MSI Sword 16 HX review

Frame rates

1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off. Averages 134fps across the 5 core benchmark games.

Measured on this machine. Source: Notebookcheck, 2024-10-08.

In use

The short version

The MSI Sword 16 HX (B14VGKG) is a performance-led 16in gaming laptop built around an RTX 4070 and a Core i7-14700HX. On the available Notebookcheck figures it is plainly capable at 1920x1080 on the High preset with upscaling off: its five-game scoring-suite mean is 134fps, and several of the lighter or better-scaling games clear the screen's 144Hz refresh target in that test. The important qualification is equally plain. The fitted display is 1920x1200 rather than 1920x1080, so the published game results are a useful performance reference, not a promise of identical figures at the panel's native resolution.

This is a sensible machine for a buyer who wants a conventional 16in IPS gaming laptop, does most of their gaming near mains power, and values high-refresh performance in games that are not among the most punishing current titles. The Witcher 3 at 239fps, Strange Brigade at 233fps, F1 24 at 194fps, Dota 2 at 171fps, GTA V at 164fps and Far Cry 5 at 145fps give the screen plenty to work with in the published 1920x1080 run. That is a strong collection of results, and it means the hardware is not merely adequate for a 144Hz panel in every circumstance: in a sizeable part of this test set, it has the speed to make that refresh rate meaningful.

It is not, however, a laptop to buy on the assumption that RTX 4070 branding alone guarantees 144fps in every demanding game at High settings without upscaling. The same measured set includes X-Plane 11 at 128fps, Far Cry 6 at 121fps, Baldur's Gate 3 at 114fps, Final Fantasy XV at 111fps, Cyberpunk 2077 at 94fps and Black Myth: Wukong at 54fps. Those figures are not failures; they show the much more useful truth that game choice matters. The Sword is fast in many games, comfortable rather than high-refresh-maxing in others, and well below the panel ceiling in the heaviest title listed.

The unresolved issue is value, not a missing performance result. There is no confirmed UK price for this exact configuration, so no overall score can be computed: value accounts for 30% of that calculation. That should not be read as a warning about the laptop itself. The benchmark suite is complete and the machine has a normal place on the frame-rate leaderboard. It simply means there is no responsible way to say whether this particular Sword is a good buy in the UK until its price is confirmed.

Buy it for the known performance profile, not for an imagined bargain. The RTX 4070, Core i7-14700HX, 16GB of memory and 1TB SSD make for a clearly specified gaming configuration, while the 2.3kg weight and 65Wh battery indicate a machine that can travel but is unlikely to be defined by untethered use. There is no published battery-life result in the supplied information, so anyone whose priority is extended time away from a socket should not fill that gap with assumption.

Performance

What the benchmark data actually says

Notebookcheck measured these results on 2024-10-08 at 1920x1080, using the High preset and with upscaling off. Those conditions matter. They provide a clean view of the machine's delivered performance under a recognisable quality setting, rather than mixing in the changing behaviour of upscaling modes. They also put every title on common ground. For a buyer comparing the Sword against another laptop in this data set, that consistency is more useful than a selective claim based on a single favourable game.

The five-game scoring-suite mean is 134fps. That is the right starting point, but it should not become the whole review. An average conceals a broad spread from GTA V at 164fps and Dota 2 at 171fps down to Baldur's Gate 3 at 114fps, X-Plane 11 at 128fps and Cyberpunk 2077 at 94fps. It also excludes the other supplied games, including Black Myth: Wukong at 54fps. A shopper interested chiefly in competitive or older games can reasonably look at the higher figures. A shopper buying primarily for technically demanding games needs to look at the lower end, because that is where the 144Hz screen is least likely to be fully exploited under the stated test conditions.

The best-performing entries are emphatic. The Witcher 3 reaches 239fps and Strange Brigade reaches 233fps. Both are far beyond the panel's 144Hz rating in the published 1920x1080 test. F1 24 is also substantially above it at 194fps. Dota 2 at 171fps and GTA V at 164fps continue the same pattern: these are results that can support very high-refresh play rather than merely make a 144Hz specification look attractive on paper. Far Cry 5 sits much closer at 145fps, but it still narrowly clears the screen's stated refresh rate in this measurement.

