Notebookcheck Logo

华硕ROG Zephyrus Duo 16笔记本回顾。带有AMD Zen4、RTX 4090和Mini-LED的多任务怪物

AMD Zen4 Ryzen 9 7945HX的首次亮相。

华硕刷新了其ROG Zephyrus Duo 16,并使用了目前可以得到的最好的组件。新的GeForce RTX 4090笔记本电脑由AMD的Ryzen 9 7945HX支持,这是目前最快的移动CPU。制造商还用一个新的WQHD Mini-LED面板取代了4K屏幕,频率为240赫兹,由一个辅助4K屏幕支持。更新:包括sRGB配置文件
AMD Gaming Laptop / Notebook Touchscreen Zen 4 Windows

华硕在2023年延续了ROG Zephyrus Duo 16的双屏概念,并采用了目前能得到的最好的笔记本电脑技术。除了来自Nvidia的全新移动显卡外,还有GeForce RTX 4080 笔记本电脑GeForce RTX 4090 笔记本电脑,华硕再次使用了AMD的HX处理器。它实际上是我们编辑部的第一批笔记本电脑之一,采用了新的AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX,它提供16个Zen4核心,对抗英特尔的Raptor Lake HX CPU。华硕还升级了显示屏。分辨率从4K下降到WQHD,但它是一个哑光的Mini-LED面板,刷新率为240赫兹,响应时间快。

笔记本电脑的分类实际上并不那么简单,因为Zephyrus Duo可能是一台游戏笔记本电脑,一台内容创作者的机器,甚至是一台移动工作站。然而,有两个屏幕的概念绝对不是每个用户都感兴趣。目前有四种不同的配置,我们的评测单元配有RTX 4090笔记本电脑,32GB内存和2TB SSD存储,售价为4999欧元。配备较小的1TB固态硬盘的SKU以及GeForce RTX 4080笔记本电脑将很快上市,售价为4299欧元。

Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
Processor
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX 16 x 2.5 - 5.4 GHz, 130 W PL2 / Short Burst, 120 W PL1 / Sustained, Dragon Range-HX (Zen 4)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU - 16 GB VRAM, Core: 2090 MHz, RAM: 2275 MHz, 175 W TDP ( including 25 W Dynamic Boost), 531.18, Optimus
Memory
32 GB 
, DDR5-4800, Dual-Channel, max. 64 GB
Display
16.00 inch 16:10, 2560 x 1600 pixel 189 PPI, capacitive, NE160QDM-NM4, MiniLED, glossy: no, HDR, 240 Hz
Mainboard
AMD Promontory/Bixby FCH
Storage
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N, 2048 GB 
, 1900 GB free
Connections
4 USB 3.1 Gen2, USB-C Power Delivery (PD), 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm, Card Reader: microSD
Networking
Realtek RTL8125 2.5GBe Family Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000/2500MBit/s), MediaTek RZ616 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/ Wi-Fi 6E 6 GHz), Bluetooth 5.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 29.7 x 355 x 266
Battery
90 Wh, 5675 mAh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 11 Home
Camera
Webcam: 1080p
Primary Camera: 2 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 6 Speakers, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 330W PSU, ROG Backpack, rubberized palmrest, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.666 kg, Power Supply: 1.149 kg
Price
5000 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

潜在的竞争对手比较

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Price
88 %
v7 (old)
04 / 2023
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
R9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
2.7 kg29.7 mm16.00"2560x1600
89 %
v7 (old)
02 / 2023
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
3.5 kg23 mm17.30"3840x2160

v (old)
02 / 2023
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
16.00"2560x1600
89.4 %
v7 (old)
02 / 2023
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
2.7 kg26 mm16.00"2560x1600
91.2 %
v7 (old)
02 / 2023
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
2.4 kg21.99 mm16.00"2560x1600
88.2 %
v7 (old)
05 / 2022
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
R9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
2.6 kg20.5 mm16.00"3840x2400
93.7 %
v7 (old)
03 / 2023
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max, M2 Max 38-Core GPU
2.2 kg16.8 mm16.20"3456x2234

机箱 - 华硕熟悉的金属机箱

底盘设计与上一代车型相比没有变化。 以前的型号.当盖子关闭时,笔记本电脑实际上是相当微妙的,只有ROG的标志是彩色的,相比之下,其他的哑光黑色处理。也没有疯狂的机箱照明。笔记本电脑的质量给人留下了很好的印象,只有塑料底盖有点不足。

然而,一旦你打开盖子,你会立即发现这不是一台普通的笔记本电脑。根据主屏幕的打开角度,副屏幕会略微抬高(约15度),并向后面移动,这就在键盘上方揭开了一个透明的盖子,你甚至可以瞥见机箱内的角落。副屏的角度不能改变,但在实践中效果不错。提升机制也非常坚固,没有任何移动。总的来说,稳定性非常好,只是盖子的最大开启角度有点限制,大约为130度。

我们的尺寸比较显示,17英寸MSI Titan GT77有一个更大的足迹,但它也表明,ROG Zephyrus Duo 16是迄今为止我们的小对比组中最厚的设备。这显然是由副屏幕造成的,它需要额外的空间。它也是最重的16英寸机型之一,将近2.7公斤,你还必须考虑笨重的330瓦电源,它的重量超过1.1公斤。

尺寸比较

397 mm 330 mm 23 mm 3.5 kg363 mm 262 mm 26 mm 2.7 kg355 mm 266 mm 29.7 mm 2.7 kg355 mm 244 mm 21.99 mm 2.4 kg355 mm 266 mm 20.5 mm 2.6 kg355.7 mm 248.1 mm 16.8 mm 2.2 kg297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g

连接性 - 读卡器,但没有USB 4.0

底座的后部区域几乎完全被散热所占据,这就是为什么在后部中央只有三个端口(以太网、HDMI、USB-A)。其余的大部分端口位于左侧的前端,倾斜的电源接口也是如此。来自PSU的电缆相当短,所以电源线会挡住USB-A端口,这取决于方向。在左侧还有一个USB-C接口。

除了有点不方便的端口布局外,我们对华硕没有包括USB 4支持感到惊讶。AMD处理器总体上支持USB 4,但需要一个额外的USB控制器,而华硕似乎不想花这个钱。

左侧。电源、USB-A 3.2 Gen.2、USB-C 3.2 Gen.2(DisplayPort、Power Delivery、G-Sync)、微型SD读卡器、3.5毫米立体声插孔
左侧。电源、USB-A 3.2 Gen.2、USB-C 3.2 Gen.2(DisplayPort、Power Delivery、G-Sync)、微型SD读卡器、3.5毫米立体声插孔
右侧。USB-C 3.2 Gen.2 (DisplayPort)
右侧。USB-C 3.2 Gen.2 (DisplayPort)
后部:2.5Gbps以太网,USB-A 3.2 Gen.2,HDMI 2.1
后部:2.5Gbps以太网,USB-A 3.2 Gen.2,HDMI 2.1

SD卡阅读器

左侧有一个microSD读卡器,SD卡与机箱平齐。与我们的参考卡(Angelbird AV Pro V60 128 GB)相结合的传输速率非常好,我们测量到270 MB/s,当我们复制jpeg图像文件时超过180 MB/s。

SD Card Reader
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
196 MB/s +8%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
182 MB/s
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60)
155 MB/s -15%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60)
125 MB/s -31%
Average of class Gaming
  (19 - 202, n=89, last 2 years)
95.5 MB/s -48%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX (Angelibird AV Pro V60)
83.5 MB/s -54%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
269 MB/s
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max (Angelbird AV Pro V60)
222 MB/s -17%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60)
207.6 MB/s -23%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60)
185 MB/s -31%
Average of class Gaming
  (25.8 - 269, n=90, last 2 years)
119.3 MB/s -56%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX (Angelibird AV Pro V60)
86.2 MB/s -68%

沟通

Wi-Fi模块位于M.2-SSD的下方。
Wi-Fi模块位于M.2-SSD的下方。

你在后面得到一个2.5Gbps的以太网插口,Wi-Fi模块(RZ616)也支持现代的6GHz网络的Wi-Fi 6E标准。我们用华硕的参考路由器使用相应的6GHz Wi-Fi网络没有任何问题,传输率非常高而且稳定。蓝牙5.2也被支持。

Networking
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
MediaTek RZ616
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1767 (min: 1634) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1738 (min: 1633) MBit/s ∼96%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Killer Wi-Fi 6E AX1690i 160MHz
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
1582 (min: 1517) MBit/s ∼93%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
1545 (min: 1508) MBit/s ∼91%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Killer Wi-Fi 6E AX1675i 160MHz Wireless Network Adapter
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
1579 (min: 848) MBit/s ∼93%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
1619 (min: 1537) MBit/s ∼96%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Wi-Fi 6E AX211
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
1155 (min: 495) MBit/s ∼68%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
1328 (min: 1093) MBit/s ∼78%
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1371 (min: 1036) MBit/s ∼78%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1494 (min: 1283) MBit/s ∼83%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
MediaTek Wi-Fi 6E MT7922 160MHz Wireless LAN Card
iperf3 transmit AXE11000
1695 (min: 1556) MBit/s ∼100%
iperf3 receive AXE11000
1692 (min: 1567) MBit/s ∼100%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Broadcom 0x14E4, 0x4388 WiFi 6E AirPort
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz
1730 (min: 1700) MBit/s ∼98%
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz
1803 (min: 1749) MBit/s ∼100%
050100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900950100010501100115012001250130013501400145015001550160016501700175018001850Tooltip
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz: Ø1767 (1634-1855)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz: Ø1738 (1633-1768)

