Medion Erazer Major 16 X1 review

Frame rates

1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off. Averages 154fps across the 5 core benchmark games.

Measured on this machine. Source: Notebookcheck, 2025-07-11.

In use

The short version

The Medion Erazer Major 16 X1 is a powerful gaming laptop with a difficult pricing problem. Its Core Ultra 7 255HX, RTX 5070 Ti running at a 140W GPU power limit, 32GB of memory and 1024GB SSD storage form the kind of specification expected from a serious high-end machine. Notebookcheck’s measured results confirm that it is quick at 1920x1080 using the High preset with upscaling disabled. The five-game scoring-suite average is 155fps, with several lighter or better-scaling games running far beyond 160fps.

That is the good news. The less appealing part is the UK price of £2,770. At that figure, the Major 16 X1 is not merely competing against other RTX 5070 Ti laptops. It is competing against RTX 5080 systems, against larger machines with more performance-oriented positioning, and even against a much more expensive RTX 5090 laptop that it matches surprisingly closely in the available shared-game comparison. The Major’s own frame rates are strong, but the price asks buyers to accept too little separation from much cheaper alternatives.

This is therefore a laptop to consider only if its exact combination of specifications matters to you: a 16in 2560x1600 IPS display with a 300Hz refresh rate, 32GB of memory, 12GB of VRAM and an RTX 5070 Ti configured with a stated 140W limit. It is not a machine to buy simply because you want the most gaming performance for your money. The MSI Vector 16 HX AI, also an RTX 5070 Ti laptop, is listed at £1,592 and is only 6fps behind the Medion across 11 shared games. That is the comparison that makes the Major 16 X1’s price especially hard to defend.

The Medion does have a strong display specification on paper. A 16in 2560x1600 panel is a sensible format for a premium gaming laptop, giving more vertical workspace than a conventional 1920x1080 screen while retaining a gaming-oriented shape. The 300Hz refresh rate is ambitious, however. Notebookcheck’s figures show that some games can take meaningful advantage of it at 1920x1080 and High settings, but many demanding modern releases do not come close. More importantly, the published figures are not native-resolution results. They cannot tell us whether this machine will produce the same frame rates at 2560x1600.

At 2.45kg, the Major 16 X1 is portable in the sense that it is a laptop rather than a desktop replacement with an 18in chassis, but it is not a light all-day travel machine. It looks better suited to moving between a desk, a home office, a student room or occasional trips than to being carried around all day. The 80Wh battery is a useful specification to know, but there is no battery-life measurement in the supplied data, so there is no basis for claiming how long it lasts away from mains power.

The right buyer is someone who has found this exact model at a substantially more attractive price than the listed £2,770, or who particularly values the 300Hz 2560x1600 IPS screen and the supplied 32GB memory configuration. The wrong buyer is someone shopping strictly on gaming value, someone wanting RTX 5080-class performance at this price, or someone expecting every modern game to exploit a 300Hz display at the measured High preset. The Major 16 X1 is fast. It is also priced as though that speed were rarer than the comparison data suggests.

Performance

What Notebookcheck’s numbers show

The published gaming results were measured by Notebookcheck on 2025-07-11 at 1920x1080, using the High preset with upscaling disabled. That context matters. These are useful, clean baseline figures because they avoid mixing native-resolution performance with an upscaling mode, but they are not a direct forecast for gaming at the Major 16 X1’s 2560x1600 panel resolution. They show what the laptop can do under one defined set of conditions, rather than what it will do in every game and every display mode.

Across the five scoring-suite games, the Major 16 X1 averages 155fps. That is a strong result for a laptop based on the RTX 5070 Ti. It means the machine has enough performance for high-refresh-rate gaming in a broad sense, not just enough performance to clear a basic smoothness threshold. But an average is only a starting point. The spread between games is large, ranging from 186fps in Dota 2 to 102fps in X-Plane 11 within the scoring suite, and the wider list reaches 202fps in Civilization 7 while falling to 77fps in Stalker 2.

