Quote from: S.Yu on February 17, 2021, 19:24:41
Very interesting, I specifically compared this with the 15" Duo and the Duo performs better in almost all synthetic benchmarks but this is slightly faster in most games, and strangely this has better battery life with a smaller battery.

Yes, that bugged me quite a bit as well.
The Blade 17 seems to draw 223W at peak load (Furmark + p95) vs. only 197W for the Zeph Duo.
No idea why, but Asus def., dropped the ball there.

Hello Allen, can i ask you why the 4K display 120Hz got just 81%?
In the summary there is no negative point about this display.
Thank you

Quote from: dude what on February 16, 2021, 13:00:56
Razer says it's for gamers, that's why you're stuck with the i7 no matter what. Then why the 4k screen option? For content creators? They certainly don't want that cpu when the competition gives them a an i9 or a ryzen 9 for the same price.
Why 100W TDP for the gpu, in a 17 inches chassis? The competition can manage 115W TDP in a 15 inches chassis and get up to 130W with Db2.
I really struggle to see how this gets 88% given how disappointing it is

This device outperforms the zephyrus duo in all comparable games tested whilst running cooler and with a lower wattage implementation of the 3080 card. The performance gap in some instances is pretty large too. I'd say "for gamers" is about right. The 4k display is a good one too.

Very interesting, I specifically compared this with the 15" Duo and the Duo performs better in almost all synthetic benchmarks but this is slightly faster in most games, and strangely this has better battery life with a smaller battery.

Razer says it's for gamers, that's why you're stuck with the i7 no matter what. Then why the 4k screen option? For content creators? They certainly don't want that cpu when the competition gives them a an i9 or a ryzen 9 for the same price.
Why 100W TDP for the gpu, in a 17 inches chassis? The competition can manage 115W TDP in a 15 inches chassis and get up to 130W with Db2.
I really struggle to see how this gets 88% given how disappointing it is

Quote from: Rich4143 on February 15, 2021, 17:46:20
Not to sound pessimistic, but $3600 and it doesn't seem like you get a top of the line IPS panel. 400 nits to tackle glare conditions with that glossy screen and colors getting redder at an angle. The last laptop display I saw that because redder at angles, was a Lenovo...back in 2014. Seems Hz took priority over screen quality tbh.

There is not much choice among 4K and 120 Hz, there's probably just one supplier (AU Optronics) whose display everyone offering this option is using. So not really Razer's fault here.

Also, most of you think when a laptop is specified to 100W TDP, it is 'limited' to 100W. Try tinkering in MSI Afterburner, it's easy to get an extra 10-15W out of most RB15s without issues in the long run (with say,  a +100 or +150 MHz overclock on core and +500 or +600 MHz core on memory, the samsung modules take to it quite well). So an almost 12000 graphics score on Time Spy seems pretty possible.

As for the target audience, it's a specific niche that wants something like a Macbook Pro 17 of old (minimalistic, high build quality, decent performance) vs something like a Clevo, Alienware 51M or GT76 Titan (big, beastly, all out performance, but loud, obnoxious and with little battery life).

Meh
Feels like a 17 inches with all the potential downsides of a 15 inches, and for top dollar

How I am envious of so many USB 3 Gen 2 ports! Is there any reason other than plain laziness or cost cutting for why we still have 5 Gbps ports on majority of laptops?

I get why the delta stated between the dB(A) values is hard percentages, for example 50dbA vs 54dBA being 7% better. But the human perception difference between 50 and 54dbA is far greater than 7%.

To be clear both of those are grating and annoying though. Which is probably why I will never own another powerful gaming laptop until there's some sea change physics-defying breakthrough in heat management. My eGPU setup games just fine and is suuuuuper quiet. Of course I get that if you actually do need all that power in a super portable form you have zero options. I happen to only game when stationary and the portable aspect doesn't need gaming power.

Quote from: Rich4143 on February 15, 2021, 17:46:20
Not to sound pessimistic, but $3600 and it doesn't seem like you get a top of the line IPS panel. 400 nits to tackle glare conditions with that glossy screen and colors getting redder at an angle. The last laptop display I saw that because redder at angles, was a Lenovo...back in 2014. Seems Hz took priority over screen quality tbh.

For a gaming focused machine that kind of makes sense, but they are trying to straddle the line between gaming and productivity with this model. I wonder if the QHD panel fares any better, though I would expect the QHD panel to be the productivity focused one.

Not to sound pessimistic, but $3600 and it doesn't seem like you get a top of the line IPS panel. 400 nits to tackle glare conditions with that glossy screen and colors getting redder at an angle. The last laptop display I saw that because redder at angles, was a Lenovo...back in 2014. Seems Hz took priority over screen quality tbh.