Overhaul. Go big, not go home: With the Core i9-13900HX and GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop, Medion has given this notebook the latest and most powerful hardware available right now. The device also features a fast 16:10 screen (2,560 x 1,600), a mechanical keyboard and a pretty good battery life.
Even though it falls under the category of gaming laptops, the Erazer Beast X40 is also conceived for other very demanding usage scenarios. The necessary computing performance is provided by a Raptor Lake CPU and an Ada Lovelace GPU. Compared with its predecessors, the laptop has received a major overhaul: Medion has given it a new screen aspect ratio (16:10 instead of 16:9), a cooling system with optional water cooling, and a mechanical keyboard.
The X40 is based on a Tongfang barebone (GM7PX9N) that is mostly identical to the one used for the XMG Neo 17. It is competing with the likes of the MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI, Alienware x17 R2 P48E, Razer Blade 16 (early 2023) and Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY.
Processor
Intel Core i9-13900HX 24 x 1.6 – 5.4 GHz, 160 W PL2 / Short Burst, 160 W PL1 / Sustained, Raptor Lake
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU – 16 GB VRAM, Core: 2040 MHz, Memory: 2375 MHz, 175 W TDP ( including 25 W Dynamic Boost), GDDR6, 31.0.15.2849, Optimus
Memory
32 GB
, DDR5-4800, dual-channel mode, two memory slots (both in use)
Display
17.00 inch 16:10, 2560 x 1600 pixel 178 PPI, BOE NE170QDM-NZ1, IPS, G-Sync, glossy: no, 240 Hz
Mainboard
Intel HM770 (Raptor Lake-S PCH)
Connections
1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 3 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 1x combo audio jack, 1x mic-in, Card Reader: SD, SDHC, SDXC, TPM 2.0
Networking
Realtek RTL8125 2.5GBe Family Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000/2500MBit/s), Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211 (a/b/g/h/n=Wi-Fi 4/ac=Wi-Fi 5/ax=Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz), Bluetooth 5.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 33 x 383 x 272 (=1.3 x 15.08 x 10.71 in)
Battery
99.8 Wh, 6450 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 11 Home
Camera
Webcam: FHD
Primary Camera: 2.1 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Mechanical, Keyboard Light: yes, McAfee LiveSafe (Trial), Microsoft 365 (Trial), Microsoft OneNote (Trial), 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.88 kg (= 101.59 oz / 6.35 pounds), Power Supply: 986 g (= 34.78 oz / 2.17 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.
The Erazer Beast X40 eschews a loud and flashy look in favour of a subdued design that wouldn’t stand out in a professional setting. As with its predecessors, the X40 uses a black metal chassis with matt finishes. The base section is covered in a grippy rubber coating. The keyboard backlight (RGB) as well as two fully configurable LED strips (RGB) above the rear exhaust vents provide the laptop with a dash of colour. The battery, which is screwed down rather than glued on, and the rest of the internals are accessible once the bottom cover is removed.
We didn’t notice any workmanship issues on our review unit. Gaps in the chassis are nice and tight, and there are no excess materials left from the manufacturing process. It is virtually impossible to twist the base section. The lid can be flexed slightly, but the amount of give is fully acceptable. The hinges keep the display firmly in place and allow the screen to be folded back by up to roughly 140 degrees. The laptop’s lid can’t be opened with one hand.
The Medion Erazer Beast X40 is one of the most compact devices in our comparison and sits somewhere in the middle when it comes to weight.
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W Alienware x17 R2 P48E MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI Medion Erazer Beast X40 Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22 Razer Blade 16 Early 2023 DIN A4 ❌
399 mm / 15.7 inch
294 mm / 11.6 inch
30.8 mm / 1.213 inch
3.1 kg6.83 lbs399.23 mm / 15.7 inch
299.57 mm / 11.8 inch
20.9 mm / 0.823 inch
3.1 kg6.84 lbs397 mm / 15.6 inch
330 mm / 13 inch
23 mm / 0.906 inch
3.5 kg7.65 lbs383 mm / 15.1 inch
272 mm / 10.7 inch
33 mm / 1.299 inch
2.9 kg6.35 lbs381.7 mm / 15 inch
272.8 mm / 10.7 inch
27 mm / 1.063 inch
2.8 kg6.15 lbs355 mm / 14 inch
244 mm / 9.61 inch
21.99 mm / 0.866 inch
2.4 kg5.34 lbs297 mm / 11.7 inch
210 mm / 8.27 inch
1 mm / 0.03937 inch
5.7 g0.01257 lbs
The Erazer has three USB-A ports (2x USB 3.2 Gen 1, 1x USB 3.2 Gen 2) and a USB-C port (Thunderbolt 4) on board. The latter doesn’t support Power Delivery but is able to output DisplayPort signals. The laptop has a total of two video outputs (HDMI 2.1, DP), two audio jacks (headset and mic-in), one Gigabit Ethernet port and a Kensington slot. On the rear, you’ll also find connectors for the optional water cooling solution.
The SD card reader is a medium-speed model that, in conjunction with our AV Pro microSD 128 GB V60 reference card, managed to reach speeds of up to 77 MB/s when transferring 250 JPEG images of around 5 MB each and 86 MB/s when copying large chunks of data.
Under optimal conditions (no other Wi-Fi devices in immediate surroundings, short distance between laptop and server PC), the Erazer delivered excellent transfer rates over Wi-Fi because Medion has decided to go with an Intel AX211 Wi-Fi 6E module. Wired network connections are handled by the Realtek RTL8125 Gigabit Ethernet chip, which is capable of speeds of up to 2.5 Gbit/s.
0501001502002503003504004505005506006507007508008509009501000105011001150120012501300135014001450150015501600165017001750180018501900TooltipThe 2.1MP webcam captures images at a maximum resolution of 1,920 x 1,080. It is lacking in colour accuracy: the colours produced by the camera deviate significantly from the reference colours. There is no mechanical privacy shutter on the webcam.
12.6 ∆E
10.5 ∆E
4.3 ∆E
7.7 ∆E
5.1 ∆E
3.5 ∆E
14.3 ∆E
5.5 ∆E
11.5 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
7.8 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
5 ∆E
5 ∆E
7.9 ∆E
13.9 ∆E
8.5 ∆E
4.2 ∆E
9.9 ∆E
8.7 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
11.3 ∆E
12.9 ∆E
10.6 ∆E
ColorChecker Medion Erazer Beast X40: 8.69 ∆E min: 3.5 – max: 14.3 ∆EThe laptop ships with no other accessories than the usual documentation and a power adapter. Medion is offering an optional external water cooling solution priced at around €250 (US$270), which the company also provided to us for testing.
The small cooling unit is fairly easy to use: simply fill it with distilled water, connect the cables and tubes, and switch it on. The laptop and the external cooling unit communicate with each other via Bluetooth, and the connection is established automatically. The laptop’s charger supplies power to both the X40 and the cooling unit. The water tubes are held in place magnetically – no tightening of screws needed. However, a few drops of water may leak out when you are disconnecting the tubes.
To remove the bottom cover, you need to undo all screws on the underside as well as two more screws on the back beside the water cooling connectors. After that, the bottom cover can be pulled off in a sharp motion by the exhaust vents. Removing the cover lets you access the memory slots (both in use), two PCIe 4.0 SSDs, Wi-Fi module, fans, BIOS battery and rechargeable battery.
Internals of the Medion Erazer Beast X40Medion provides a two-year warranty on the Erazer. Upgrade options are available, but they have to be purchased together with the laptop in Medion’s online shop. You can’t upgrade or extend the warranty after buying the laptop. It costs nearly €200 (US$216) to extend the warranty by one year.
Mechanical keyboards are generally known for their precise inputs and feedback as well as premium typing feel – this is no different with the X40’s keyboard. Its Cherry MX switches offer a moderate travel and an audible and tactile actuation point. The keyboard doesn’t flex when you are typing. There are two function keys to let you adjust the per-key RGB lighting to one of the four brightness levels. Overall, the Erazer Beast X40 has an all-round fantastic keyboard.
Measuring approx. 15.5 x 10 cm (6.1 x 3.9″), the multitouch clickpad has a smooth surface that lets you slide your fingers across easily. It offers a short travel and a distinct click point. There are status LEDs in upper corners of the pad. Tapping the left LED will enable or disable the entire touchpad, whilst the right LED is used for turning only the right half of the pad on or off.
Keyboard on the Beast X40SubpixelThe 17-inch matt IPS display (2,560 x 1,440) has a 16:10 aspect ratio and stands out with adequate brightness, fast response times, high refresh rate (240Hz) and the absence of PWM flicker. But its contrast ratio falls short of what is considered good (>1,000:1).
The panel supports G-Sync, a technology that helps the display’s refresh rate adapt dynamically to the frame rate being output by the GPU. This is designed to provide a smoother viewing experience, particularly when gaming.
