Razer Blade 18 2024 review

Frame rates

1920×1080, High preset, upscaling off.

Measured on this machine. Source: Notebookcheck, 2024-05-06.

In use

The short version

The Razer Blade 18 2024 is a very large, very high-specification gaming laptop built around an RTX 4090, a Core i9-14900HX, 32GB of memory and a 2TB SSD. Its display is an 18in 2560x1600 panel with a 300Hz refresh rate, while the GPU is configured with a 175W power limit. On paper, that is the sort of specification expected of a flagship desktop-replacement machine rather than a conventional portable laptop.

The available benchmark data supports the idea that it is a fast gaming machine, but it also gives important reasons not to overstate the case. Notebookcheck’s measured figures at 1920x1080, High preset and with upscaling disabled range from 114fps in Alan Wake 2 to 180fps in Dota 2. The mean across the three available scoring-suite games is 146fps. Those are strong numbers, particularly because they were recorded without upscaling, but they are not enough to declare that the Blade 18 will make full use of its 300Hz panel in every game.

That distinction matters. A 300Hz screen can show up to 300 frames per second, but the measured results do not show 300fps in any of the games listed. Dota 2 comes closest at 180fps, while Final Fantasy XV reaches 157fps, GTA V reaches 130fps, X-Plane 11 reaches 127fps and Alan Wake 2 reaches 114fps. Even at the benchmark resolution of 1920x1080, the Blade 18 is well short of the display’s refresh ceiling in the measured games. At the laptop’s native 2560x1600 resolution, there is no measured frame-rate data in the fact sheet, so it would be wrong to promise similarly high results there.

The central buying question is therefore not whether this is powerful enough for gaming. The published figures show that it is. The more useful question is whether the particular mix of 18in 2560x1600, 300Hz, 3.134kg weight and RTX 4090 performance suits the way you play. This is best viewed as a machine for someone who wants a large integrated screen, a high-end GPU configuration and desktop-style gaming use in one unit, rather than someone who needs a light laptop to carry daily or who expects every modern game to run at 300fps.

There is no confirmed UK price in the supplied information. That prevents a proper value judgement. A machine with this specification could make sense at one price and be difficult to recommend at another, particularly because the rival information includes machines with the same generation of GPU but very different recorded performance relationships. Without a confirmed UK price, this review cannot say whether the Blade 18 is good value, poor value or competitively positioned in the UK.

There is also no overall score to report. The available scoring-suite data covers Dota 2, GTA V and X-Plane 11, but there are no supplied figures for Cyberpunk 2077 or Baldur’s Gate 3. Every scored laptop is averaged over the same five games, so a partial three-game set cannot be ranked fairly against machines with complete five-game results. The available figures are still useful for assessing the measured performance spread, but they should not be turned into a league-table position that the data does not support.

Buy the Blade 18 because you specifically want the 18in 2560x1600 format, the 300Hz display specification, 32GB of memory, 2TB of storage and the RTX 4090 configured at 175W. Do not buy it merely because the RTX 4090 name suggests that every game will run at the panel’s maximum refresh rate. Notebookcheck’s figures show strong results, but they also show the difference between “high frame rates” and “300fps gaming”.

Performance

What the measured figures say

Notebookcheck measured the Razer Blade 18 2024 at 1920x1080 using the High preset with upscaling disabled. That test condition is important enough to keep in view throughout the discussion. The numbers do not represent native 2560x1600 performance, they do not represent an upscaled mode, and they do not represent every available graphics preset. They are a consistent, clearly defined set of measurements that makes the available games comparable.

• Dota 2: 180fps
• Final Fantasy XV: 157fps
• GTA V: 130fps
• X-Plane 11: 127fps
• Alan Wake 2: 114fps

Across the three games in the scoring suite that have figures available, the mean is 146fps. Those three games are Dota 2, GTA V and X-Plane 11. The mean is useful as a broad indication of performance, but it is not a substitute for looking at the individual games. The difference between 180fps in Dota 2 and 127fps in X-Plane 11 is substantial in practical terms. A buyer interested primarily in fast competitive titles should not judge the machine in the same way as a buyer focused on demanding modern games or simulation workloads.

