Razer Blade 2017 (GTX 1060, 7700HQ, Full-HD) Laptop Review

[Redaktion]

I Am What I Am. The Razer Blade combines great performance with good mobility and a healthy dose of design. The result is an appealing notebook which weighs in at less than 2 kg and measures less than 20 mm thick. The price is not for the faint of the heart, however.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Razer-Blade-2017-GTX-1060-7700HQ-Full-HD-Laptop-Review.212606.0.html

[AC]

This would be the most perfect laptop available today if it also had USB PD...

[arok]

While i love NotebookCheck i find a score of 89 to be a bit high given the facts of the review. Sure, the build quality of the Razer is peerless but its high emissions (51db!), lack of expandability(worst in class), and high price seem to make the score overly generous to me.

[GD]

Some values in this article look very suspicious. For example:
1) Razer Blade, For Honor, ultra settings - 71 fps;
2) Gigabyte Aero 14, the same game and settings - 42 fps.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Gigabyte-Aero-14-7700HQ-GTX-1060-Laptop-Review.211666.0.html
Why is so big difference when the hardware is the same? As I understand all the tests were performed in Full HD resolution.

[Imglidinhere]

This is crap. This is absolutely a paid review here. There is NO way it isn't. Razer is absolutely garbage for games and this model in particular is known to overheat even after aftermarket repaste jobs are done by licensed professionals. They even put out a BIOS that limits your 1060 by power consumption, and effectively reduces your normally top-notch GPU down to the level of a 1050 Ti.

There are no thermal runs done, except external heat cams, with this and this score is reflects exactly that. You had no problem showing all the faults of every Clevo in every review, but this machine gets a super high rating because why? In no way should Razer ever be recommended. For $2250 USD, I better get a flawlessly operating design that doesn't overheat, when I can drop $500 and grab the same specs on an equivalent, nearly-same-thinness, Clevo model from any of the resellers here.

[AP]

"lack of expandability(worst in class)"

Well, the laptop competes in the class of ultrabooks lasting 9 hrs with minimal to no expandability.

"and high price"

Agree but this does not seem to be included in the rating since, typically, people want to buy the best laptop for the fixed price.

"As I understand all the tests were performed in Full HD resolution."

Nope, it is WQHD in Aero. Why would it be FHD on Ultra?

"This is crap."

Haters gonna hate.

"repaste jobs are done by licensed professionals"

Where may I have a license for that?

"They even put out a BIOS that limits your 1060 by power consumption"

There is a reason for that: Blade is thin and cannot handle the heat. Moreover, there was no 1050 Ti at that point.

"You had no problem showing all the faults of every Clevo"

Even you have problems with pointing out faults because, basically, overheat is your only concern. However, the reviewed Blade (unlike the Skylake model with 84% rating) had no overheat at all:

"The CPU temperature stabilized around 70 °C, die GPU just under 80 °C"

[sidney]

We should know whether Razer fixed their mosfet issues on the new RB,
see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BITrae8g9gM
Having to send your laptop back to Razer over a part not rated for the heat experienced within for $700 a pop only to have it replaced by the same vulnerable part is not acceptable. All internal parts should be rated for temp tolerance well above the heat they experience. It may not just be the Mosfet parts at risk, the discovery of the Mosfet noted other potential components at risk as well (some sitting directly under the heat sink were demonstrating odd failures).

[sidney]

For the record, I would have liked to have seen an oled display option to compete with Alienware.

[Mr.Bean]

No RJ45 port for a laptop gamer? That's a dealbreaker for sure!

[paulc]

"lack of expandability(worst in class)"

Well, the laptop competes in the class of ultrabooks lasting 9 hrs with minimal to no expandability.

"and high price"

Agree but this does not seem to be included in the rating since, typically, people want to buy the best laptop for the fixed price.

"As I understand all the tests were performed in Full HD resolution."

Nope, it is WQHD in Aero. Why would it be FHD on Ultra?

"This is crap."

Haters gonna hate.

"repaste jobs are done by licensed professionals"

Where may I have a license for that?

"They even put out a BIOS that limits your 1060 by power consumption"

There is a reason for that: Blade is thin and cannot handle the heat. Moreover, there was no 1050 Ti at that point.

