Review
Asus TUF Gaming A16 review
Frame rates
1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off. Averages 118fps across the 5 core benchmark games.
Measured on this machine. Source: Notebookcheck, 2025-09-25.
Not scored: no confirmed UK price
We have the full benchmark suite for this machine, so it ranks on the frame rate leaderboard like any other. What we don't have is a UK listing for this exact configuration - it's sold as a European review unit, or only in specifications that differ from the one tested. Since 30% of our score is value for money, scoring it would mean pretending price is no object, which would flatter it against every laptop you can actually buy. The frame rates below are real and comparable; there is just no buying recommendation to make yet.
How these numbers were produced
Frame rates here are not measured by us, and we label how each one was arrived at. A figure marked measured comes from a published run on that exact machine. A figure marked representative is derived from the GPU and its power limit (TGP) and cross-referenced against published reviews - a sound estimate of what that configuration delivers, but not a measurement of that specific laptop. Unless stated otherwise, numbers are 1920x1080, High preset, upscaling off. Where a laptop ships in several power configurations we use the wattage of the exact SKU listed, because a 140W RTX 5070 and a 115W one are not the same product.
In use
The short version
The Asus TUF Gaming A16 FA608UP is a straightforward proposition on the evidence available: it combines an RTX 5070 running at a 115W GPU power limit with a Ryzen 7 260, 32GB of memory, a 1024GB SSD and a 16in 2560x1600 IPS display with a 165Hz refresh rate. The measured gaming figures are strong at 1920x1080 on High settings with upscaling disabled, but they also show a familiar reality for this class of machine: its display can refresh far faster than many demanding games will run at those settings.
Notebookcheck’s benchmark data gives the A16 exceptional results in the lighter and better-scaling games here. Strange Brigade reaches 241fps and F1 24 manages 234fps, both comfortably beyond the screen’s 165Hz refresh rate. Final Fantasy XV at 142fps, Baldur’s Gate 3 at 134fps, Dota 2 at 129fps, GTA V at 125fps and Cyberpunk 2077 at 121fps are also clearly fast results, although they do not reach the display’s maximum refresh rate. X-Plane 11 is the outlier at 81fps, showing that a powerful graphics configuration does not turn every game into a high-refresh experience.
The important qualification is that all of these figures were measured at 1920x1080, High preset, with upscaling off. The panel’s native resolution is 2560x1600, so the benchmark data is useful as a clean indication of the underlying performance available from this RTX 5070 configuration, but it is not evidence that every measured result will be reproduced at the screen’s full resolution. That distinction matters more here than it would on a 1920x1080 laptop, because the A16’s panel has substantially more resolution than the test setting.
There is no overall score for this exact configuration because its UK price is not confirmed. The benchmark suite is complete and the machine can be placed normally on the frame-rate leaderboard, but value cannot be assessed responsibly without a confirmed price.
That does not stop the performance judgement. This looks like a good fit for someone who wants a 16in gaming laptop with high-refresh potential for competitive and less demanding titles, while retaining enough measured performance for graphically heavier games at the stated benchmark settings. It is less obviously the right choice for someone buying specifically to run every demanding game at 2560x1600 while keeping the panel fully fed, or for a buyer who wants a portable machine and cannot tolerate a 2.213kg laptop.
The A16’s closest recorded rivals also make its position clear. It is only marginally ahead of the Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH G10 RTX and the Asus ProArt P16 across their shared games, close to the ASUS TUF Gaming A18 with the same RTX 5070 and 115W limit, and narrowly ahead of the Lenovo Legion 5 15AHP G10. Against the Gigabyte Gaming A16, which uses an RTX 5070 limited to 85W, the measured shared-game advantage is still modest rather than dramatic. This is not a machine that separates itself from nearby configurations by an enormous benchmark gap. It is a competitive RTX 5070 laptop whose appeal will depend heavily on the eventual UK price, screen preference, chassis preference and the specific games you play.