That cluster matters because it tells a prospective owner what sort of experience the Sword can deliver without relying on settings changes or upscaling in the quoted run. In these titles, the RTX 4070 and Core i7-14700HX combination is not constrained to a conventional 60fps target. There is enough performance headroom at 1920x1080 High for the display's refresh capability to be relevant. For players who spend much of their time in Dota 2, GTA V, F1 24, The Witcher 3, Strange Brigade or Far Cry 5, the headline specification and the measured results point in the same direction.

The middle of the results is just as important. X-Plane 11 delivers 128fps, Far Cry 6 121fps, Baldur's Gate 3 114fps and Final Fantasy XV 111fps. These are still high frame rates, but they are below the 144Hz panel ceiling. In practical buying terms, that means the screen remains a sensible match, but buyers should not translate “144Hz” into “144fps guaranteed”. The gap is modest in some of these games and more noticeable in others, yet the distinction should be made honestly: under Notebookcheck's stated 1920x1080 High, upscaling-off conditions, they do not reach 144fps.

Cyberpunk 2077 at 94fps makes the same point more strongly. It is a capable-looking number in the context of the supplied data, but it is not a high-refresh result against a 144Hz screen. Black Myth: Wukong at 54fps is the clearest counterweight to the faster titles. It shows why a review of this Sword cannot credibly be reduced to its 134fps scoring-suite mean or to the 239fps peak in The Witcher 3. The measured performance is highly game-dependent. A buyer expecting a machine to produce similar numbers across every new demanding release would be better served by reading the whole range than by reading the average alone.

Why the spread is the real story

The data spans 54fps to 239fps. That is not inconsistency in the measurement; it is the useful consequence of testing games with different demands. The Sword runs some titles at figures well beyond its 144Hz display specification, while others remain below that point even before moving from the test resolution to the laptop's 1920x1200 native panel. The benchmark list therefore supports a more nuanced conclusion than “good for gaming”. It is good for high-refresh gaming in a defined group of games, strong but below the screen ceiling in another group, and much less able to provide that sort of headroom in the most demanding entry supplied.

There is also a lesson here for settings expectations. The published runs use High and no upscaling. That is valuable because it prevents a review from presenting a frame rate achieved through an unspecified compromise as if it were straightforward performance. Conversely, it means this review cannot claim what the Sword will do with upscaling enabled, at different quality presets, or with any feature not described in the fact sheet. Those options may matter to an individual buyer, especially for Cyberpunk 2077 and Black Myth: Wukong, but there are no supplied measurements for them. It is better to leave that question open than to turn a likely possibility into a claimed result.

The 1920x1080 condition creates a second limitation. The panel has 1920x1200 pixels, not 1920x1080. The benchmark figures remain directly useful as a consistent comparison point, but native-panel gaming asks the GPU to render a different resolution from the test. Nothing in the supplied data says exactly how each result changes at 1920x1200. It would be unsafe to subtract an invented amount from every result, and equally unsafe to imply no change. Treat the published figures as the known baseline and treat native-resolution performance as unmeasured here.

That distinction is most consequential around the 144fps boundary. Far Cry 5 is measured at 145fps, Dota 2 at 171fps and GTA V at 164fps at 1920x1080. These are all good signs for a 144Hz screen, but only the figures themselves are established. At 1920x1200, the data supplied does not establish whether each still exceeds 144fps. The same caution applies in the other direction: Cyberpunk 2077 at 94fps and Black Myth: Wukong at 54fps clearly do not meet 144fps in the stated run, and there is no basis to suggest they will do so at the panel's native resolution under otherwise equivalent conditions.

GPU power limit: an important unknown, not a detail to invent

The performance question about the RTX 4070's specific power limit cannot be answered from this fact sheet, because no GPU power limit is provided. That is worth stating directly. GPU names alone are not the complete performance description of gaming laptops, and a review should not attach a power figure to this Sword without a source. Nor should it claim that the machine is running at a particular class of RTX 4070 implementation when the supplied specifications do not say so.

What can be said is narrower and more useful: whatever the unlisted power configuration may be, Notebookcheck's measured output is the result buyers should evaluate. At 1920x1080 High with upscaling off, that output ranges from 54fps in Black Myth: Wukong to 239fps in The Witcher 3, with a 134fps mean across the five scoring-suite games. Those are the outcomes. The reason a particular game lands where it does cannot be reduced to an unconfirmed power figure, particularly when the results show that different titles place very different demands on the complete system.