377
cd/m²357
cd/m²372
cd/m²387
cd/m²384
cd/m²368
cd/m²398
cd/m²383
cd/m²369
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
BOE NE170QDM-NZ1
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 398 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 377.2 cd/m² Minimum: 18 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 384 cd/m²
Contrast: 853:1 (Black: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 2.05 | 0.55-29.43 Ø5.2, calibrated: 0.74
ΔE Greyscale 2.3 | 0.57-98 Ø5.4
69.4% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
68.6% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.017
Medion Erazer Beast X40
BOE NE170QDM-NZ1, IPS, 2560×1600, 17.00MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
B173ZAN06.C, Mini-LED, 3840×2160, 17.30Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
CSOT T3 MNG007DA4-1, IPS, 2560×1600, 16.00Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
BOE0A99, IPS, 2560×1600, 17.00Alienware x17 R2 P48E
AU Optronics B173HAN, IPS, 1920×1080, 17.30Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NE180QDM-NZ2, IPS, 2560×1600, 18.00Display24%
24%
0%
10%
21%
Display P3 Coverage68.6
94.9
38%
98.5
44%
69
1%
79.2
15%
97.2
42%
sRGB Coverage99.8
99.9
0%
100
0%
99.8
0%
99.8
0%
99.9
0%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage69.4
92.4
33%
89.7
29%
69.6
0%
79.6
15%
84.9
22%
Response Times-248%
-9%
12%
-17%
19%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *11.3 ?(5.4, 5.9)
38.4 ?(13.6, 24.8, n)
-240%
6.6 ?(3.4, 3.2)
42%
10.8 ?(5.1, 5.7)
4%
12.4 ?(6.4, 6)
-10%
5.41 ?(2.57, 2.84)
52%
Response Time Black / White *7.5 ?(3.3, 4.2)
26.6 ?(9.2, 17.4, n)
-255%
12 ?(6.8, 5.2)
-60%
6.1 ?(2.5, 3.6)
19%
9.2 ?(5.2, 4)
-23%
8.62 ?(3.68, 4.94, n)
-15%
PWM Frequency2380 ?(100)
Screen78886%
-6%
11%
-22%
-92%
Brightness middle384
606
58%
456.8
19%
415
8%
365.4
-5%
490
28%
Brightness377
602
60%
437
16%
399
6%
344
-9%
468
24%
Brightness Distribution90
93
3%
83
-8%
90
0%
85
-6%
86
-4%
Black Level *0.45
0.0001
100%
0.35
22%
0.43
4%
0.29
36%
0.54
-20%
Contrast853
6060000
710334%
1305
53%
965
13%
1260
48%
907
6%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *2.05
4.8
-134%
3.7
-80%
1.44
30%
3.17
-55%
4.97
-142%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *3.64
8.2
-125%
6.42
-76%
2.33
36%
7.69
-111%
11.02
-203%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *0.74
1.8
-143%
0.66
11%
0.89
-20%
0.51
31%
2.97
-301%
Greyscale dE 2000 *2.3
6.5
-183%
2.6
-13%
1.8
22%
5.3
-130%
7.2
-213%
Gamma2.017 109%
2.63 84%
2.3 96%
2.132 103%
2.18 101%
2.161 102%
CCT6546 99%
6596 99%
6108 106%
6327 103%
5879 111%
6515 100%
Total Average (Program / Settings)26221% /
50682%
3% /
-0%
8% /
9%
-10% /
-15%
-17% /
-52%
* … smaller is better
The display already has great colour reproduction right out of the box. Its average colour difference of roughly 2 is significantly lower than the threshould of what is considered good (Delta E <3). Calibrating the display reduced the average colour difference to 0.74 and made the greyscale more balanced. The panel is able to cover the entire sRGB colour space, but not AdobeRGB and DCI-P3. The displays on some of the competing laptops perform better in terms of colour coverage.
Display Response Timesℹ
Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
↔ Response Time Black to White7.5 ms … rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 3.3 ms rise↘ 4.2 ms fallThe screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 13 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (22.5 ms). ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey11.3 ms … rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 5.4 ms rise↘ 5.9 ms fallThe screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 16 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (35.5 ms).
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)ℹ
To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession – a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detectedIn comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 19232 (minimum: 5 – maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured.
The IPS panel has a wide viewing angle and is easily readable from any position. The display is definitely usable outdoors, provided the sun isn’t overly bright.
Even though it is designed primarily with QHD+ gaming in mind, the Erazer Beast X40 also cuts a good figure in applications such as video editing and rendering. The required computing muscle is provided by Raptor Lake and Ada Lovelace. The X40 model in this review can be had for around €4,500 (US$4,856). But Medion also offers a slightly lower-spec configuration (RTX 4080 and 1 TB SSD; otherwise identical) at €3,500 (US$3,777).
There are three manufacturer-specified performance modes: Office, Balance and Turbo. We used Turbo mode for benchmarking and Office mode for our battery-life tests and enabled Nvidia Optimus in both cases. After completing these tests, we ran more benchmarks with dGPU mode enabled and the external water cooling unit connected. You can find the results of this additional testing in the comparison table, but they are not taken into consideration for the rating.
Users can toggle between the three modes using a dedicated button right beside the power button. A status LED indicates which mode is currently enabled. Customised profiles can also be created using the preinstalled Control Center software. For instance, you can specify the CPU’s power limits, the GPU’s TGP, temperature limits and so on.
Note: We used the English user interface in the Control Center software because there are some issues with the German translation. The software lets you switch between the two languages.
Turbo Mode
Balance Mode
Office Mode
Power Limit 1
160 Watt
160 Watt
160 Watt
Power Limit 2
160 Watt
160 Watt
160 Watt
The Core i9-13900HX (Raptor Lake) consists of eight performance cores (Hyper-Threading, 2.2 to 5.4 GHz) and sixteen efficiency cores (no Hyper-Threading, 1.6 to 3.9 GHz), resulting in a total of 40 logical cores. The benchmark results obtained are slightly above what the CPU can produce on average.
With the Erazer Beast X40 plugged in, its CPU ran Cinebench R15 at high to max clock speeds. On battery power, single-thread performance was only marginally lower (score: 228), whereas multi-thread performance took a considerable hit (score: 1,154). Running Cinebench 15 in a loop demonstrated that the CPU is capable of running constantly at high boost speeds when it is on mains power.
Using the water cooling unit didn’t bring about any dramatic increase in performance. Nonetheless, the CPU’s performance was more stable under sustained multi-thread load (CB15 loop), and the average CPU temperature dropped by around 5°C (9°F).
02655307951060132515901855212023852650291531803445371039754240450547705035TooltipMedion Erazer Beast X40 Intel Core i9-13900HX; dGPU, Cooling: Ø4680 (4646.3-4744.4)
CPU Performance Rating – PercentAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
85.6 pt ∼86%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
84.3 pt ∼84%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
83 pt ∼83%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
81.7 pt ∼82%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
80.8 pt ∼81%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
73.7 pt ∼74%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
61.5 pt ∼62%
Average of class Gaming
49.6 pt ∼50%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
48.8 pt ∼49%
Cinebench R23 Multi CoreMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
33277 Points ∼100% +8%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
31572 Points ∼95% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
30932 Points ∼93%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
30886 Points ∼93% 0%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(26407 – 32623, n=12)
28824 Points ∼87% -7%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
26736 (22394.1min – 26736.1max) Points ∼80% -14%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
18870 (18654.1min – 18869.7max) Points ∼57% -39%
Average of class Gaming
(2435 – 34521, n=229, last 2 years)
15408 Points ∼46% -50%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
14152 Points ∼43% -54%
Single CoreAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
2140 Points ∼100% +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
2100 Points ∼98% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
2083 Points ∼97% +2%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(2035 – 2095, n=9)
2071 Points ∼97% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
2035 Points ∼95%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
2029 Points ∼95% 0%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
1905 Points ∼89% -6%
Average of class Gaming
(527 – 2169, n=226, last 2 years)
1638 Points ∼77% -20%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
1557 Points ∼73% -23%
Cinebench R20 CPU (Multi Core)MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
12648 Points ∼100% +7%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
12073 Points ∼95% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
11788 Points ∼93% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
11780 Points ∼93%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(9992 – 12541, n=10)
11157 Points ∼88% -5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
8697 Points ∼69% -26%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
7169 Points ∼57% -39%
Average of class Gaming
(930 – 13457, n=232, last 2 years)
5810 Points ∼46% -51%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
5549 Points ∼44% -53%
CPU (Single Core)Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
824 Points ∼100% +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
803 Points ∼97% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
793 Points ∼96% +1%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(756 – 805, n=10)
790 Points ∼96% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
782 Points ∼95%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
742 Points ∼90% -5%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
727 Points ∼88% -7%
Average of class Gaming
(169 – 825, n=232, last 2 years)
631 Points ∼77% -19%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
605 Points ∼73% -23%
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64BitMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
5227 (4889.98min – 5226.71max) Points ∼100% +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
4828 Points ∼92%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
4823 Points ∼92% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
4744 Points ∼91% -2%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
4781 (4684.94min – 4780.69max) Points ∼91% -1%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(4302 – 4970, n=11)
4688 Points ∼90% -3%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
4529 (4463.29min – 4528.99max) Points ∼87% -6%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
2918 (2849.61min – 2917.79max) Points ∼56% -40%
Average of class Gaming
(400 – 5554, n=237, last 2 years)
2475 Points ∼47% -49%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
2296 Points ∼44% -52%
CPU Single 64BitAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
312 Points ∼100% +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
300 Points ∼96% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
297 Points ∼95%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(278 – 301, n=11)
296 Points ∼95% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
295 Points ∼95% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
278 Points ∼89% -6%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
274 Points ∼88% -8%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
272 Points ∼87% -8%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
248 Points ∼79% -16%
Average of class Gaming
(79.2 – 312, n=233, last 2 years)
247 Points ∼79% -17%
Blender – v2.79 BMW27 CPUAverage of class Gaming
(93 – 1259, n=234, last 2 years)
243 Seconds * ∼100% -134%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
216 Seconds * ∼89% -108%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
173.6 Seconds * ∼71% -67%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
114 Seconds * ∼47% -10%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(101 – 153, n=11)
113.1 Seconds * ∼47% -9%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
104 Seconds * ∼43%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
103 Seconds * ∼42% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
102 Seconds * ∼42% +2%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
100 Seconds * ∼41% +4%
7-Zip 18.03 7z b 4MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
127295 MIPS ∼100% +4%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
123833 MIPS ∼97% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
121921 MIPS ∼96%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