网络摄像头

华硕升级了网络摄像头,现在使用1080p传感器。与以前的型号相比,这对图像的清晰度有积极的影响,但色彩准确性仍然不是很好。ROG Zephyrus Duo 16不提供机械快门。

ColorChecker
19.9 ∆E
14.8 ∆E
21.2 ∆E
20.9 ∆E
18.1 ∆E
12.6 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
26 ∆E
18.4 ∆E
18.6 ∆E
10.4 ∆E
9.1 ∆E
22.3 ∆E
16.5 ∆E
21.6 ∆E
6.1 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
19.8 ∆E
2.3 ∆E
8.9 ∆E
12.5 ∆E
15.1 ∆E
14 ∆E
2.1 ∆E
ColorChecker Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W: 15.1 ∆E min: 2.09 - max: 26 ∆E

辅料

每个版本的ROG Zephyrus Duo 16在发货时都有一个橡胶掌托以及一个深色的ROG背包,这给人留下了相当好的质量印象。配备Windows 11专业版、64GB内存和2或4TB SSD存储的更昂贵的设备还包括ROG Fusion II 300耳机以及游戏鼠标ROG Gladius III Mouse P514。

ROG 背包
ROG 背包
ROG 背包
ROG 背包
掌心橡胶垫
掌心橡胶垫

维护

底盖由几颗Torx螺丝(TR6)固定,但还有一颗螺丝隐藏在中间的胶合橡胶垫下面,这使得访问内部结构变得不必要的复杂。里面有两个SO-DIMM插槽,以及两个用于SSD的M.2-2280插槽。也可以更换Wi-Fi模块,但你必须先移除SSD。

一颗螺丝钉隐藏在一个胶合的橡胶垫下面。
一颗螺丝钉隐藏在一个胶合的橡胶垫下面。
内部布局
内部布局

输入设备 - 键盘不符合人体工程学

额外的屏幕需要将键盘移到基本单元的前面,这显然对人体工程学不理想。华硕也知道这一点,并为每台设备配备了一个橡胶手掌托。它在你家里的桌子上很好用,但当你在路上的时候,它就没有帮助了。键盘本身提供了一个舒适的打字体验,键程较浅,但也很安静。键盘有照明,你可以使用Armoury Crate软件为每个键单独设置颜色(如果你愿意的话)。

纵向的触摸板紧挨着键盘,由于外形狭窄,即使是标准的光标移动也会有难度,需要多次尝试。你也可以将触摸板作为数字键盘使用(通过点击左上角激活),效果不错。

输入设备
输入设备
键盘照明
键盘照明

显示屏 - 240赫兹迷你LED

子像素阵列
子像素阵列
最大HDR亮度
最大HDR亮度

16英寸Mini-LED面板是对前一型号的一个重大升级。它提供了WQHD分辨率(2560 x 2600像素,16:10)和240 Hz的刷新率。哑光面板提供了一个特殊的图像质量,具有锐利的内容和丰富的色彩。华硕宣传的亮度高达1100尼特,但你必须区分SDR和HDR内容。

测试结果非常好,而MacBook Pro 16的Mini-LED面板则是MacBook Pro 16的Mini-LED面板在SDR内容中只达到500尼特,但在评测单元中可以测量到700尼特。在HDR内容下,它甚至可以达到近1400尼特,如果你只有一个小区域或一个完整的画面,这并不重要。另一方面,Windows的HDR实现仍然很麻烦,需要手动改变设置。

黑值极低,导致对比度极佳。迷你LED面板也没有任何混浊或背光渗出的问题。

692
cd/m²
690
cd/m²
693
cd/m²
724
cd/m²
712
cd/m²
709
cd/m²
701
cd/m²
710
cd/m²
693
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
NE160QDM-NM4 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 724 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 702.7 cd/m² Minimum: 85 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 713 cd/m²
Contrast: 10171:1 (Black: 0.07 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93, calibrated: 1.2
ΔE Greyscale 2.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
90.8% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.21
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NE160QDM-NM4, MiniLED, 2560x1600, 16"
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
B173ZAN06.C, Mini-LED, 3840x2160, 17.3"
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
2560x1600, 16"
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
MNG007DA2-3 (CSO1628), IPS, 2560x1600, 16"
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
CSOT T3 MNG007DA4-1, IPS, 2560x1600, 16"
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
BOE NE160QAM-NX1, IPS-Level, 3840x2400, 16"
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Mini-LED, 3456x2234, 16.2"
Display
-1%
-20%
-17%
-1%
-2%
-1%
Display P3 Coverage
99.4
94.9
-5%
67.44
-32%
69.1
-30%
98.5
-1%
98
-1%
99
0%
sRGB Coverage
100
99.9
0%
96.89
-3%
99.7
0%
100
0%
99.9
0%
100
0%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
90.8
92.4
2%
68.93
-24%
71.2
-22%
89.7
-1%
86.3
-5%
88.5
-3%
Response Times
-91%
44%
47%
38%
-185%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
15.2 ?(11.2, 4)
38.4 ?(13.6, 24.8, n)
-153%
12.3 ?(5.7, 6.6)
19%
6.6 ?(3.4, 3.2)
57%
14.6 ?(6.7, 7.9)
4%
80.5 ?(38.5, 42)
-430%
Response Time Black / White *
19 ?(10.6, 8.4)
26.6 ?(9.2, 17.4, n)
-40%
5.9 ?(2.2, 3.7)
69%
12 ?(6.8, 5.2)
37%
5.6 ?(2, 3.6)
71%
47.2 ?(20.6, 26.6)
-148%
PWM Frequency
12000 ?(100)
2380 ?(100)
-80%
14880 ?(100, 500)
24%
Screen
6565%
-152%
-48%
-78%
-104%
618%
Brightness middle
712
606
-15%
377.62
-47%
511
-28%
456.8
-36%
459
-36%
504
-29%
Brightness
703
602
-14%
469
-33%
437
-38%
434
-38%
487
-31%
Brightness Distribution
95
93
-2%
86
-9%
83
-13%
88
-7%
94
-1%
Black Level *
0.07
0.0001
100%
0.47
-571%
0.4
-471%
0.35
-400%
0.44
-529%
0.001
99%
Contrast
10171
6060000
59481%
803
-92%
1278
-87%
1305
-87%
1043
-90%
504000
4855%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.7
4.8
-182%
3.2
-88%
0.95
44%
3.7
-118%
2.97
-75%
1.5
12%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
4
8.2
-105%
6.9
-73%
2.07
48%
6.42
-61%
8.13
-103%
3.3
17%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
1.2
1.8
-50%
0.91
24%
0.66
45%
1.03
14%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.8
6.5
-132%
3.9
-39%
0.6
79%
2.6
7%
4.9
-75%
2.1
25%
Gamma
2.21 100%
2.63 84%
2.176 101%
2.3 96%
2.235 98%
2.25 98%
CCT
6978 93%
6596 99%
6545 99%
6108 106%
6775 96%
6882 94%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
2158% / 3920%
-86% / -108%
-7% / -28%
-11% / -44%
-23% / -62%
144% / 314%

* ... smaller is better

CalMAN灰度(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN灰度(目标色彩空间P3)。
卡尔曼饱和度扫描(目标色彩空间P3)。
卡尔曼饱和度扫描(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN ColorChecker(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN ColorChecker(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN 灰度校准(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN 灰度校准(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN 饱和度扫描已校准(目标色彩空间P3)
CalMAN 饱和度扫描已校准(目标色彩空间P3)
CalMAN ColorChecker已校准(目标色彩空间P3)。
CalMAN ColorChecker已校准(目标色彩空间P3)。

开箱后的画质已经非常好了。我们用专业的CalMAN软件(X-Rite i1 Pro 2)对面板进行了分析,与P3参考色彩空间相比,灰度以及色彩检查器的性能都只显示出小的偏差。然而,有一个小的蓝色偏移,色温也有点偏冷。我们自己的校准(配置文件可以在上面的盒子里免费下载)进一步提高了性能,所以该面板也适合于图片/视频编辑。有点遗憾的是,华硕没有包括一个切换到较小的sRGB色域的选项。

更新:Armoury Crate软件中有一个专门的sRGB配置文件。

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. DCI-P3
vs. DCI-P3
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB

Display Response Times

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 White
19 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10.6 ms rise
↘ 8.4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 38 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
15.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.2 ms rise
↘ 4 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 26 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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 detected 12000 Hz ≤ 100 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 12000 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 12000 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering.