"You had no problem showing all the faults of every Clevo"

Even you have problems with pointing out faults because, basically, overheat is your only concern. However, the reviewed Blade (unlike the Skylake model with 84% rating) had no overheat at all:

"The CPU temperature stabilized around 70 °C, die GPU just under 80 °C"

"Well, the laptop competes in the class of ultrabooks lasting 9 hrs with minimal to no expandability."

Be careful when you use the term "ultrabook", it has a formal definition by Intel, and I can't see that how is a laptop with GTX1060 and quad core i7 CPU "ultrabook" in any way. Comparable devices like XPS15, Aero14 and Macbook Pro 15 do have certain expandability, excluding the MBP.

"There is a reason for that: Blade is thin and cannot handle the heat."

Reasons behind the problem is not for consumers to care about. The question that should be asked is, is this important for the people who buy the device? I don't know, personally I don't care, as I don't do that much of gaming, but Razer talks about gaming all the time in their product page, so it seems pretty justified to care about this.

"However, the reviewed Blade (unlike the Skylake model with 84% rating) had no overheat at all"

Maybe he(or she) means overheat under full stress, not in that game. I do notice that there is a screenshot missing for the frequencies & thermals under full stress, they include it for every other gaming notebook review, even some non-gaming ones. Further information will be appreciated.


From my point of view, this review does seem, to say the very least, a little bit biased. Maybe that's because the attractive design always makes a good first impression, which explains why Apple desperately struggles to make their product 1mm slimmer...

[IB]

So the OpenGL score for Cinebench R15 is 53.4 fps, which is a lower score than a 960m...

Nice job Razer...next generation prices with last generation performance!

[AP]

Be careful when you use the term "ultrabook", it has a formal definition by Intel, and I can't see that how is a laptop with GTX1060 and quad core i7 CPU "ultrabook" in any way. Comparable devices like XPS15, Aero14 and Macbook Pro 15 do have certain expandability, excluding the MBP.

I did not say that it is an ultrabook; I said that it successfully competes with them in terms of size and battery life. You mentioned best of the best and that already says something: while there is no DIMM slot in the Blade (XPS and Aero do have it), there is a full-featured thunderbolt 3 functionality. So it is more like a trade-off than "not worth buying it". At least, specs-wise.

Reasons behind the problem is not for consumers to care about. The question that should be asked is, is this important for the people who buy the device? I don't know, personally I don't care, as I don't do that much of gaming, but Razer talks about gaming all the time in their product page, so it seems pretty justified to care about this.

Care about what exactly? The review basically shows that it is absolutely fine with games. The original comment was a complaint about scores in benchmarks. Well, some customers do care about it but it is not a deal breaker if you are choosing between FHD models.

Maybe he(or she) means overheat under full stress, not in that game. I do notice that there is a screenshot missing for the frequencies & thermals under full stress, they include it for every other gaming notebook review, even some non-gaming ones. Further information will be appreciated.

I would rather look at frequences under full load. Because the overheating problems with previous models were very obvious under moderate gaming load as well. Since it is not the case here I assume Razer solveded it and keeps temperatures below 80C.

From my point of view, this review does seem, to say the very least, a little bit biased. Maybe that's because the attractive design always makes a good first impression, which explains why Apple desperately struggles to make their product 1mm slimmer...

I cannot agree with that because the gain of 5% in rating (compared to the previous model) is absolutely justified: this unit works 9 hours unplugged and does not suffer from high temperatures. Compared to Aero, there is a plenty of improvements starting from thunderbolt 3 and ending with dedicated touchpad buttons and dual-channel memory. Compared to Macbook, well, better performance and a full-sized HDMI port.

[paulc]

I did not say that it is an ultrabook; I said that it successfully competes with them in terms of size and battery life. You mentioned best of the best and that already says something: while there is no DIMM slot in the Blade (XPS and Aero do have it), there is a full-featured thunderbolt 3 functionality. So it is more like a trade-off than "not worth buying it". At least, specs-wise.

If I just want an ultrabook-specced device, there are choices like the Surface Pro 4, less than 0.8kg & 9mm; most of the top ultrabooks on notebookcheck are less than 1.5kg, with the best one 1.2kg & 12.3mm. So, no, I really don't think they are comparable.
DIMM slots & TB3 ports seem irrelevant, so I don't get why that's a trade-off, certain notebooks do have both, like the Alienware 13. If there's any trade-off, they may sacrifice them for a slimmer chassis.

