Correct me if I'm wrong but did this review really give a 88% positive review to a laptop which:

-Plays Witcher 3 and GTA V (6-7 year old games) at 1080p Ultra are barely 100 fps
-Probably faces ghosting issues due to below average display response; the section literally says "The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers." Yet, the summary (which is what people read) says "+very good display"
-Has poor, no, horrible DPC latency and
-Has a 3080 locked to an insanely dumb 105 W TDP (GTX 960 had 120 W TDP in comparison)?

Is this for real? And this turd, people are supposed to buy for freaking $3700? Expected better work from techcrunch, honestly. I saw the individual sections and I was like, man, GB is going get torn a new one today, but none of that apparently.

Guys, if you're going to buy a 3080 locked to 105W, just get a 3060 instead (because that's the performance you'll get anyway) and don't throw money on a 4K display. Common sense.

Impressive stats but I must express 2 dissatisfaction.

- the price for upper hand is overwhelming.

- I understand a A4 size paper is too thick and too heavy to manufacturers but in counterpart, manufacturer insisting stubbornly to remain only on air cooled system is purely unbuyable for my gaming needs for I already know without trying the machine that heavy load gaming will either way throttle the machine down, or burn my fingers but still likely to be both at same time, that is, burn my fingers while the machine automatically throttle down..

So what manufacturer waiting for?
I dont give a rat a** how light and thin a laptop is.

Somewhat surprised by the 'great performance' summary, when the GPU tests and games show the Alienware m17R4 with identical specs being consistently 25% faster.

Quote from: maxc777 on May 29, 2021, 14:36:21
Not to mention, the games benchmarked (Far Cry) are known to be strong titles for Intel. Considering top-end AMD gaming notebooks are paired with full 3080 (150-160w), the game benchmarks on this Tiger Lake H is going to be worse. Best not to compare with AMD, anything to avoid embarrassing Intel I guess.

Indeed. Since when did german tech websites become so shitty? very un-german of them.

Not to mention, the games benchmarked (Far Cry) are known to be strong titles for Intel. Considering top-end AMD gaming notebooks are paired with full 3080 (150-160w), the game benchmarks on this Tiger Lake H is going to be worse. Best not to compare with AMD, anything to avoid embarrassing Intel I guess.

Quote from: Moe Lester on May 29, 2021, 11:02:24
Great review.
No comparison to Ryzen 5000 laptops, no proper thermal benchmark readings (especially given its Intel), s*** screen for a "gaming" laptop and it gets a 88% rating.

70W PL1 in a "H45", nice.

No comparison against Ryzen laptops, even older ones? Obviously, it's because they want to highlight how much better it is compared to last gen Intel. It's not like they're being persuaded by Intel or anything to avoid comparing to AMD options at similar CPU and even GPU performance for 30-50% lower price.

Great review.
No comparison to Ryzen 5000 laptops, no proper thermal benchmark readings (especially given its Intel), s*** screen for a "gaming" laptop and it gets a 88% rating.

70W PL1 in a "H45", nice.

So wait.. what is the non-turbo mode decibel reading?