华硕TUF Gaming A16优势版评测。7的支持下的AMD笔记本
不出所料，全新的TUF Gaming A16将有几个型号。根据不同的型号，一个Ryzen 7 7735HS或 Ryzen 9 7940HS作为CPU，而无论是一个 Radeon RX 7600S或 Radeon RX 7700S被用作显卡。与过去一样，S表示适度的功耗。16英寸显示屏也继续存在：要么是FHD+面板（1920x1200），165赫兹和100% sRGB覆盖，要么是QHD+面板（2560x1600），240赫兹和100% DCI-P3覆盖。根据华硕网站，DDR5内存范围为8至32GB，存储容量为512GB至2TB。
我们的评测设备是便宜的版本之一，配备了Ryzen 7 7735HS、Radeon RX 7600S、FHD+面板、16GB内存和1TB SSD。
TUF Gaming A16的竞争者主要包括其他配备AMD硬件的中端笔记本，如华硕ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ(R7 6800HS& RX 6700S)或 联想Legion S7 16ARHA7(R9 6900HX& RX 6800S)。 在Nvidia方面，配备有 GeForce RTX 3060应被视为主要对手。虽然 HP Envy 16 h0112nr有一个相同的最大TGP 95瓦，而 华硕TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM例如，拥有140瓦的明显更高的TGP--当然是以能源消耗为代价的。
潜在的竞争对手比较
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 86.2 % v7 (old) | 02 / 2023 | Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 R7 7735HS, Radeon RX 7600S | 2.2 kg | 27 mm | 16.00" | 1920x1200 | |
| 86.9 % v7 (old) | 09 / 2022 | HP Envy 16 h0112nr i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | 2.3 kg | 19.8 mm | 16.00" | 3840x2400 | |
| 87.2 % v7 (old) | 03 / 2022 | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | 2.1 kg | 24.95 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
| 86.4 % v7 (old) | 10 / 2022 | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ R7 6800HS, Radeon RX 6700S | 1.7 kg | 19.5 mm | 14.00" | 2560x1600 | |
| 89.3 % v7 (old) | 01 / 2023 | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 R9 6900HX, Radeon RX 6800S | 2.2 kg | 16.9 mm | 16.00" | 2560x1600 |
案例
外壳得到了一个好的分数。华硕选择了塑料（基本单元）和金属（盖板）的组合，以及一个体面的材料强度/厚度。机箱只有在重压下才会有明显的屈服。与其他设备相比，盖子也相当抗扭，尽管指纹很快就会在金属盖上聚集。
至于设计，华硕在微妙和俏皮之间成功地做出了妥协。虽然深色的颜色相当朴素，但制造商对一些细节（电源按钮、功能灯、盖子的形状）却很有创意。在我们的评测样品中，所有的设计元素都非常干净地组合在一起。
A16不一定是最轻和最紧凑的游戏笔记本之一。在2.2公斤的重量下，这款16英寸的笔记本在适合频繁旅行方面受到限制，但大多数竞争设备在这里有可比性的数值。高度也是一个类似的故事，最大为2.7厘米。
设备
连接性
根据华硕的主页，端口的范围因型号不同而不同。例如，USB 4端口不是标准配置，而是只安装在更好或更昂贵的型号中。我们的评测设备不得不使用两个USB-A 3.2 Gen1端口和两个USB-C 3.2 Gen2端口（后者支持DisplayPort）。一个积极的方面。其中一个Type-C端口可以实现高达100瓦的电力传输。A16还有一个HDMI 2.1输出，一个RJ45端口，一个音频插孔和一个用于Kensington锁的开口。只缺少一个读卡器。
连接的分布更多是为右手设计的。由于许多端口放在左边，在左边使用鼠标可能会导致限制。
沟通
在WLAN性能方面，这款笔记本电脑以高达900MBit/s的发送和接收速率位居中场，我们在距离我们的新华硕Rapture GT-AXE11000参考路由器一米处测量了这一数据。尽管Zephyrus G14采用了类似的联发科芯片，但这一点显然被Zephyrus G14超越了。
| Networking | |
| iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Average of class Gaming (680 - 1890, n=149, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average MediaTek MT7921 (104.2 - 968, n=18) | |
| iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
| Average of class Gaming (469 - 1843, n=149, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average MediaTek MT7921 (47.8 - 985, n=18) | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Average MediaTek MT7921 (90 - 972, n=16) | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Average MediaTek MT7921 (548 - 985, n=16) | |
网络摄像头
网络摄像头的性能也很一般。与大多数笔记本一样，它缺乏图像清晰度和色彩准确性。
辅料
我们的评测样品所包含的唯一附件是一些信息手册。240瓦的电源装置重量刚刚超过500克，尺寸约为16 x 7.5 x 2厘米，所以它既不小也不特别笨重。
维护
要进入TUF Gaming A16的内部，必须从底部卸下10多颗十字螺丝。然后，整个底板可以用很大的力气从其锚定处撬开。几乎所有组件都可以看到，而固态硬盘和内存模块则隐藏在塑料薄膜后面（见照片）。
担保
在德国，保修期超过24个月。这在其他国家可能有所不同，所以买家应在购买前与卖家仔细核实。
输入设备
键盘
华硕可以稍微改进一下键盘。虽然键盘总体上是一个体面的数字，但仔细检查后会发现一些弱点和不一致的地方。从打字的感觉开始，在压力点和行程方面感觉有点松软。我们希望这里的反馈更清晰或更硬。
布局也是值得商榷的。除了F键之外，方向箭头也非常小。笔者认为，一些功能（如回车/退车）被合并在一起的事实是不方便的。此外，字迹相对较弱，因此可以分几步调整的白色背光在白天也应该保持激活状态。完整的数字键盘和四个特殊键，包括音量控制，应该被视为加分项。