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

PWM (0 % 亮度)
PWM (0 % 亮度)
PWM(20%的亮度)。
PWM(20%的亮度)。
PWM(50%的亮度)。
PWM(50%的亮度)。
PWM (100 % 亮度)
PWM (100 % 亮度)

该面板在所有亮度水平上都使用了PWM,但12kHz的频率非常高,应该不会造成任何问题。然而,持续的PWM闪烁使其很难准确测量响应时间。我们的结果是相当平均的,但华硕宣传的响应时间是3毫秒。在我们的测试中,我们没有注意到任何重影,该面板对游戏来说是很好的。

在阳光下
在阳光下
室外(阴天)
室外(阴天)

哑光的Mini-LED面板在户外也很好用,这在我们的户外照片中得到了证实。你显然应该避免来自直接光源的反射,但在阳光明媚的日子里,你仍然可以非常舒适地看到内容,而在光面副屏(约400尼特)上,你什么都看不到。视角的稳定性也不会引起任何批评。

视角稳定
视角稳定

ScreenPad Plus - 4K IPS触摸屏

子像素阵列
子像素阵列

去年的型号,副屏的分辨率为3840 x 1100像素(14英寸),现在是光泽的。触摸输入执行得很好,华硕通过调整缩放系数避免了不同水平分辨率的问题,这意味着当你从一个显示器切换到另一个显示器时,窗口的宽度不会改变。这在实践中效果相当好,但在全屏模式下运行应用程序(如游戏)时可能会出现问题,因为第二屏幕上的应用程序或窗口会移动。

亮度接近400尼特,其他测量结果也不错,但画质无法跟上主屏幕。额外的面板也被限制在较小的sRGB色域内,但我们没有检测到任何PWM闪烁。

384
cd/m²
381
cd/m²
379
cd/m²
377
cd/m²
386
cd/m²
377
cd/m²
365
cd/m²
349
cd/m²
382
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 386 cd/m² (Nits) Average: 375.6 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 386 cd/m²
Contrast: 1838:1 (Black: 0.21 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.7 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.93
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
Gamma: 2.11
CalMAN灰度
CalMAN灰度
卡尔曼饱和度扫描
卡尔曼饱和度扫描
CalMAN ColorChecker
CalMAN ColorChecker
vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. DCI-P3
vs. DCI-P3

Display Response Times

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 White
17.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.7 ms rise
↘ 9.5 ms fall
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 35 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (21 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
32.1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15.4 ms rise
↘ 16.7 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 39 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

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 detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8774 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

性能 - Ryzen 9和RTX 4090笔记本电脑

ROG Zephyrus Duo的所有型号都配备了强大的AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX,但华硕并没有使用快速内存,仍然使用DDR5-4800。我们在评测过程中也遇到了一些bug,例如,我们在启动AIDA64基准测试时甚至出现了一些蓝屏。你还必须知道,当你使用外部屏幕时,图形是由专用的GeForce GPU处理的。这是由副屏幕引起的,即使在关闭两个集成屏幕时,GeForce GPU也在运行,这显然会增加功耗。

 
 

审查设置

预装的Armoury Crate软件为ROG Zephyrus Duo 16提供了几个电源配置文件。除了基本配置文件外,还可以调整GPU设置。我们使用Turbo配置文件以及默认的GPU设置(MSHybrid)获得了最佳的整体效果。

军械库木箱软件
军械库木箱软件

处理器

新的AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (Dragon Range)使用16个Zen4内核(32个线程),采用5纳米工艺制造。它是AMD新的旗舰移动CPU,是英特尔目前猛禽湖HX芯片的直接对手。AMD宣传的典型TDP为55瓦,但ROH Zephyrus Duo 16中的处理器可消耗130瓦,持续工作负荷为120瓦。这意味着它比英特尔的最新型号如酷睿i9-13980HX等,后者在峰值负载情况下可消耗超过200瓦特。

特别是多核性能令人印象深刻,Ryzen 9 7945HX在几乎所有基准测试中都能占据榜首。英特尔目前的CPU只在单核测试中略有优势,但在这些情况下也会消耗更多电力。我们将在另一篇比较文章中提供新的AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX和猛禽湖HX CPU之间的性能和效率的详细比较。

Cinebench R15 Multi Loop

02805608401120140016801960224025202800308033603640392042004480476050405320Tooltip
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX: Ø5385 (5255.55-5554.01)
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H Intel Core i9-13900HX: Ø4574 (4429.68-4819.28)
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake Intel Core i9-13900HX: Ø4366 (4298.3-4875.08)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI Intel Core i9-13950HX: Ø4980 (4889.98-5226.71)
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023 Intel Core i9-13950HX: Ø4512 (4463.29-4528.99)
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS Intel Core i9-12900HX: Ø3311 (3259.45-3569.52)
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX: Ø2247 (2222.47-2257.72)
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max Apple M2 Max: Ø2074 (2068.47-2081.27)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI Intel Core i9-13980HX: Ø4987 (4917.63-5171.97)
CPU数据 Cinebench R15多循环
CPU数据 Cinebench R15多循环

在持续的工作负荷下,CPU的性能几乎完全稳定,但在电池运行的多核测试中,你必须预期有大约50%的性能下降(单核性能不受影响)。与之相比Ryzen 9 6900HX在旧的Zephyrus Duo 16相比,在所有CPU基准测试中,CPU性能提高了68%。更多基准测试结果可在 我们的技术部分.

CPU Performance Rating: Percent
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
Geekbench 5.5: Multi-Core | Single-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
CPU Performance Rating
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
83.3 pt
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
 
82.5 pt
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
81.5 pt
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
81.3 pt
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
79.2 pt
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
77.4 pt
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
71.1 pt
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
66.3 pt
Average of class Gaming
 
62 pt
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max -6!
Apple M2 Max
60.4 pt
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
47.8 pt
Cinebench R23 / Multi Core
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
34521 (32987.6min - 34521.3max) Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (30799 - 34613, n=7)
33437 Points -3%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
33277 Points -4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
33052 Points -4%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
30162 Points -13%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
28707 (26191.7min - 28706.8max) Points -17%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
28010 (26406.1min - 28009.8max) Points -19%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
26703 Points -23%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
26736 (22394.1min - 26736.1max) Points -23%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
22982 Points -33%
Average of class Gaming
  (5668 - 36249, n=194, last 2 years)
21642 Points -37%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
14767 Points -57%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
14085 Points -59%
Cinebench R23 / Single Core
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
2169 Points +12%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
2100 Points +8%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
2055 Points +6%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
2043 Points +5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
2029 Points +5%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
1940 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (1863 - 1957, n=7)
1923 Points -1%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
1913 Points -1%
Average of class Gaming
  (1088 - 2235, n=192, last 2 years)
1878 Points -3%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
1625 Points -16%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
1566 Points -19%
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
13457 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (10025 - 13769, n=7)
12719 Points -5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
12648 Points -6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
12437 Points -8%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
11500 Points -15%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
11289 Points -16%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
8697 Points -35%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
8667 Points -36%
Average of class Gaming
  (2179 - 13832, n=192, last 2 years)
8236 Points -39%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
5489 Points -59%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
4044 Points -70%
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
825 Points +9%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
803 Points +6%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
788 Points +4%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
756 Points 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
756 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (712 - 760, n=7)
743 Points -2%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
742 Points -2%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
738 Points -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (427 - 856, n=192, last 2 years)
722 Points -4%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
595 Points -21%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
460 Points -39%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
5554 (5255.55min - 5554.01max) Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (4998 - 5663, n=8)
5404 Points -3%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
5227 (4889.98min - 5226.71max) Points -6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
5172 (4917.63min - 5171.97max) Points -7%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
4913 Points -12%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
4875 (4298.3min - 4875.08max) Points -12%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
4819 (4429.68min - 4819.28max) Points -13%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
4529 (4463.29min - 4528.99max) Points -18%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
3570 (3259.45min - 3569.52max) Points -36%
Average of class Gaming
  (905 - 5663, n=199, last 2 years)
3392 Points -39%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
2292 Points -59%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
2074 (2068.47min, 2068.57P1 - 2081.27max) Points -63%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
312 Points +2%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
307 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (294 - 311, n=8)
305 Points -1%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
301 Points -2%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
300 Points -2%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
295 Points -4%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
294 Points -4%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
278 Points -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (176.6 - 318, n=196, last 2 years)
276 Points -10%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
274 Points -11%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
249 Points -19%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
239 Points -22%
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
220 Seconds * -137%
Average of class Gaming
  (87 - 555, n=187, last 2 years)
172.1 Seconds * -85%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
147 Seconds * -58%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
114 Seconds * -23%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
111 Seconds * -19%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
105 Seconds * -13%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
101 Seconds * -9%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
100 Seconds * -8%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (87 - 100, n=7)
94.1 Seconds * -1%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
93 Seconds *
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (123364 - 140932, n=7)
136168 MIPS 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
135927 MIPS
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
127295 MIPS -6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
125720 MIPS -8%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
122254 MIPS -10%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
118715 MIPS -13%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
109330 MIPS -20%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
86234 MIPS -37%
Average of class Gaming
  (23795 - 140932, n=191, last 2 years)
84613 MIPS -38%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
64457 MIPS -53%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (7319 - 7711, n=7)
7473 MIPS +2%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
7319 MIPS
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
7035 MIPS -4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
7018 MIPS -4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
6897 MIPS -6%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
6800 MIPS -7%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
6445 MIPS -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (4168 - 7581, n=191, last 2 years)
6280 MIPS -14%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
6256 MIPS -15%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
5727 MIPS -22%
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
21058 Points +8%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
20784 Points +6%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
20634 Points +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
20329 Points +4%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (18372 - 20394, n=7)
19609 Points 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
19583 Points
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
18152 Points -7%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
16250 Points -17%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
15348 Points -22%
Average of class Gaming
  (4557 - 23194, n=192, last 2 years)
14892 Points -24%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
10167 Points -48%
Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
2139 Points 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
2132 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (2047 - 2158, n=7)
2109 Points -1%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
2043 Points -4%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
2025 Points -5%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
2023 Points -5%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max
1978 Points -7%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
1923 Points -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (986 - 2210, n=192, last 2 years)
1882 Points -12%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
1805 Points -15%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
1594 Points -25%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (33.8 - 37.6, n=6)
36 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
34.8 fps
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
33.4 fps -4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
32.7 fps -6%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
31.9 fps -8%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
30.9 fps -11%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
28.7 fps -18%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
25.6 fps -26%
Average of class Gaming
  (6.72 - 38.9, n=191, last 2 years)
23.3 fps -33%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
18 fps -48%
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
60.4 s *
Average of class Gaming
  (31.4 - 96.6, n=188, last 2 years)
47.6 s * +21%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
47.5 s * +21%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
46.5 s * +23%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
46 s * +24%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
45 s * +25%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (35.5 - 60.4, n=6)
45 s * +25%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
44 s * +27%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
39 s * +35%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
36.7 s * +39%
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
0.4799 sec * -21%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.3609 - 0.759, n=192, last 2 years)
0.4401 sec * -11%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX
0.4194 sec * -5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX
0.4121 sec * -3%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
  (0.3884 - 0.4159, n=6)
0.4048 sec * -2%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX
0.4033 sec * -1%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13980HX
0.4008 sec * -1%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
0.3982 sec *
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX
0.3979 sec * -0%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX
0.3866 sec * +3%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
21698
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
71582
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
8481
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
3.65 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
64.29 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
182.2 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
307 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
283 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
5554 Points
Help