That spread is more useful than the headline average because it describes the real compromise involved in buying a 300Hz laptop. The Major 16 X1 can generate very high frame rates in some games, but it is not a machine that turns every major release into a 300Hz showcase. A fast display remains beneficial below its maximum refresh rate, particularly for motion clarity and input response where the game can sustain a high frame rate, but buyers should not interpret the panel specification as a promise that the GPU will run every modern title at the screen’s maximum refresh rate.

Civilization 7 is the fastest result listed at 202fps. That is an excellent showing at the stated 1920x1080 High settings without upscaling. It puts the game well into high-refresh territory and shows that the Major’s CPU and GPU combination can produce very high output in a title that scales favourably under this test configuration. It still does not equal the display’s 300Hz refresh rate, but it is close enough to make the 300Hz panel feel less theoretical than it would on a laptop limited to much lower frame rates.

Dota 2 follows at 186fps. For a competitive game with a large established player base, that is a persuasive result. Dota 2 is one of the titles where the Major 16 X1’s screen specification makes obvious sense: 186fps is substantially higher than a conventional 60Hz target and gives the panel meaningful work to do. The gap between 186fps and 300Hz also matters, though. Anyone buying specifically for the maximum possible refresh rate should recognise that the published High-preset result does not show a full match for the screen’s ceiling. It shows very fast performance, not an automatic 300Hz lock.

GTA V runs at 181fps in the supplied result. Again, that is comfortably in the territory where a high-refresh display can be appreciated. It reinforces the impression that the Major 16 X1 is capable of very high frame rates in games that are not among the heaviest modern GPU loads in the list. Alongside Dota 2 and Civilization 7, GTA V is part of the case for the Medion as a high-refresh gaming machine. If your library consists mainly of established competitive titles, esports games or games with similar performance demands, the Major’s 300Hz panel is less excessive than it first appears.

Final Fantasy XV is measured at 173fps. That remains strong, and it keeps the Major above 160fps in another title. Baldur’s Gate 3 is close behind at 161fps. These results matter because they show that the laptop’s strong outcome is not confined to one genre. At the stated settings, the Major can produce high frame rates in strategy, multiplayer, open-world and role-playing games. That breadth is a genuine positive.

Cyberpunk 2077 comes in at 143fps. This is still a high frame rate, but it also marks a useful transition point in the benchmark list. At 143fps, the Major 16 X1 is clearly not struggling at 1920x1080 High without upscaling. It should still look responsive on a 300Hz display. Yet it is also less than half of the screen’s maximum refresh rate. Cyberpunk 2077 therefore illustrates the distinction between owning a 300Hz panel and fully exploiting it. The former is easy here; the latter depends heavily on the game.

Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 records 127fps. That is a good result in isolation and remains comfortably above 100fps, but it demonstrates how quickly the relationship between GPU performance and refresh rate changes in more demanding games. A game at 127fps will still benefit from a quality high-refresh display, but it is much closer to the frame-rate territory associated with a 144Hz or 165Hz screen than with a panel intended to display 300Hz. This does not make the Medion’s display a mistake. It does make it important to buy the laptop for the display’s overall quality and flexibility rather than for the assumption that every game will reach its headline refresh rate.

X-Plane 11 is measured at 102fps. That is the lowest result among the five scoring-suite games, despite the Major 16 X1’s otherwise strong 155fps average. It is a reminder that gaming laptops do not have one universal performance level. Different engines, workloads and settings can produce very different outcomes. The published data cannot identify precisely which part of the system determines the result in each title, so it would be wrong to assign the difference solely to the CPU, GPU, memory or any one component. What the figures do show is that a buyer who plays simulation games should not assume that the results from Dota 2 or GTA V represent the results they will receive in X-Plane 11.

The demanding games outside the scoring suite make the same point more sharply. Doom: The Dark Ages runs at 86fps. The Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion Remastered is listed at 82fps. Stalker 2 is the lowest result in the supplied data at 77fps. These are still playable-looking frame rates in the abstract, but this review should not invent a subjective experience beyond the data. The safer conclusion is that these results are far removed from the 300Hz ceiling and show that the Major 16 X1 is not immune to the demands of newer games at High settings, even at 1920x1080 and without upscaling.