For a buyer trying to decide whether this is a suitably fast RTX 4070 laptop, the rival results below offer a better grounded answer than an assumed power limit. The Sword is substantially ahead of the RTX 4050 MSI Thin GF63 in the shared data, while it produces effectively identical shared-game averages to the RTX 4060 MSI Katana 17 and Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX9 G9. It is behind the RTX 4090 Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 in its limited shared set. Those are measured comparative outcomes, not a substitute for an absent power specification, but they are meaningful evidence of where this configuration lands.

Processor, memory and storage in context

The Core i7-14700HX is the CPU named for this configuration, alongside 16GB of memory and a 1TB SSD. The benchmark data should be read as whole-laptop results from that combination, rather than as a claim about the GPU operating in isolation. This is particularly relevant when comparing machines at 1920x1080: the supplied rival note explicitly warns that lighter titles in the shared set can be CPU-bound and compress genuine GPU gaps. That is why an apparent tie against an RTX 4060 laptop does not establish that RTX 4060 and RTX 4070 machines are interchangeable in every game or setting.

The 16GB memory and 1TB SSD are concrete parts of the specification, but the fact sheet does not include measurements of memory behaviour, storage speed, game loading, upgrade access or available slots. There is no reason to invent a verdict on any of those subjects. For a buyer, the relevant conclusion is simply that the quoted configuration has 16GB and 1TB, while the performance evidence supplied is game frame rate rather than component-level testing. If unusually large local game libraries, specific memory-heavy workloads or upgrade plans are decisive, more configuration information is needed before purchase.

The screen

A sensible format, with a benchmark caveat

The Sword has a 16in IPS display at 1920x1200 with a 144Hz refresh rate. On the facts available, that is a coherent gaming-screen specification: the vertical space of 1920x1200 is paired with a refresh rate that the machine can approach or exceed in a number of the published 1920x1080 results. The panel type, resolution and refresh rate are known. Colour coverage, brightness, response behaviour, contrast, adaptive-sync support and calibration are not included in the fact sheet, so none should be presumed.

The 144Hz figure should be treated as a ceiling rather than a performance guarantee. In the 1920x1080 High, upscaling-off measurement, six listed games reach or exceed it: The Witcher 3 at 239fps, Strange Brigade at 233fps, F1 24 at 194fps, Dota 2 at 171fps, GTA V at 164fps and Far Cry 5 at 145fps. In this part of the list, choosing a 144Hz panel makes practical sense. It gives the laptop room to show the performance that the benchmark data demonstrates.

Five other listed games fall below that refresh figure in the same test: X-Plane 11 at 128fps, Far Cry 6 at 121fps, Baldur's Gate 3 at 114fps, Final Fantasy XV at 111fps and Cyberpunk 2077 at 94fps. Black Myth: Wukong at 54fps is further away again. There is no contradiction in fitting a 144Hz screen to a machine with such a spread. A high-refresh panel is not wasted merely because every game does not hit its maximum refresh rate. But it does mean the panel is best understood as offering headroom for lighter and better-running games, rather than as an indication of uniform performance across the whole game library.

Native resolution is the point that demands restraint. The results were measured at 1920x1080 while this screen is 1920x1200. The figures still tell us how the machine behaved under clearly defined conditions. They do not establish that The Witcher 3 will run at 239fps on this panel at native resolution, or that Far Cry 5 will remain above 144fps there. Neither statement is supported by the available data.

For the same reason, the screen is a better fit for a buyer who accepts game-by-game settings decisions than for one who expects a single fixed configuration to make every title line up with 144Hz. The benchmark spread says that the latter expectation would be unrealistic. The former approach is well supported: enjoy the high-frame-rate games where the data shows ample speed, recognise that the middle group remains below 144fps under the published conditions, and do not assume unmeasured settings behaviour in the heaviest games.

What is not known about the panel

An IPS label tells us the panel technology, but it does not provide a full image-quality review. There are no supplied measurements for brightness, black levels, colour reproduction, response times or outdoor visibility. There is also no information about whether the display has any particular gaming synchronisation feature. Those omissions matter because screen quality is more than resolution and refresh rate. A buyer whose priority is creative colour work, HDR-style presentation, particularly dark scenes, or use in bright environments needs verified display measurements that are not present here.