系统性能

除了前面提到的蓝屏,我们在评测期间还注意到一些软件错误。蓝牙连接有问题(我们偶尔要打开蓝牙菜单才能让鼠标工作),YouTube有时不能播放任何视频,这可以通过重启解决。我们目前不确定这些是华硕造成的软件问题还是新AMD平台的初始问题。

如果一切都按设计工作(大部分时间都是这样),性能真的很好。没有停顿,所有的输入都是无延迟地执行。合成基准测试的结果也很好,AMD系统可以击败大多数英特尔的竞争对手。

PCMark 10 / Score
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
9151 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (8733 - 9151, n=2)
8942 Points -2%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
8884 Points -3%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
7888 Points -14%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
7830 Points -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (5776 - 9852, n=169, last 2 years)
7771 Points -15%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
6351 Points -31%
PCMark 10 / Essentials
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
12176 Points
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
11761 Points -3%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
11703 Points -4%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (11165 - 12176, n=2)
11671 Points -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
11078 Points -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (9057 - 12334, n=168, last 2 years)
10833 Points -11%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
9374 Points -23%
PCMark 10 / Productivity
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
11833 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (10266 - 11833, n=2)
11050 Points -7%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
10788 Points -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (6662 - 14612, n=168, last 2 years)
9878 Points -17%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9851 Points -17%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
8271 Points -30%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
7704 Points -35%
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
16424 Points +14%
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (14432 - 15768, n=2)
15100 Points +5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
14535 Points +1%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
14432 Points
Average of class Gaming
  (6703 - 18475, n=168, last 2 years)
12018 Points -17%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
10319 Points -28%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
9626 Points -33%
CrossMark / Overall
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
2139 Points +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
2078 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (1993 - 2078, n=2)
2036 Points -2%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX
1993 Points -4%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max 38-Core GPU, M2 Max, Apple SSD AP2048Z
1910 Points -8%
Average of class Gaming
  (1247 - 2344, n=152, last 2 years)
1900 Points -9%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
1711 Points -18%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1592 Points -23%
CrossMark / Productivity
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1977 Points +2%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
1946 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (1838 - 1946, n=2)
1892 Points -3%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX
1820 Points -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (1299 - 2204, n=152, last 2 years)
1802 Points -7%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
1698 Points -13%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max 38-Core GPU, M2 Max, Apple SSD AP2048Z
1618 Points -17%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1509 Points -22%
CrossMark / Creativity
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max 38-Core GPU, M2 Max, Apple SSD AP2048Z
2505 Points +5%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
2423 Points +2%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX
2384 Points 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
2377 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (2334 - 2377, n=2)
2356 Points -1%
Average of class Gaming
  (1275 - 2660, n=152, last 2 years)
2084 Points -12%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1780 Points -25%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
1724 Points -27%
CrossMark / Responsiveness
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1861 Points +10%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
1715 Points +2%
Average of class Gaming
  (1030 - 2330, n=152, last 2 years)
1700 Points +1%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
1689 Points
Average AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (1584 - 1689, n=2)
1637 Points -3%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX
1528 Points -10%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max 38-Core GPU, M2 Max, Apple SSD AP2048Z
1395 Points -17%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1342 Points -21%
PCMark 10 Score
9151 points
Help

DPC延时

我们的标准化延迟测试(网页浏览、YouTube 4K播放、CPU负载)显示了当前BIOS版本的测试单元的显著局限性,因此它不适合实时音频应用。

LatencyMon - 概述
LatencyMon - 概述
LatencyMon - 驱动程序
LatencyMon - 驱动程序
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
5418.4 μs *
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
4710.9 μs * +13%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
2448.6 μs * +55%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
521.5 μs * +90%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
437.7 μs * +92%

* ... smaller is better

存储设备

免费的M.2-2280插槽
免费的M.2-2280插槽

我们的评测单元配备了SK海力士的快速2TB固态硬盘(PC801),它通过PCIe 4.0连接。NVMe驱动器的性能非常好,我们的传输速率超过了7GB/s。在持续的工作负荷下,性能也很稳定,这是目前许多高端笔记本电脑的一个问题。更多的SSD基准测试被列在 这里.

SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 7107 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 6036 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 532 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 585 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 64.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 163.9 MB/s
CDM 6 Write 4K Q8T8: 486 MB/s
CDM 6 Read 4K Q8T8: 1278 MB/s
Drive Performance Rating - Percent
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
77.5 pt
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
74.7 pt
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
67.7 pt
Average of class Gaming
 
59 pt
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
57.8 pt
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
57.5 pt
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
 
55.3 pt
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake -11!
 
40.7 pt
DiskSpd
seq read
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
5598 (5462.22min - 5597.85max) MB/s +103%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
4903 MB/s +78%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
4525 (4498.41min - 4525.41max) MB/s +64%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3844 (3257.93min - 3843.87max) MB/s +39%
Average of class Gaming
  (1319 - 7045, n=169, last 2 years)
3500 MB/s +27%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (2756 - 4427, n=6)
3391 MB/s +23%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
3180 (3109.94min - 3179.84max) MB/s +15%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
2756 (2741.19min - 2756.29max) MB/s
seq write
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
7889 (6495.73min - 7888.81max) MB/s +86%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
7533 (7482.85min - 7532.79max) MB/s +77%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
4378 (4355.78min - 4378.43max) MB/s +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
4250 (4204.35min - 4249.88max) MB/s
Average of class Gaming
  (535 - 9307, n=169, last 2 years)
3819 MB/s -10%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (2671 - 4250, n=6)
3610 MB/s -15%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
3434 (3027.24min - 3434.35max) MB/s -19%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3242 (1498min - 3241.78max) MB/s -24%
seq q8 t1 read
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
11242 (10740.3min - 11242.2max) MB/s +60%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
10557 (9742.97min - 10557.3max) MB/s +50%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
7048 (6068.56min - 7047.9max) MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (6807 - 7155, n=6)
7028 MB/s 0%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
6872 (4963.33min - 6872.25max) MB/s -2%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
6682 (5778.28min - 6681.95max) MB/s -5%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
6637 (5645.11min - 6636.65max) MB/s -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (2594 - 16089, n=169, last 2 years)
6365 MB/s -10%
seq q8 t1 write
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9942 (9912.92min - 9941.76max) MB/s +66%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
9830 (9799.27min - 9829.82max) MB/s +64%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
6004 (5933.65min - 6004.3max) MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (4865 - 6052, n=6)
5773 MB/s -4%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
4985 (4706.66min - 4985.24max) MB/s -17%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
4943 (4923.06min - 4943.2max) MB/s -18%
Average of class Gaming
  (539 - 14571, n=169, last 2 years)
4855 MB/s -19%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
4244 (427.59min - 4244.22max) MB/s -29%
4k q1 t1 read
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
95.3 (93.25min - 95.25max) MB/s +48%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
83.1 (79.37min - 83.07max) MB/s +29%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
73.1 (72.79min - 73.06max) MB/s +14%
Average of class Gaming
  (30.6 - 95.9, n=169, last 2 years)
65.9 MB/s +2%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
64.3 (63.09min - 64.34max) MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (47.2 - 72.2, n=6)
61.9 MB/s -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
56.5 (49.8min - 56.49max) MB/s -12%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
46.6 (45.38min - 46.63max) MB/s -28%
4k q1 t1 write
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
359 (324.09min - 358.58max) MB/s +119%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
255 (243.79min - 255.25max) MB/s +55%
Average of class Gaming
  (66.6 - 397, n=169, last 2 years)
222 MB/s +35%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
220 (56.84min - 219.56max) MB/s +34%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
213 (205.52min - 212.72max) MB/s +30%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
164.3 (163.26min - 164.34max) MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (79.4 - 175.8, n=6)
147.9 MB/s -10%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
108.4 (106.69min - 108.4max) MB/s -34%
4k q32 t16 read
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
4100 (4085.58min - 4100.1max) MB/s +254%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3111 (2388.54min - 3111.42max) MB/s +169%
Average of class Gaming
  (417 - 6172, n=169, last 2 years)
2553 MB/s +120%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
2390 (2226.95min - 2390.15max) MB/s +106%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1469 (1266.81min - 1469.47max) MB/s +27%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
1158 (1132.18min - 1157.71max) MB/s
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
973 (941.21min - 972.98max) MB/s -16%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (522 - 1158, n=6)
872 MB/s -25%
4k q32 t16 write
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
3537 (3519.01min - 3536.66max) MB/s +635%
Average of class Gaming
  (162.3 - 4869, n=169, last 2 years)
2101 MB/s +337%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
1542 (1501.74min - 1541.63max) MB/s +221%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1424 (1251.47min - 1423.75max) MB/s +196%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1282 (960.6min - 1281.78max) MB/s +167%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
481 (462.66min - 481.19max) MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (269 - 714, n=6)
470 MB/s -2%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
 
