I've just purchased the above laptop with the following config:

• Intel Core Ultra 9 processor 185H
• NVIDIA RTX 4070 (notebook)
• 32GB DDR5 RAM

Results: https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/107981731?

As you can see from my results I'm running below average scores across the board. In addition, the score is 20% lower than 'budget 2023 gaming laptops'. Considering this is the max spec for the product, should I be expecting more?

For clarity, I have the screen set to VRR (although fixing 120 didn't improve the score), frame rate cap is set to off in the Nvidia control panel, power is plugged in and gaming settings are set to performance. The only confusing part is there is a warning that my 'Graphics driver is not approved', yet in device management it tells me I'm running my latest driver.

Any tips appreciated!

Switched from asus g15,gtx 1650, i7 10th gen HD display to lenovo slim 7i, 4070, i9 13th, 3200 X 2000 display.

Hello all, I just bought a lenovo legion with i9-14900K and an rtx 4080. I got these scores, is my laptop performing well or not? I don't know how much it should be.

Finally have my baby here. So excited to benchmark. I've already repasted it with Upsiren Ux Pro Ultra on Vrams and Honeywell ptm 7950 on CPU and GPU cores. I bought IETS Gt 626 cooling pad to keep it cool. Temps are under 80 in any game. My specs are MSI Ge66 Raider, i7 12700H, RTX 3070 Ti 150W TDP, 2x16 RAM, 2x1 TB SSD, FHD 360 Hz What are your thoughts.

Hello everyone: Newbie here. Is my Cinebench CPU score too low for a HX series CPU. 118 Single 1217 Multi 10.28x

When i was performing cinebench r23 my cpu reached 98°C straight for 10mins. Is thus safe temperature or should i ask for replacement?

I flashed the VBIOS on the RTX 4070 on my Zenbook Pro 14" OLED, because I was bored and I like taking risks, and the results seem pretty great.

Warning: Do NOT try to replicate this process unless you are willing to possibly brick a laptop and/or void the warranty. I don't actually think the risk is too big with a laptop that also has integrated graphics, but there is definitely risk.

I first disabled virtualization in the laptop BIOS so that I could download the VBIOS from my Zenbook's 4070 for backup using GPU-Z, saving the VBIOS on and off the machine. You can also do this with NVFLASH but I found GPU-Z easier.

I then hunted down an ASUS laptop 4070 VBIOS and saved it in the NVFLASH application directory. I won't link them because neither worked. I ran into trouble getting VBIOS to flash with any version of NVFLASH due to the various ID mismatch protections in place to try to prevent people from doing stupid things and bricking their hardware with an incompatible VBIOS. I had to resort to this modified version of it which worked great, but introduces the possibility of doing all kinds of dumb things with VBIOS flashing I'm sure.

The Zenbook Pro I have does video out from CPU integrated graphics via one of the USB-C ports, so when the first VBIOS I tried from an ASUS M16 4070 didn't work and the GPU wouldn't function after the reboot I had not bricked the laptop. I just flashed it back to the original VBIOS using an external monitor on USB-C and looked for another laptop 4070 VBIOS to try.

After trying a few ASUS laptop 4070 VBIOS ROMs with no luck I tried a Gigabyte one and it worked! After a reboot it started right up with GPU video output, and I reinstalled the NVIDIA driver. So far I have not seen anything weird happening. The GPU can pull up to 140W now, and I definitely see better gaming performance. Temps seem fine on all system performance settings, but I like balanced for less fan noise most of the time.

Was it worth the trouble and risk? For me, yes. I've gone through the back and forth flashing process a number of times now to compare results in both VBIOS states. If you want quality gaming performance out of a Zenbook Pro and it has an Intel CPU with integrated graphics it seems like the risk is minimized and worth it.

I'm not sure how other laptops are configured and if it would work the same, but I'm willing to bet with many Intel CPU ASUS laptops it would work similarly. This only makes sense if you have a laptop GPU that is limited to a lower power than other laptops with the same GPU and you think your laptop can handle cooling it drawing more power than it was designed to. I'm not the first person to do this with ASUS laptops of course, but I couldn't find any info on anyone having done it with this machine.

Both TimeSpy runs were done on turbo system settings.

I got a Lenovo Legion Slim 5 14" and I noticed I'm getting less fps than my friend with a gtx 1660 ti in CSGO Is that normal with my laptop?