The performance profile is therefore split into three practical groups. Civilization 7, Dota 2, GTA V, Final Fantasy XV and Baldur’s Gate 3 are the games where the Major produces roughly 160fps or more in the supplied results. These are the games most likely to make a 300Hz display feel worthwhile, even if they do not necessarily hit the screen’s maximum refresh rate. Cyberpunk 2077 and Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 sit in the middle, at 143fps and 127fps respectively. They still make good use of a high-refresh panel, but they are not evidence that the laptop can routinely drive 300Hz gaming. X-Plane 11, Doom: The Dark Ages, Oblivion Remastered and Stalker 2 are the cautionary group, between 102fps and 77fps, where the display’s maximum refresh rate is much less relevant than raw consistency and visual settings choices.

What the 140W GPU power limit means

The RTX 5070 Ti in this machine has a stated GPU power limit of 140W. That is important because laptop GPU names alone do not describe the complete performance picture. Two laptops carrying the same GPU name can be configured differently, and their cooling, power limits, processor pairing, memory and firmware choices can all influence benchmark results. The 140W figure tells us that Medion has specified a defined power ceiling for this RTX 5070 Ti rather than leaving buyers to infer performance from the graphics name alone.

What it does not tell us is how the laptop behaves in every workload. A power limit is not a frame-rate guarantee. It does not establish sustained clock behaviour, fan noise, surface temperatures, battery performance, GPU power draw in a particular game, or performance at the screen’s native resolution. None of those measurements are present in the supplied data, so they should not be invented. The relevant evidence is the game list itself: at the Notebookcheck test settings, this 140W configuration delivers 202fps in Civilization 7, 186fps in Dota 2, 181fps in GTA V, 173fps in Final Fantasy XV and 161fps in Baldur’s Gate 3, while demanding titles such as Stalker 2 fall to 77fps.

The useful interpretation is that the 140W configuration is capable of producing strong 1920x1080 High-preset results, but it does not erase game-to-game variation. It is tempting to see a high stated power limit and assume that every title will perform similarly. The benchmark spread shows why that is not a sensible purchasing assumption. The Major is very fast where the game and test settings allow it to be very fast, and more restrained where the workload is harder.

The 12GB VRAM allocation is another specification worth noting without overstating. It gives the RTX 5070 Ti a defined memory capacity, but the supplied results do not include VRAM usage, texture-setting comparisons, ray-tracing measurements or evidence of memory-related limitations. There is no basis here for saying that 12GB is either sufficient or insufficient for a particular future game. What can be said is that buyers are getting 12GB rather than having to infer the configuration from the RTX 5070 Ti name, and that the supplied benchmark run used High settings with upscaling disabled.

The same restraint applies to the Core Ultra 7 255HX and 32GB of system memory. Both are appropriate specifications for a premium gaming laptop, but the provided data does not include productivity benchmarks, processor-only benchmarks, memory bandwidth results or multitasking tests. The gaming figures demonstrate the performance of the complete machine in specific games; they do not isolate individual component contributions. Someone buying primarily for video work, software development, rendering or other non-gaming use should look for evidence specific to those workloads rather than treating the gaming numbers as a substitute.

High frame rate does not mean identical results in every game

The Major 16 X1’s benchmark spread is exactly why published frame-rate data matters. A product page can list an RTX 5070 Ti, 32GB of memory and a 300Hz panel and leave the impression of a uniformly high-end gaming experience. Notebookcheck’s numbers provide the necessary correction. The same machine that reaches 202fps in Civilization 7 records 77fps in Stalker 2 under the stated test conditions. Neither result cancels out the other. Together, they describe a laptop that is powerful but not limitless.

The difference is particularly relevant for buyers who play a mixture of competitive and single-player games. If your regular games resemble Dota 2, GTA V or Civilization 7, the Major 16 X1 has performance that can justify buying a fast panel. If your priority is newer demanding games resembling Doom: The Dark Ages, Oblivion Remastered or Stalker 2, the 300Hz screen is less central to the experience because the benchmark data sits much further from that refresh ceiling. In that case, the laptop should be judged more on the quality of the panel, the native resolution, the GPU’s broader performance and the price than on the maximum refresh-rate headline.