121631 MIPS ∼96% 0%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(94649 – 127283, n=10)
116006 MIPS ∼91% -5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
109330 MIPS ∼86% -10%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
69146 MIPS ∼54% -43%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
64439 MIPS ∼51% -47%
Average of class Gaming
(11386 – 135927, n=229, last 2 years)
62802 MIPS ∼49% -48%
7z b 4 -mmt1Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
7084 MIPS ∼100% +3%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(6800 – 7070, n=10)
6925 MIPS ∼98% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
6918 MIPS ∼98% 0%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
6897 MIPS ∼97% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
6890 MIPS ∼97%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
6445 MIPS ∼91% -6%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
5872 MIPS ∼83% -15%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
5803 MIPS ∼82% -16%
Average of class Gaming
(2685 – 7332, n=230, last 2 years)
5735 MIPS ∼81% -17%
Geekbench 5.4 Multi-CoreAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
20847 Points ∼100% +3%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
20634 Points ∼99% +2%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(19425 – 21075, n=11)
20370 Points ∼98% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
20350 Points ∼98% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
20182 Points ∼97%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
18152 Points ∼87% -10%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
13717 Points ∼66% -32%
Average of class Gaming
(1946 – 21853, n=228, last 2 years)
11009 Points ∼53% -45%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
10126 Points ∼49% -50%
Single-CoreAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
2099 Points ∼100% +3%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(1988 – 2093, n=11)
2051 Points ∼98% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
2047 Points ∼98% +1%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
2043 Points ∼97% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
2036 Points ∼97%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
1878 Points ∼89% -8%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
1805 Points ∼86% -11%
Average of class Gaming
(158 – 2139, n=228, last 2 years)
1649 Points ∼79% -19%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
1590 Points ∼76% -22%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 – 4k PresetAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
33.4 fps ∼100% +10%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
32.7 fps ∼98% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
32.7 fps ∼98% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
30.5 fps ∼91%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(25.2 – 34.4, n=11)
30.5 fps ∼91% 0%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
28.7 fps ∼86% -6%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
21.4 fps ∼64% -30%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
17.5 fps ∼52% -43%
Average of class Gaming
(3 – 34.8, n=234, last 2 years)
17.5 fps ∼52% -43%
LibreOffice – 20 Documents To PDFSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
56 s * ∼100% -30%
Average of class Gaming
(32.8 – 332, n=230, last 2 years)
51.2 s * ∼91% -19%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
47.5 s * ∼85% -10%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
46.5 s * ∼83% -8%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
43 s * ∼77%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(32.8 – 46, n=10)
40.9 s * ∼73% +5%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
40.7 s * ∼73% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
38.2 s * ∼68% +11%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
36 s * ∼64% +16%
R Benchmark 2.5 – Overall meanAverage of class Gaming
(0.375 – 4.47, n=230, last 2 years)
0.514 sec * ∼100% -28%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
0.4808 sec * ∼94% -20%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK
0.4323 sec * ∼84% -8%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
0.4121 sec * ∼80% -3%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
0.4033 sec * ∼78% -0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX
0.4014 sec * ∼78%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
0.3954 sec * ∼77% +1%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(0.375 – 0.4049, n=11)
0.3932 sec * ∼76% +2%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX
0.3793 sec * ∼74% +6%
* … smaller is better
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
4828 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
261 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
297 Points
Help
Performance RatingMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
97.7 pt ∼98%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
97.4 pt ∼97%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
94.6 pt ∼95%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
93.3 pt ∼93%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
91.1 pt ∼91%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
90.3 pt ∼90%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
64.9 pt ∼65%
Average of class Gaming
56.8 pt ∼57%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
52.8 pt ∼53%
AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-TraceMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
28957 KRay/s ∼100% +5%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
28701 KRay/s ∼99% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
27615 KRay/s ∼95% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
27524 KRay/s ∼95%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
25857 KRay/s ∼89% -6%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(17589 – 27615, n=11)
25141 KRay/s ∼87% -9%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
16115 KRay/s ∼56% -41%
Average of class Gaming
(2585 – 52479, n=202, last 2 years)
14065 KRay/s ∼49% -49%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
9759 KRay/s ∼34% -65%
AIDA64 / FPU JuliaMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
144303 Points ∼100% +8%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
138190 Points ∼96% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
136688 Points ∼95% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
134221 Points ∼93%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
125944 Points ∼87% -6%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(88686 – 136688, n=11)
124104 Points ∼86% -8%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
98800 Points ∼68% -26%
Average of class Gaming
(12439 – 227882, n=202, last 2 years)
74815 Points ∼52% -44%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
43695 Points ∼30% -67%
AIDA64 / CPU SHA3MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
7093 MB/s ∼100% +5%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
6949 MB/s ∼98% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
6799 MB/s ∼96% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
6758 MB/s ∼95%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
6350 MB/s ∼90% -6%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(4362 – 7029, n=11)
6277 MB/s ∼88% -7%
Average of class Gaming
(629 – 8525, n=202, last 2 years)
3530 MB/s ∼50% -48%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
3504 MB/s ∼49% -48%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
3422 MB/s ∼48% -49%
AIDA64 / CPU QueenAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
141427 Points ∼100% +6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
139649 Points ∼99% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
134571 Points ∼95% +1%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(125644 – 141385, n=11)
134284 Points ∼95% +1%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
133226 Points ∼94% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
133197 Points ∼94%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
107120 Points ∼76% -20%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
102167 Points ∼72% -23%
Average of class Gaming
(15371 – 180473, n=202, last 2 years)
99138 Points ∼70% -26%
AIDA64 / FPU SinJuliaAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
17117 Points ∼100% +7%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
17057 Points ∼100% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
16037 Points ∼94% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
15947 Points ∼93%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
15813 Points ∼92% -1%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(12334 – 17179, n=11)
15434 Points ∼90% -3%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
12783 Points ∼75% -20%
Average of class Gaming
(2137 – 29598, n=202, last 2 years)
10890 Points ∼64% -32%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
10402 Points ∼61% -35%
AIDA64 / FPU MandelMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
71038 Points ∼100% +5%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
70739 Points ∼100% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
69202 Points ∼97% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
67872 Points ∼96%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
63308 Points ∼89% -7%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(43850 – 69202, n=11)
62235 Points ∼88% -8%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
54060 Points ∼76% -20%
Average of class Gaming
(7135 – 118401, n=202, last 2 years)
40176 Points ∼57% -41%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
27285 Points ∼38% -60%
AIDA64 / CPU AESAverage Intel Core i9-13900HX
(89413 – 236139, n=11)
138538 MB/s ∼100% +9%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
136551 MB/s ∼99% +7%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
135833 MB/s ∼98% +6%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
134166 MB/s ∼97% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
129440 MB/s ∼93% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
127548 MB/s ∼92%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
125644 MB/s ∼91% -1%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
106367 MB/s ∼77% -17%
Average of class Gaming
(18146 – 236139, n=202, last 2 years)
104245 MB/s ∼75% -18%
AIDA64 / CPU ZLibMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
2059 MB/s ∼100% +7%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
2030 MB/s ∼99% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
1950 MB/s ∼95% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
1928 MB/s ∼94%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
1850 MB/s ∼90% -4%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(1284 – 1958, n=11)
1820 MB/s ∼88% -6%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
1203 MB/s ∼58% -38%
Average of class Gaming
(150.9 – 2090, n=223, last 2 years)
892 MB/s ∼43% -54%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
845 MB/s ∼41% -56%
AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-TraceMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
15573 KRay/s ∼100% +4%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
15540 KRay/s ∼100% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
15279 KRay/s ∼98% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
14995 KRay/s ∼96%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
13844 KRay/s ∼89% -8%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(9481 – 15279, n=11)
13663 KRay/s ∼88% -9%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
8529 KRay/s ∼55% -43%
Average of class Gaming
(1437 – 28105, n=202, last 2 years)
7642 KRay/s ∼49% -49%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
5748 KRay/s ∼37% -62%
AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxxRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
50834 MPixel/s ∼100% +18%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(43025 – 50890, n=11)
47248 MPixel/s ∼93% +10%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100, dGPU, Cooling)
44270 MPixel/s ∼87% +3%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
44016 MPixel/s ∼87% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.75.6100)
43025 MPixel/s ∼85%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (v6.85.6300)
40896 MPixel/s ∼80% -5%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.50.5800)
34534 MPixel/s ∼68% -20%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (v6.70.6000)
30226 MPixel/s ∼59% -30%
Average of class Gaming
(8341 – 51096, n=203, last 2 years)
30209 MPixel/s ∼59% -30%
The hardware inside this snappy system offers more than enough performance for tasks like gaming and rendering. The laptop comes with 32 GB of memory running in dual-channel mode. And the memory’s transfer rates are typical for DDR5-4800 RAM. What’s more, the system also delivered superb PCMark results in our testing.