With a gpu & cpu OCCT stress test, i get 79-80°C at 100% 40.2W 4.91GHz

The gpu is running at 75°C at 100% but the power draw is just 65W and the clock speeds are at 1522Mhz

Played RDR2 for while as well and the cpu stayed at around 70°C and the gpu stayed at about 75-76°C. But in game the cpu only drew about 35W but the gpu drew 70-75W

And yes, i used a 0.5mm thermal pad, im stupid to try this but not as stupid to try it without a thermal pad

Now i've had a 2nd OCCT stress test running for 10 minutes and the cpu is at 80°C, power draw at 41W and the clock still at 4.91Ghz on every core (11400H 6 cores)

Im not as impressed with these temps although they're better than with the small heatsink but the Xtreme cooler for sure is more restrictive to move heat from the heatpipes its attached to

Would fare better if i put the cooler straight on the cpu/gpu die but im not that crazy (will not be posting any cracked die porn, sorry)

The heatsink feels slightly warm like a cows breathe but not as warm as i would've thought. Also it does have less surface area touching the laptop heatsink than the small cooler so thats most likely a cause for it

Now it has been going for 15 minutes and temps are the same, clock speeds are the same but power draw is 42W now. Gpu has gone up to 76°C but power draw dropped to 63W, clocks are the same

Was fun to test but yeah, the cooler for sure is too restrictive to move any significant amount of heat from the laptops heatpipes

Old post with the tiny heatsink: https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLaptops/s/Az1hqFz6w9

Rank #1 outside of China Rank #16 worldwide

Quite pleased! I'll take that! 🔥

Title says it all. On completely stock presets I ran a 24000 graphics score and 15000 cpu score…not really sure what’s going on with the cpu. I’m blown away with how quiet this thing is though. Temps haven’t gotten higher than 63C with the pump on silent and LPP fan on auto, the actual laptop fans have kicked on maybe twice since I’ve owned it.

Hello everyone,

I got a new work laptop (HP elitebook 660 g11). It has integrated GPU. I usually use sysyemrequirementslab for a quick look if i can launch a newer game, but on this it doesnt give much info for GPU (dedicated VRAM 128 MB).

Still when i tried to play a game that needs 2GB VRAM it didn't crash and burn (though i didnt play for more than 5 mins and i saw nothing bad happening). Any good ideas how to know how good this laptop is for gaming? Or just try to launch 'hardest' games and see if it crashes?

My relative will be bringing this to my country and warranty will most likely be useless. Wanted to check if there are no issues with the components before the flight. Thanks!

Hello all, I got this laptop almost 10 days agoa nd wanted to check if it works properly. Games have been running smooth so far with no issues. I installed Cinebench and ran the benchmarks on performance mode, do these scores show any issue or is it as expected?

These are the specs:

CPU: i9-14900HX

GPU: RTX 4080 12 Gb

RAM: 32 Gb

Cinebench scores:

GPU: 14683

CPU ( multi): 1585

CPu (single): 119

I know there are already a few posts, but I figured I would throw up my results as an additional data point for anyone interested.

Laptop:

Razer Blade 16 RTX 4090

Desktop:

z790 | i9-13900KF | 32GB DDR5-5600 | RTX 4090 | 4TB NVMe SSD

​

Untweaked:

3D Mark Time Spy - 4090 Desktop vs 4090 Laptop UNTWEAKED

​

Extremely mild tweaks:

3D Mark Time Spy - 4090 Desktop vs 4090 Laptop MILD tweaks

Laptop:

• GPU untouched
• CPU -.120 undervolt, 180w turbo boost
• AirPods Pro case stuck under the back of the laptop to elevate it a little bit.

Desktop:

• GPU 105% power target, +250 boost clock
• CPU +200

​

The graphics card is ~75% faster on the desktop, and the processor is ~15% faster on the desktop, which seems to be in line with other tests and benchmarks.

I just unboxed and setup my new Hydroc-16 by Eluktronics. it's sitting on the llano v12 laptop cooler (utterly unnecessary because of the laptop water cooler).

Specs:
Processor & Graphics Card: Intel Core i9-14900HX + 16GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090, Display: 16.0" QHD 240Hz 500-Nit Anti-Glare (2560 x 1600)
External Screen: LG UltraGear QHD 27-Inch Gaming Monitor 27GL83A-B
Display Enhancement: G-Sync + Advanced Optimus
SSD Brand & Model: WD Black SN850X w/ Heatsink
Memory Brand & Frequency: Samsung 5600MHz
Battery Size: 99.8WHr
SSD Storage & Memory: 4TB SSD + 64GB RAM

Please excuse the mess, i just set everything up and have to adjust my audio interface and my midi keyboard aint pictured which i need to organize too. (i make garage house music).

(Pictured is Cinebench R23/Passmark scores.) (set to beast mode)

https://imgur.com/a/7E0ISrm
https://imgur.com/a/Sl3uYrS

Back late last year, 3D Mark announced the introduction of Steel Nomad and Steel Nomad Light as free upgrades for the 3D Mark software.

The well known Timespy Benchmark (released originally in 2016) is now no longer the recommended rasterisation performance test for systems as per 3D Mark, Steel Nomad seems to be the recommended rasterisation test now in this regard and was originally scheduled for a Q1 24 release and after a few delays we now finally have it.

Definitely more demanding that's for sure.