It would be easy to turn “IPS” and “144Hz” into a generic compliment. That would not be useful. The defensible conclusion is more limited: the screen has a 16in 1920x1200 IPS specification with a 144Hz refresh rate, and the supplied 1920x1080 benchmark data shows that the laptop can feed high frame rates in several games but not all of them. That is enough to judge the basic gaming match. It is not enough to make claims about every aspect of panel quality.

Build, size and portability

Portable enough to move, not a weightless gaming machine

The MSI Sword 16 HX weighs 2.3kg. That places a clear practical condition on who it suits. It is a laptop that can be carried between locations, rather than a desktop-only system, but 2.3kg is still a substantial item to put in a bag regularly. Buyers commuting frequently or travelling with a laptop every day should judge it as a performance-oriented 16in machine that is transportable, not as a lightweight companion.

The screen size also matters here. A 16in display offers a larger gaming and working area than a compact machine, and the 1920x1200 resolution is part of the stated package. In return, the Sword is not presented by the available information as a small-format laptop. Exact dimensions are not included in the fact sheet, so there is no reliable basis to say how much desk space it occupies, whether it fits a particular bag, or how thin it is. Anyone with a strict sleeve or backpack requirement should obtain those dimensions before ordering rather than infer them from the screen size.

The 65Wh battery is known, but battery life is not. Capacity alone is not a measured endurance result, and the supplied information gives no web, video, idle, productivity or gaming runtime. It would be particularly misleading to infer gaming duration from the 65Wh figure when the review's strongest evidence is about high-performance game frame rates. Treat the battery specification as a capacity figure and nothing more. Buyers whose use case involves long unplugged sessions should seek attributable runtime measurements before choosing this model.

There is similarly no supplied information on chassis materials, keyboard, touchpad, port selection, wireless hardware, speakers, webcam, cooling noise, temperatures or internal access. These are not minor details for a real purchase, especially in a 2.3kg gaming laptop, but they cannot be honestly reviewed from this sheet. The absence of temperature and noise results also means there is no basis to call the Sword quiet, loud, cool-running or hot. Performance figures do not answer those questions.

What the available specifications do establish is the likely role of the laptop. It is best considered a system for a fixed desk, a shared living space, study location or occasional travel, where moving 2.3kg is acceptable and gaming performance takes priority over ultra-light portability. It is less clearly suited to a buyer who needs verified all-day battery behaviour, minimal carry weight, or a known compact chassis. That is not a criticism of the Sword; it is a boundary around what the published facts support.

How it compares

Against the MSI Thin GF63 with RTX 4050

Across five shared games, the Sword averages 58fps ahead of the MSI Thin GF63 with an RTX 4050. This is the largest positive comparison in the supplied rival group, and it is a meaningful performance separation rather than a marginal leaderboard movement. The rival has no confirmed UK price, so this cannot be turned into a value judgement. It can, however, inform a straightforward performance decision: the Sword has considerably more measured gaming speed in the shared set.

That difference reinforces the Sword's own results. A 134fps mean across its five scoring-suite games is not simply a consequence of one exceptionally favourable title; the shared-game comparison shows a substantial lead over the RTX 4050 Thin GF63. For a buyer deciding between these two MSI options primarily on frame-rate capability, the evidence favours the Sword decisively. The caveat is that the supplied comparison gives an average across shared games rather than individual title-by-title differences, so it should not be used to claim an exact advantage in a particular game not broken out here.

The right interpretation is practical. If high-refresh performance matters, the Sword's results make it the stronger candidate of these two. It is the machine more likely to make its 144Hz screen useful in the games where its own published figures already exceed that threshold. Without confirmed UK prices for either exact configuration, though, there is no honest conclusion about which is the better financial purchase. Performance and value are separate questions, and only the former is answerable from this comparison.

Against the MSI Katana 17 with RTX 4060

The MSI Katana 17 with an RTX 4060 is one of the closest rivals in the supplied data. Across three shared games, the Sword averages +0fps. That near-zero result is real, but it must not be misread as proof that the two machines will always perform the same. The comparison covers only three shared games, and the rival note explains why a tie can occur: at 1920x1080, lighter titles in the shared set can be CPU-bound and compress genuine GPU gaps.

This is precisely where model-name reasoning becomes less useful than the benchmark context. It would be tempting to assume that an RTX 4070 laptop must produce a visibly higher result than every RTX 4060 laptop in every 1920x1080 game. The published shared-game average does not show that here. The appropriate response is not to dismiss the figure or to invent a hidden margin. It is to recognise that the test conditions and shared titles can limit how much GPU difference is visible.

