Every laptop we have figures for

Frame rates measured by Notebookcheck.

What it asks of a laptop

Look at the shape of the data before anything else. Six laptops, 1920x1080, High preset, upscaling switched off — and exactly one of them clears 60fps. Nothing reaches 100. Nothing comes close to 144. The median across the sample is 48fps, which is not a number you often see at 1080p on current-generation hardware.

That single fact reframes the whole conversation. Most games at 1080p on a modern laptop GPU are a question of how much headroom you have — whether you're feeding a 165Hz panel or a 240Hz one. Here, the question is whether you're getting a stable 60 at all, and on five of the six machines Notebookcheck measured, the answer is no.

The difficulty is unambiguously GPU-side. Watch how cleanly the figures stack by tier: RTX 5050 averages 42fps, RTX 5060 lands at 48, RTX 5070 at 54, RTX 5090 at 93. There's no plateau, no point where the numbers stop climbing because something else has become the bottleneck. Add graphics silicon, get frames — right up to the top of the stack. In a CPU-limited title you'd expect the 5070 and 5090 results to converge at 1080p; instead the 5090 is 72% faster than the 5070, which is close to the raw hardware gap. This is a pure rasterisation load, and the laptop that wins is simply the one with the most GPU in it.

The other thing worth noting is how compressed the bottom of the stack is. The gap from a 5050 to a 5060 is about 14%; from a 5060 to a 5070, about 12.5%. Those are small steps in a game where you need a large one. Buying one tier up the entry-level ladder does not move you from unplayable to comfortable — it moves you from 42fps to 48fps.

What runs it

RTX 5090 — 93fps. The Medion Erazer Beast 16 X1 Ultimate is the only machine in the sample that produces a genuinely comfortable 1080p result. Even then, note what "comfortable" means here: 93fps is a good number, but it's not 144, and it's not 100. The flagship mobile GPU, at the game's High preset without upscaling, cannot saturate a high-refresh panel at 1080p. That should tell you everything about the load.

RTX 5070 — 54fps. The MSI Katana 17 HX misses 60 by six frames. That's frustrating rather than fatal — it's the sort of deficit you'd expect to close by nudging one or two settings down from High, though nothing in the measured data quantifies that. As shipped, at the tested preset, it's a sub-60 experience.

RTX 5060 — 48fps. The Lenovo LOQ, running its 5060 at 115W, lands at 48fps. That's a reasonably well-fed configuration and it still sits a full 20% short of 60.

RTX 5050 — 39 to 48fps. Three machines, and the spread within the tier is the most interesting detail in the whole sample. The Medion Erazer Scout 17 E1 hits 48fps — matching the 115W RTX 5060 in the Lenovo LOQ exactly. The HP Victus 15-fa2160ng manages 39fps on the same GPU. That's a 23% swing on identical silicon, which is a cooling and power-limit story, not a specification story. If you're shopping at this tier, the badge on the box tells you far less than the chassis it's bolted into.

Tally it up: 60fps is cleared by one of six laptops. 100fps by none. 144fps by none.

The cheapest laptop that handles it

This depends entirely on what you'll accept, and the honest answer is that the fact sheet doesn't contain a cheap 60fps machine.

The MSI Cyborg 15 at £984 is the cheapest machine measured, and it returns 40fps. For a slow-paced game that's on the edge of tolerable rather than actively broken, but you're playing at a frame rate that will feel heavy in any sustained action, and you have no margin at all for a busier scene than the benchmark run.

The MSI Katana 17 HX at £2,312 is the closest thing to a 60fps machine short of the flagship, and it's still short at 54fps. That's £1,328 more than the Cyborg for 14 extra frames — a poor rate of exchange, and one that still doesn't get you over the line at the tested settings.

The Medion Erazer Beast 16 X1 Ultimate at £4,884 is the only laptop here that comfortably clears 60, at 93fps. It costs roughly five times the Cyborg for 2.3 times the performance.

The genuinely useful budget observation isn't about price at all: the unpriced Medion Erazer Scout 17 E1, on an RTX 5050, matched a 115W RTX 5060 at 48fps. A well-cooled entry-level card beat a badly-cooled one by 23% within the same tier. If your budget is under £1,500, chassis quality and sustained power delivery will do more for you than the GPU model number.

What this means if you're buying

Three things follow from these numbers.

• Don't buy a high-refresh panel for this game. Not a single machine in the sample reached 100fps at 1080p, and the fastest mobile GPU on the market managed 93. A 165Hz or 240Hz screen is wasted capability here — you'd be buying refresh rate you have no hardware to feed.
• Stepping one tier up the budget ladder buys you very little. 5050 to 5060 is roughly six frames. 5060 to 5070 is another six. If you're at 40fps and want 60, no single-tier upgrade in this data gets you there.
• The measured figures are with upscaling off. That's a deliberately unforgiving test condition and worth remembering when you compare these results against numbers quoted elsewhere. Whatever an upscaler would recover isn't captured in this sample, so treat these as the floor of what the hardware does, not a verdict on what the game can be made to run at.

Bluntly: this is one of the heaviest 1080p loads in the current benchmark set. Below the RTX 5090, plan on either sub-60 frame rates at High or on turning settings down.