NotebookCHECK - Notebook Forum

The price is clearly too high for a processor 2 times weaker than 7945HX, a mediocre screen with an outdated fhd resolution (and even on a larger panel than 15.6, which reduces the already bad ppi for 15.6"), with which it is impossible to eliminate muddy fonts in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.

Quote from: NikoB on June 07, 2023, 16:04:58The 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

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

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. 

Quote from: NikoB on June 07, 2023, 16:04:58The 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.

Quote from: A on June 07, 2023, 19:43:21I 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 :)

Quote from: A on June 07, 2023, 19:43:21You 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:

Quote from: NikoB on May 25, 2023, 10:04:00...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 :)

Quote from: A on June 07, 2023, 19:43:21I 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.

QuoteI 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)?

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.

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.

Quote from: LL on June 07, 2023, 21:06:24

QuoteI 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.

Quote from: I_love_fhdscreens on June 07, 2023, 16:42:55fhd ... 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.

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.

Quote from: A on June 07, 2023, 23:22:23Overall, 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.

Quote from: Ednumero on June 08, 2023, 00:24:13f you're referring to 2560x1440 and 2560x1600, then terms "2.5K" and "QHD" will create a stronger impression for your points.

As I found out on the forums and among buyers for a long time - the majority of the adult population of the world is incapacitated and does not know  elementary school arithmetic - does not know the rounding rules. How are such people given a matriculation certificate in general and the right to vote and drive a car? I do not understand this. It's terrible, but it's a fact.

This site never checks the quality and capabilities of the video ports.

For example, what happens if you turn off the discrete in the BIOS in order to increase the autonomy of battery life only from the built-in - will the output video ports work. In the Legion series, some ports become useless in this case, according to Jarrod's reviews.

Next - Zen4 Phoenix has native support for UHBR10 for DP2.0+ (and there are no discrete AMD/Intel cards, except for AMD's professional series, which recently received support for UHBR20, i.e. full support for DP2.0+), but the reviewer did not check support for new technologies on USB40 output and another USB-C - will there be support for 2 x DP2.0+ (UHBR10 @40Gb/s) or not. Again, nothing is written where in reality both usb-c ports are switched - to the built-in or discrete. If both are discrete, this deprives buyers of the built-in igpu, which is more advanced than the 7600S (and all current NVidia 4xxx) in terms of video outputs standarts. USB40 v1 support DP2.0+ output.

And nowhere is it still considered whether the USB40 ports in principle support 2 x DP1.4b+ video output, although TB4 supports this output mode on 2 x 4k monitors simultaneously.

Quote from: NikoB on June 08, 2023, 13:02:53You 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.

QuoteWhere are you getting 1800 from?

The price is 1,099.99 GBP which is 1,279.99 euros.

So 990 euros vs 1,279.99 euros that is 29%

Also, let us remember the premium for performance is not a straight line. Even more so when comparing old architecture vs new.

And the battery life which you ignore.

QuoteIt 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.

Personally, I prefer when laptops have options for less ram and smaller SSD. Always cheaper to buy them myself as that is where manufacturers make their premium. As long as it isn't soldered.

Am I the only person who feels like Asus has deliberately handicapped this 'advantage' edition laptop?
The RAM, the screen, the ports...
Especially for this price...
I feel like the previous gen legion 5 pro (3070Ti) or legion 7 (6800s)  would be a far better option.
Even the previous gen Zephyrus G14 is a great option when it goes on sale very often on best buy... (Though this one had a lot of QC issues), especially if you don't plan on upgrading your RAM.
And if you go for intel, then there are plenty of options.

Quote from: Russel on June 08, 2023, 18:36:31I feel like the previous gen legion 5 pro (3070Ti) or legion 7 (6800s)  would be a far better option.

TUF is below ROG. ROG is comparable to Legion 5 Pro, TUF is comparable to Legion 5 or LOQ from Lenovo.

Quote from: Russel on June 08, 2023, 18:36:31Even the previous gen Zephyrus G14...

Again - TUF is below ROG in Asus hierarchy. Zephyrus G14 is a member of ROG series.

Quote from: Neenyah on June 08, 2023, 18:39:58

Quote from: Russel on June 08, 2023, 18:36:31I feel like the previous gen legion 5 pro (3070Ti) or legion 7 (6800s)  would be a far better option.

TUF is below ROG. ROG is comparable to Legion 5 Pro, TUF is comparable to Legion 5 or LOQ from Lenovo.

Quote from: Russel on June 08, 2023, 18:36:31Even the previous gen Zephyrus G14...

Again - TUF is below ROG in Asus hierarchy. Zephyrus G14 is a member of ROG series.

Yea... Doesn't that mean it should be even cheaper?