The memory runs in dual-channel mode.PCMark 10 / ScoreMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
9331 Points ∼100% +18%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
8884 Points ∼95% +12%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HX, 2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
8764 Points ∼94% +10%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(7932 – 9331, n=4)
8663 Points ∼93% +9%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
8186 Points ∼88% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
7932 Points ∼85%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
7888 Points ∼85% -1%
Average of class Gaming
(4477 – 9331, n=190, last 2 years)
7174 Points ∼77% -10%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
6966 Points ∼75% -12%
PCMark 10 / EssentialsMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
11761 Points ∼100% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
11512 Points ∼98% +2%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(10972 – 11983, n=4)
11436 Points ∼97% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
11275 Points ∼96%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
11205 Points ∼95% -1%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
11078 Points ∼94% -2%
Average of class Gaming
(7334 – 12639, n=189, last 2 years)
10378 Points ∼88% -8%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
9740 Points ∼83% -14%
PCMark 10 / ProductivityMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
11680 Points ∼100% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
11321 Points ∼97%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(9837 – 11680, n=4)
10898 Points ∼93% -4%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
10144 Points ∼87% -10%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9851 Points ∼84% -13%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
9564 Points ∼82% -16%
Average of class Gaming
(6161 – 11833, n=189, last 2 years)
9353 Points ∼80% -17%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
8271 Points ∼71% -27%
PCMark 10 / Digital Content CreationMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
16424 Points ∼100% +55%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
16395 Points ∼100% +55%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
14535 Points ∼88% +37%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(10611 – 16395, n=4)
14300 Points ∼87% +35%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
13098 Points ∼80% +23%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
10611 Points ∼65%
Average of class Gaming
(5288 – 16424, n=189, last 2 years)
10374 Points ∼63% -2%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
9848 Points ∼60% -7%
CrossMark / OverallMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
2150 Points ∼100% +1%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
2139 Points ∼99% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
2125 Points ∼99%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(1993 – 2195, n=5)
2115 Points ∼98% 0%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HX, 2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
2080 Points ∼97% -2%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1903 Points ∼89% -10%
Average of class Gaming
(974 – 2195, n=98, last 2 years)
1828 Points ∼85% -14%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
1699 Points ∼79% -20%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1592 Points ∼74% -25%
CrossMark / ProductivityMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
2014 Points ∼100% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
1978 Points ∼98%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1977 Points ∼98% 0%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(1820 – 2032, n=5)
1960 Points ∼97% -1%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HX, 2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1909 Points ∼95% -3%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1808 Points ∼90% -9%
Average of class Gaming
(907 – 2062, n=98, last 2 years)
1753 Points ∼87% -11%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
1646 Points ∼82% -17%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1509 Points ∼75% -24%
CrossMark / CreativityAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HX, 2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
2455 Points ∼100% +3%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
2423 Points ∼99% +1%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(2384 – 2514, n=5)
2422 Points ∼99% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
2392 Points ∼97% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
2389 Points ∼97%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
2095 Points ∼85% -12%
Average of class Gaming
(1027 – 2514, n=98, last 2 years)
1963 Points ∼80% -18%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
1867 Points ∼76% -22%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1780 Points ∼73% -25%
CrossMark / ResponsivenessMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
1902 Points ∼100% +2%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1861 Points ∼98% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
1857 Points ∼98%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(1528 – 1902, n=5)
1776 Points ∼93% -4%
Average of class Gaming
(1029 – 2230, n=98, last 2 years)
1687 Points ∼89% -9%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1666 Points ∼88% -10%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HX, 2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1634 Points ∼86% -12%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
1405 Points ∼74% -24%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1342 Points ∼71% -28%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4936 pointsPCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
6075 pointsPCMark 10 Score
7932 pointsHelp
AIDA64 / Memory CopyRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
77060 MB/s ∼100% +14%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(67716 – 78835, n=11)
73527 MB/s ∼95% +9%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
67716 MB/s ∼88%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
67561 MB/s ∼88% 0%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
63863 MB/s ∼83% -6%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
53861 MB/s ∼70% -20%
Average of class Gaming
(18074 – 78835, n=202, last 2 years)
51110 MB/s ∼66% -25%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
50231 MB/s ∼65% -26%
AIDA64 / Memory ReadRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
84869 MB/s ∼100% +14%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(74284 – 86816, n=11)
80605 MB/s ∼95% +9%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
74518 MB/s ∼88% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
74284 MB/s ∼88%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
62807 MB/s ∼74% -15%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
57237 MB/s ∼67% -23%
Average of class Gaming
(20318 – 86294, n=202, last 2 years)
54837 MB/s ∼65% -26%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
51403 MB/s ∼61% -31%
AIDA64 / Memory WriteRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
80441 MB/s ∼100% +23%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(65472 – 76988, n=11)
71529 MB/s ∼89% +9%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
67449 MB/s ∼84% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
65472 MB/s ∼81%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
60389 MB/s ∼75% -8%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
55263 MB/s ∼69% -16%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
54443 MB/s ∼68% -17%
Average of class Gaming
(15975 – 80441, n=202, last 2 years)
52040 MB/s ∼65% -21%
AIDA64 / Memory LatencyRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
99.5 ns * ∼100% -12%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
98.4 ns * ∼99% -10%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
92.8 ns * ∼93% -4%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
90.8 ns * ∼91% -2%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
89.3 ns * ∼90% -0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
89.1 ns * ∼90%
Average Intel Core i9-13900HX
(83 – 90.6, n=11)
86.5 ns * ∼87% +3%
Average of class Gaming
(76.2 – 135.3, n=223, last 2 years)
69.8 ns * ∼70% +22%
* … smaller is better
Our standardised latency monitor test, which involves web browsing, 4K video playback and Prime95 high-load, revealed some issues. The system seems to be unsuitable for real-time video and audio processing. We hope future software updates will help rectify these issues.
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon – interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
4710.9 μs * ∼100% -107%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
4362 μs * ∼93% -92%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
2448.6 μs * ∼52% -8%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
2275.2 μs * ∼48%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HK, 2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1101.9 μs * ∼23% +52%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HX, 2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1095 μs * ∼23% +52%
* … smaller is better
Medion equipped our X40 review unit with two 1 TB SSDs (PCIe 4.0, M.2-2280) made by Phison. One of them serves as the system drive, and the other is used for data storage. Not only do the SSDs not form a RAID configuration, but the laptop itself doesn’t support RAID. The included drives are not amongst the best SSDs on the market. Even so, they still deliver great performance. Another positive thing to mention is that we didn’t notice any performance drops caused by thermal throttling.
The laptop comes with two SSDs.CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1:
7077 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1:
4783 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1:
962.7 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1:
705.5 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq:
3250 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq:
3156 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K:
55.25 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K:
265.1 MB/s
Drive Performance Rating – PercentSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
77.7 pt ∼78%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
73.9 pt ∼74%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
70.6 pt ∼71%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
69.1 pt ∼69%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
59.9 pt ∼60%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
59.1 pt ∼59%
Average of class Gaming
56.2 pt ∼56%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
54 pt ∼54%
DiskSpd seq readMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
5598 (5462.22min – 5597.85max) MB/s ∼100% +79%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
4931 (4875.77min – 4930.83max) MB/s ∼88% +58%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
4842 (4719.64min – 4842.11max) MB/s ∼86% +55%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
3872 (3855.82min – 3871.97max) MB/s ∼69% +24%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3844 (3257.93min – 3843.87max) MB/s ∼69% +23%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3127 – 3582, n=2)
3355 MB/s ∼60% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3127 (2701.13min – 3126.72max) MB/s ∼56%
Average of class Gaming
(834 – 5676, n=188, last 2 years)
3099 MB/s ∼55% -1%
seq writeMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
7533 (7482.85min – 7532.79max) MB/s ∼100% +134%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
4819 (4728.89min – 4819.25max) MB/s ∼64% +50%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
4242 (4225.7min – 4241.7max) MB/s ∼56% +32%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
4199 (3998.61min – 4199.12max) MB/s ∼56% +30%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3218 – 3714, n=2)
3466 MB/s ∼46% +8%
Average of class Gaming
(399 – 7889, n=187, last 2 years)
3291 MB/s ∼44% +2%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3242 (1498min – 3241.78max) MB/s ∼43% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3218 (2245.63min – 3218.43max) MB/s ∼43%
seq q8 t1 readAlienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
13195 (9412.86min – 13194.8max) MB/s ∼100% +90%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
11242 (10740.3min – 11242.2max) MB/s ∼85% +62%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
10774 (9137.92min – 10774max) MB/s ∼82% +55%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(6956 – 6976, n=2)