Performance
What Notebookcheck’s figures show
The benchmark results were measured by Notebookcheck on 2025-09-25 at 1920x1080, High preset and with upscaling disabled. That setup is important. It removes the variable results that can come from different upscaling modes and gives a direct view of the machine’s performance at a widely useful resolution. It is also not the A16’s native 2560x1600 resolution, so these should be read as benchmark figures for the stated setting, rather than as a promise of native-resolution frame rates.
The headline result is a mean of 118fps across the scoring-suite games. That mean is useful as a compact summary, but the individual results are more useful when deciding whether this laptop fits a particular person’s gaming habits. The spread is wide enough that no single average can describe the actual experience across every title.
At the top end, Strange Brigade runs at 241fps and F1 24 at 234fps. These are the results that make the 165Hz panel meaningful. Both games exceed the screen’s refresh rate under the stated test conditions. That does not mean the display becomes irrelevant once the measured result is above 165Hz; it means the laptop has more frame-rate headroom than the panel can display at a single moment. For players who care about smooth motion in these particular games, the A16 has the measured performance to take advantage of a high-refresh screen.
Final Fantasy XV reaches 142fps. That is below the 165Hz ceiling, but it remains a very strong result at the stated settings. It suggests a game that should feel responsive and fluid without needing the machine to hit the display’s maximum refresh rate. It also demonstrates why treating 165Hz as a pass-or-fail target would be misleading. A laptop does not become inadequate merely because a demanding game runs below the panel limit. The more useful question is whether the measured result is appropriate for the player’s priorities, the chosen settings and the kind of game involved.
Baldur’s Gate 3 records 134fps, Dota 2 records 129fps and GTA V records 125fps. These are all strong figures, but they sit in a different category from the Strange Brigade and F1 24 results. The A16 is clearly capable of delivering high frame rates in these titles at 1920x1080 High with upscaling disabled, yet the screen’s full 165Hz refresh rate is not reached by the published numbers. That matters most to buyers who are choosing the A16 because they specifically want every game to match the panel limit. The data does not support that expectation.
Cyberpunk 2077 comes in at 121fps. For a demanding game, that is an encouraging result under the stated conditions, particularly because the result is measured without upscaling. It is also a useful reminder that “RTX 5070” is not enough information by itself. A gaming laptop’s frame rate depends on the configured GPU power limit, processor, memory, game engine, test resolution and preset. The A16’s result is therefore more useful than a generic expectation based on the GPU name. The published figure tells us what this specific laptop configuration achieved in this specific benchmark scenario.
X-Plane 11 is the clear low point in the scoring suite at 81fps. That is still a playable measured result, but it is far removed from the figures in Strange Brigade and F1 24. The difference is not evidence that anything is wrong with the machine. It shows why buyers should not shop only by the mean result or only by the graphics card label. Different games place different demands on the processor, graphics card and wider system. A laptop that is capable of 241fps in Strange Brigade can still produce 81fps in X-Plane 11 at the same stated test resolution and High preset.
That spread is the central performance story of the TUF Gaming A16. It is not a laptop that produces one fixed type of result across the suite. It ranges from frame rates that exceed a 165Hz screen to a result far below that limit, with several demanding games sitting between those extremes. The sensible reading is not that one title disproves another. It is that the machine has a broad performance range, and the relevance of that range depends on the games a buyer actually plays.
The 115W RTX 5070 configuration
The RTX 5070 in this Asus is configured with a 115W GPU power limit. That is a meaningful specification because laptop GPUs with the same name do not necessarily run under the same power limit. In practical buying terms, the 115W figure identifies this as a particular RTX 5070 implementation rather than an interchangeable generic part.
The measured figures show that the configuration has enough performance to produce very high frame rates in Strange Brigade and F1 24, while also sustaining strong results in Final Fantasy XV, Baldur’s Gate 3, Dota 2, GTA V and Cyberpunk 2077. They do not show that 115W automatically produces a particular result in every game, because the games themselves vary sharply. X-Plane 11 is the clearest evidence of that. The GPU power limit is part of the machine’s performance profile, not a guarantee that every game will behave like the best result in the suite.