Dota 2 is the fastest result at 180fps. That is a high enough figure to make the 300Hz display specification more meaningful than it would be on a machine limited to much lower frame rates. It is still not 300fps, however. The panel can refresh at 300Hz, while the measured figure is 180fps. The Blade 18 can therefore produce a high-refresh gaming experience in this title according to the benchmark data, but the available result does not show the panel being fully driven to its maximum refresh rate.

Final Fantasy XV follows at 157fps. That is well into high-refresh territory, but again it sits below 300fps. For a buyer who regards anything comfortably above conventional refresh rates as a success, 157fps is a strong result. For a buyer selecting a 300Hz laptop specifically to pursue the highest possible frame rates, it is a reminder that the display specification is an upper limit, not a performance guarantee.

GTA V records 130fps. This is one of the scoring-suite games and therefore contributes to the 146fps mean across the available scoring titles. The result remains high, but it is notably below the Dota 2 figure. The gap illustrates why averages need context. The Blade 18 does not produce one fixed class of performance across all games; it produces different results depending on the title, the engine and the workload represented by the benchmark.

X-Plane 11 records 127fps, only slightly behind GTA V at 130fps. That closeness is useful because it shows that the three-game mean is not being carried solely by Dota 2. The Blade 18 has more than one result above 120fps in the supplied data. At the same time, X-Plane 11 is another example of a game where the measured result is nowhere near the 300Hz ceiling. The laptop’s high-refresh panel is not wasted simply because the game does not reach 300fps, but buyers should set expectations correctly: high refresh and maximum refresh are not the same thing.

Alan Wake 2 is the slowest listed result at 114fps. It is still above 100fps at the stated benchmark settings, which is a strong showing, but it is also the clearest demonstration that an RTX 4090 laptop does not automatically mean extreme frame rates in every title. The difference between Alan Wake 2 at 114fps and Dota 2 at 180fps is 66fps. That range is not a fault in the data; it is precisely why a review should discuss the game-by-game spread rather than presenting only one average.

The 175W GPU power limit in context

The Blade 18 uses an RTX 4090 with a stated 175W GPU power limit. That matters because a GPU name alone does not fully describe a laptop’s gaming configuration. The RTX 4090 designation tells you the GPU class, while the stated power limit tells you how the machine is configured to run it. In laptop comparisons, two machines carrying the same GPU name can still produce different frame rates, and machines with different GPU names can sometimes appear closer than expected in selected tests.

The available rival data demonstrates that point directly. The Razer’s 175W RTX 4090 is not just being compared with another RTX 4090; it is also compared with RTX 4060 systems configured at different power limits. The Medion Erazer Defender P40 has an RTX 4060 at 140W, while the Gigabyte G5 KF5 has an RTX 4060 at 75W. Yet the supplied shared-game comparisons report a +0fps average against the Medion and a -0fps average against the Gigabyte. Those near-zero results should not be read as proof that an RTX 4090 and RTX 4060 are broadly interchangeable. They are a warning that the particular shared games and 1920x1080 setting can compress differences.

The supplied comparison notes explain why: at 1080p, lighter titles in the shared set can be CPU-bound and compress genuine GPU gaps. That is especially relevant here because the Blade 18 uses a Core i9-14900HX. When a game is limited more by CPU-side work than by GPU throughput, changing the GPU configuration may have less effect on the final frame rate than buyers expect from the GPU label alone. The result is that headline GPU hierarchy and observed frame-rate hierarchy can diverge in a narrow selection of 1080p games.