What I am saying is that, this is a terrible deal compared to those that are mentioned above, that you yourself admitted to be a tier above the TUF A16.
(5 pro with 3070ti goes for 1499 @microcenter, I got mine with 32GB for 1299 excl tax, 6700s Zephyrus g14 goes on sale for 1099 regularly, 6800s for 1399 for 16GB model, legion 7 slim with 6800s also goes on sale often @lenovo, then there is legion 7, which is kinda hard to find, but went on sale @ Lenovo, a few weeks back)... All these are well below 1799, and zen 3 + isn't exactly a bad cpu either.
If you can get a higher tier laptop for a lesser price, wouldn't it be considered a better deal?
I was talking about this. Not equating TUF to ROG or Legion Pro.

Quote from: Russel on June 08, 2023, 20:10:47Yea... Doesn't that mean it should be even cheaper?


What I am saying is that, this is a terrible deal compared to those that are mentioned above, that you yourself admitted to be a tier above the TUF A16.

...

If you can get a higher tier laptop for a lesser price, wouldn't it be considered a better deal?
I was talking about this. Not equating TUF to ROG or Legion Pro.

Well yes, I agree with you and it's what I said on the previous page:

Quote from: Neenyah on June 07, 2023, 18:31:27Now 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.

Quote from: Neenyah on June 07, 2023, 19:52:30It 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 :)

The laptop is great but it's not ROG-great yet it's in its price range and about 50% increase over the previous year for similarly spec'd TUF is simply not something to reason with "inflation", "war in Ukraine", "climate change" and those usual silly reasonings for insane price jumps over so short time period. It's simply greed from OEMs, nothing else and getting a 2022 ROG or L5P, as you have mentioned, is clearly way more reasonable decision than paying the same (or even more) for this one here. Sure the battery life is stellar but battery life isn't everything.

Quote from: Neenyah on June 08, 2023, 20:27:58It's simply greed from OEMs

In fact, you should always look at the cost of the solution from the factory. And since this is not Apple, the "intellectual" component can be discarded - only the prices for components in retail, taking into account their class. And it turns out that all this should cost much cheaper.

By the way, I want to draw the attention of readers to how disgraced in terms of energy efficiency (in general, absolute terms) this particular Asus model. But apparently all the others will be no better.

PL1 is more than 100W (this is complete madness against the background of the recommended 54W, which in turn is 9W higher than the recommended levels of the previous generation - and it should be exactly the opposite - the Zen4 Phoenix should have had a recommended level in the region of 30-35W), but it is in CBR15 gives out a shameful 2650 points, while R5 3500U, in a laptop for relatives once bought, with PL1 no more than 20W (it is very quiet) gives out a stable 620-630 points in the same CBR15.

We get - the 7940HS has 8 cores with HT, the 3500U has 4 with HT. PL1 differs by at least 5 times. But the speed difference is only 4.5 times!

It turns out that the 7940HS in the TUF series at 100W+ PL1 has an energy efficiency of 2650 / (625 (3500U PL1 СBR15) x 2 (more than twice as many cores) x 5 (so much more than PL1)) only 42% of the energy efficiency of R5 3500U on Zen + cores with "12/14nm" vs "4/5nm".

What is it if not a total shame for AMD (or Asus?)? Or intentional, artificial limitation of performance by 2-2.5 times?

Have any of you even thought about it. I know IT analysts who wrote about this a long time ago, even 10 years ago, that Intel / AMD actually deliberately restrained the real performance of the cores for years in order to stretch its monetization over several pseudo-"generations", spreading suckers.

After all, the real performance of the 7940HS, taking into account the above factors, should be above 6000 points in CBR15 in PL1 mode! Those. this processor should actually be faster than the 7945HX at 100W!

Do you understand what I'm getting at? Just like now car manufacturers sell you more power just by unlocking the code in the firmware ...

This is pure fraud.

Question - why did Asus overclock PL1 to shame and awful 100W+ when AMD recommended 2 times less for Zen4 Phoenix and even that level is too much? Isn't it because at 50-54W it will be practically indistinguishable from 6800H and almost indistinguishable from 5800H?

In fact, AMD succumbed to the vile fraud of Intel, which, like a real cheater with the full connivance of a stupid crowd, overclocked TDP by 3-4 times relative to the norm for laptops in order to beat AMD at least because of the worst technical process. After all, the stupid crowd of the population, with the howls of "experts", looks only at absolute perfromance for CPU/GPU, not looking at the obviously sharply increased consumption (where are the "greens" and the authorities always crying about the planet's ecology and global "warming" looking?), And most importantly, the unbearable noise level (Nvidia is essentially the same  cheater by consumption as and Intel) and the sharply lower reliability of such solutions during long-term operation of such solutions compared to the old ones with much lower levels of PL2/PL1. It is for the same reason that power piping shemes, motherboards and cooling systems are becoming more expensive - in order to do at least something adequate in terms of reliability, you need to take the highest quality and high-temperature components, instead of cheaper ones for old series.