触摸板
触摸板几乎在所有方面都令人印象深刻。除了它的尺寸（约13 x 7.5厘米），它的滑行特性也很令人满意。由于表面光滑，可以实现极快的输入。触摸板的精确性和干净的手势支持也得到了进一步的赞扬。然而，底部的点击按钮并不十分完美。这些按钮可以更稳定一些，不那么摇摇欲坠。
显示
TUF Gaming A16提供一个16:10格式的哑光16英寸显示屏。我们的评测模型采用了165赫兹的面板，分辨率为1,920 x 1,200。
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 308 cd/m²
Contrast: 1339:1 (Black: 0.23 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.47 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 1.02
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
70.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
97.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
69.4% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.228
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 NE160WUM-NX2 (BOE0B33), IPS-Level, 1920x1200, 16" | HP Envy 16 h0112nr Samsung SDC4174, OLED, 3840x2400, 16" | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM TL156VDXP0101, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ BOEhydis NE140QDM-NX1, IPS, 2560x1600, 14" | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 BOE CQ NE160QDM-NY1, IPS, 2560x1600, 16" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 23% | -3% | 21% | 1% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 69.4 | 99.3 43% | 66.4 -4% | 97.6 41% | 69.8 1% |
| sRGB Coverage | 97.8 | 100 2% | 97 -1% | 99.9 2% | 98.1 0% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 70.9 | 88 24% | 68.5 -3% | 85.6 21% | 71.9 1% |
| Response Times | 85% | 20% | 46% | 7% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 17 ? | 2 ? 88% | 5.6 ? 67% | 8.3 ? 51% | 10 ? 41% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 10.1 ? | 1.9 ? 81% | 12.8 ? -27% | 6 ? 41% | 12.8 ? -27% |
| PWM Frequency | 240.4 ? | 26191 ? | |||
| Screen | -6% | -3% | -20% | 1% | |
| Brightness middle | 308 | 328.8 7% | 353.7 15% | 500 62% | 492.4 60% |
| Brightness | 293 | 332 13% | 340 16% | 470 60% | 471 61% |
| Brightness Distribution | 90 | 97 8% | 89 -1% | 85 -6% | 90 0% |
| Black Level * | 0.23 | 0.34 -48% | 0.42 -83% | 0.4 -74% | |
| Contrast | 1339 | 1040 -22% | 1190 -11% | 1231 -8% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.47 | 1.53 -4% | 1.74 -18% | 2.45 -67% | 1.9 -29% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 2.98 | 6.04 -103% | 3.63 -22% | 5.34 -79% | 3.81 -28% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.02 | 0.5 51% | 1.2 -18% | 0.99 3% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 2.2 | 1.3 41% | 2.1 5% | 3.1 -41% | 1.7 23% |
| Gamma | 2.228 99% | 2.18 101% | 2.3 96% | 2.213 99% | 2.36 93% |
| CCT | 6228 104% | 6362 102% | 6257 104% | 7251 90% | 6497 100% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 34% /
18% | 5% /
1% | 16% /
-2% | 3% /
2% |
* ... smaller is better
如果你不考虑糟糕的亮度（平均只有293cd/m²），IPS屏幕几乎没有显示任何弱点。0.23cd/m²的黑值应该能满足大多数买家的要求，对比度超过1,300:1也应如此。此外，响应时间（黑到白10毫秒，灰到灰17毫秒）也不错，而且良好的色彩再现不需要校准。
对于色彩空间，我们的测量设备记录了98%的sRGB，71%的AdobeRGB和69%的P3--对于一个游戏笔记本来说是可用的数值。视角符合典型的IPS标准，所以它们相当好，即使是从陡峭的角度。
对于户外使用，更高的亮度水平将是可取的。此外，我们的评测设备在底部边缘有光晕（只有在深色内容中可见）。
