This review is internally inconsistent. The figures simply don't add up.
According to the reviewer, the CPU in this chassis is configured for a sustained 160 W PL1 / 170 W PL2 , yet the reported combined system load under stress is only 195 W and the "average load" is listed as 118 W. These numbers contradict each other and don't reflect the actual behaviour shown in the gaming and stress‑test sections.
In 2024 this was, in practice, the fastest 14900HX laptop tested. The reviewer's own performance tables show Application Performance at 97% and Gaming Performance at 99% , ahead of every other machine in the comparison group. That isn't mentioned anywhere in the conclusion.
The reason the GPU uplift looks small is never explained. It's not a thermal issue — it's because the CPU is already running at its full 160 W envelope in normal mode. There is no additional power budget left for Overboost to give the GPU, so the GPU results barely move. That's the real reason for the small delta, but the review doesn't state it.
It also means this particular 4070 configuration is capable of being one of the fastest 4070 laptops available once you remove Windows 11 overhead (e.g., a stripped‑down build). The chassis clearly has the cooling and power delivery to sustain it.
Because of the oddly negative tone toward a TongFang‑based design, I've just bought the Medion Major X1 — the same GM5IX7A platform — for £800. Same cooling, same 240 Hz anti‑glare panel, same CPU/GPU behaviour. To match this performance in a mainstream brand you're looking at a Scar 18 or similar at five to six times the price. It's a sleeper laptop, and the numbers in this review actually prove that — even if the conclusion doesn't.