This does not make the GPU power limit irrelevant. On the contrary, the 175W figure is one of the important specifications of the Blade 18. It tells prospective buyers that the RTX 4090 is not being described without an accompanying power configuration. But the benchmark evidence should be used carefully. The published numbers establish the performance of this exact Razer configuration in the stated games and test conditions. They do not establish a universal advantage over every lower-tier GPU in every title, nor do they prove how it performs at 2560x1600.

There is one same-GPU comparison that is more straightforward. The Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 also has an RTX 4090 and is reported to average 53fps ahead of the Blade 18 across three shared games. That does not mean the Blade 18 is slow. It means the RTX 4090 label and a 175W power limit should not be treated as the complete story. A buyer considering an RTX 4090 laptop should compare measured figures for the games they play, not assume that all machines with the same GPU will perform identically.

How comfortable are these frame rates?

At the measured 1920x1080 High preset with upscaling disabled, every listed game is above 100fps. That gives the Blade 18 a consistently high frame-rate baseline across the available results. Dota 2 at 180fps and Final Fantasy XV at 157fps are the clearest matches for buyers who want a visibly high-refresh experience. GTA V at 130fps, X-Plane 11 at 127fps and Alan Wake 2 at 114fps remain high-frame-rate results, although they leave more of the 300Hz panel’s potential unused.

For the 300Hz display, the practical conclusion is simple: the panel has more refresh capacity than the measured games are shown to require. That is not necessarily a negative. A display does not become unsuitable merely because a game is running below its maximum refresh rate. But it does mean that the 300Hz specification should be understood as headroom rather than a level the Blade 18 demonstrably reaches in the supplied benchmarks.

The measured data also gives no basis for claiming a particular frame rate at 2560x1600. The laptop’s screen has 2560x1600 resolution, while the benchmark data is at 1920x1080. Those are different resolutions. Anyone buying the Blade 18 primarily to play at the panel’s native resolution should recognise that the supplied figures are not native-resolution results. The data suggests that the machine has substantial performance at 1080p High without upscaling, but it cannot be used to state that Alan Wake 2, GTA V, X-Plane 11, Final Fantasy XV or Dota 2 will achieve the same numbers at 2560x1600.

Upscaling is also disabled in the measured results. This makes the figures useful as a baseline because they do not depend on an upscaling mode. It does not, however, allow a review to infer what performance would be with upscaling enabled. There are no supplied results for that condition, so it would be speculation to claim a resulting frame-rate level.

Why the game-to-game spread matters

The 66fps spread between Dota 2 at 180fps and Alan Wake 2 at 114fps is the most useful performance lesson in the data. The Blade 18 is not delivering a flat 146fps across every title. The 146fps figure is a mean across Dota 2, GTA V and X-Plane 11 only. It is not the average of all five supplied results, and it is not a promise for games outside the measured set.

For someone whose gaming is centred on Dota 2, the 180fps figure is likely to be more relevant than the three-game mean. For someone interested in Alan Wake 2, the 114fps figure is more relevant. For someone alternating between the supplied scoring-suite games, the 146fps mean gives a reasonable broad summary while still needing the game-by-game context beside it.

The presence of a 300Hz screen makes this spread more visible as a buying issue. On a lower-refresh display, the difference between 114fps and 180fps may be less central to the purchase decision. On a 300Hz laptop, the gap is directly connected to how much of the display’s available refresh range the GPU can use. The Blade 18 has enough measured performance to make high refresh worthwhile, but not enough evidence to say its 300Hz display will be saturated in the listed games.

The correct conclusion is neither that the display is excessive nor that the RTX 4090 is inadequate. The evidence supports a more specific position: this is a high-performance laptop whose 300Hz screen provides a ceiling above the measured frame rates. The panel can accommodate the fastest result in the supplied data, but the available figures do not show it being fully exploited.

The screen

The Razer Blade 18 2024 has an 18in display with a 2560x1600 resolution and a 300Hz refresh rate. Those specifications place the screen at the centre of the laptop’s appeal. An 18in panel is larger than the screens used on more conventional gaming laptops, while 2560x1600 provides a taller format than 1920x1080. The 300Hz refresh rate is also unusually ambitious compared with the measured frame rates available here.