The lack of upscaling in the published test also deserves emphasis. Upscaling can change results substantially depending on the game and mode selected, but there are no upscaling figures in the supplied data. It would be wrong to claim what frame rates the Major 16 X1 can achieve with a particular upscaling setting, frame generation mode or ray-tracing configuration. The numbers available are deliberately simpler: 1920x1080, High preset, no upscaling. That makes them a dependable comparison baseline, but it also limits what they can prove about the laptop’s performance in a buyer’s preferred settings.

For this reason, the Major 16 X1 should be seen as a laptop with strong conventional High-preset performance rather than a machine guaranteed to maximise every visual setting and every high-refresh display option. There is plenty of speed here. The problem is not that the laptop is slow; the problem is that its price makes the performance harder to celebrate without qualification.

The screen

The Major 16 X1 has a 16in IPS display with a 2560x1600 resolution and a 300Hz refresh rate. This is one of the better parts of the specification. The 16in size is a sensible middle ground for a gaming laptop: larger than a compact machine but less extreme than an 18in model. The 2560x1600 resolution provides more vertical pixels than 2560x1440 while keeping a familiar widescreen-oriented layout. For gaming, general work and media use, that extra vertical space can be useful, although the supplied data does not include measurements of colour coverage, brightness, contrast, response times, backlight behaviour or calibration.

The panel is IPS. That tells buyers the underlying panel type, but it should not be stretched into claims about image quality that have not been measured. There are no contrast figures, brightness figures, colour measurements or black-level measurements in the fact sheet. The correct conclusion is simply that the Major uses an IPS panel with a high resolution and a high refresh rate. Those specifications are attractive, but they are not a complete display review.

The major practical question is whether the RTX 5070 Ti can drive this panel effectively. The answer depends on what “effectively” means. At 1920x1080 High without upscaling, the Major 16 X1 reaches 202fps in Civilization 7, 186fps in Dota 2, 181fps in GTA V, 173fps in Final Fantasy XV and 161fps in Baldur’s Gate 3. Those are all strong results for a 300Hz panel, because they sit well above ordinary display refresh levels and should allow the screen to display a large number of distinct frames. They do not, however, show the laptop reaching the panel’s 300Hz maximum.

Cyberpunk 2077 at 143fps and Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 at 127fps show the more typical trade-off for demanding games. These figures still justify a fast display more than they justify a basic 60Hz panel, but they do not make the 300Hz headline the defining feature of the experience. The panel’s speed becomes headroom rather than a target that the GPU is consistently able to fill.

For the most demanding titles in the list, the case is clearer. X-Plane 11 at 102fps, Doom: The Dark Ages at 86fps, Oblivion Remastered at 82fps and Stalker 2 at 77fps are all far below the display’s 300Hz refresh rate. A 300Hz panel is not wasted in these games, but the reason to choose it is no longer the expectation of matching the headline refresh rate. Instead, the benefit is that the screen is capable of accommodating higher frame rates in less demanding titles and leaves room for settings choices that may increase performance, though the supplied data does not quantify those choices.

The native resolution introduces another important limitation. Notebookcheck’s benchmark figures are all at 1920x1080, while the laptop screen is 2560x1600. The available data therefore does not show native-resolution performance. It would be inappropriate to write that Cyberpunk 2077 runs at 143fps at 2560x1600, because the published result is not measured that way. The same is true for every game in the list.

Buyers should treat the 1920x1080 High-preset data as a performance reference point rather than as a native-panel promise. Running at the display’s full 2560x1600 resolution changes the rendering workload compared with the measured 1920x1080 result. The fact sheet does not provide the resulting frame rates, so no exact estimate should be made. This matters especially for anyone choosing the Major specifically because of its 2560x1600 display. The screen is a premium specification, but its full-resolution gaming performance is not documented in the available benchmark set.

The best match for the screen is likely to be a mixed gaming library. Faster titles can make good use of the 300Hz capability at the published 1920x1080 settings. More demanding games can still benefit from the panel’s resolution and refresh headroom, but buyers should expect to make their own settings decisions if they want to balance native resolution, image quality and frame rate. The supplied figures cannot tell us which setting mix is best because only one preset and one resolution are documented.