It is tempting to assume that the 115W specification should create a large lead over every lower-power RTX 5070 laptop. The closest rival data does not support making that claim. The Gigabyte Gaming A16 also uses an RTX 5070, but at an 85W limit. Across the games both machines have been measured in, the Asus averages 4fps ahead. That is an advantage for the TUF Gaming A16, but it is not evidence of an overwhelming gulf. The two systems may differ in more than GPU power configuration, and the shared-game average is the relevant evidence rather than an assumption based on the specification alone.
The ASUS TUF Gaming A18 is even more revealing. It also uses an RTX 5070 at 115W, and the A16 averages 2fps behind it across their shared games. That is close enough to describe the two as near neighbours in benchmark terms. The shared-game figures do not support presenting the A16 as clearly faster or clearly slower in any broad sense. They support a more useful conclusion: the A16 performs in the same general territory as another TUF system with the same stated GPU and power limit.
Buyers should therefore treat the 115W RTX 5070 as a positive piece of configuration information, but not as a substitute for the published frame-rate data. The figures in the actual games are what matter. On that evidence, the Asus has strong 1920x1080 High performance, with enough variation by title that anyone buying for a particular game should look first at that game’s result rather than the overall mean.
How the individual games change the recommendation
For Strange Brigade, the A16’s 241fps result places the laptop in a position where the screen’s 165Hz refresh rate is not the limiting performance figure. The measured output is above the display limit under the benchmark conditions. A buyer who spends significant time in games with similar demands can reasonably see the 165Hz panel as an asset rather than a specification that will sit unused.
F1 24 at 234fps tells a similar story. It is another result beyond 165Hz, so the A16 has the measured headroom to run that benchmark above the panel refresh ceiling. This matters for a buyer looking for a laptop that can handle games where frame rate is a major priority. It does not mean every racing game, every setting combination or every future release will behave identically. It means the published result for F1 24 is strong enough to justify the presence of the high-refresh display.
Final Fantasy XV at 142fps is a more representative example of the middle ground. The figure is not beyond 165Hz, but it is not close to the X-Plane 11 result either. It shows the A16 delivering a high frame rate in a game that does not reach the panel maximum under the stated conditions. Buyers who want smooth play at 1920x1080 High without insisting on a matched 165fps result should find this more than adequate evidence of performance.
Baldur’s Gate 3 at 134fps is particularly useful because it is part of the scoring suite. It reinforces the impression that the A16 can run substantial games at a high frame rate at the measured settings, but it also reinforces the point that the display’s maximum refresh rate is aspirational rather than universal. The difference between 134fps and 165Hz should not be treated as a flaw in the laptop; it should be treated as a reason to set expectations properly before buying.
Dota 2 reaches 129fps. That is another result where the A16 has plenty of measured performance for a high-refresh gaming laptop, even though it does not hit the stated refresh ceiling. For a buyer whose time is divided between competitive titles and more visually demanding games, this kind of result is arguably more useful than a single exceptional benchmark. It shows the laptop’s ability to remain well above basic playability expectations without making the unrealistic claim that every game will run at the maximum refresh rate.
GTA V at 125fps and Cyberpunk 2077 at 121fps are closely grouped. That grouping is more informative than either number alone. It suggests that, in the published test conditions, the A16 can maintain a consistently high level of performance in both titles without relying on upscaling. It also tells buyers that the system’s observed performance does not suddenly collapse as games become more demanding. The lower X-Plane 11 result is therefore better understood as a title-specific result within a varied suite, not as the universal ceiling of the hardware.
X-Plane 11 at 81fps is the result that should temper the more enthusiastic reading of the A16. It remains a usable frame rate, but it is not close to 165Hz and it is substantially lower than the other scoring-suite results. Flight simulation buyers should not look at the F1 24 or Strange Brigade figures and assume the same kind of result here. The published data says otherwise. Anyone whose main use is X-Plane 11 should regard the 81fps result as the relevant starting point for the purchase decision.
The performance conclusion is therefore specific rather than generic. The Asus TUF Gaming A16 is not simply “fast”. It is demonstrably very fast in Strange Brigade and F1 24, strong in Final Fantasy XV, Baldur’s Gate 3, Dota 2, GTA V and Cyberpunk 2077, and more limited in X-Plane 11. That is a useful profile for many gaming buyers, but the fit is strongest for someone who values broad 1920x1080 High performance and understands that the exact result will depend heavily on the game.