There is no panel type in the supplied information. It would therefore be wrong to state whether this is an IPS, OLED, Mini LED or another panel technology. There is also no supplied information on brightness, colour coverage, response time, contrast, adaptive-sync support or HDR behaviour. Those omissions matter because resolution and refresh rate are not the whole display story. The known facts are the size, resolution and refresh rate; anything beyond those would need a separate attributable source.

Resolution versus benchmark resolution

The main caution for prospective buyers is that the screen’s native resolution and the published benchmark resolution are not the same. The Blade 18’s display is 2560x1600, but Notebookcheck’s figures were measured at 1920x1080 on High with upscaling off. The numbers therefore tell us how the Razer performed under the stated 1080p test condition, not how it performs at the panel’s native 2560x1600 resolution.

This is not a minor technicality. A buyer choosing an 18in 2560x1600 laptop is likely to want to use that display at its native resolution. The benchmark results are still relevant because they establish a consistent performance reference, but they cannot settle whether each game will be closer to 114fps, 127fps, 130fps, 157fps or 180fps at 2560x1600. No native-resolution figures are supplied, so none should be implied.

The same limitation applies to the 300Hz refresh rate. At 1920x1080, the measured maximum among the listed games is 180fps. At 2560x1600, there is no available measurement. It would be irresponsible to claim that Dota 2 reaches 300fps at native resolution, or that any of the other titles do. The data does not say that.

Is 300Hz useful here?

The answer depends on what a buyer means by useful. The measured results show frame rates from 114fps to 180fps. A 300Hz display can present those frame rates without being the limiting ceiling. In that sense, the refresh rate leaves headroom above the supplied results. It also avoids the situation where the display’s refresh limit is below the laptop’s measured frame rate in Dota 2, Final Fantasy XV, GTA V, X-Plane 11 or Alan Wake 2.

However, if the aim is to choose a laptop because it can deliver 300fps in demanding games, the supplied evidence does not support that purchase rationale. None of the listed measurements reaches 300fps, and all of them were taken at 1920x1080 rather than 2560x1600. The best measured result is 180fps in Dota 2, leaving a substantial gap to the panel’s maximum refresh rate.

For competitive players, the 300Hz specification may still be attractive because the available results are all high enough to take advantage of a high-refresh display. But it would be more accurate to call the screen a high-ceiling feature than to call it fully driven by the benchmark data. Buyers who care more about visual detail at 2560x1600 than about maximum refresh should wait for native-resolution figures before assuming how demanding titles will behave.

Build, size and portability

The most concrete portability figure available is the weight: 3.134kg. That is a significant weight for a laptop and should shape expectations before purchase. The Blade 18 is not presented by its specifications as a lightweight machine for effortless daily transport. It has an 18in display, 32GB of memory, 2TB of SSD storage, a Core i9-14900HX and an RTX 4090 with a 175W power limit. The weight is consistent with the idea of a desktop-replacement-style gaming laptop, although this review cannot make claims about chassis materials, rigidity, keyboard feel, hinge quality or thermal design because those details are not supplied.

There are no dimensions in the fact sheet. As a result, this review cannot state the laptop’s width, depth or thickness, and it cannot calculate how much space it takes in a bag or on a desk. The 18in screen and 3.134kg weight are enough to establish that this is not a compact class of gaming laptop, but they are not enough to make precise claims about its footprint.

The practical implication of 3.134kg is that the Blade 18 is better suited to deliberate transport than casual portability. Moving it occasionally between rooms, taking it to a fixed destination or using it as a primary machine in more than one location is a different proposition from carrying it throughout the day. The exact suitability depends on the individual buyer, but anyone prioritising low carried weight should regard 3.134kg as a major part of the decision rather than an incidental specification.