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 10.1 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 5.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 4.7 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. » 24 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 17 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 8 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 9 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. » 28 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| 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 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
业绩
在设备方面，TUF Gaming A16属于中端产品。希望多年来以最大细节进行游戏的热情玩家应该到其他地方去寻找更强大的硬件。
测试条件
在预装的Armory Crate中可以选择各种性能配置和GPU模式，由于功能众多，有时会出现过载和混乱。除非另有说明，我们所有的测试都是在性能 模式下进行的，GPU模式设置为标准。虽然Turbo 模式会多出几个百分点（注意Cinebench循环和3DMark分数），但这是以不成比例的高噪音水平为代价的。
| 静音模式 | 性能模式 | 涡轮模式 | |
| CPU PL1 | 75瓦 | 105瓦 | 120瓦 |
| CPU PL2 | 90瓦 | 114瓦 | 144瓦 |
处理器
Ryzen 7 7735HS是一款配备16MB L3缓存的八核处理器，通过6纳米工艺制造，通过SMT可以并行处理多达16个线程。基本时钟为3.2 GHz，在负载下可能达到4.75 GHz。TDP的范围是35至54瓦，取决于笔记本的情况。由于图形切换，TUF A16可以在dGPU和Radeon 680M之间自动切换。Radeon 680M集成在处理器中，这对于要求不高的游戏来说绝对是足够的。
在Cinebench R15的长期测试中，Ryzen 7 7735HS提供了令人满意的稳定性能值，没有下降，这也适用于大多数竞争对手。其速度始终与联想Legion S7（R9 6900HX）和惠普Envy 16（Core i7-12700H）相当。
Cinebench R15 Multi Sustained Load
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
| Performance Rating | |
| Average of class Gaming | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
| Average of class Gaming (4986 - 60169, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (12718 - 17161, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
| Average of class Gaming (25360 - 252486, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (81722 - 105483, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
| Average of class Gaming (1339 - 10389, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (2818 - 3494, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
| Average of class Gaming (50699 - 200651, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (90101 - 108729, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
| Average of class Gaming (4800 - 32988, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (11441 - 13097, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average of class Gaming (12321 - 134044, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (44756 - 58232, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Average of class Gaming (19065 - 328679, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (49927 - 137629, n=13) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
| Average of class Gaming (373 - 2409, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (651 - 906, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
| Average of class Gaming (2540 - 31796, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (1459 - 9094, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
| Average of class Gaming (10805 - 60161, n=185, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (19153 - 30542, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
系统性能
在系统测试中，Gaming A16在比较领域中排在最后一名（仅次于Zephyrus G14），但在PCMark 10中的7332分仍然是一个好成绩。有点恼人的是，在交付状态下，系统在打开程序时有时会冻结或挂起几秒钟。这是由于Armoury Crate软件中的Smart Access Graphic选项造成的，它负责GPU的切换。
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
| PCMark 10 / Score | |
| Average of class Gaming (5776 - 9852, n=166, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
| PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Average of class Gaming (9057 - 12334, n=165, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