Memory and storage context
The 32GB memory configuration is welcome in a gaming laptop positioned around an RTX 5070. It means the A16 is not presented as a graphics-heavy machine paired with a minimal memory specification. The fact sheet does not provide memory speed, memory configuration or upgrade information, so there is no basis for making claims about those details. What can be said is that 32GB gives the machine a substantial stated memory allocation alongside its gaming-focused graphics hardware.
The 1024GB SSD is similarly sensible on paper. Modern game libraries can consume storage quickly, and 1024GB is a more practical starting point than a smaller drive for a buyer intending to keep several large games installed. The available information does not include storage performance, additional drive support or upgrade access, so those should not be assumed. The listed capacity is useful, but it is not enough to judge the SSD’s speed or the machine’s internal expansion options.
The Ryzen 7 260 is the stated processor, but the published information does not include processor benchmark results. It would be wrong to attribute the X-Plane 11 result to the CPU, or to claim that the processor is the reason for the stronger results elsewhere. Gaming performance is produced by the whole system and the game workload. The useful evidence remains the measured frame rates rather than speculation about which component is responsible for each result.
The screen
The A16 uses a 16in IPS panel with a native resolution of 2560x1600 and a 165Hz refresh rate. On specification alone, that is a good match for a gaming laptop intended to balance work space, game detail and high-refresh play. The crucial question is not whether 165Hz sounds appealing; it is whether the measured performance can make effective use of it.
At the benchmark setting of 1920x1080 High with upscaling disabled, Strange Brigade at 241fps and F1 24 at 234fps exceed the panel’s 165Hz refresh rate. Those are the games in the supplied data where the answer is unambiguous: the machine has enough measured performance to drive frame rates beyond the display ceiling. A buyer focused on those titles, or on games with similar performance demands, is getting a screen specification that the benchmark data can support.
The rest of the measured games do not reach 165fps. Final Fantasy XV at 142fps, Baldur’s Gate 3 at 134fps, Dota 2 at 129fps, GTA V at 125fps and Cyberpunk 2077 at 121fps are all below the panel maximum. X-Plane 11 at 81fps is further away again. This does not make the 165Hz display a poor choice. It means the display provides a ceiling that some games can exceed, while other games will run below it at the measured setting.
The larger qualification is resolution. The panel is 2560x1600, while Notebookcheck’s figures are at 1920x1080. The test resolution is lower than the panel’s native resolution. There are no supplied native-resolution results, so it would be wrong to state what frame rate the A16 will achieve at 2560x1600 in any of the listed games. Buyers who intend to use native resolution should recognise that the published figures establish performance at 1920x1080 High, not at the panel’s full resolution.
This is not a minor technicality. The laptop’s screen is part of the product you are buying, and a 2560x1600 panel creates a different expectation from a 1920x1080 panel. If your priority is the sharpness and workspace of the native resolution, the available benchmark data leaves an important gap. If your priority is high measured gaming performance at 1920x1080 High without upscaling, the figures are much more directly relevant.
The IPS panel type is also stated, but there is no provided information about brightness, contrast, colour coverage, response behaviour, backlight behaviour or outdoor visibility. It would be irresponsible to infer display quality from IPS alone. IPS describes the panel type, not every aspect of the viewing experience. The information available supports describing the size, resolution, refresh rate and panel technology; it does not support a wider judgement about image quality.
The screen therefore suits a buyer who understands the split in the data. The 165Hz refresh rate is meaningful in the fastest measured titles. It is a generous ceiling for the middle group of results. It is well above the X-Plane 11 figure. Meanwhile, the 2560x1600 resolution offers more native pixels than the test setting, but there are no measured figures showing how the machine performs at that resolution. That is not a reason to reject the A16. It is a reason to buy it for the evidence it has, rather than for performance that has not been published.