For a buyer comparing these exact machines, the tie means the decision cannot sensibly rest on the expectation of a universal 1920x1080 frame-rate advantage for the Sword. The Sword's own wider results remain useful, especially its strong figures in The Witcher 3, Strange Brigade and F1 24, but the direct three-game comparison is effectively level. Neither laptop has a confirmed UK price in the supplied data, so value cannot resolve the choice either. More information about the particular games a buyer plays, and verified configuration details beyond this sheet, would be needed.

Against the Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX9 G9 with RTX 4060

The Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX9 G9 with an RTX 4060 is the other closest comparison. Across five shared games, the Sword averages -0fps. As with the Katana result, the displayed outcome is effectively a tie. The minus sign should not be turned into a claim of a meaningful Lenovo lead; the supplied result is near zero. Its significance lies in showing how strongly shared-game selection and 1920x1080 limitations can compress differences that buyers might expect from the GPU labels alone.

This comparison has a broader shared sample than the Katana's three games, but it still should be treated as a result for those shared games, not a blanket ranking of every possible workload. The Sword's RTX 4070 does not demonstrate a measurable shared-game average advantage here. Equally, the Lenovo's RTX 4060 does not demonstrate a meaningful lead. A buyer should view these as performance peers in the published comparison conditions rather than assume that one will categorically outrun the other across an entire library.

The Lenovo has a listed UK price of £2,625, while the Sword's UK price is not confirmed. That establishes a price for the Lenovo, but it does not permit a value comparison. There is no Sword price to set against £2,625, and this review should not speculate about one. If the two are being considered as alternatives, the sensible conclusion is that the shared benchmark average does not create a decisive performance reason to choose the Sword; its eventual UK price would be essential to the purchasing decision.

Against the Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 with RTX 4090

At the other end of the supplied spread is the Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 with an RTX 4090. Across three shared games, the Sword averages 45fps behind. That is the largest deficit in the listed comparisons and it provides useful perspective. The Sword is a fast laptop in many of its own results, but it is not positioned by the available frame-rate data as the outright performance option against this RTX 4090 rival.

The Asus has a listed UK price of £4,864. Again, the Sword has no confirmed UK price, so there is no responsible value verdict between them. The performance evidence alone says that the Scar has the stronger shared-game average by 45fps. The smaller shared set must still be acknowledged: this is an average across three games, not a universal promise of an exact 45fps lead in every title. But it is sufficiently large to show a real tier separation in the available comparison.

The buyer implication is clear. Someone whose first priority is extracting the highest shared-game frame rates among these named machines should look to the RTX 4090 Scar, accepting that its listed price is £4,864. Someone who wants the Sword should do so because its own performance profile meets their needs, not because it can be represented as matching the Scar. The Sword's 239fps in The Witcher 3 and 233fps in Strange Brigade are excellent individual figures, yet the direct shared-game comparison still places it behind the Asus.

What the rival set says as a whole

The four comparisons form a more useful picture than a single nearest rival. The Sword is well ahead of the RTX 4050 Thin GF63 by 58fps across five shared games. It is effectively tied with the RTX 4060 Katana 17 across three and the RTX 4060 Legion Pro 5 16IRX9 G9 across five. It trails the RTX 4090 Scar by 45fps across three. That is a credible measured spread: the Sword is not at the bottom of the group, does not establish a clear shared-game advantage over every RTX 4060 implementation, and does not challenge the RTX 4090 machine's lead.

The two ties deserve particular emphasis because they prevent lazy conclusions. At 1920x1080, lighter shared games can become CPU-bound, which compresses genuine GPU gaps. That explanation is not an excuse to ignore the figures; it is the reason to interpret them correctly. A near-zero average is still a real result for the conditions and games tested. It just does not authorise a broader claim that the hardware classes are equivalent in all circumstances, especially when the Sword's own benchmark list includes much more demanding titles with markedly lower frame rates.

Who it's for

A good fit for buyers with the right gaming priorities

The Sword 16 HX is for the buyer who wants measured high-refresh potential in a 16in 1920x1200 IPS laptop and understands that game demands vary. Its strongest case is made by the cluster of 1920x1080 High, upscaling-off results above the 144Hz screen rating: 239fps in The Witcher 3, 233fps in Strange Brigade, 194fps in F1 24, 171fps in Dota 2, 164fps in GTA V and 145fps in Far Cry 5. If those kinds of games are central to your library, the published data supports the choice.

