 = 78.3 pt

Also note you are comparing retail price of 1 vs store price correct? You can usually pick up laptops for less than their retail price

Overall, the specs are clearly up to their value. Especially the superb battery life which is hard to find on gaming laptops.

[Ednumero]

fhd ... 2k

I agree with the issues of rescaling certain content to certain resolutions, and with wanting good display stats regardless of resolution.

Please remember, though, that "2K" for 2560-width resolutions is a marketing misnomer! It's a viral trend that stems from ill-prepared product listings rather than any earnest attempt at sensible labeling. 2560x1440 and 2560x1600 are better categorized as 2.5K, while proper 2K resolutions are in the FHD range.

If you're referring to 2560x1440 and 2560x1600, then terms "2.5K" and "QHD" will create a stronger impression for your points.

[theflyingeagle]

This looks like a great laptop. Can there be a video review or comparison done?

I'm in Australia so it's not available yet. Yet this is a great step forward for working on the road for the value it brings.

[NikoB]

Overall, the specs are clearly up to their value. Especially the superb battery life which is hard to find on gaming laptops.

You are writing nonsense again.

55.5 vs 74 - +33% but with high tdp!
78.3 vs 91.7 - only +17%

(33+17)/2 - +25% average.

$999 vs 1800 is +80%, not +25%.

This laptop is 100% not worth the money and not even worth $1300.

It costs a maximum of 1250 (if you discard other disadvantages). and with fall 2022 sale prices, it's not even worth it.

There is NO good from 7940HS in it. Asus didn't ship the advanced DDR5600 memory supported by Zen4 Phoenix and put the infamous small 16Gb(8+8 not 16x1 for good and fast upgrade to 32) instead of 32Gb or 64Gb and the infamous small 512GB SSD, while a 2TB SSD costs already $80-90 with 5(five) years warranty, not for  only 2 years inside laptop, Asus jacked up the TDP, despite being advertised as the most energy efficient - why not were tests done in CBR15 at 35-45W? Because everything is bad there - it will not be better than 5800H at 70-80W.
Asus intentionally didn't bring out the built-in second USB40 port for the wild price of $1800, didn't bring out 2 more usb-a, there is no card reader.

Even the RJ45 port is shameful for a 2023 at this price - it should be at least 5Gb/s, not obsolete 1Gbps from 2000x.

There is NOTHING that justifies this price, so Asus marketer relogin.