Build, size and portability
The Asus TUF Gaming A16 weighs 2.213kg. That places a clear boundary around its portability. It is possible to carry, but it is not the kind of gaming laptop that disappears into a bag or becomes irrelevant when travelling. A buyer moving between a desk, home, university, work or occasional trips may find the weight acceptable. Someone carrying it for long periods should treat 2.213kg as a meaningful part of the purchase decision rather than focusing only on the RTX 5070 and display.
The available specification does not include the chassis dimensions, thickness, materials, keyboard layout, trackpad quality, port selection, webcam, speakers, cooling behaviour or fan noise. Those are all important ownership factors, but they cannot be assessed from this fact sheet. It would be wrong to claim that the A16 is compact, slim, rugged, quiet, cool-running or well equipped without measurements or specifications to support those claims.
The 16in screen and 2.213kg weight point towards a machine best understood as a transportable gaming laptop rather than a lightweight everyday laptop. That is an interpretation of the stated size class and weight, not a claim about its physical dimensions. The 90Wh battery is substantial as a capacity figure, but there is no battery-life measurement in the supplied data. Do not buy this machine on an assumed unplugged gaming duration or working-day endurance figure, because none is available here.
For most gaming buyers, the more realistic use case is likely to involve a regular desk or mains-powered location, with the option to move the system when necessary. That is not a criticism. A 16in machine with this hardware is often bought because it can serve as a primary gaming computer without requiring a separate monitor or desktop tower. The A16’s published specifications support that type of use more clearly than they support a claim of effortless daily portability.
The 90Wh battery should be read cautiously. Battery capacity is not battery life. Runtime changes with workload, brightness, refresh behaviour, background tasks and many other factors, none of which are measured here. The only firm statement is that the machine has a 90Wh battery. Anyone for whom unplugged use is a deciding factor should seek a published battery test for this exact configuration before committing.
How it compares
The rival comparison data is deliberately limited to games measured on both machines. That is the right way to compare systems with incomplete overlap in benchmark libraries. It avoids pretending that one laptop’s result in a game can be directly substituted for another laptop’s result in a different game.
Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH G10 RTX
Against the Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH G10 RTX with an RTX 5060, the Asus TUF Gaming A16 averages 1fps ahead across shared games. That is effectively a near tie in the available comparison. The RTX 5070 name in the Asus does not translate into a large shared-game advantage in this particular database comparison.
Neither machine has a confirmed UK price in the supplied data, so there is no responsible value conclusion to draw between them. The A16 has the more gaming-oriented stated display refresh rate at 165Hz, but the fact sheet does not provide the Yoga’s display specification here, so no broader screen comparison should be made. On performance alone, the data says the two are extremely close across the games they share.
ASUS TUF Gaming A18
The ASUS TUF Gaming A18 is the closest conceptual sibling in the rival list. It also uses an RTX 5070 at 115W. Across shared games, the A16 averages 2fps behind. That is a small difference, and it should not be inflated into a decisive performance gap.
What this comparison does show is that the A16’s 115W RTX 5070 configuration is operating very close to another TUF model with the same stated graphics card and power limit. If choosing between the two, performance is unlikely to be the only sensible basis for the decision. Screen size, physical size, weight, price and available configuration would matter, but those details are not supplied for the A18 here. Neither has a confirmed UK price in the stated data.
Asus ProArt P16
The Asus ProArt P16 also uses an RTX 5070, and the TUF Gaming A16 averages 3fps ahead across shared games. That is an advantage, but a narrow one. It supports the claim that the A16 is slightly faster in the available shared-game comparison, not the claim that it is in another performance class.
The two models are likely to appeal to different buyers based on their product positioning, but the fact sheet does not provide enough information to make a detailed chassis, screen or workflow comparison. The useful conclusion is simply that the TUF Gaming A16 edges the ProArt P16 in the shared benchmark data. Neither has a confirmed UK price, so value remains unresolved.
Lenovo Legion 5 15AHP G10
The Lenovo Legion 5 15AHP G10 uses an RTX 5060 at 115W. The Asus averages 4fps ahead across shared games. Again, that is a real lead, but it is modest. The data supports describing the A16 as ahead in their measured overlap, not as dramatically faster.