It also suits a buyer content with very good rather than refresh-maxing results in games such as X-Plane 11, Far Cry 6, Baldur's Gate 3 and Final Fantasy XV. At 128fps, 121fps, 114fps and 111fps respectively, these measurements are below 144Hz but still form a strong middle group. The right buyer does not see any frame rate below the panel maximum as a defect. They see a laptop that can run a range of games quickly, while accepting that the display has more headroom than some titles can use under the quoted conditions.

It is also a reasonable candidate for someone who uses a laptop primarily at a desk or moves it occasionally. The 2.3kg weight does not rule out travel, but it points away from ultra-portable expectations. The 65Wh battery capacity is known, yet there is no endurance measurement, making this a purchase best made by someone whose decision does not depend on an unverified battery-life claim. In other words, the Sword's documented strengths are gaming frame rates and a high-refresh 16in specification, not measured mobility credentials.

Finally, it is for the buyer willing to wait for or verify a confirmed UK price. The performance case exists now. The value case does not, because the exact configuration's UK price is unconfirmed. That is not a reason to reject the machine outright; it is a reason not to purchase based on assumed positioning against the £2,625 Lenovo or the £4,864 Asus. A confirmed price is the missing fact that would turn a performance assessment into a buying recommendation on value.

Who should buy something else

Buy something else if your main expectation is 144fps in every demanding game at high settings with upscaling off. Notebookcheck's 94fps in Cyberpunk 2077 and 54fps in Black Myth: Wukong at 1920x1080 are direct evidence against that expectation. Since the laptop's screen is 1920x1200, not the 1920x1080 test resolution, there is no evidence here that native-resolution performance would remove that limitation. A buyer focused on the most demanding games should either accept settings choices supported by their own research or consider a machine with stronger demonstrated performance.

Buy something else if the highest available shared-game performance is the overriding priority and the listed £4,864 price is within reach. The Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 with RTX 4090 is 45fps ahead on average across three shared games. That does not make it automatically better value, because the Sword has no confirmed UK price, but it does make it the performance-led alternative in the supplied comparison. The Sword is not the right choice for someone who wants to minimise compromises in the hardest games simply by buying the fastest option named here.

Also look elsewhere if daily carrying weight, confirmed battery life, chassis dimensions, quiet operation, low temperatures, port selection or display colour performance are deal-breakers. The fact sheet gives 2.3kg, 65Wh, 16in, 1920x1200, 144Hz and IPS, but it does not provide the additional measurements or specifications required to judge those priorities. This is not a negative finding; it is an information limit. A careful buyer should not convert absent data into a favourable assumption.

The MSI Katana 17 and Lenovo Legion Pro 5 16IRX9 G9 also deserve attention from buyers whose shortlist is driven by the shared 1920x1080 results. The Sword's averages against them are +0fps across three games and -0fps across five games respectively. Those near-ties do not prove equal performance everywhere, but they do mean the Sword has not earned a decisive direct frame-rate advantage over either in the supplied sets. For the Lenovo in particular, its £2,625 listed price is a known comparison point, whereas the Sword's price is not. Buyers should wait for the missing price rather than assume that the RTX 4070 label makes the decision obvious.

Bottom line

The MSI Sword 16 HX (B14VGKG) has a credible, well-defined performance profile. Its RTX 4070 and Core i7-14700HX deliver a 134fps mean across the five scoring-suite games in Notebookcheck's 1920x1080 High, upscaling-off data, with several games at or above the 144Hz panel rating. The same data honestly shows the limits: not every game reaches that refresh target, Cyberpunk 2077 is measured at 94fps, and Black Myth: Wukong is measured at 54fps.

Its 16in 1920x1200 144Hz IPS screen is a logical match for the fast end of the results, while the 2.3kg weight and 65Wh battery make it more clearly a transportable performance laptop than a proven all-day portable. The unlisted GPU power limit, battery life, dimensions, temperatures, noise and detailed display behaviour should remain unanswered rather than guessed at. Most importantly, wait for a confirmed UK price before deciding whether these frame rates represent good value. Until then, the right verdict is performance-positive but purchase-cautious.

How it compares