6966 MB/s ∼53% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
6956 (5970.17min – 6956.25max) MB/s ∼53%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
6872 (4963.33min – 6872.25max) MB/s ∼52% -1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
6384 (5573.36min – 6384.17max) MB/s ∼48% -8%
Average of class Gaming
(1620 – 13195, n=188, last 2 years)
5382 MB/s ∼41% -23%
seq q8 t1 writeMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9942 (9912.92min – 9941.76max) MB/s ∼100% +99%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
8404 (8165.05min – 8403.71max) MB/s ∼85% +69%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
8227 (8104.29min – 8226.71max) MB/s ∼83% +65%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
5043 (5032.12min – 5043.21max) MB/s ∼51% +1%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(4986 – 5011, n=2)
4999 MB/s ∼50% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
4986 (4917.82min – 4985.65max) MB/s ∼50%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
4244 (427.59min – 4244.22max) MB/s ∼43% -15%
Average of class Gaming
(86.2 – 10261, n=188, last 2 years)
4033 MB/s ∼41% -19%
4k q1 t1 readMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
83.1 (79.37min – 83.07max) MB/s ∼100% +46%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
79.3 (77.82min – 79.25max) MB/s ∼95% +40%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
79.1 (78.08min – 79.08max) MB/s ∼95% +39%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(56.8 – 84.3, n=2)
70.6 MB/s ∼85% +24%
Average of class Gaming
(23.3 – 97.4, n=188, last 2 years)
64.9 MB/s ∼78% +14%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
57.5 (57.09min – 57.53max) MB/s ∼69% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
56.8 (53.63min – 56.77max) MB/s ∼68%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
56.5 (49.8min – 56.49max) MB/s ∼68% -1%
4k q1 t1 writeAverage Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(283 – 295, n=2)
289 MB/s ∼100% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
283 (273.23min – 283.12max) MB/s ∼98%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
220 (56.84min – 219.56max) MB/s ∼76% -22%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
213 (205.52min – 212.72max) MB/s ∼74% -25%
Average of class Gaming
(66.6 – 421, n=187, last 2 years)
203 MB/s ∼70% -28%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
195.1 (194.02min – 195.09max) MB/s ∼68% -31%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
170.2 (168.21min – 170.2max) MB/s ∼59% -40%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
103.7 (103.17min – 103.74max) MB/s ∼36% -63%
4k q32 t16 readSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
4483 (4465.42min – 4482.78max) MB/s ∼100% +27%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3543 – 3551, n=2)
3547 MB/s ∼79% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3543 (3529.91min – 3542.8max) MB/s ∼79%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3111 (2388.54min – 3111.42max) MB/s ∼69% -12%
Average of class Gaming
(310 – 5829, n=187, last 2 years)
2313 MB/s ∼52% -35%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1469 (1266.81min – 1469.47max) MB/s ∼33% -59%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
874 (867.39min – 873.79max) MB/s ∼19% -75%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
711 (692.26min – 710.64max) MB/s ∼16% -80%
4k q32 t16 writeSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
4383 (4358.15min – 4383.06max) MB/s ∼100% +19%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3688 (3576.03min – 3687.54max) MB/s ∼84%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3398 – 3688, n=2)
3543 MB/s ∼81% -4%
Average of class Gaming
(288 – 4383, n=187, last 2 years)
2025 MB/s ∼46% -45%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1424 (1251.47min – 1423.75max) MB/s ∼32% -61%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1282 (960.6min – 1281.78max) MB/s ∼29% -65%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
461 (442.02min – 461.29max) MB/s ∼11% -87%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
350 (343.49min – 350.45max) MB/s ∼8% -91%
AS SSD Score TotalSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
9218 Points ∼100% +9%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(8477 – 8906, n=2)
8692 Points ∼94% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
8477 Points ∼92%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
7311 Points ∼79% -14%
Average of class Gaming
(910 – 10330, n=177, last 2 years)
6236 Points ∼68% -26%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
4941 Points ∼54% -42%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
4850 Points ∼53% -43%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
4364 Points ∼47% -49%
Score ReadAverage Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3394 – 3464, n=2)
3429 Points ∼100% +1%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
3428 Points ∼100% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3394 Points ∼99%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3308 Points ∼96% -3%
Average of class Gaming
(389 – 3629, n=177, last 2 years)
2331 Points ∼68% -31%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
2035 Points ∼59% -40%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1948 Points ∼57% -43%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1858 Points ∼54% -45%
Score WriteSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
4113 Points ∼100% +21%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3399 – 3707, n=2)
3553 Points ∼86% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3399 Points ∼83%
Average of class Gaming
(338 – 5157, n=177, last 2 years)
2756 Points ∼67% -19%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
2428 Points ∼59% -29%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
2137 Points ∼52% -37%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1877 Points ∼46% -45%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1691 Points ∼41% -50%
Seq ReadMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9511 MB/s ∼100% +98%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
7888 MB/s ∼83% +64%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
6561.69 MB/s ∼69% +37%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
5157 MB/s ∼54% +7%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
5144.76 MB/s ∼54% +7%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(4800 – 5200, n=2)
5000 MB/s ∼53% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
4799.93 MB/s ∼50%
Average of class Gaming
(925 – 9971, n=177, last 2 years)
4262 MB/s ∼45% -11%
Seq WriteMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
7181 MB/s ∼100% +83%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
5041 MB/s ∼70% +28%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(3925 – 4309, n=2)
4117 MB/s ∼57% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
3925.33 MB/s ∼55%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
3733 MB/s ∼52% -5%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
3480.87 MB/s ∼48% -11%
Average of class Gaming
(308 – 8590, n=177, last 2 years)
3072 MB/s ∼43% -22%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3058.47 MB/s ∼43% -22%
4K ReadAverage Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(60.6 – 97.3, n=2)
79 MB/s ∼100% +30%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
72.8 MB/s ∼92% +20%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
69.21 MB/s ∼88% +14%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
68.93 MB/s ∼87% +14%
Average of class Gaming
(20 – 108, n=177, last 2 years)
62.8 MB/s ∼79% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
60.64 MB/s ∼77%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
58 MB/s ∼73% -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
49.65 MB/s ∼63% -18%
4K WriteAverage Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(175.5 – 294, n=2)
235 MB/s ∼100% +34%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
184.49 MB/s ∼79% +5%
Average of class Gaming
(18 – 364, n=177, last 2 years)
183.2 MB/s ∼78% +4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
177.9 MB/s ∼76% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
175.47 MB/s ∼75%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
157.01 MB/s ∼67% -11%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
144.8 MB/s ∼62% -17%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
114.7 MB/s ∼49% -35%
4K-64 ReadMedion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
2853.84 MB/s ∼100%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(2846 – 2854, n=2)
2850 MB/s ∼100% 0%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
2842.96 MB/s ∼100% 0%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
2744.3 MB/s ∼96% -4%
Average of class Gaming
(216 – 2963, n=177, last 2 years)
1842 MB/s ∼65% -35%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1223.07 MB/s ∼43% -57%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1011 MB/s ∼35% -65%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1011 MB/s ∼35% -65%
4K-64 WriteSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
3582.58 MB/s ∼100% +27%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(2831 – 2982, n=2)
2906 MB/s ∼81% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
2830.74 MB/s ∼79%
Average of class Gaming
(243 – 4381, n=177, last 2 years)
2276 MB/s ∼64% -20%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1944.47 MB/s ∼54% -31%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
1604.89 MB/s ∼45% -43%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
1072 MB/s ∼30% -62%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
981 MB/s ∼27% -65%
Access Time ReadAverage Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(0.085 – 0.086, n=2)
0.0855 ms * ∼100% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
0.085 ms * ∼99%
Average of class Gaming
(0.02 – 0.23, n=172, last 2 years)
0.05649 ms * ∼66% +34%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
0.044 ms * ∼51% +48%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
0.036 ms * ∼42% +58%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
0.034 ms * ∼40% +60%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
0.03 ms * ∼35% +65%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
0.028 ms * ∼33% +67%
Access Time WriteRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
0.082 ms * ∼100% -257%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
2x Samsung PM9A1 1TB (RAID 0)
0.066 ms * ∼80% -187%
Average of class Gaming
(0.012 – 0.425, n=177, last 2 years)
0.05642 ms * ∼69% -145%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
2x Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR (RAID 0)
0.035 ms * ∼43% -52%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
Samsung SSD 980 Pro 1TB MZ-V8P1T0BW
0.025 ms * ∼30% -9%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
0.023 ms * ∼28% -0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
0.023 ms * ∼28%
Average Phison E18-1TB-PHISON-SSD-B47R
(0.013 – 0.023, n=2)
0.018 ms * ∼22% +22%
* … smaller is better
069013802070276034504140483055206210690075908280897096601035011040117301242013110TooltipThe GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop is Nvidia’s current flagship mobile GPU. It features 9,728 shading units, a 256-bit memory bus and 16,384 MB of high-speed GDDR6 memory. The RTX 4090 has up to 175 watts of TGP at its disposal (150 watts + 25 watts Dynamic Boost) – this is as high as it gets. But the TGP wasn’t fully utilised during our Witcher 3 test.
The benchmark results are on par with (Optimus mode) or slightly better than (dGPU mode) what we have seen so far from the RTX 4090 Laptop on average. The laptop also supports Advanced Optimus. Switching between dGPU and Optimus mode doesn’t require restarting the computer.
The optional water cooling can give a slight performance gain in some benchmarks and games. Witcher 3, for example, ran at higher frame rates during our testing. Average GPU temperature was also lower than when using only air cooling.
3DMark Performance Rating – PercentMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI -1!
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
99.4 pt ∼99%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
96.8 pt ∼97%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
96.7 pt ∼97%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
95.1 pt ∼95%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
93.3 pt ∼93%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
92.7 pt ∼93%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023 -1!
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
81.8 pt ∼82%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
70.4 pt ∼70%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22 -1!