| Average of class Gaming (6662 - 14612, n=165, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
| Average of class Gaming (6703 - 18475, n=165, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS, AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| CrossMark / Overall | |
| Average of class Gaming (1247 - 2344, n=147, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| CrossMark / Productivity | |
| Average of class Gaming (1299 - 2204, n=147, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| CrossMark / Creativity | |
| Average of class Gaming (1275 - 2660, n=147, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
| Average of class Gaming (1030 - 2330, n=147, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 7332 points | |
Help | ||
| AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
| Average of class Gaming (21842 - 94222, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (30324 - 52012, n=13) | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
| Average of class Gaming (23681 - 99713, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (33938 - 51856, n=13) | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
| Average of class Gaming (22986 - 108954, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (33175 - 55284, n=13) | |
| AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
| Average of class Gaming (59.5 - 259, n=184, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (78.2 - 109.7, n=13) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
* ... smaller is better
DPC延时
尽管到目前为止，延迟是测试领域中最好的，但LatencyMon工具预见了在实时处理音频内容或类似内容时可能出现的问题，这应该只影响一小部分买家。
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
* ... smaller is better
存储设备
华硕为我们的评测配置提供了一个基于M.2的1TB SSD。这块NVMe硬盘为PCIe标准提供了坚实的性能，连续读取速度接近4000MB/s，连续写入速度约3000MB/s（AS SSD基准）。一个好处是：箱子里还有一个M.2插槽是空的。
* ... smaller is better
Sustained Read Performance: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
图形卡
华硕安装了一个中端GPU以配合中端CPU。Radeon RX 7600S提供1,792个着色器单元，游戏时钟为1,865 MHz。8GB GDDR6显存只有128位，按照今天的标准，这有点紧张。
RX 7600S在基准图表中表现得足够好。在3DMarks中，该显卡与旧的RX 6800S大致处于同一水平（但有更好的光线追踪性能）。具有相同的TGP的RTX 3060偶尔会有很大的表现。
| 3DMark Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Average of class Gaming | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 (Turbo Mode) | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr -1! | |
| 3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Average of class Gaming (1029 - 72178, n=183, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 (Turbo Mode) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S (33037 - 35278, n=4) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| 3DMark 06 Standard Score | 46893 points | |
| 3DMark Vantage P Result | 79339 points | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 26235 points | |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 233845 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 59913 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 22642 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 9261 points | |
Help | ||
* ... smaller is better
游戏性能
游戏基准测试并没有呈现出统一的画面。有时RX 7600S的表现略低于GeForce RTX 3060的水平，有时略高于此。与合成基准类似，RX 7600S几乎没有区别于其RX 6700S和RX 6800S的前辈，这对于一个新的模型系列来说有点令人失望（更深入的比较，见我们的 游戏列表.)