There is also a basic value question. At £2,770, the display has to do more than merely look impressive in a specification list. A 16in 2560x1600 300Hz IPS panel is a meaningful advantage over a lower-spec screen, and it helps explain why this is positioned as a premium laptop. But display quality is only one part of the purchase. When similarly performing rivals cost less or when RTX 5080 options sit close to the same price, the screen needs to be a genuine personal priority, not just a nice extra.

Build, size and portability

The Major 16 X1 weighs 2.45kg. That places it firmly in the substantial gaming-laptop category. It is not an ultra-light machine intended to disappear into a bag, and buyers should not approach it as a casual carry-everywhere laptop. At the same time, it is a 16in system rather than an 18in model, so its role is more flexible than that of a very large desktop-focused machine.

The sensible use case is regular movement rather than effortless mobility. The Major can be appropriate for someone who moves between home and university accommodation, between a main desk and another room, or between home and an office on an occasional basis. The supplied data does not include chassis dimensions, so there is no basis for detailed claims about bag fit, desk footprint or thickness. It would be misleading to describe it as compact or bulky beyond what the 2.45kg weight supports.

Weight matters because the Major’s price and performance position encourage buyers to use it as a primary machine. A laptop with a 16in 2560x1600 display, Core Ultra 7 255HX, RTX 5070 Ti, 32GB memory and 1024GB SSD storage is clearly specified for more than occasional gaming. It could plausibly serve as a desktop replacement for someone who needs the ability to move their system, but the 2.45kg figure means that mobility comes with a real carrying burden. This is a machine to transport with intent, not one to toss into a small bag without thinking about it.

The 80Wh battery capacity is another reason for caution. Battery capacity alone cannot be turned into a battery-life claim. There are no published runtimes for web browsing, video playback, office work, idle use or gaming in the supplied information. There is also no data on charging speed, charger size, USB-C charging behaviour, power modes or performance away from mains power. Buyers who need dependable all-day use away from a socket should not assume that an 80Wh battery delivers a particular result without a measured battery test.

The absence of noise and thermal data is equally important for a gaming laptop with a 140W GPU power limit. There are no fan-noise measurements, surface-temperature measurements or sustained-load thermal results in the fact sheet. It would be easy to infer that a high-power gaming configuration must be loud or hot, but inference is not evidence. Equally, it would be wrong to imply that Medion has solved those issues. The available information establishes the performance results and the specified GPU limit, not the acoustic or thermal character of the chassis.

Storage is supplied as a 1024GB SSD, which is a practical starting point for a premium gaming laptop. However, there is no information here about SSD speed, second storage slots, upgrade access, memory upgradeability, internal layout or component serviceability. A buyer who intends to keep a large local game library should not assume expansion options without checking Medion’s documentation or a reliable teardown. The same applies to ports, wireless connectivity, keyboard layout, webcam quality, speakers and build materials: they are not listed in the fact sheet, so they cannot be responsibly reviewed here.

That may sound like a limitation, but it is better than pretending a specification table answers questions it does not answer. The Major’s known portability profile is straightforward: 2.45kg, 16in display, 80Wh battery. It is likely best treated as a powerful machine that can travel when needed, rather than as a mobility-first laptop that happens to play games.

How it compares

Against the Alienware 16X Aurora Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus

The Alienware 16X Aurora Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is one of the most revealing comparisons because it also uses an RTX 5070 Ti. It is listed at £2,569, lower than the Medion’s £2,770 price, and the Major 16 X1 averages exactly the same frame rate across six shared games. The shared-game result is not a broad claim that the two laptops are identical in every title, screen mode or workload. It is a narrow but meaningful statement: in the six games available for direct comparison, the Medion does not establish a performance lead.

That makes the Medion hard to justify on gaming speed alone. The Major has a stated 140W GPU power limit, 32GB of memory, a 1024GB SSD and a 300Hz 2560x1600 IPS screen, but the comparison data does not provide the Alienware’s screen, memory, storage, weight or GPU power configuration. It would therefore be wrong to declare one machine universally better. What can be said is that the Medion costs more while producing no average advantage across the shared games. Buyers considering the Major should identify a specific Medion advantage that matters to them rather than paying extra on the assumption of better gaming performance.