This comparison is useful for buyers deciding whether the RTX 5070 badge automatically justifies a switch from a well-configured RTX 5060 laptop. On these shared-game figures, the difference is not enormous. Price would therefore matter greatly, but no confirmed UK price is supplied for the Legion 5 15AHP G10 or this exact TUF Gaming A16 configuration.
Gigabyte Gaming A16
The Gigabyte Gaming A16 is the only listed rival with a stated UK price: £1,400. It uses an RTX 5070 at an 85W GPU power limit, while the Asus uses an RTX 5070 at 115W. Across shared games, the TUF Gaming A16 averages 4fps ahead.
The Asus has the benchmark advantage, but without a confirmed UK price for the A16, it is impossible to say whether that advantage represents better value. If the Asus eventually costs materially more, a modest shared-game lead may not be enough to justify the difference for every buyer. If it is closely priced, the 115W configuration and the measured advantage become more attractive. Until the exact UK price is confirmed, either conclusion would be speculation.
The wider rival picture is consistent. The TUF Gaming A16 is close to every listed machine. It is not substantially ahead of the Lenovo Yoga Pro 9 16IAH G10 RTX, slightly behind the TUF Gaming A18, slightly ahead of the ProArt P16 and Lenovo Legion 5 15AHP G10, and ahead of the Gigabyte Gaming A16. These are small shared-game averages, so buyers should avoid treating them as permanent rankings across every title. They show a tightly packed group of laptops rather than a clear runaway winner.
Who it’s for
The Asus TUF Gaming A16 is for the buyer who wants a 16in gaming laptop with an RTX 5070 at a stated 115W limit, 32GB of memory, 1024GB of SSD storage and a 2560x1600 165Hz IPS screen, and who values measured 1920x1080 High performance more than unverified claims about native-resolution results.
It is particularly suitable for players of Strange Brigade and F1 24, where Notebookcheck’s figures of 241fps and 234fps exceed the screen’s 165Hz refresh rate. It also suits players of Final Fantasy XV, Baldur’s Gate 3, Dota 2, GTA V and Cyberpunk 2077 who want high measured frame rates at the stated settings without upscaling. The results of 142fps, 134fps, 129fps, 125fps and 121fps show a machine with substantial gaming performance even where it does not fully match the display refresh limit.
It is also a reasonable choice for someone who wants one laptop to cover a range of game types rather than a machine selected solely for one benchmark result. The suite contains very fast results, several consistently strong results and one much lower result. That is realistic information. A buyer can look at the games closest to their own library and decide whether the performance profile matches their priorities.
It is less suitable for the buyer who needs proof of performance at 2560x1600. The screen runs at that native resolution, but the available frame-rate data is at 1920x1080. There is no supplied basis for promising native-resolution results in Strange Brigade, F1 24, Final Fantasy XV, Baldur’s Gate 3, Dota 2, GTA V, Cyberpunk 2077 or X-Plane 11.
It is also not the obvious choice for an X-Plane 11-first buyer who expects 165Hz-class frame rates. The measured figure is 81fps, and that is the number to take seriously for that workload. It may still be acceptable depending on personal expectations, but it is very different from the figures achieved in the fastest games in the suite.
Portability-focused buyers should be cautious. At 2.213kg, this is not a trivial weight to carry regularly. The lack of dimension, thickness and battery-life data also means there is no evidence to support a claim that it is especially travel-friendly. The 90Wh battery is a useful capacity specification, but it is not a measured endurance result.
Finally, anyone who is primarily motivated by value should wait for a confirmed UK price. The A16’s frame rates are competitive, but the closest rivals are closely matched, and the Gigabyte Gaming A16 is listed at £1,400. Without a price for the Asus, there is no honest way to say whether the TUF Gaming A16 is a bargain, fairly priced or overpriced.
Buy it for the measured 1920x1080 High performance, the strong specification around the RTX 5070, the 165Hz screen’s potential in the fastest games, and the 32GB memory configuration. Buy something else if native 2560x1600 performance, low carrying weight, measured battery life, confirmed value or exceptional X-Plane 11 performance is your deciding requirement.