尽管如此，TUF Gaming A16的速度足以以60 FPS以上的速度运行几乎所有的FHD游戏。该显卡还将合理地适用于QHD显示器，帧率为40以上。只有在4K范围内，RX 7600S才会迅速耗尽动力。在这里，如果选择最大设置，目前的标题很少超过40 FPS。
| Performance Rating - Percent | |
| Average of class Gaming | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM -1! | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr -1! | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 -1! | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ -1! | |
| The Witcher 3 v4.00 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset / On AA:FX | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average of class Gaming (25.7 - 150, n=17, last 2 years) | |
| The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
| Average of class Gaming (18.4 - 216, n=163, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x | |
| Average of class Gaming (12.1 - 167.7, n=169, last 2 years) | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark - 1920x1080 High Quality | |
| Average of class Gaming (19.2 - 201, n=181, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Strange Brigade - 1920x1080 ultra AA:ultra AF:16 | |
| Average of class Gaming (38.9 - 421, n=178, last 2 years) | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking | |
| Average of class Gaming (33.2 - 220, n=187, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| X-Plane 11.11 - 1920x1080 high (fps_test=3) | |
| Average of class Gaming (31.5 - 166.2, n=193, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| The Witcher 3 v4.00 | |
| 1920x1080 High Preset / On AA:FX | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
| Average of class Gaming (10.1 - 176.2, n=16, last 2 years) | |
| 1920x1080 Ultra Preset / On AA:FX | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S () | |
| Average of class Gaming (25.7 - 150, n=17, last 2 years) | |
| The Witcher 3 | |
| 1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) | |
| Average of class Gaming (40.1 - 449, n=120, last 2 years) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S (152 - 166.5, n=2) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
| Average of class Gaming (18.4 - 216, n=163, last 2 years) | |
| Average AMD Radeon RX 7600S (91 - 98.1, n=2) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 | |
| Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 | |
| Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ | |
| HP Envy 16 h0112nr | |
在我们用60分钟的测试中 TheWitcher 3,如我们的图表所示，除了轻微的波动之外，性能方面没有任何异常（例如帧率下降）。然而，AMD仍然需要调整驱动程序：在测试中出现了一两次崩溃。 F1 22通常在启动时崩溃并有错误信息。
Witcher 3 FPS Chart
| low | med. | high | ultra | QHD | 4K | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GTA V (2015) | 169 | 154.1 | 85.5 | |||
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 186.7 | 152 | 91 | |||
| Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 131.4 | 112.5 | 110 | |||
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 103.4 | 78.2 | ||||
| X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 68.2 | 55 | ||||
| Far Cry 5 (2018) | 102 | 99 | 96 | |||
| Strange Brigade (2018) | 227 | 190 | 162.7 | |||
| Outriders (2021) | 115.2 | 103.2 | 89.1 | 59.7 | 32.9 | |
| Resident Evil Village (2021) | 165.4 | 159.1 | 141.5 | 92.3 | 45.7 | |
| Days Gone (2021) | 131.3 | 111.7 | 79.9 | 56.5 | 30.6 | |
| Deathloop (2021) | 112.1 | 93.2 | 69.4 | 48.7 | 23 | |
| Back 4 Blood (2021) | 186.9 | 155.2 | 146 | 94.7 | 48.4 | |
| Guardians of the Galaxy (2021) | 110 | 108 | 102 | 75 | 42 | |
| Riders Republic (2021) | 91 | 87 | 83 | 68 | 35 | |
| Farming Simulator 22 (2021) | 163.8 | 139.5 | 125.5 | 110.3 | 68.6 | |
| Halo Infinite (2021) | 101.3 | 83.7 | 79.6 | 59.5 | 34.1 | |
| God of War (2022) | 93.7 | 80.9 | 57.7 | 45.8 | 28 | |
| Rainbow Six Extraction (2022) | 156 | 154 | 125 | 76 | 37 | |