Against the Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9 with RTX 5090

The Razer Blade 16 Core Ultra 9 with RTX 5090 is listed at £5,000. The Medion averages 2fps more across six shared games. That result is striking because the Razer carries an RTX 5090 name while the Medion uses an RTX 5070 Ti. But it should be interpreted carefully. The shared-game average covers only six games, and the supplied data does not provide the Razer’s GPU power limit, display mode, memory configuration, screen specification, weight or other conditions that might help explain the result.

The useful conclusion is not that the Major 16 X1 is categorically an RTX 5090-class laptop. The data does not support that broad statement. The useful conclusion is that, in the available six-game comparison, the Medion’s gaming output is exceptionally close to a much more expensive Razer, and slightly ahead on average. That makes the Razer difficult to defend purely on those six shared benchmark results, while also showing how much laptop implementation can matter beyond the GPU label.

For Medion buyers, this comparison is flattering but does not repair the Major’s value problem. Being close to a £5,000 laptop is interesting; being close to a £1,592 RTX 5070 Ti laptop is more relevant to a buyer deciding where to spend their own money. The Razer comparison shows that the Major is capable. The MSI comparison shows that capability is not priced competitively.

Against the Acer Predator Helios 18 AI

The Acer Predator Helios 18 AI uses an RTX 5080 and is listed at £3,103. Across six shared games, the Medion averages 4fps less. This is arguably the most important comparison for someone willing to spend around the Major’s asking price. The Acer costs more, but the difference in listed price is not accompanied by a large shared-game performance gap in favour of the RTX 5080 system. The Medion is only 4fps behind on average across the games both machines have been measured in.

That puts the Major in an awkward but not hopeless position. If the Acer’s 18in form factor is too large for your needs, a 16in Medion may be easier to live with simply because it is a smaller class of laptop. However, no Acer weight or screen information is supplied here, so that cannot be taken further. On gaming data alone, the Medion is close enough to the Helios 18 AI that the Acer’s higher price does not automatically make it the obvious choice.

The caveat is that the Major still needs to be judged against cheaper alternatives. Being only slightly behind an RTX 5080 laptop at £3,103 is a positive. It does not change the fact that the Major is substantially more expensive than the MSI Vector 16 HX AI while only modestly faster in the larger shared-game sample.

Against the Medion Erazer Beast 18 X1

The Medion Erazer Beast 18 X1 is particularly awkward for the Major 16 X1 because it is another Medion model. It uses an RTX 5080, is listed at £2,499, and the Major averages 4fps less across 11 shared games. The Beast costs less, uses a higher-tier RTX 5080 designation and leads the Major in the available direct comparison. Unless the 16in format is a major preference, this is the rival that most directly undermines the Major 16 X1’s position.

The Major does have a 16in 2560x1600 300Hz IPS display, whereas the supplied data does not list the Beast’s panel details. It is therefore possible that the Major has a screen-related advantage important to a particular buyer, but that cannot be established from the comparison information. On the data that is available, the Beast offers more gaming performance on average across 11 shared games while costing less. That is not a small concern; it is a direct challenge to the Major’s reason for existing at £2,770.

Buyers who prefer a 16in machine should still consider the Major’s form factor relevant. A larger 18in laptop is not automatically a substitute for everyone. But the burden is on the Major to justify why its smaller screen, RTX 5070 Ti and higher listed price make more sense. The published shared-game figures do not make that case.

Against the MSI Vector 16 HX AI

The MSI Vector 16 HX AI is the most damaging comparison of all. Like the Major, it has an RTX 5070 Ti. It is listed at £1,592, and the Major averages only 6fps more across 11 shared games. The Medion is faster in the comparison, so this is not a case of the cheaper laptop matching it exactly. But a 6fps average lead across 11 shared games is not a persuasive enough advantage to explain the enormous gap between the listed prices.