460 (453.59min - 459.8max) MB/s -4%
AS SSD
Score Total
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
8224 Points +28%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
7311 Points +14%
Average of class Gaming
  (2271 - 13854, n=160, last 2 years)
6742 Points +5%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
6635 Points +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
6435 Points
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (4481 - 7962, n=6)
6194 Points -4%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
4850 Points -25%
Score Read
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3308 Points +113%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
3188 Points +105%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
2619 Points +69%
Average of class Gaming
  (776 - 4721, n=160, last 2 years)
2445 Points +57%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
2035 Points +31%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
1554 Points
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (1134 - 2044, n=6)
1512 Points -3%
Score Write
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
4164 Points
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (2671 - 4954, n=6)
3991 Points -4%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
3468 Points -17%
Average of class Gaming
  (515 - 7208, n=160, last 2 years)
3113 Points -25%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
2556 Points -39%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
2428 Points -42%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1877 Points -55%
Seq Read
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
9511 MB/s +67%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
5689 MB/s
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
5429.33 MB/s -5%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (5107 - 5689, n=6)
5394 MB/s -5%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
5344.88 MB/s -6%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
5144.76 MB/s -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (2260 - 12763, n=160, last 2 years)
4976 MB/s -13%
Seq Write
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
7663.27 MB/s +96%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
7181 MB/s +84%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
4064.76 MB/s +4%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
3904 MB/s
Average of class Gaming
  (495 - 11316, n=160, last 2 years)
3750 MB/s -4%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (3170 - 3904, n=6)
3490 MB/s -11%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
3058.47 MB/s -22%
4K Read
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
85.9 MB/s +45%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
72.8 MB/s +23%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
68.93 MB/s +16%
Average of class Gaming
  (27.8 - 112.1, n=160, last 2 years)
65.1 MB/s +10%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (50.9 - 67.9, n=6)
60.1 MB/s +2%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
59.2 MB/s
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
49.65 MB/s -16%
4K Write
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
328.69 MB/s +73%
Average of class Gaming
  (108.8 - 512, n=160, last 2 years)
211 MB/s +11%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (150.5 - 278, n=6)
206 MB/s +9%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
205.06 MB/s +8%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
189.7 MB/s
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
177.9 MB/s -6%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
144.8 MB/s -24%
4K-64 Read
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
2744.3 MB/s +197%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
2558.72 MB/s +177%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
2015.68 MB/s +118%
Average of class Gaming
  (451 - 3475, n=160, last 2 years)
1876 MB/s +103%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
1011 MB/s +9%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
925 MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (540 - 1461, n=6)
913 MB/s -1%
4K-64 Write
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
3584 MB/s
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (2204 - 4339, n=6)
3435 MB/s -4%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
2856.24 MB/s -20%
Average of class Gaming
  (277 - 5909, n=160, last 2 years)
2529 MB/s -29%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
1944.47 MB/s -46%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
1460.96 MB/s -59%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
981 MB/s -73%
Access Time Read
Average of class Gaming
  (0.016 - 0.379, n=159, last 2 years)
0.05489 ms * -89%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
0.053 ms * -83%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
0.036 ms * -24%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
0.029 ms *
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
0.028 ms * +3%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (0.022 - 0.038, n=6)
0.028 ms * +3%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
0.025 ms * +14%
Access Time Write
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
SSSTC CA6-8D1024
0.082 ms * -290%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.011 - 1.028, n=160, last 2 years)
0.04827 ms * -130%
Average SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
  (0.018 - 0.058, n=6)
0.038 ms * -81%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
0.023 ms * -10%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
0.021 ms *
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
0.019 ms * +10%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
0.013 ms * +38%

* ... smaller is better

Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8

035571010651420177521302485284031953550390542604615497053255680603563906745Tooltip
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W: Ø7048 (6645.87-7075.48)

GPU性能

GPU-Z NvidiaGeForce RTX 4090 笔记本电脑
GPU-Z NvidiaGeForce RTX 4090 笔记本电脑

华硕提供新的ROG Zephyrus Duo 16与NvidiaGeForce RTX 4080 Laptop或GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop,就像我们现在的审查单位。从理论上讲,这是最快的GPU版本,但175瓦的最大TGP(150瓦TGP+25瓦Dynamic Boost)是保留给手动电源配置文件的。用于所有基准测试的Turbo配置文件被限制在155瓦(140瓦TGP + 15瓦动态提升)。

这意味着RTX 4090笔记本电脑在Turbo模式下,Zephyrus Duo 16不能完全跟上最快的对手,如Titan GT77,通常只比GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop快几个百分点。而RTX 3080 Ti之前的Zephyrus Duo 16在所有测试中明显被击败(快55-78 %)。计算性能也非常好,在一些SPECviewperf测试中,RTX 4090 Laptop也能与专业移动GPU相媲美。请参阅我们的 全面分析RTX 4090笔记本电脑和RTX 4080笔记本电脑的更多测试结果。

在持续工作负荷下,GPU性能稳定,Time Spy 压力测试以97.8%的比例通过。然而,在电池供电的情况下,GPU的功耗被限制在55W,这导致了超过50%的性能赤字(Time Spy Graphics: 9575分)。

