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

[NikoB]

f 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.

[NikoB]

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.

[A]

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.

Where 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.

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.

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.

[Russel]

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.

[Neenyah]

I 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.

Even the previous gen Zephyrus G14...

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

[Russel]

I 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.

Even 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.

[Neenyah]

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.

...

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:

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.

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 :)

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.

[NikoB]

It'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.

[NikoB]

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.

[RobertJasiek]

It 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.

[NikoB]

The 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.

[Oblivion]

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

[NikoB]

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

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.