There is no battery-life figure in the supplied information. It would be wrong to infer battery endurance from the laptop’s size, CPU, GPU or weight. Likewise, there are no measurements for noise or temperatures. A 175W GPU power limit is relevant to performance configuration, but it does not provide a measured answer to how loud or how warm the machine is. Buyers for whom quiet operation, low surface temperatures or long battery life are essential should seek attributable data for those areas rather than treating the gaming figures as a substitute.

The storage and memory specifications are generous on their face: 32GB of memory and a 2TB SSD are supplied. That makes the machine less dependent on immediate upgrades than a lower-memory or smaller-storage configuration, but the fact sheet does not state upgradeability, the number of storage slots or the memory arrangement. It should therefore not be assumed that the laptop can be expanded in a particular way.

The Blade 18’s physical concept is clear even where the detailed build information is not: it combines a large 18in screen with high-end internal specifications and a 3.134kg weight. This is a machine for buyers comfortable with the compromises of a large gaming laptop. It is not the obvious choice for someone seeking the smallest or lightest system that can run games.

How it compares

The available rival list is deliberately broad rather than limited to one nearest alternative. It includes an RTX 4050 machine, two RTX 4060 machines with different stated power limits, and another RTX 4090 machine. The comparisons are only for games both machines hold, with preference given to scoring-suite games. That restriction matters: these are not full-system rankings and should not be interpreted as universal performance differences across all games.

Against the MSI Thin GF63

Against the MSI Thin GF63 with an RTX 4050, the Blade 18 averages 58fps ahead across three shared games. This is the largest positive comparison in the supplied rival set. It supports the expected broad conclusion that the Blade 18’s RTX 4090 configuration is in a substantially higher performance class than an RTX 4050 machine in those shared tests.

The gap is especially relevant to buyers moving from an entry-level or lower-tier gaming laptop to a flagship configuration. A 58fps shared-game average advantage is not a marginal result. It is the clearest evidence in the rival data that the Blade 18 can offer materially more performance in the right comparison. However, there is no confirmed UK price for the MSI Thin GF63 and no confirmed UK price for the Blade 18, so this cannot become a value comparison.

Against the Medion Erazer Defender P40

The Medion Erazer Defender P40 has an RTX 4060 at 140W. Across three shared games, the reported difference is +0fps in favour of the Blade 18. That is a near-zero result, and it deserves explanation rather than repetition. It does not mean that the RTX 4090 at 175W is generally equivalent to an RTX 4060 at 140W. The supplied notes state that at 1080p the lighter titles in the shared set can be CPU-bound and compress genuine GPU gaps.

That is exactly why buyers should not shop solely from shared-game averages without checking the games and settings behind them. The Blade 18’s RTX 4090, 175W GPU configuration and Core i9-14900HX are still the specifications of the Razer under review. The +0fps result simply says that, in those three shared games at the relevant test conditions, the measured average did not separate the machines.

There is no confirmed UK price for the Medion either, so no price-performance conclusion can be made. What can be said is that this comparison is a warning against assuming that a higher GPU tier guarantees a visible advantage in every 1080p game. The benchmark setting and the game selection matter.

Against the Gigabyte G5 KF5

The Gigabyte G5 KF5 has an RTX 4060 at 75W. The reported shared-game result is -0fps for the Blade 18 across three games. As with the Medion result, the minus sign should not be treated as evidence that the Gigabyte is meaningfully faster. The figure is near zero, and the supplied guidance specifically notes that lighter 1080p titles can become CPU-bound, compressing the genuine GPU performance gap.

This is the most counterintuitive comparison in the supplied data because the Gigabyte’s stated GPU power limit is 75W while the Razer’s is 175W. The correct response is not to dismiss the data, but to understand its scope. These are shared-game averages from a limited set, not a complete performance characterisation of every game and every resolution. In this narrow comparison, the systems are effectively tied. That does not establish a general tie between the two GPU configurations.