| Dying Light 2 (2022) | 79.1 | 65.7 | 43.2 | 20.8 | ||
| Elden Ring (2022) | 59.7 | 59.6 | 59.5 | 58.2 | 34.8 | |
| Cyberpunk 2077 1.6 (2022) | 103 | 84 | 69.7 | 42.9 | 18.4 | |
| Elex 2 (2022) | 111.7 | 100.3 | 86.7 | 59.9 | 31.3 | |
| Ghostwire Tokyo (2022) | 125.1 | 122.7 | 115.3 | 75.4 | 35.8 | |
| Vampire Bloodhunt (2022) | 177.6 | 169.4 | 147.4 | 104.1 | 51.7 | |
| F1 22 (2022) | 0 () | 0 () | 0 () | 0 () | 0 () | |
| The Quarry (2022) | 95 | 77.9 | 57.1 | 37.9 | 12.8 | |
| A Plague Tale Requiem (2022) | 53.7 | 46 | 39.7 | 28.2 | 15.2 | |
| Uncharted Legacy of Thieves Collection (2022) | 75 | 68.6 | 65.9 | 47.4 | 17.3 | |
| Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 2022 (2022) | 135 | 99 | 94 | 65 | 37 | |
| Spider-Man Miles Morales (2022) | 96 | 86.7 | 79.8 | 55.9 | 30 | |
| The Callisto Protocol (2022) | 79.4 | 48.6 | 48.4 | 35.6 | 20.9 | |
| Need for Speed Unbound (2022) | 103.6 | 81.8 | 66.5 | 51.1 | 29.9 | |
| High On Life (2023) | 138.7 | 103.7 | 80.5 | 49.1 | 21 | |
| The Witcher 3 v4.00 (2023) | 156.7 | 129.5 | 103.1 | 69.3 | 36.3 | |
| Dead Space Remake (2023) | 62.2 | 52.6 | 52.3 | 34.8 | 11.3 |
排放
噪声
对于一个中端游戏机来说，A16在负载下变得相当响亮。在Witcher 3 测试和满负荷的情况下，我们检测到16英寸处理器在没有耳机的情况下发出了非常明显的、令人讨厌的50 dB(A)的声音。在空闲模式和简单的活动中，如办公应用、视频播放和网上冲浪，风扇是舒适的抑制。在正常情况下，笔记本是无声的。如果你想让它在任何情况下都尽可能地安静，只需激活静音 模式。
Noise Level
| Idle |
| 24 / 25 / 28 dB(A) |
| Load |
| 42 / 50 dB(A) |
 | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min:  , med:  , max:  Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 24 dB(A) | ||
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 R7 7735HS, Radeon RX 7600S | HP Envy 16 h0112nr i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ R7 6800HS, Radeon RX 6700S | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 R9 6900HX, Radeon RX 6800S | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 1% | 1% | 0% | 8% | |
| off / environment * | 24 | 22.8 5% | 23.2 3% | 25 -4% | 23.1 4% |
| Idle Minimum * | 24 | 22.9 5% | 23.6 2% | 25 -4% | 23.1 4% |
| Idle Average * | 25 | 22.9 8% | 23.6 6% | 26 -4% | 23.1 8% |
| Idle Maximum * | 28 | 30.5 -9% | 25.4 9% | 29 -4% | 23.1 17% |
| Load Average * | 42 | 41.4 1% | 38 10% | 45 -7% | 31.4 25% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 50 | 51.1 -2% | 54.1 -8% | 43 14% | 51.4 -3% |
| Load Maximum * | 50 | 51.4 -3% | 57.2 -14% | 45 10% | 51.2 -2% |
* ... smaller is better
温度
除了噪音之外，温度的发展也相当高。即使在空闲模式下，机箱在某些地方也会升温到40℃，这是测试领域的最高值。任何长时间将笔记本放在腿上的人都不会对A16感到满意。在负载情况下，上侧的温度也比同类平均水平高，最高为54℃。
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 54 °C / 129 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 47 °C / 117 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(±) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 36.3 °C / 97 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 40.7 °C / 105 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(±) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 36 °C / 96.8 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (-7.1 °C / -12.8 F).
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 R7 7735HS, Radeon RX 7600S | HP Envy 16 h0112nr i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ R7 6800HS, Radeon RX 6700S | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 R9 6900HX, Radeon RX 6800S | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | 14% | 5% | 2% | 18% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 54 | 45.2 16% | 44.4 18% | 53 2% | 46.6 14% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 47 | 44 6% | 48.8 -4% | 54 -15% | 50.8 -8% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 40 | 33.6 16% | 37.8 5% | 34 15% | 26.4 34% |
| Idle Bottom * | 40 | 32.6 18% | 39.6 1% | 38 5% | 27.2 32% |
* ... smaller is better
压力测试
