MSI Titan 18 HX A14VIG laptop review: Year of the dragon

[Redaktion]

MSI's biggest and fastest gaming laptop is back this year with an even larger screen size than before. The redesign aligns with Intel's latest Raptor Lake-HX refresh and is the first 18-inch MSI laptop ever since the old GT80 series from several years ago.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/MSI-Titan-18-HX-A14VIG-laptop-review-Year-of-the-dragon.794953.0.html

[NikoB]

Rear: AC adapter, HDMI 2.1 (8K@60 Hz, 4K@120 Hz), 2.5
Gbps RJ-45
This is an illiterate lie from the author - HDMI 2.1 does NOT support monitors in lossless mode, only with guaranteed loss of information in DSC lossy compression mode. Indication in the text of reviews of support for 8k for monitors without necessarily specifying that only in DSC data loss mode is a deliberate deception of readers. Editors need to force the author to change the meaning of what they wrote if they are pursuing good goals of increasing the technical literacy of readers, and not pursuing selfish goals for the sake of publishing marketing materials from manufacturers.

Only Display Port 2.0+ in UHBR20 mode supports 8K monitors at 60Hz. But Intel, like NVidia, deceived everyone again and did not support DP2.0/UHBR20 even in cards and SoC 2023-2024. Despite the fact that the DP2.0 standard was published back in 2019!

Again, it was this author who did not check the native contrast, thereby destroying any point in testing the screen.

Again, it was this author who did not check the native contrast, thereby destroying any point in testing the screen.

While the resolution and aspect ratio are correct, the screen isn't outstanding given the unknown native contrast and lack of Adobe RGB coverage, which is pretty ridiculous considering the price.

The keyboard traditionally kills any possibility of fast typing and work, as on classic, work, desktop keyboards with a normal, and not damaged, as here, numeric keypad.

Again, I would like to emphasize the removal of the 4th M.2 from version 2024, as well as 2023, compared to version 2022 - which deprives owners of the opportunity to create a fault-tolerant RAID10 on 4x M.2 SSD. This is sad considering the price of the laptop.

The processor was never able to overtake last year's 7945HX. But there is nothing surprising here - after all, under the 14th series, Intel still hides outdated Raptor cores, and not the new Meteor Lake made using the "7nm" technical process for the first time for Intel.

Also extremely shocking is the monstrously slow RAM, despite the installation of DDR5 5600 modules for which Intel promises a throughput of 89GB/s in the datasheet for the 14900HX. As we can see from the AIDA64 tests, the real efficiency of the memory controller is simply shameful - it does not even reach 62% of the promised 89GB/s. Shame on the heads of the Intel developers and the MSI engineering team.

Taking into account the fact that there are simply no options on the market with 18" 16:10 4K as obvious competitors, it will still find its admirers with deep wallets and sailors, shift workers who simply have nothing else to do on long business trips in the middle of nowhere.. .

Thanks for your attention.

[Bennyg1]

I'm not seeing the "270W" from the CES advertising...
Looks like it was CPU thermal throttling at 76W+169W on the Witcher stress test in NoiseBoost max fan mode

Also, why leave 7945HX off the CPU comparison graphs like the cinebench stability test? I know it's far less available which is not the author's fault, but awareness needs to be raised among consumers that there is a CPU alternative that exists and doesn't need 176W-238W blasted through it to get productivity work done, and so informed consumers can demand more of this superior option from OEMs. We are overdue for alternatives to these outdated AlderLake++ "14th gen" CPUs.

[Bob Morrison]

Rear: AC adapter, HDMI 2.1 (8K@60 Hz, 4K@120 Hz), 2.5
Gbps RJ-45
This is an illiterate lie from the author - HDMI 2.1 does NOT support monitors in lossless mode, only with guaranteed loss of information in DSC lossy compression mode. Indication in the text of reviews of support for 8k for monitors without necessarily specifying that only in DSC data loss mode...

Your reply is wrong on so many levels and irrelevant on others. Do you even know what Display Stream Compression is? Regarding the colour space range, it's a gaming laptop. Everything comes with a trade-off; a larger space means more gradient banding as the bits of color are spaced further apart colorimetrically, which can result in a posterization effect. In any case, a decent colour grader is often a better choice. Get a good callibrator which is often used by professionals on any screen.

Don't you just hate uninformed fan boys? Probably a little envious that their day job takes them away from being a real pro!

[NikoB]

Man, you are talking outright nonsense. DSC - lossy compression. This is not a lossless mode for displaying monitor images. This is a deception of buyers.

HDMI 2.1 DOES NOT support 8k monitors in lossless mode.

Only ports supporting Display Port 2.0 in UHBR20 mode support native 8k resolution at 60Hz 4:4:4 with 24-36 bit color depth, without loss of information, when transmitted to the screen panel controller.

Therefore, I "congratulate" all future and current owners of modern junk - even 5 years later, after the advent of the DP2.0 standard, there is not a single laptop or video card in the consumer segment that supports 8k resolution in lossless mode.

That's why there are no 8k monitors on sale (and all 8k TVs do not support lossless mode in 4:4:4 at 60Hz, i.e. they cannot serve as a monitor) - what can they actually be connected to? Monitor manufacturers are clearly smarter than Bob Morrison.