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
71432 Points +15%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
69211 Points +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (54073 - 73027, n=42)
65041 Points +5%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
62240 Points
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
60038 Points -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
56565 Points -9%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
44906 Points -28%
Average of class Gaming
  (1029 - 72178, n=187, last 2 years)
43524 Points -30%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
40257 Points -35%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
49247 Points +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
47798 Points
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (40259 - 53059, n=41)
46365 Points -3%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
46240 Points -3%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
43525 Points -9%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
40570 Points -15%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
34439 Points -28%
Average of class Gaming
  (781 - 53059, n=197, last 2 years)
31252 Points -35%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
27562 Points -42%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
22254 Points +11%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
21786 Points +9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (16950 - 23292, n=43)
20950 Points +5%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
20033 Points
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
18441 Points -8%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
18417 Points -8%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
13554 Points -32%
Average of class Gaming
  (224 - 22717, n=192, last 2 years)
13032 Points -35%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
11227 Points -44%
Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
44487 Points +9%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
40668 Points
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (34246 - 44948, n=7)
40300 Points -1%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
28879 Points -29%
Average of class Gaming
  (4663 - 44948, n=21, last 2 years)
25633 Points -37%
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU, Apple M2 Max
25103 Points -38%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
23085 Points -43%
SPECviewperf 13
Solidworks (sw-04)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
159.12 fps +14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (140.1 - 159.1, n=3)
151.7 fps +8%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
140.08 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
134.49 fps -4%
Average of class Gaming
  (87.4 - 159.1, n=10, last 2 years)
118.5 fps -15%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
108.6 fps -22%
Siemens NX (snx-03)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
34.38 fps +9%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (31.5 - 34.4, n=3)
33 fps +5%
Average of class Gaming
  (16.2 - 99.6, n=10, last 2 years)
32.7 fps +4%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
31.45 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
28.76 fps -9%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
21.2 fps -33%
Showcase (showcase-02)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
281.1 fps +22%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (231 - 281, n=3)
256 fps +11%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
230.78 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
203.33 fps -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (25.9 - 281, n=10, last 2 years)
154.7 fps -33%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
148.9 fps -35%
Medical (medical-02)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
122.82 fps +2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (119 - 122.8, n=3)
120.7 fps 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
120.28 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
107.84 fps -10%
Average of class Gaming
  (57.6 - 122.8, n=10, last 2 years)
86 fps -29%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
75.2 fps -37%
Maya (maya-05)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
600.78 fps +22%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (494 - 601, n=3)
557 fps +13%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
494.88 fps 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
494.02 fps
Average of class Gaming
  (83.7 - 601, n=10, last 2 years)
365 fps -26%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
308.1 fps -38%
Energy (energy-02)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
74.73 fps +6%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (70.6 - 74.7, n=3)
72.7 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
70.56 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
61.32 fps -13%
Average of class Gaming
  (20.3 - 74.7, n=10, last 2 years)
45.3 fps -36%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
26.1 fps -63%
Creo (creo-02)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
461.26 fps +22%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (378 - 461, n=3)
423 fps +12%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
377.82 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
377.58 fps 0%
Average of class Gaming
  (70.4 - 461, n=10, last 2 years)
271 fps -28%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
239.7 fps -37%
Catia (catia-05)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
281.44 fps +6%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (266 - 281, n=3)
273 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
266.33 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
233.27 fps -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (47.7 - 281, n=10, last 2 years)
174.4 fps -35%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
171.4 fps -36%
3ds Max (3dsmax-06)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
372.51 fps +10%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
346.23 fps +2%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (305 - 373, n=3)
339 fps 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
338.22 fps
Average of class Gaming
  (49.1 - 373, n=10, last 2 years)
232 fps -31%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
208.7 fps -38%
SPECviewperf 2020
1920x1080 Solidworks (solidworks-05)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
499.25 fps +17%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (426 - 515, n=5)
473 fps +11%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
426.16 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
420.83 fps -1%
Average of class Gaming
  (47.1 - 515, n=21, last 2 years)
307 fps -28%
1920x1080 Siemens NX (snx-04)
Average of class Gaming
  (16.2 - 231, n=27, last 2 years)
37.3 fps +19%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (31.3 - 37.6, n=7)
34.6 fps +11%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
34.28 fps +10%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
31.26 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
30 fps -4%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
21.1 fps -33%
1920x1080 Medical (medical-03)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
56.7 fps +3%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (50 - 59.9, n=7)
55.3 fps 0%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
55.09 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
49.97 fps -9%
Average of class Gaming
  (25.7 - 59.9, n=27, last 2 years)
40.3 fps -27%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
38.7 fps -30%
1920x1080 Maya (maya-06)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
610.71 fps
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (529 - 687, n=6)
595 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
555.93 fps
Average of class Gaming
  (99.8 - 687, n=26, last 2 years)
416 fps
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
336 fps
1920x1080 Energy (energy-03)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
74.95 fps +6%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (70.6 - 76.5, n=7)
73.8 fps +4%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
70.65 fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
62.41 fps -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (20.6 - 76.5, n=27, last 2 years)
47.6 fps -33%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
26.2 fps -63%
1920x1080 Creo (creo-03)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
138.99 fps +23%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (113.3 - 141.9, n=7)
131.3 fps +16%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
130.27 fps +15%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
113.27 fps
Average of class Gaming
  (44 - 141.9, n=27, last 2 years)
107.9 fps -5%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
86.4 fps -24%
1920x1080 CATIA (catia-06)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
116.64 fps +554%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (17.8 - 117.2, n=7)
100.2 fps +462%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
98.79 fps +454%
Average of class Gaming
  (17.8 - 117.2, n=27, last 2 years)
73.4 fps +311%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
66.6 fps +273%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
17.84 fps
1920x1080 3ds Max (3dsmax-07)
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
212.6 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
206.67 fps
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (128 - 221, n=7)
197.4 fps -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
177.9 fps -14%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX
128.7 fps -38%
Average of class Gaming
  (25.7 - 221, n=27, last 2 years)
125.8 fps -39%
3DMark 11 Performance
46207 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
40149 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
18602 points
Help
Blender / v3.3 Classroom OPTIX/RTX
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
22 Seconds * -69%
Average of class Gaming
  (9 - 95, n=178, last 2 years)
21 Seconds * -62%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
15 Seconds * -15%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
15 Seconds * -15%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
13 Seconds *
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (9 - 19, n=38)
12.1 Seconds * +7%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
11 Seconds * +15%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
11 Seconds * +15%
Blender / v3.3 Classroom CUDA
Average of class Gaming
  (16 - 175, n=184, last 2 years)
36.7 Seconds * -84%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
32 Seconds * -60%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
23 Seconds * -15%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
22 Seconds * -10%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
20 Seconds *
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (16 - 24, n=38)
18.3 Seconds * +8%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
18 Seconds * +10%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
17 Seconds * +15%
Blender / v3.3 Classroom CPU
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU, Apple M2 Max
326 Seconds * -122%
Average of class Gaming
  (138 - 962, n=192, last 2 years)
297 Seconds * -102%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-12900HX
263 Seconds * -79%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
207 Seconds * -41%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
200 Seconds * -36%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (144 - 305, n=38)
198.6 Seconds * -35%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13900HX
192 Seconds * -31%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Intel Core i9-13950HX
175 Seconds * -19%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX
147 Seconds *
Blender / v3.3 Classroom METAL
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU, Apple M2 Max
51.2 Seconds *

* ... smaller is better

游戏性能

ROG Zephyrus Duo 16的游戏性能非常好,但由于RTX 4090 Laptop的版本稍慢,与最快的设备相比有点低。AMD处理器在游戏过程中留下了良好的印象,不必躲在英特尔HX对应产品的后面。在我们的游戏基准测试中,我们也没有发现任何问题。然而,考虑到原生的WQHD分辨率,我们建议你把钱留给RTX 4090 笔记本电脑SKU,并获得RTX 4080笔记本电脑来代替。

Performance Rating - Percent
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
97 pt
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
95.9 pt
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
91.5 pt
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
90.4 pt
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
88.8 pt
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
76.7 pt
Average of class Gaming
 
69.3 pt
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
57 pt
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
216.4 (5.6P0.1, 144.3P1) fps +21%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
198.9 (190min, 191P1) fps +11%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
178.6 (172min, 173P1) fps
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
178 (151min) fps 0%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
176.8 (159min) fps -1%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
129.3 (110min, 111.14P1) fps -28%
Average of class Gaming
  (18.4 - 216, n=169, last 2 years)
126.8 fps -29%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
111.1 (30min, 41.5P0.1, 74.7P1) fps -38%
GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
145.5 (3.79min, 100P1) fps +9%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
140.9 (3.54min, 83.3P1) fps +5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
140.7 (3.02min, 100P1) fps +5%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
137.5 (3.4min, 100P1) fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
134 (7.27min, 90.9P1) fps
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
131.8 (6.21min, 90.9P1) fps -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.1 - 167.7, n=172, last 2 years)
113.1 fps -16%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
101.5 (21.1min, 71.4P1) fps -24%
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
187.4 fps +10%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
180.7 (119min, 128.92P1) fps +7%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
169.6 fps
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
162.4 fps -4%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
157.8 fps -7%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
137.6 fps -19%
Average of class Gaming
  (19.2 - 201, n=185, last 2 years)
119 fps -30%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
108 fps -36%
Strange Brigade - 1920x1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
373 (29.9min, 272P1) fps +12%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
350 (32.1min, 230P1) fps +5%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
333 (38min, 227P1) fps
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
323 (61.7min, 222P1) fps -3%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
318 (29.2min, 228P1) fps -5%
Average of class Gaming
  (38.9 - 421, n=183, last 2 years)
227 fps -32%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
219 (67.8min, 154.6P1) fps -34%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
182.4 (66.8min, 132.6P1) fps -45%
Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
194.7 (160min) fps +8%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
185.9 (157.5min) fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
179.7 (153.7min) fps
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
179 (152.4min) fps 0%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
177.3 (150.3min) fps -1%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
170.5 (148.2min) fps -5%
Average of class Gaming
  (30.8 - 220, n=191, last 2 years)
149.4 fps -17%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
111.3 (96.1min) fps -38%
X-Plane 11.11 - 1920x1080 high (fps_test=3)
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
137 fps +16%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
137 fps +16%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
135.7 fps +15%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
135.5 fps +15%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
134.2 fps +14%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
134.1 fps +14%
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
131.8 fps +12%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
123.8 fps +5%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
117.8 fps
Average of class Gaming
  (31.5 - 166.2, n=197, last 2 years)
107.2 fps -9%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
78.2 fps -34%
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
216.4 (5.6P0.1, 144.3P1) fps +21%
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
198.9 (190min, 191P1) fps +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (139.2 - 216, n=35)
198.5 fps +11%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
178.6 (172min, 173P1) fps
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
178 (151min) fps 0%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
176.8 (159min) fps -1%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
129.3 (110min, 111.14P1) fps -28%
Average of class Gaming
  (18.4 - 216, n=169, last 2 years)
126.8 fps -29%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
111.1 (30min, 41.5P0.1, 74.7P1) fps -38%
Cyberpunk 2077 1.6 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
135 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
130.6 (34.83min) fps
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (91 - 159.7, n=20)
124 fps -5%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
122.8 (25.64min) fps -6%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
106.2 (47.5min) fps -19%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
99.4 (40.7min) fps -24%
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
99.1 (29min) fps -24%
Average of class Gaming
  (16.7 - 159.7, n=72, last 2 years)
92.3 fps -29%
The Witcher 3 v4.00 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset / On AA:FX
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
150 fps +12%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
141.8 fps +6%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (120.4 - 150, n=6)
137.7 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
133.9 fps
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
125.3 (35.5min, 57.7P0.1, 92.5P1) fps -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (25.7 - 150, n=17, last 2 years)
87.3 fps -35%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Highest Preset AA:T
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
214 fps +3%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
208 fps
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
207 (140min) fps 0%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (143.7 - 271, n=14)
197.2 fps -5%
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
176 (117min) fps -15%
Average of class Gaming
  (27 - 271, n=29, last 2 years)
165.6 fps -20%
F1 22 - 1920x1080 Ultra High Preset AA:T AF:16x
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
138.2 (118min, 84P1) fps +21%
SCHENKER XMG Neo 16 Raptor Lake
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
137.4 (118min, 92P1) fps +20%
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
  (70.3 - 144.7, n=25)
125.3 fps +10%
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
114.3 (92min, 71P1) fps
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
101 (90min) fps -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (13 - 144.7, n=98, last 2 years)
84.4 fps -26%
MSI Titan GT77 12UHS
Intel Core i9-12900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
79.8 (65min, 29P1) fps -30%