Care about what exactly? The review basically shows that it is absolutely fine with games. The original comment was a complaint about scores in benchmarks. Well, some customers do care about it but it is not a deal breaker if you are choosing between FHD models.

I really don't know much about gaming, but 37 fps doesn't sound like "absolutely fine", as far as I know, that's more like something about 60 fps. Again, I've got nothing against this, but someone may want to get as much performance as he could, after paying all that money.

I would rather look at frequences under full load. Because the overheating problems with previous models were very obvious under moderate gaming load as well. Since it is not the case here I assume Razer solveded it and keeps temperatures below 80C.

I'm not assuming anything; it's a simple problem, just run the test. Hope that some editor reading this would fill the blank.

I cannot agree with that because the gain of 5% in rating (compared to the previous model) is absolutely justified: this unit works 9 hours unplugged and does not suffer from high temperatures. Compared to Aero, there is a plenty of improvements starting from thunderbolt 3 and ending with dedicated touchpad buttons and dual-channel memory. Compared to Macbook, well, better performance and a full-sized HDMI port.

5% is a huge difference for these top-end devices. Battery is really not that improved, given that the previous model already managed ~7 hrs; as for comparison with the Aero 14, I can also list a bunch of things that Aero is better: WQHD display, storage performance, slightly better CPU&GPU performance, screen color gamut, etc. But are these things really worth that much of rating difference? More compact chassis, surely rather important; TB3 support, maybe, I don't know how many people actually use eGPU, multiple 4k monitors or high-speed drive arrays, the USB 3.1 port on Aero is already more than sufficient for myself. Apart from those, I really can't see anything of importance. And it just feels not enough, especially when considering the price tag.

[AP]

If I just want an ultrabook-specced device, there are choices like the Surface Pro ... I really don't think they are comparable.

You are obviously more biased than the reviewer so following is my very last reply to you. You mentioned a lot of laptops already so please go, read, compare, etc those reviews.

DIMM slots & TB3 ports seem irrelevant

I will just mention that the original complaint was about expandability. It was important for that guy and, apparently, not important for you. This is the second reason why both of you cannot be objective.

Again, I've got nothing against this, but someone may want to get as much performance as he could, after paying all that money.

Once more: the ratings do not include expensiveness of the devices directly to the best of my knowledge. Thus, this is not related to how biased the review is.

5% is a huge difference for these top-end devices.

Agree.

Battery is really not that improved, given that the previous model already managed ~7 hrs;

"that improved" is subjective. "+20% off-plug time" is objective. "+5% rating" is objective. You, basically, say that the review is biased because of your feelings. This is not an argument, of course.

WQHD display

I will reply with your own words: "I've got nothing against this". To be more precise, me and a lot of others prefer FHD on small screens because it is cheaper. Whether it is reflected in the score I do not know.

storage performance

Agree but FHD Blade 2016 is miles ahead of Aero in this test yet both receive similar scores. Does this mean that the reviewer is biased towards Aero? I would suspect so.

slightly better CPU&GPU performance

GPU - yes but otherwise you give "alternative facts" here: Blade has +7% in PCMark. By the way, this is regardless of a slower storage in synthetic tests.

But are these things really worth that much of rating difference? More compact chassis, surely rather important; TB3 support, maybe, I don't know how many people actually use eGPU, multiple 4k monitors or high-speed drive arrays, the USB 3.1 port on Aero is already more than sufficient for myself. Apart from those, I really can't see anything of importance. And it just feels not enough, especially when considering the price tag.

So you say review is biased because "you do not know how many people actually use" Thunderbolt? I do not know any single reason to buy WQHD laptops. I do not need an ethernet adapter shipped with Aero at all. I do not need an SD card reader. I do not need this Blade either. Does this mean that the review is biased? No.

[dthrp]

Let's break it down:

If you want the best specs and performance is of utmost importance, go with Aorus X3 Plus v7.

If you need long battery life, go with the Gigabyte Aero 14 and then replace its WQHD screen with an aftermarket/last gen's Full HD.

If you're on a budget, go with MSI GS43VR or a Clevo model of similar weight and performance.

If you don't need 32GB of memory and build quality is the only thing that matters, go with the Razer Blade 14.