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
62.2 pt ∼62%
Average of class Gaming
55.7 pt ∼56%
3DMark 11 – 1280×720 Performance GPUMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
69777 Points ∼100% +2%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
69211 Points ∼99% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
68692 Points ∼98%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU)
67073 Points ∼96% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(58891 – 72070, n=12)
65943 Points ∼95% -4%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
63818 Points ∼91% -7%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
56565 Points ∼81% -18%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
44381 Points ∼64% -35%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
43823 Points ∼63% -36%
Average of class Gaming
(1029 – 72070, n=228, last 2 years)
35258 Points ∼51% -49%
3DMark1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard GraphicsMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU)
164399 Points ∼100% +15%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
159724 Points ∼97% +12%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
150156 Points ∼91% +5%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(140386 – 164399, n=7)
148198 Points ∼90% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
142552 Points ∼87% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
142520 Points ∼87%
Average of class Gaming
(15902 – 192520, n=166, last 2 years)
119743 Points ∼73% -16%
1920×1080 Fire Strike GraphicsMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
49247 Points ∼100% +10%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
49220 Points ∼100% +10%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
48101 Points ∼98% +7%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(44568 – 49247, n=12)
46965 Points ∼95% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU)
46047 Points ∼94% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
44759 Points ∼91%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
40570 Points ∼82% -9%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
33120 Points ∼67% -26%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
32849 Points ∼67% -27%
Average of class Gaming
(781 – 49247, n=237, last 2 years)
26302 Points ∼53% -41%
2560×1440 Time Spy GraphicsMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
22479 Points ∼100% +6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
22254 Points ∼99% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU)
21900 Points ∼97% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
21278 Points ∼95%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
21167 Points ∼94% -1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(17650 – 22529, n=12)
20951 Points ∼93% -2%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
18441 Points ∼82% -13%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
13455 Points ∼60% -37%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
12684 Points ∼56% -40%
Average of class Gaming
(224 – 22529, n=238, last 2 years)
10365 Points ∼46% -51%
3DMark 06 Standard Score
60717 points3DMark 11 Performance
47487 points3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
66757 points3DMark Fire Strike Score
34788 points3DMark Time Spy Score
19708 pointsHelp
Blender v3.3 Classroom OPTIX/RTXAverage of class Gaming
(9 – 142, n=71, last 2 years)
24.9 Seconds * ∼100% -78%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (3.3.3)
15 Seconds * ∼60% -7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (3.3.3)
14 Seconds * ∼56%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (3.3.3, dGPU, Cooling)
12 Seconds * ∼48% +14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(9 – 15, n=13)
11.7 Seconds * ∼47% +16%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (3.3.3)
11 Seconds * ∼44% +21%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (3.3.3)
10 Seconds * ∼40% +29%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (3.3.3, dGPU)
10 Seconds * ∼40% +29%
v3.3 Classroom CUDAAverage of class Gaming
(17 – 168, n=74, last 2 years)
39.4 Seconds * ∼100% -107%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (3.3.3)
22 Seconds * ∼56% -16%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (3.3.3)
19 Seconds * ∼48%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (3.3.3, dGPU, Cooling)
19 Seconds * ∼48% -0%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (3.3.3)
18 Seconds * ∼46% +5%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (3.3.3)
17 Seconds * ∼43% +11%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (3.3.3, dGPU)
18 Seconds * ∼46% +5%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(17 – 20, n=14)
17.9 Seconds * ∼45% +6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (3.3.3)
17 Seconds * ∼43% +11%
Geekbench 5.4 OpenCL ScoreMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU)
215531 Points ∼100% +8%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
215425 Points ∼100% +8%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
215359 Points ∼100% +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
198772 Points ∼92%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(6841 – 221004, n=13)
195191 Points ∼91% -2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
190582 Points ∼88% -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
173311 Points ∼80% -13%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
147189 Points ∼68% -26%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
138625 Points ∼64% -30%
Average of class Gaming
(4617 – 221004, n=232, last 2 years)
110884 Points ∼51% -44%
Vulkan ScoreMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU, Cooling)
134644 Points ∼100% +1429%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
90003 Points ∼67% +922%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK
76932 Points ∼57% +774%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (dGPU)
76039 Points ∼56% +764%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
75965 Points ∼56% +763%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
71346 Points ∼53% +710%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(7860 – 134644, n=12)
57030 Points ∼42% +548%
Average of class Gaming
(1806 – 134644, n=232, last 2 years)
33023 Points ∼25% +275%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
27460 Points ∼20% +212%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
8804 Points ∼7%
Geekbench 6 GPU VulkanAverage of class Gaming
(9497 – 96149, n=4, last 2 years)
33635 Points ∼100% +254%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
9497 Points ∼28%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
9497 Points ∼28% 0%
GPU OpenCLMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
213472 Points ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(208453 – 213472, n=2)
210963 Points ∼99% -1%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX
208453 Points ∼98% -2%
Average of class Gaming
(103225 – 213472, n=5, last 2 years)
160906 Points ∼75% -25%
V-Ray 5 Benchmark GPU RTXAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (5.0.1)
3590 mpaths ∼100% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1, dGPU)
3569 mpaths ∼99% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1)
3551 mpaths ∼99%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(3335 – 3665, n=9)
3546 mpaths ∼99% 0%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (5.0.1)
3533 mpaths ∼98% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1, dGPU, Cooling)
3335 mpaths ∼93% -6%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (5.0.1)
2655 mpaths ∼74% -25%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (5.0.1)
1880 mpaths ∼52% -47%
Average of class Gaming
(171 – 3665, n=93, last 2 years)
1713 mpaths ∼48% -52%
GPU CUDAAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (5.0.1)
2644 mpaths ∼100% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1)
2589 mpaths ∼98%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1, dGPU)
2589 mpaths ∼98% 0%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (5.0.1)
2582 mpaths ∼98% 0%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(2424 – 2674, n=9)
2582 mpaths ∼98% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1, dGPU, Cooling)
2424 mpaths ∼92% -6%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (5.0.1)
1945 mpaths ∼74% -25%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (5.0.1)
1384 mpaths ∼52% -47%
Average of class Gaming
(120 – 2674, n=92, last 2 years)
1231 mpaths ∼47% -52%
CPUMedion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1, dGPU, Cooling)
21230 mpaths ∼100% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1)
21011 mpaths ∼99%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (5.0.1, dGPU)
20543 mpaths ∼97% -2%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (5.0.1)
20438 mpaths ∼96% -3%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(12923 – 25486, n=9)
20215 mpaths ∼95% -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (5.0.1)
18935 mpaths ∼89% -10%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HK (5.0.1)
12463 mpaths ∼59% -41%
Average of class Gaming
(1690 – 25486, n=125, last 2 years)
10749 mpaths ∼51% -49%
V-Ray Benchmark Next 4.10 GPUAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (v4.10.07 )
1261 mpaths ∼100% +1%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (v4.10.07 )
1252 mpaths ∼99% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (v4.10.07 )
1252 mpaths ∼99%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (v4.10.07, dGPU)
1244 mpaths ∼99% -1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(1122 – 1334, n=12)
1234 mpaths ∼98% -1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (v4.10.07, dGPU, Cooling )
1122 mpaths ∼89% -10%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (v4.10.07 )
511 mpaths ∼41% -59%
Average of class Gaming
(51 – 1334, n=203, last 2 years)
464 mpaths ∼37% -63%
CPUMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX (v4.10.07 )
32727 ksamples ∼100% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (v4.10.07, dGPU, Cooling)
32036 ksamples ∼98% +1%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13980HX (v4.10.07 )
31821 ksamples ∼97% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (v4.10.07 )
31769 ksamples ∼97%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX (v4.10.07, dGPU)
31120 ksamples ∼95% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(19786 – 37629, n=12)
30397 ksamples ∼93% -4%
Average of class Gaming
(2741 – 37629, n=203, last 2 years)
15686 ksamples ∼48% -51%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (v4.10.07 )
14909 ksamples ∼46% -53%
SPECviewperf 2020 v11920x1080 Siemens NX (snx-04)MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
34.28 fps ∼100% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
33.6 fps ∼98%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(31.3 – 34.3, n=3)
33 fps ∼96% -2%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
30 fps ∼88% -11%
Average of class Gaming
(2.93 – 34.3, n=17, last 2 years)
22.3 fps ∼65% -34%
1920×1080 Medical (medical-03)Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
59.5 fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(55.1 – 59.5, n=3)
57.1 fps ∼96% -4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
56.7 fps ∼95% -5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
49.97 fps ∼84% -16%
Average of class Gaming
(23.5 – 59.5, n=17, last 2 years)
38.4 fps ∼65% -35%
1920×1080 Maya (maya-06)MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
610.71 fps ∼100% +15%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(529 – 611, n=2)
570 fps ∼93% +8%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
555.93 fps ∼91% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
528.8 fps ∼87%
Average of class Gaming
(123.1 – 611, n=15, last 2 years)
371 fps ∼61% -30%
1920×1080 Energy (energy-03)Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
76.1 fps ∼100%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
74.95 fps ∼98% -2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(70.7 – 76.1, n=3)
73.9 fps ∼97% -3%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
62.41 fps ∼82% -18%
Average of class Gaming
(20.6 – 76.1, n=17, last 2 years)
36.5 fps ∼48% -52%
1920×1080 Creo (creo-03)MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
138.99 fps ∼100% +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
131.4 fps ∼95%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
130.27 fps ∼94% -1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(113.3 – 139, n=3)
127.9 fps ∼92% -3%
Average of class Gaming
(52 – 139, n=16, last 2 years)
99.2 fps ∼71% -25%
1920×1080 CATIA (catia-06)MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
116.64 fps ∼100% +3%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
112.8 fps ∼97%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
98.79 fps ∼85% -12%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(17.8 – 116.6, n=3)
82.4 fps ∼71% -27%
Average of class Gaming
(17.8 – 116.6, n=17, last 2 years)
66.7 fps ∼57% -41%
1920×1080 3ds Max (3dsmax-07)MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
212.6 fps ∼100% +3%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(207 – 213, n=3)
209 fps ∼98% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
206.8 fps ∼97%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
177.9 fps ∼84% -14%
Average of class Gaming
(47.4 – 213, n=17, last 2 years)
128.3 fps ∼60% -38%
* … smaller is better
The X40 lets users play games at QHD+ and max settings. It is possible to use a higher resolution if you connect the laptop to an appropriate monitor. The games we tested generally ran at frame rates similar to what we have seen from the RTX 4090 until now. Depending on the game, you may be able to get higher frame rates by driving the display directly from the GeForce GPU.
Performance Rating – PercentMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
98.2 pt ∼98%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
98.1 pt ∼98%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W -1!