这也难怪，因为这些组件在负载下达到了很高的温度。在使用Furmark和Prime95进行60分钟的压力测试后，处理器升温到90℃以上（GPU：约80℃）。在TheWitcher 3 中，Ryzen 7 7735HS只保持在80℃左右的轻微温度（GPU也是约80℃）。
发言人
扬声器充其量是平庸的。我们的音频分析发现弱点主要在低音的强度上--大多数笔记本在这方面没有更好的表现。至少82dB(A)的最大音量是相当高的。
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | reduced highs - on average 6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (10.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 60% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 32% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (76.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.2% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 36% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 22% of all tested devices were better, 5% similar, 73% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
电源管理
消耗功率
在积极的一面，A16在功耗方面从竞争中脱颖而出。如果你把所有的数值加在一起，这款16英寸的产品在某种程度上比其同类产品更经济。就所提供的性能而言，8至16瓦的空闲消耗和97至168瓦的负载消耗是可以接受的。240瓦的电源（更强大的配置为280瓦）是绰绰有余的。
| Off / Standby | 0.1 / 0.7 Watt |
| Idle | 8 / 11 / 16 Watt |
| Load |
97 / 168 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 R7 7735HS, Radeon RX 7600S | HP Envy 16 h0112nr i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ R7 6800HS, Radeon RX 6700S | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 R9 6900HX, Radeon RX 6800S | Average of class Gaming | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -21% | -17% | -30% | -16% | -53% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 8 | 10 -25% | 6.3 21% | 12 -50% | 8.8 -10% | 13.5 ? -69% |
| Idle Average * | 11 | 10.9 1% | 9.8 11% | 18 -64% | 14.7 -34% | 18.9 ? -72% |
| Idle Maximum * | 16 | 27.8 -74% | 26.5 -66% | 26 -63% | 19.8 -24% | 26.7 ? -67% |
| Load Average * | 97 | 116.4 -20% | 103.8 -7% | 88 9% | 85.3 12% | 106.3 ? -10% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 161.5 | 133.7 17% | 189 -17% | 157.7 2% | 167.5 -4% | |
| Load Maximum * | 168 | 209.8 -25% | 241.9 -44% | 194 -15% | 230.7 -37% | 249 ? -48% |
* ... smaller is better
Power Consumption Witcher 3 / Stress test
Power Consumption with an External Monitor
电池寿命
TUF Gaming A16的最大亮点是充足的电池寿命。得益于强大的90Wh电池，这款16英寸的笔记本在理想条件下（无负载，最低显示亮度）可以持续20小时，这是测试领域的最佳价值。在现实情况下，如在中等亮度下通过WLAN上网，笔记本可以持续12小时左右--也是非常值得称赞的（在静音 模式下的测量）。
| Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617 R7 7735HS, Radeon RX 7600S, 90 Wh | HP Envy 16 h0112nr i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, 83 Wh | Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX507ZM i7-12700H, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU, 90 Wh | Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 GA402RJ R7 6800HS, Radeon RX 6700S, 76 Wh | Lenovo Legion S7 16ARHA7 R9 6900HX, Radeon RX 6800S, 71 Wh | Average of class Gaming | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | -14% | -37% | -15% | -48% | -35% | |
| Reader / Idle | 1212 | 1068 -12% | 947 -22% | 565 ? -53% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 724 | 472 -35% | 285 -61% | 612 -15% | 374 -48% | 376 ? -48% |
| Load | 90 | 94 4% | 66 -27% | 85.6 ? -5% |
Pros
Cons
判决书
如果3D操作中陡峭的温度和噪音发展不会困扰你，TUF Gaming A16 FA617是一款成功的中端游戏笔记本。
的 Ryzen 7 7735HS和 Radeon RX 7600S在我们的审查配置中，为1920x1200的原生分辨率提供了足够的动力，即使是在现代的标题中。16英寸的屏幕提供了良好的对比度，干净的颜色和坚实的响应时间，尽管亮度可以更好一点。
该机箱在外观上不显眼，拥有相当好的连接性和一个伟大的触摸板。键盘的反馈有点松动，华硕应该在未来加以改进。声音和网络摄像头也可以做一些优化。
电池寿命（长达20小时）是一个绝对的卖点。几乎没有任何其他游戏笔记本能达到如此高的效果。
总的来说，这款笔记本电脑足够好，可以获得86%的评分。作为替代品，读者应该考虑16英寸的 Legion S7配有 Ryzen 9 6900HX和一个 Radeon RX 6800S，取得了89%的略高评价。同时，英特尔和Nvidia的粉丝可以去买 TUF Gaming F15与它的 酷睿i7-12700H和 GeForce RTX 3060或类似的笔记本（尽管RTX 3060的继任者已经在地平线上）。
价格和可用性
华硕TUF游戏机A16优势版FA617似乎还没有在美国或其他地方销售。有兴趣的买家应定期通过华硕的官方网站检查供应情况的变化。
Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA617
- 02/13/2023 v7 (old)
Florian Glaser
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