This does not mean every buyer should automatically purchase the MSI. The supplied data does not give its display specification, GPU power limit, processor, memory, storage, weight, battery or build details. A 16in 2560x1600 300Hz IPS panel, 32GB of memory and a 1024GB SSD may matter, and the Major’s 140W GPU power limit is explicitly known. But buyers need those additional specifications to be worth a great deal to them, because the gaming evidence says the MSI is extremely close.

The MSI comparison is why the Major is best approached as a discounted opportunity rather than a straightforward recommendation at £2,770. If Medion’s price fell closer to the market around it, the 155fps scoring-suite average and strong high-refresh results would become much more compelling. At the listed price, the Major asks buyers to pay a premium that the measured gaming advantage does not convincingly support.

Who it’s for

The Medion Erazer Major 16 X1 is for the buyer who wants a 16in gaming laptop with a 2560x1600 IPS screen, a 300Hz refresh rate, 32GB of memory, 1024GB SSD storage and an RTX 5070 Ti with a stated 140W GPU power limit, and who can obtain it at a more attractive price than the listed £2,770. It is also for someone whose regular games resemble Civilization 7, Dota 2, GTA V, Final Fantasy XV or Baldur’s Gate 3, where Notebookcheck’s measured figures range from 161fps to 202fps under the stated test conditions.

It is particularly suitable for a player who values a fast screen but understands what that means in practice. The Major can feed the display with very high frame rates in several games, but the data does not show it reaching 300fps. The 300Hz panel is therefore best regarded as premium headroom rather than a universal target. If that distinction is acceptable, the screen specification is a genuine attraction.

It can also suit someone who wants a machine that is transportable rather than ultra-portable. At 2.45kg, it is realistic for planned travel and regular relocation, but it is not ideal for users who carry a laptop continuously through the day. The 80Wh battery may be relevant to mobile use, but there are no battery-life results here, so a buyer who needs long unplugged operation should seek measured evidence before committing.

The Major is not the sensible choice for a strict value buyer at £2,770. The MSI Vector 16 HX AI is listed at £1,592 and is only 6fps behind across 11 shared games. The Medion Erazer Beast 18 X1 is listed at £2,499, carries an RTX 5080 and is 4fps ahead across 11 shared games. The Alienware 16X Aurora is listed at £2,569 and is level with the Major across six shared games. Those are not distant theoretical alternatives. They are direct database comparisons that make the Major’s price difficult to accept.

It is also not the obvious choice for someone who wants the highest available performance near this price. The Acer Predator Helios 18 AI, with RTX 5080 graphics, is listed at £3,103 and is only 4fps ahead across six shared games. Depending on your tolerance for a larger laptop and the importance of specifications not included here, that may be a more logical step up. Conversely, the Major is not the best route to maximum savings, because the MSI demonstrates how close a much cheaper RTX 5070 Ti machine can get in gaming performance.

Buyers focused on demanding modern games should be realistic. Doom: The Dark Ages at 86fps, Oblivion Remastered at 82fps and Stalker 2 at 77fps are not poor results, but they are far from the 300Hz panel limit. If these are your main games, the display’s maximum refresh rate should not be the reason you choose this model. You would be buying the Major for its overall screen specification, its 2560x1600 resolution and its strong general gaming performance, not because the published data shows a full 300Hz experience in those titles.

Finally, this is not a laptop to buy based on assumed qualities that are absent from the data. There is no supplied information on dimensions, noise, temperatures, battery runtime, keyboard, ports, webcam, speakers, SSD speed, upgradeability or measured display quality beyond the panel type, size, resolution and refresh rate. Those factors may be important enough to change a purchasing decision. They simply cannot be judged from the information available.

The final judgement is straightforward. The Medion Erazer Major 16 X1 is a genuinely fast RTX 5070 Ti laptop with a very appealing 16in 2560x1600 300Hz IPS display specification. Notebookcheck’s results show high frame rates in a varied game list, including 202fps in Civilization 7, 186fps in Dota 2 and 181fps in GTA V. But the same data also shows a wide performance spread in harder titles, and the rival comparisons show that its £2,770 price is too ambitious. Buy it for the specific screen-and-specification package only if the price improves. Otherwise, the competing RTX 5070 Ti and RTX 5080 options provide a stronger argument for your money.

How it compares