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
96.5 pt ∼97%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
96.3 pt ∼96%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
94.3 pt ∼94%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
93.8 pt ∼94%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
90.7 pt ∼91%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
71.8 pt ∼72%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
60.5 pt ∼61%
Average of class Gaming
56.8 pt ∼57%
The Witcher 3 – 1920×1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU)
206 (178.6P1) fps ∼100% +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU, Cooling)
204.9 (178min) fps ∼99% +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
198.9 (190min, 191P1) fps ∼97% +2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(174.8 – 216, n=11)
198.1 fps ∼96% +2%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
195.1 (169min) fps ∼95%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
176.8 (159min) fps ∼86% -9%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
128 (124min) fps ∼62% -34%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
121 (98min) fps ∼59% -38%
Average of class Gaming
(8.61 – 216, n=233, last 2 years)
100.8 fps ∼49% -48%
GTA V – 1920×1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16xMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU)
151.6 (4.06min, 90.9P1) fps ∼100% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
151.3 (2.81min, 111.1P1) fps ∼100%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU, Cooling)
149.8 (3.42min, 111.1P1) fps ∼99% -1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(127.7 – 151.6, n=12)
141.9 fps ∼94% -6%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
141.3 (4.69min, 100P1) fps ∼93% -7%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
140.9 (3.54min, 83.3P1) fps ∼93% -7%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
140.7 (3.02min, 100P1) fps ∼93% -7%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
126.3 (5.94min, 90.9P1) fps ∼83% -17%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
101.8 (18.4min, 71.4P1) fps ∼67% -33%
Average of class Gaming
(4.18 – 151.6, n=231, last 2 years)
97.4 fps ∼64% -36%
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark – 1920×1080 High QualityMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.3)
187.4 fps ∼100% +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.3, dGPU)
187.4 fps ∼100% +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.3, dGPU, Cooling)
186.8 fps ∼100% +6%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.3)
177.6 fps ∼95% +1%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.3)
176.2 fps ∼94%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(122.2 – 194.9, n=12)
174.5 fps ∼93% -1%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (1.3)
157.8 fps ∼84% -10%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (1.3)
127.8 fps ∼68% -27%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (1.3)
122.8 fps ∼66% -30%
Average of class Gaming
(9.13 – 194.9, n=228, last 2 years)
97 fps ∼52% -45%
Strange Brigade – 1920×1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12, dGPU, Cooling)
378 (79.8min, 269P1) fps ∼100% +4%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12, dGPU)
376 (53.4min, 284P1) fps ∼99% +3%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12)
373 (29.9min, 272P1) fps ∼99% +2%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12)
366 (29.1min, 263P1) fps ∼97% 0%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12)
365 (90.9min, 268P1) fps ∼97%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(315 – 421, n=12)
361 fps ∼96% -1%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12)
323 (61.7min, 222P1) fps ∼85% -12%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12)
213 (71.8min, 156.1P1) fps ∼56% -42%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU (1.47.22.14 D3D12)
201 (41.3min, 148.1P1) fps ∼53% -45%
Average of class Gaming
(10.9 – 421, n=231, last 2 years)
175.8 fps ∼47% -52%
Dota 2 Reborn – 1920×1080 ultra (3/3) best lookingRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
194.7 (160min) fps ∼100% +14%
Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
190.2 (160.9min) fps ∼98% +11%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
185.9 (157.5min) fps ∼95% +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU, Cooling)
184.5 (155.3min) fps ∼95% +8%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU)
182.3 (154.8min) fps ∼94% +6%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(160.7 – 192.5, n=13)
181.9 fps ∼93% +6%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
171.5 (144.2min) fps ∼88%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
158.9 (139.1min) fps ∼82% -7%
Average of class Gaming
(22 – 194.7, n=247, last 2 years)
130.3 fps ∼67% -24%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
121.4 (106.8min) fps ∼62% -29%
X-Plane 11.11 – 1920×1080 high (fps_test=3)Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
Intel Core i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
142.8 fps ∼100% +11%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
137 fps ∼96% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU)
136.8 fps ∼96% +7%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU (dGPU, Cooling)
136.6 fps ∼96% +6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
134.2 fps ∼94% +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
134.1 fps ∼94% +5%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(116.4 – 146.4, n=17)
134.2 fps ∼94% +5%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
128.3 fps ∼90%
Alienware x17 R2 P48E
Intel Core i9-12900HK, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
112.9 fps ∼79% -12%
Average of class Gaming
(12.4 – 146.4, n=250, last 2 years)
89.3 fps ∼63% -30%
Schenker XMG Neo 17 M22
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
80.3 fps ∼56% -37%
Returnal1920x1080 Epic PresetMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
146 (65min) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
146 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(68 – 146, n=4, last 2 years)
105.8 fps ∼72% -28%
2560×1440 Epic PresetMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
113 (67min) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
113 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(66 – 113, n=3, last 2 years)
90.3 fps ∼80% -20%
1920×1080 Epic Preset + Epic Ray-TracingMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
126 (63min) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
126 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(66 – 126, n=4, last 2 years)
92.3 fps ∼73% -27%
Atomic Heart1920x1080 Atomic PresetAverage NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(128.6 – 166, n=2)
147.3 fps ∼100% +15%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
128.6 (29min, 91.2P0.1, 105.8P1) fps ∼87%
Average of class Gaming
(66.8 – 166, n=3, last 2 years)
120.5 fps ∼82% -6%
2560×1440 Atomic PresetAverage NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
(93.8 – 135, n=2)
114.4 fps ∼100% +22%
Average of class Gaming
(93.8 – 135, n=2, last 2 years)
114.4 fps ∼100% +22%
Medion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
93.8 (31.5min, 68.5P0.1, 76P1) fps ∼82%
Hogwarts Legacy1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:High TMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
166.1 (7.97min, 44.8P0.1, 101.4P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
166.1 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(59.3 – 166.1, n=6, last 2 years)
109.4 fps ∼66% -34%
2560×1440 Ultra Preset AA:High TMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
125.9 (16.5min, 32.2P0.1, 83.3P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
125.9 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(42.6 – 125.9, n=5, last 2 years)
78.3 fps ∼62% -38%
1920×1080 Ultra Preset + Full Ray Tracing AA:High TMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
65.5 (24.6min, 27.1P0.1, 39.9P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
65.5 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(36.8 – 65.5, n=5, last 2 years)
47.4 fps ∼72% -28%
Company of Heroes 31920×1080 Maximum SettingsMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
215.2 (32.4P0.1, 87.8P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
215 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(131.3 – 215, n=4, last 2 years)
175.5 fps ∼82% -18%
2560×1440 Maximum SettingsMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
176.4 (58.8P0.1, 92.22P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
176.4 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(107 – 176.4, n=3, last 2 years)
145.7 fps ∼83% -17%
Sons of the Forest1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:TMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
85.7 (46.8min, 52.9P0.1, 64.8P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
85.7 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(71.8 – 85.7, n=2, last 2 years)
78.8 fps ∼92% -8%
2560×1440 Ultra Preset AA:TMedion Erazer Beast X40
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
85.2 (38min, 57.3P0.1, 64.9P1) fps ∼100%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
85.2 fps ∼100% 0%
Average of class Gaming
(last 2 years)
85.2 fps ∼100% 0%
To test out whether the laptop can run games at mostly stable frame rates over an extended period, we ran The Witcher 3 for roughly 60 minutes at Full HD and max quality settings without moving the player character. We didn’t observe any dip in frame rates.
0153045607590105120135150165180195210TooltipMedion Erazer Beast X40 i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU; dGPU, Cooling: Ø200 (186-211)
The laptop is relatively quiet in everyday use (e.g. office applications, web browsing). The fans may even stop spinning once in a while. Unsurprisingly, the X40 can get pretty loud under heavy load, producing as much as 53 dB(A) of noise during the stress test and Witcher 3 test. Despite the fairly high noise levels, the sound produced by the two fans is tolerable as a whole: a whooshing noise is accompanied by a sonorous whirring that gradually turns into light whistling with increasing fan speed.
The laptop’s fans ease off when the external water cooling unit is connected. However, the unit itself also adds to the overall noise: although the pump is relatively quiet in use, the fan inside the cooler makes more racket. All things considered, we think the overall noise is more pleasant when the water cooling unit is used.
Noise Level
Idle
25 / 29 / 35 dB(A)
Load
51 / 53 dB(A)
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
min: , med: , max: Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 24 dB(A)
dB(A)
0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs204040.545.939.537.446.22540.938.339.439.63640.33147.649.746.748.244.152.74031.232.332.631.427.434.65030.732.829.130.326.333.36335.727.928.627.825.937.98031.32822.220.818.232.710028.123.518.615.114.83112529.424.820.117.116.432.516030.825.620.119.314.832.420033.326.123.12218.335.725035.525.22018.514.436.731536.723.719.813.612.637.940037.426.619.811.610.238.850039.72721.311.411.141.963041.827.622.610.610.642.880040.626.419.210.710.842.8100040.425.918.410.910.743125042.125.7181111.944.3160039.522.815.411.811.342.320003721.11412.611.439.4250037.920.913.512.412.640.4315039.719.113.412.812.942.2400039.518.313.913.313.242.1500036.716.113.813.613.239.8630033.114.413.713.313.236.4800030.714.51413.713.234.51000027.313.913.713.313.131.51250023.313.513.112.612.626.81600017.913.312.912.611.921.7SPL50.734.828.825.124.553.1N7.72.11.10.60.69.1median 36.7median 23.5median 18median 12.8median 12.6median 38.8Delta4.53.93.11.61.44.9hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseMedion Erazer Beast X40Medion Erazer Beast X40
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HXMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HXRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HXSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HXAlienware x17 R2 P48E
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, i9-12900HKAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13980HXNoise-3%
13%
-3%
15%
4%
off / environment *24
24.6
-3%
23
4%
26
-8%
22.7
5%
23.9
-0%
Idle Minimum *25
29.2
-17%
23
8%
26
-4%
23.1
8%
23.9
4%
Idle Average *29
29.2
-1%
23
21%
29
-0%
23.1
20%
32.6
-12%
Idle Maximum *35
29.2
17%
23.6
33%
40
-14%
23.1
34%
32.6
7%
Load Average *51
50.7
1%
39
24%
47
8%
31.9
37%
35.9
30%
Witcher 3 ultra *51
53.3
-5%
51.6
-1%
52
-2%
52.5
-3%
Load Maximum *53
61
-15%
51.3
3%
54
-2%
52.5
1%
55.8
-5%
* … smaller is better
Chassis temperatures stay within an acceptable range in everyday use cases, such as running office software and Internet browsers. The laptop gets noticeably warm but not overly hot under load, as we noted during the stress test and Witcher 3 test. CPU temperatures also gave us no cause for concern.