Witcher 3 FPS Chart

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180Tooltip
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W R9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU: Ø178.6 (172-188)
CPU/GPU数据Witcher 3 Ultra设置
CPU/GPU数据Witcher 3 Ultra设置
lowmed.highultraQHD
GTA V (2015) 186.7 182.4 134 123.8
The Witcher 3 (2015) 361 178.6
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 227 207 196.1 179.7
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 210 169.6 142.1
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 177.5 155.7 117.8
Strange Brigade (2018) 518 400 370 333 257
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) 208 175
Assassin´s Creed Valhalla (2020) 161 126
F1 2021 (2021) 476 391 312 182.4 159.7
Far Cry 6 (2021) 117 110
Cyberpunk 2077 1.6 (2022) 136 130.6 86
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands (2022) 171.5 120
F1 22 (2022) 303 286 265 114.3 80.3
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 2022 (2022) 170 125
The Witcher 3 v4.00 (2023) 174 158 133.9 88

排放--Duo 16在涡轮模式下声音很大

系统噪音

两个相对较小的风扇
两个相对较小的风扇

Zephyrus Duo在日常情况下通常是可以听到的,当您不需要全部性能时,您应该使用静音功率配置文件。涡轮增压模式通常会导致超过30 dB(A),即使是在空转时。游戏和高负荷情况下,很快就会超过50分贝(A),最高可达56分贝(A),这在较长时间内会很烦人。你还可以注意到冷却解决方案中相对较小的风扇。当你需要最大性能时,没有办法绕过噪音,但我们建议你在玩游戏时检查Armoury Crate软件的其他电源配置文件。我们用三种不同的游戏对其进行了测试。

标题 静音 性能 涡轮增压
Witcher 3 40.2 dB(A) 48.6 dB(A) 51.2 dB(A)
Witcher 3 v4.00 40.2 dB(A) 48.6 dB(A) 56 dB(A)
Cyberpunkt 2077 v1.5 40.2 dB(A) 48.6 dB(A) 56 dB(A)

现代游戏通常会在性能模式下运行良好,与涡轮模式相比,帧数只是低了一点,但风扇的噪音更方便,约为49 dB(A)。静音模式主要适用于较老的作品,因为性能会明显下降。我们还注意到在一些基准测试/游戏中的一些电子声音。

Noise Level

Idle
23.9 / 32.9 / 36.5 dB(A)
Load
42.9 / 56 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 23.9 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2029.43730.82929.733.131.3253335.730.728.726.839.433.63128.237.427.62827.928.825.54031.533.430.831.230.13130.75024.729.729.127.324.425.825.76324.427.530.322.422.424.623.48023.233.730.321.720.12323.71002426.525.324.120.520.621.712526.12827.325.22117.723.216025.226.826.421.121.218.824.4200283025.92324.319.625.125028.933.325.321.722.616.424.931529.632.728.720.221.815.627.440034.135.527.720.523.212.326.85003341.228.224.62612.627.663034.440.330.624.427.112.429.380037.74332.924.828.410.930.9100039.945.535.225.129.110.232.6125040.245.73423.726.810.331.5160037.94532.321.72610.429.3200037.34431.220.424.510.728.5250037.143.730.818.223.11126.7315035.443.128.517.521.511.625400037.746.231.617.323.711.828.5500038.545.830.715.92011.825.3630033.344.12414.116.51220.1800028.841.820.413.11412.117.81000024.635.617.413.213.112.3161250021.232.217.413.312.912.417.51600017.927.718.413.612.912.319.1SPL48.95642.932.936.523.940.1N6.510.64.11.72.40.53.3median 33.3median 41.2median 28.2median 20.5median 22.6median 12.3median 25.3Delta6.36.13.84.142.13.5hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseAsus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, R9 7945HX, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13900HX, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, i9-13950HX, SSSTC CA6-8D1024
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, R9 6900HX, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0)
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max 38-Core GPU, M2 Max, Apple SSD AP2048Z
Noise
-4%
-1%
13%
6%
19%
off / environment *
23.9
24.6
-3%
24
-0%
23
4%
26
-9%
23.9
-0%
Idle Minimum *
23.9
29.2
-22%
26
-9%
23
4%
26
-9%
23.9
-0%
Idle Average *
32.9
29.2
11%
28
15%
23
30%
27
18%
23.9
27%
Idle Maximum *
36.5
29.2
20%
34
7%
23.6
35%
29
21%
23.9
35%
Load Average *
42.9
50.7
-18%
47
-10%
39
9%
41
4%
36.6
15%
Witcher 3 ultra *
51.2
53.3
-4%
55
-7%
51.6
-1%
48
6%
35.1
31%
Load Maximum *
56
61
-9%
56
-0%
51.3
8%
50
11%
43.2
23%

* ... smaller is better

温度

在轻度工作负荷下,机箱温度非常舒适。键盘的位置对游戏/负载下的游戏是有利的,因为它只在上部区域升温,经常使用的按键通常保持非常凉爽。然而,键盘和副键盘之间的区域是一个热点。我们在底部测量到高达47℃,所以你不应该把设备放在负载下的腿上。整体温度发展还可以。

我们的压力测试有利于专用显卡,处理器将在几分钟后达到50瓦特的水平,而GPU的消耗从130瓦特上升到~140瓦特(这是Turbo电源配置文件的指定值)并保持在这个水平。这是一个不错的结果,我们没有看到压力测试后立即出现性能下降。在电池供电的情况下,CPU/GPU的综合工作负荷导致CPU消耗约43瓦特,GPU消耗约33瓦特。

CPU/GPU数据压力测试
CPU/GPU数据压力测试
Max. Load
 29.7 °C31 °C29.9 °C 
 42.5 °C44.2 °C42.2 °C 
 35.6 °C34.7 °C34.8 °C 
Maximum: 44.2 °C
Average: 36.1 °C
46.8 °C46.7 °C44.9 °C
41.7 °C41.6 °C40.9 °C
38.5 °C38.6 °C35.8 °C
Maximum: 46.8 °C
Average: 41.7 °C
Power Supply (max.)  50.8 °C | Room Temperature 20.5 °C | Fluke t3000FC (calibrated), Voltcraft IR-900
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 36.1 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 44.2 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 40.5 °C / 105 F, ranging from 21.2 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 46.8 °C / 116 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.2 °C / 79 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 36.5 °C / 98 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (35.7 °C / 96.3 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (-6.8 °C / -12.3 F).
表面温度应力测试(顶部)
表面温度应力测试(顶部)
表面温度应力测试(底)。
表面温度应力测试(底)。
表面温度压力测试(ScreenPad下面的基本单元)。
表面温度压力测试(ScreenPad下面的基本单元)。
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
Intel Core i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
Intel Core i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Apple M2 Max, Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU
Heat
8%
-15%
4%
-8%
14%
Maximum Upper Side *
44.2
40.6
8%
48
-9%
40
10%
45
-2%
44.2
-0%
Maximum Bottom *
46.8
41.1
12%
49
-5%
37.6
20%
50
-7%
42.9
8%
Idle Upper Side *
29.2
26.2
10%
40
-37%
32.4
-11%
33
-13%
22.4
23%
Idle Bottom *
30.2
30.3
-0%
33
-9%
31.4
-4%
33
-9%
22.3
26%

* ... smaller is better

发言人

华硕采用了由6个模块组成的扬声器系统,整体效果非常好。与以前的型号相比,制造商还改进了声音性能,只是低音性能可以更好。这个结果对于偶尔的视频/电影播放来说绝对是足够的,但在游戏时,扬声器的声音通常会被风扇的噪音所匹敌。

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2033.1322539.435.43128.830.6403130.55025.828.66324.632.3802335.510020.645.812517.751.616018.855.220019.663.325016.466.131515.670.540012.372.850012.672.363012.476.380010.975.9100010.271.2125010.371.4160010.470.9200010.76925001169.2315011.670400011.867.1500011.865.763001263.7800012.163.21000012.362.11250012.4601600012.354SPL23.982.5N0.557.2median 12.3median 67.1Delta2.15.228.728.427.529.2242528.33625.935.521.750.218.554.123.664.11766.815.868.719.172.816.673.716.675.210.573.712.573.511.773.29.674.910.274.310.175.710.475.310.576.411.176.211.574.211.972.212.370.912.470.412.570.512.669.312.568.211.867.423.986.10.573.8median 12.3median 73.52.52.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006WApple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.4% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 11% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 7% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.1 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | bass is linear (5.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (1.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (4.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 0% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 0% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 100% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%