Quote from: NikoB on June 09, 2023, 15:14:43It is for the same reason that power piping shemes, motherboards and cooling systems are becoming more expensive

The plot of inefficient hardware is that its lifetime is much shorter so people shall buy new computers more frequently.

Quote from: RobertJasiek on June 09, 2023, 19:10:51The plot of inefficient hardware is that its lifetime is much shorter so people shall buy new computers more frequently.

I doubt it in the light of the gradual extinction of the "middle class" and the fall in the population's median income in real money in terms of purchasing power.

Asus is Scamming people with this, overrated price. They're charging double the price or value of other laptops unknown brands with even higher expects like WUQHD 165hz. DDR5 , PCI express 4, and with much better finishing and design, with aluminium lid...that's truly paying for just the brand name nothing else, a laptop with this specs is around maximum $900USD in same Asia where Asus assemble their scams... Lenovo even worse let's not talk about its brand price tag...laptop all made in plastic, same thing Acer, even so Acer is cheaper from all the known brands. Check in AliExpress or JD for such like spec laptops

Quote from: Oblivion on June 13, 2023, 06:17:52Asus is Scamming people with this, overrated price. They're charging double the price or value of other laptops unknown brands with even higher expects like WUQHD 165hz. DDR5 , PCI express 4, and with much better finishing and design, with aluminium lid...that's truly paying for just the brand name nothing else, a laptop with this specs is around maximum $900USD in same Asia where Asus assemble their scams... Lenovo even worse let's not talk about its brand price tag...laptop all made in plastic, same thing Acer, even so Acer is cheaper from all the known brands. Check in AliExpress or JD for such like spec laptops

You can't be sure of solutions from lesser-known manufacturers unless you conduct a thorough audit of the quality of their solutions at all levels, not just externally.

Are you sure that soldering, the quality of power elements, circuitry, design, specifications are definitely better balanced than here?

Yes, brands charge a lot for the name (reputation).

But for example, you may decide to buy an A-Data SSD and find that at a lower price, every 20th buyer has a problem with the drive, while Samsung only has every 150-200th. Such is the statistics of warranty cases, for example in our local retail chains. What do you choose in this lottery? At the same time, a Samsung drive costs about 1.5 times more, not 8-10 times at all.

Or take the popular MX500 Hynix (Crucial) series - it has an average WAF of 3-4, Samsung has 1-1.5, As a result, for 1TB of recorded, the average number of cycles used is about 3 for the MX500, and for Samsung 1-1.5 and both limit at 1500 cycles for 3D TLC. Both come in a metal case and 1Gb dram buffer. Moreover, the MX500 is even declared in the PLP datasheet. As a result, the 860 evo resource is almost 3 times more, but it costs only 1.5 times more (in the USA it can even be cheaper), and not 2-3 at all.

The situation is approximately the same with laptops (and any other types of goods) - until you fully understand the issue at an expert level, you cannot say that a cheaper product is no worse. It's just demagoguery for the benefit of the poor.

Asus is famous for its less reliable component base and architecture (circuitry) in comparison, for example, with Lenovo, but Lenovo, in turn, for a number of reasons, loses internally in terms of circuitry and the quality of Dell components. Everything also depends on the series and the nuances in each relative to analogues from other manufacturers. You need to carefully study the nuances, i.e. be an expert.

Usually this is an attempt to justify the lack of money and in very rare cases, a real situation where a cheaper product is not inferior in quality or even better than a more expensive one. And most often, this happens in the market when, at the expense of profits, a new company tries to capture market share, in moments of such desperate attempts. When the beneficiaries of the company deliberately sell goods at close to cost or even below it. But usually they are cunning even in this case (this practice is also possible for brands) - at the time of the release of a new product, they release high-quality batches that go to reviews and tests, where they receive laudatory reviews. And at retail, goods with sharply worse components are massively sold. Or wholesale lots, in a certain proportion, are diluted with quality lots, for example 2 to 10 or otherwise, in order to keep break-even or even profitable production. In this case, some of the buyers still receive a quality product, purely by accident or through pull, and try to object to the majority on the forums that received a low-quality product. Or simply the majority does not understand the quality of the product thoroughly, but some part is disassembled and such lucky ones (or hired bots) return it. I don't know the statistics on the quality of components in batches, you cannot reliably say that all batches are of high quality from such a new upstart manufacturer. Although large manufacturers can also deceive you in the same way, examples of which I can easily give.

Finding a quality product outside of brands, such a new upstart company, is not easy, again without understanding the nuances of quality.