[NikoB]

I've been waiting for 8k monitors for 10 years already (the most necessary technology for people on 27-32" monitors - 300ppi+ - for ideal text and photo, as on smartphones), as soon as video cards became capable of serving them at least in 2D. And I've been really waiting since 2019, when the DP2.0 standard was released. But then everything has completely died down and now almost 5 years have passed, and hardware with DP2.0 ports with UHBR20 mode is still not on sale, except for professional AMD W7 series cards - www.anandtech.com/show/18812/amd-announces-radeon-pro-w7900-w7800-rdna-3-workstation-cards.

[NikoB]

Show me at least one 8k 27-32" monitor on sale with DP2.0+ input ports with UHBR20 or TB5 port. They simply don't exist. How so? After all, IPS 8k panels could already be mass produced 10 years ago.

This is a disgrace to the entire IT industry.

And NVidia is primarily to blame for this.

[lmao]

who is even going to use 8k right now or next year or the year after, for what.
most used in 2023 was 1080p (60%), second 1440p (17%), 4k is like 3% users.
you trying to find problems when theres none.

[NikoB]

The majority of the population is simply stupid, their opinion does not matter in advanced things. Why should I care about their opinion given their complete technical illiteracy and blindness? Primitive thinking and outlook?

What amazes me most of all is the last 9-10 years - when almost all people had smartphone screens with 250ppi+ at home. In theory, if a person is not a complete idiot, then all sorts of questions should have disappeared from him - why is there 250ppi+ on a monitor or laptop screen.

I remember the times literally 5 years ago, when the same idiots shouted on the forums - why do I need 2.5k on a laptop, fhd is enough for me. And now the same idiots (literally on the same forums), having bought a model with a 2.5 screen, are delighted with how much clearer the text and graphics are there than on the wretched fhd. But at the same time, these same idiots, without any doubt, immediately categorically claim that 4K is not necessary, although this further improves the quality of text and graphics, bringing it on laptop screens to the level of quality on smartphone screens in terms of picture clarity. Although they have smartphone screens right in front of their eyes, the answer is why only 4k+ screens are needed on laptops.

And 8k+ will do the same thing as 4k+ on laptop screens - it will give almost standard clarity on 27-32" diagonals. Almost standard. Everything will be completely standard, in terms of image clarity for the eyes, at a resolution of 12-16k on 32".

But as it turns out, most people are such blind idiots that even looking at the answer with their own eyes, they don't see it point blank.

Well, what can I do about it? Only look with despondency at the increasing dullness of the population...

[NikoB]

Corrected the stupid "AI" of the Google translator.
---
The majority of the population is simply stupid, their opinion does not matter in advanced things. Why should I care about their opinion given their complete technical illiteracy and blindness? Primitive thinking and outlook?

What amazes me most of all is the last 9-10 years - when almost all people had smartphone screens with 250ppi+ at home. In theory, if a person is not a complete idiot, then all sorts of questions should have disappeared from him - why is there 250ppi+ on a monitor or laptop screen.

I remember the times literally 5 years ago, when the same idiots shouted on the forums - why do I need 2.5k on a laptop, fhd is enough for me. And now the same idiots (literally on the same forums), having bought a model with a 2.5k screen, are delighted with how much clearer the text and graphics are there than on the wretched outdated fhd, although they had previously lamentably stated that "they don't need anything else." But at the same time, these same idiots, without any doubt, immediately categorically claim that they no longer need 4K on a laptop, although this further improves the quality of text and graphics, bringing it on laptop screens to the level of quality on smartphone screens, in terms of clarity Pictures. Although the screens of their smartphones with ppi above 300 are RIGHT in front of their eyes - the answer is why only 4k+ screens are needed on laptops.

And 8k+ will do the same thing as 4k+ on laptop screens - it will give almost perfect clarity on 27-32" diagonals. Almost perfect. Everything will be completely ideal, in terms of image clarity for the eyes, at a resolution of 12-16k on 32".

But as it turns out, most people are such blind idiots that even looking at the answer with their own eyes, they don't see it point blank.

Well, what can I do about it? Only look with despondency at the increasing dullness of the population...

Progress is promoted by scientists, engineers and civil activists - the crowd follows them, their opinion is not decisive here.

[NikoB]

Well, approximately 99.9% do not see cloudy fonts point-blank in modern browsers on their fhd-2.5k screens (for all screens with ppi < 220-230), although professionals see them right away. And this is a proven fact. Due to incorrect black and white antialiasing on x86 PCs/laptops. And this problem is automatically practically solved when ppi is above 250-300. Even if the anti-aliasing remains cloudy, the shadows simply become invisible, blurring the clarity of characters due to the fault of the developers of modern browsers.

And I can easily demonstrate this with screenshots of any page at 400% font magnification in Chrome/Edge and Firefox with default settings.

[lmao]

But as it turns out, most people are such blind idiots that even looking at the answer with their own eyes, they don't see it point blank.

or they are smart to not waste money on 8k anything, because usual two-three 8k display setup will just smash any gpu displaying desktops and will cost unproportionally

[NikoB]

Practicality = means mental poverty, if you do not strive for the best and be content with what is given or imposed on purpose, when there is a 100% opportunity to do better.

Why are people not satisfied with <200ppi on smartphones? After all, it's practical and consumes less!

[Neenyah]

Practicality = means mental poverty, if you do not strive for the best and be content with what is given or imposed on purpose, when there is a 100% opportunity to do better.

Where is your 8K screen?

[lmao]

Why are people not satisfied with <200ppi on smartphones

because you keep them close to your face and they do not cost $5K per screen