能量管理--体力有限的Zephyrus

消耗功率

笨重的330W PSU
笨重的330W PSU

ROG Zephyrus Duo 16不是一个特别高效的设备,其最低功耗为19瓦,最大亮度时超过30瓦(副屏关闭)。副屏将增加4-7瓦的功耗,这取决于亮度。我们在游戏时测量到约260瓦特,在压力测试中高达330瓦特,但该值很快就在约270瓦特处趋于平稳。这意味着330瓦的PSU是完全足够的。

我们再次要提到,当你使用外部屏幕时,专用的GeForce GPU正在处理所有的图形任务,这意味着下面的CPU测量与外部屏幕不提供可比的结果。

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.13 / 0.18 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 19.2 / 29.7 / 30.8 Watt
Load midlight 126 / 330 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
R9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, SK hynix PC801 HFS002TEJ9X101N, MiniLED, 2560x1600, 16"
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL22T0HBLB, Mini-LED, 3840x2160, 17.3"
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, Samsung PM9A1 MZVL21T0HCLR, IPS, 2560x1600, 16"
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, SSSTC CA6-8D1024, IPS, 2560x1600, 16"
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
R9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, 2x Samsung SSD 980 Pro 2TB MZ-V8P2T0 (RAID 0), IPS-Level, 3840x2400, 16"
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max, M2 Max 38-Core GPU, Apple SSD AP2048Z, Mini-LED, 3456x2234, 16.2"
Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU
 
Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
8%
3%
2%
14%
49%
4%
23%
Idle Minimum *
19.2
14
27%
18
6%
15.2
21%
19
1%
5.2
73%
16.3 ?(6 - 32.3, n=28)
15%
Idle Average *
29.7
21.6
27%
24
19%
22.8
23%
24
19%
16.5
44%
Idle Maximum *
30.8
24.8
19%
32
-4%
49.8
-62%
31
-1%
16.8
45%
34.6 ?(11.6 - 57.9, n=28)
-12%
Load Average *
126
122.5
3%
130
-3%
121.2
4%
104
17%
113
10%
131.1 ?(79 - 201, n=28)
-4%
Witcher 3 ultra *
258
265
-3%
260
-1%
242
6%
186.5
28%
92
64%
Load Maximum *
330
418
-27%
320
3%
273.7
17%
256
22%
145
56%

* ... smaller is better

Power consumption Witcher 3 / Stress test

020406080100120140160180200220240260280300320Tooltip
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Witcher 3 ultra: Ø258 (248-265)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; 1280x720 Prime95 28.10 and Furmark 1.25: Ø275 (255-330)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Idle 150cd/m2: Ø24.1 (19.8-32.8)

Power consumption external screen

0153045607590105120135150165180195210225240Tooltip
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Prime95 V2810 Stress (external Monitor): Ø172.7 (170.1-207)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Cinebench R15 Multi (external Monitor): Ø186.3 (185.9-186.7)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Cinebench R23 Single (external Monitor): Ø73.4 (69.8-99.9)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Cinebench R23 Multi (external Monitor): Ø177.6 (166.7-187.3)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; 1280x720 FurMark 1.19 GPU Stress Test (external Monitor): Ø236 (219-250)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; 1920x1080 The Witcher 3 ultra (external Monitor): Ø244 (232-252)
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W; Idle 1min (external Monitor): Ø50.5 (37.5-59.8)

电池运行时间

尽管使用同样的90Wh电池,但电池运行时间比前一型号要差得多。现在,我们不确定这是否只是由新的Mini-LED面板或新的AMD平台的问题造成的。即使在150尼特和没有副屏的情况下,我们也只能做到约4小时的视频播放和Wi-Fi运行时间,而在面板最大亮度下则下降到只有2.5小时。这些都是很差的结果,而且负载运行时间还不到一小时。笔记本电脑开机后,电池完全充电需要108分钟。

充电
充电
90瓦特电池
90瓦特电池
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing (Edge 110)
3h 58min
WiFi Websurfing max. Brightness (Edge 110)
2h 36min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
3h 50min
Load (maximum brightness)
0h 57min
Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W
R9 7945HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, 90 Wh
MSI Titan GT77 HX 13VI
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop GPU, 99.9 Wh
Lenovo Legion Pro 7 16IRX8H
i9-13900HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, 99.9 Wh
Razer Blade 16 Early 2023
i9-13950HX, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Laptop GPU, 95.2 Wh
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650RX
R9 6900HX, GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU, 90 Wh
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M2 Max
M2 Max, M2 Max 38-Core GPU, 99.6 Wh
Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
47%
73%
48%
83%
226%
62%
H.264
230
358
56%
559
143%
1124
389%
WiFi v1.3
238
319
34%
303
27%
365
53%
469
97%
887
273%
Load
57
86
51%
124
118%
81
42%
62
9%
66
16%

Pros

+ 坚固的金属底盘
+ 最快的CPU/GPU组合
+ 强大的系统性能
+ 卓越的240赫兹迷你屏幕
+ 众多功能,如FreeSync、G-Sync和Wi-Fi 6E
+ 2x SO-DIMM & 2x M.2-2280 SSD
+ 快速读卡器

Cons

- 没有USB 4.0
- 游戏时风扇声音大
- 怠速消耗高,电池运行时间短
- 一些软件错误
- 对第二个屏幕的处理并不总是理想的
- 外部屏幕总是由DGPU处理

评语 - 有趣的概念,但有缺点

在审查中。华硕ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 2023。测试模型由华硕德国公司提供。
在审查中。华硕ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 2023。测试模型由华硕德国公司提供。

新的ROG Zephyrus Duo 16的副屏幕再次成为一个有趣的概念,但它也需要妥协。这款笔记本电脑明显比竞争对手厚,即使副屏的质量非常好,但它就是无法与新的240赫兹迷你LED屏幕的优秀图像质量相媲美。双屏处理在实践中也不一定理想,但这是Windows的一个普遍问题。副屏是通过iGPU连接的,这意味着当你使用外部屏幕(例如4K)时,Nvidia GPU负责所有图形计算,这将增加功耗。键盘在笔记本电脑前面的位置是另一个问题,在家里可以用附带的掌托解决,但在路上仍然是一个问题。副屏幕有什么意义吗?嗯,这取决于你的使用场景。

华硕在关键领域改进了笔记本电脑,首先是新的哑光240赫兹Mini-LED屏幕和WQHD分辨率。画面质量是惊人的,对于SDR内容来说,700尼特已经非常明亮(对于HDR内容来说,几乎是1400尼特)。开箱后的颜色已经非常准确,我们在校准屏幕方面没有问题。

新的GeForce RTX 4090 笔记本电脑是目前笔记本上最强大的GPU,与旧的RTX 3080 Ti相比,其性能优势非常大。然而,它只是手动模式下的最快版本(175W),但我们建议使用RTX 4080 LaptopSKU,尽管如此,考虑到原生的WQHD分辨率。

新的华硕ROG Zephyrus Duo 16凭借出色的Mini-LED屏幕以及由新的AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX和GeForce RTX 4090 Laptop组成的强大硬件组合令人信服,它在原生WQHD分辨率方面没有问题。不过仍有一些bug,而且当你利用全部性能潜力时,风扇非常嘈杂。

AMD的新Zen4处理器,即 Ryzen 9 7945HX可能是目前最有趣的升级。由于有16个Zen4核心,它从英特尔酷睿i9-13980HX手中抢走了多核性能的桂冠,甚至消耗更少的电力。由于之前提到的连接外部屏幕时专用Nvidia GPU的问题,我们目前无法提供准确的效率数字,但我们将在另一篇文章中介绍。

还有一些问题我们需要谈一谈,我们的测试装置有一些错误。闲置功耗也非常高,这显然也影响了电池的运行时间。这到底是华硕的软件问题还是新的AMD平台的初始问题,目前还不清楚。高价格是另一个问题,但现在所有RTX 4090笔记本都是这种情况。考虑到价格,我们也不得不批评缺乏USB 4以及使用DDR5-4800内存的问题。

总而言之,新的ROG Zephyrus Duo 16是具有充足动力的好设备,副屏对一些用户来说可能是一个真正的优势。然而,如果你不需要笔记本上的第二个显示屏(游戏玩家或内容创作者),你最好选择普通的笔记本电脑,这也意味着在某些方面的妥协更少。

Download your licensed rating image as SVG / PNG

价格和可用性

ROG Zephyrus Duo 16 2023现在只能预购,应该在未来几周内上市。

Asus Zephyrus Duo 16 GX650PY-NM006W - 03/14/2023 v7 (old)
Andreas Osthoff

Chassis
86 / 98 → 88%
Keyboard
81%
Pointing Device
83%
Connectivity
63 / 80 → 79%
Weight
59 / 10-66 → 87%
Battery
56 / 95 → 59%
Display
94%
Games Performance
99%
Application Performance
96%
Temperature
85 / 95 → 90%
Noise
68 / 90 → 76%
Audio
85%
Camera
45 / 85 → 53%
Average
77%
88%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Transparency

The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this 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. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.

This is how Notebookcheck is testing

Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebookcheck中文版(NBC中国) > 评测 > 华硕ROG Zephyrus Duo 16笔记本回顾。带有AMD Zen4、RTX 4090和Mini-LED的多任务怪物
Andreas Osthoff, 2023-03-16 (Update: 2023-03-16)