46 °C
115 F48 °C
118 F44 °C
111 F 45 °C
113 F45 °C
113 F40 °C
104 F 33 °C
91 F28 °C
82 F29 °C
84 F
Maximum: 48 °C=118 F
Average: 39.8 °C=104 F
50 °C
122 F52 °C
126 F44 °C
111 F38 °C
100 F40 °C
104 F36 °C
97 F32 °C
90 F34 °C
93 F33 °C
91 F
Maximum: 52 °C=126 F
Average: 39.9 °C=104 F Power Supply (max.) 47 °C=117 F | Room Temperature 20 °C=68 F | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 39.8 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 33.8 °C / 93 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 48 °C / 118 F, compared to the average of 40.4 °C / 105 F, ranging from 21.2 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 52 °C / 126 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 28.2 °C / 83 F, compared to the device average of 33.8 °C / 93 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 40.7 °C / 105 F, compared to the device average of 33.8 °C / 93 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34 °C / 93.2 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 29 °C / 84.2 F (-5 °C / -9 F).
For the stress test, we let Prime95 and FurMark run for a prolonged period. It represents an extreme scenario designed to evaluate how stable the system is under full load. The CPU started off at high clock speeds (P-cores: 4 GHz, E-cores: 3.3 GHz) while the GPU fluctuated between 1 and 1.5 GHz. After roughly five minutes, the CPU’s P-cores and E-cores gradually dropped to 2 GHz and 1.8 GHz respectively, but the GPU clock climbed to about 2.3 to 2.4 GHz
The stereo speakers sound decent but produce hardly any bass. We recommend using a pair of headphones or external speakers for a better audio experience.
dB(A)
0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.441.5253638.23144.148.54027.431.35026.3316325.927.68018.23110014.839.212516.445.716014.848.220018.352.325014.46031512.660.740010.266.850011.176.563010.680.480010.877.9100010.778.1125011.973.7160011.376.3200011.474.9250012.674.4315012.971.2400013.270500013.278.7630013.277.1800013.2701000013.168.41250012.656.41600011.957.2SPL24.587.5N0.675.2median 12.6median 70Delta1.49.525.938.126.539.926.640.432.340.731.737.830.440.232.845.222.847.321.751.820.558.820.465.918.770.617.173.613.675.513.279.812.48211.28211.181.310.479.710.675.610.976.711.576.511.476.11273.812.17512.479.912.677.312.472.312.569.111.864.324.690.10.691.8median 12.4median 75.52.75.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseMedion Erazer Beast X40MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VIFrequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Medion Erazer Beast X40 audio analysis(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88 dB)
Bass 100 – 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass – on average 19% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 – 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids – on average 6.3% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 – 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs – only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 – 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 45% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 46% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 47%
Compared to all devices tested
» 26% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI audio analysis(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (90.1 dB)
Bass 100 – 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass – on average 14.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 – 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids – only 3.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 – 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs – only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 – 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 47%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 20%, worst was 65%
The X40’s power consumption averaged 280 watts in the Witcher 3 test and briefly peaked at 363 watts in the stress test. Whilst power usage dropped slightly over the course of the Witcher 3 test, it fluctuated throughout the stress test. At idle, the laptop draws a fairly normal amount of power for the hardware inside. The included charger is rated at 330 watts and thus can supply enough power to the laptop.
Medion Erazer Beast X40
i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPUMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPURazer Blade 16 Early 2023
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPUSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
R9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPUAlienware x17 R2 P48E
i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPUAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPUAverage NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
Average of class Gaming
Power Consumption-5%
-14%
31%
-42%
-30%
-13%
5%
Idle Minimum *11
14
-27%
15.2
-38%
7
36%
24.1
-119%
17.3
-57%
15.8 ?(8 – 27.5, n=9)
-44%
14.2 ?(3 – 64, n=178, last 2 years)
-29%
Idle Average *18
21.6
-20%
22.8
-27%
11
39%
28.5
-58%
27
-50%
23.2 ?(17 – 34.4, n=9)
-29%
19.2 ?(6.5 – 68.2, n=178, last 2 years)
-7%
Idle Maximum *30
24.8
17%
49.8
-66%
17
43%
60
-100%
46
-53%
31.8 ?(24.8 – 46, n=9)
-6%
26.7 ?(8.9 – 76, n=177, last 2 years)
11%
Load Average *136
122.5
10%
121.2
11%
92
32%
128.7
5%
133
2%
128.5 ?(107 – 147.8, n=9)
6%
113.8 ?(48.4 – 202, n=178, last 2 years)
16%
Witcher 3 ultra *280
265
5%
242
14%
221
21%
254
9%
Load Maximum *363
418
-15%
273.7
25%
306
16%
323
11%
329
9%
341 ?(267 – 418, n=9)
6%
237 ?(103.1 – 418, n=177, last 2 years)
35%
* … smaller is better
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300Tooltip
020406080100120140160180200220240260280300Tooltip The 17-inch laptop lasted 6h 22m and 6h 56m respectively in the Wi-Fi test (accessing websites automatically using a script) and video test (looping the short film Big Buck Bunny, encoded in H.264, at Full HD). For both tests, all power-saving features were disabled on the laptop, and screen brightness was set to about 150 cd/m². The wireless adapter was also disabled when we were carrying out the video test.
On the whole, the Erazer delivers great battery life for such a high-performance laptop. It can outlast most of the competitors, even those with identical battery capacity.
The battery has a capacity of 99.8 Wh.Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
9h 25min
WiFi Websurfing (Edge 110)
6h 22min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
6h 56min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 54min
Medion Erazer Beast X40
i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, 99.8 WhMSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, 99.9 WhRazer Blade 16 Early 2023
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, 95.2 WhSchenker XMG Neo 17 M22
R9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, 99 WhAlienware x17 R2 P48E
i9-12900HK, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, 87 WhAsus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY-N6005W
i9-13980HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, 90 WhAverage of class Gaming
Battery Runtime-18%
-13%
15%
-63%
-13%
-10%
Reader / Idle565
533
-6%
722
28%
234
-59%
572 ?(57 – 1212, n=95, last 2 years)
1%
H.264416
358
-14%
398
-4%
419
1%
370 ?(56 – 643, n=85, last 2 years)
-11%
WiFi v1.3382
319
-16%
365
-4%
537
41%
117
-69%
428
12%
357 ?(57 – 724, n=175, last 2 years)
-7%
Load114
86
-25%
81
-29%
109
-4%
46
-60%
56
-51%
88.7 ?(36 – 228, n=151, last 2 years)
-22%
Witcher 3 ultra53
76.3 ?(45 – 131, n=22, last 2 years)
Pros+ 16:10 QHD display
+ good colour reproduction
+ G-Sync
+ Advanced Optimus
+ slim bezel
+ robust metal chassis
+ high system performance
+ 2 PCIe 4.0 SSDs each 1 TB
+ Thunderbolt 4
+ mechanical keyboard
+ great battery life
+ water cooling option available
Cons- display could use more contrast
– loud under load
– no Power Delivery
The Erazer Beast X40 was kindly provided by Medion.The Medion Erazer Beast X40 is a laptop designed for highly demanding usage scenarios, such as video editing, rendering and gaming. The computing muscle required for these applications is provided by one of the most powerful CPU-GPU combinations right now: a Core i9-13900HX paired with a GeForce RTX 4090.
The processor and graphics card are capable of running consistently at high clock speeds, and the X40 produces a fairly normal amount of heat and noise for this class of device.
All in all, the Erazer Beast X40 is a compelling laptop for gaming and other demanding applications.
The matt 17-inch 16:10 display (QHD, IPS, 240Hz, G-Sync, sRGB) looks great for the most part. The only downside is that its contrast is slightly too low. The superb mechanical keyboard (with RGB lighting) makes the laptop look even more attractive. Those who have never used a mechanical keyboard before are in for a new typing experience. The Thunderbolt 4 port on the laptop opens up expansion options (e.g. external GPU, docking solution) but doesn’t support Power Delivery.
One possible alternative to the Erazer Beast X40 is the Asus ROG Strix Scar 18 2023 G834JY. The Asus ROG stands out with its 18-inch 16:10 QHD+ panel, more RAM (64 GB) and RAID support. At about €4,800 (US$5,177), it is in the same price bracket as the Beast. If money is no object, you can take a look at the MSI Titan GT77 HX 13V as another alternative. It offers slightly more CPU performance, three SSD slots, RAID support and four RAM sockets. The exceptionally bright mini-LED display with excellent contrast is a highlight on the device. But the overall package will set you back around €6,600 (US$7,120).
Verdict on water cooling
The optional water cooling unit fundamentally does what it is supposed to: improving performance (Medion promises up to 10% increase) and reducing heat and noise. In actual use, however, the performance gain is rather modest, and the laptop is confined to a stationary spot. The only advantages left are lower temperatures and noise levels. It is up to every X40 owner to decide whether these benefits are worth the extra €250 (US$270).
In Germany, the review configuration of the Medion Erazer Beast X40 is available from Saturn.de and has a price tag of €4,499 (US$4,856).
Medion Erazer Beast X40
–
03/20/2023 v7
Sascha Mölck
Connectivity
69 / 80 → 86%
Application Performance
95%
Gaming – Weighted Average
More Articles for this DeviceMedion Erazer Beast X40 (Erazer Series)
Related Articles
TransparencyThe present review sample was made available to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or a shop for the purposes of review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review.
Pricecompare
Editor of the original article: Sascha Mölck – Senior Tech Writer – 934 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2012
What started as a side job during my computer science studies later became my main job: For more than 20 years now I have been working as an editor and author in the IT sector. While working in the print sector I also contributed to the creation of various loose-leaf publications and published original written pieces. I have been working for Notebookcheck since 2012.
Translator: Zhiwei Zhuang – Translator – 78 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2022
After graduating with a bachelor’s degree in environmental engineering, I moved from Singapore to
Cologne in 2014 and began pursuing a career as a freelance translator. Much of my translation work
focuses on science, engineering and technology. My fascination with computers and mobile
electronics began when I was young. And I have fond memories reading countless tech and gaming
magazines. Working with Notebookcheck gives me the opportunity to incorporate my personal
interests into my professional work.
Sascha Mölck, 2023-03-24 (Update: 2023-03-24)