For a buyer considering the Blade 18, the lesson is useful: a premium GPU configuration should be judged where it is likely to matter, not only in lighter 1080p games. Unfortunately, the supplied fact sheet does not include more demanding shared-game comparisons, native 2560x1600 figures or a confirmed UK price for either machine. It therefore cannot establish whether the Razer is worth the likely premium over the Gigabyte.

Against the Asus ROG Strix Scar 17

The Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 is the important high-end rival because it also uses an RTX 4090. It is listed at £4,864, and it averages 53fps ahead of the Blade 18 across three shared games. This is the largest negative comparison for the Razer in the supplied rival group and the strongest reason not to treat all RTX 4090 laptops as equivalent.

A 53fps average deficit across three shared games is significant. It suggests that buyers focused purely on measured frame rates should look closely at the Scar 17 rather than assume the Blade 18’s RTX 4090 and 175W power limit make it the automatic choice. The fact that both machines use an RTX 4090 reinforces the broader point: GPU model names are not enough. Actual measured results remain the more useful evidence.

That said, there is no confirmed UK price for the Blade 18. The Scar 17’s £4,864 price gives a concrete reference point for that rival, but without a confirmed Razer price, it is impossible to say whether the Scar’s frame-rate advantage represents better value. The Razer could be less expensive, similarly priced or more expensive; the supplied data does not establish it.

The Blade 18 does have a larger 18in 2560x1600 300Hz display specification than can be inferred from the Scar’s listed information, because no screen information for the Scar is supplied here. But this review cannot turn that into a full feature comparison. The valid conclusion is narrower: in the listed shared games, the Scar 17 is ahead by 53fps on average, while the Razer’s final value position cannot be assessed without its UK price.

Who it’s for

The Razer Blade 18 2024 is for the buyer who wants a large-screen gaming laptop with a high-end configuration and understands the difference between high-refresh performance and maximum-refresh performance. The 18in 2560x1600 300Hz display, RTX 4090 at 175W, Core i9-14900HX, 32GB of memory and 2TB SSD make it a serious specification for someone intending to use one machine as a major gaming system rather than as a light travel laptop.

It makes most sense for players who value the integrated 18in display and are comfortable with a 3.134kg laptop. The available frame rates show consistently strong 1080p High performance with upscaling disabled: 180fps in Dota 2, 157fps in Final Fantasy XV, 130fps in GTA V, 127fps in X-Plane 11 and 114fps in Alan Wake 2. Those are figures for buyers who want high frame rates across different types of games, not merely acceptable performance in one title.

Dota 2 players are especially well served by the supplied data because the measured result is 180fps. That does not fully use the 300Hz panel, but it is the closest result to doing so among the listed games. Buyers who play Final Fantasy XV also have a strong measured result at 157fps. For GTA V and X-Plane 11, the recorded figures of 130fps and 127fps respectively remain firmly in high-refresh territory.

The Blade 18 is also a reasonable fit for someone who wants performance headroom at 1080p without relying on upscaling in the supplied test condition. Upscaling was disabled for every listed result. That does not tell us what the laptop can do with upscaling enabled, but it does mean the stated figures are not dependent on that feature.

It is less suitable for the buyer whose priority is daily portability. At 3.134kg, it is not a machine chosen primarily to minimise carried weight. The 18in screen also points toward a larger-format design, although dimensions are not provided. Someone commuting with a laptop every day, carrying it between classes or using it frequently away from a fixed workspace should consider whether the weight is acceptable before focusing on the RTX 4090 badge.

It is also not the obvious choice for someone who expects every game to run at 300fps. The 300Hz screen is a genuine feature, but the measured results range from 114fps to 180fps at 1920x1080 High with upscaling disabled. No available figure reaches 300fps, and there are no figures for native 2560x1600. Buyers whose purchase decision is built around fully saturating a 300Hz panel should look for game-specific evidence matching the titles and resolution they actually intend to use.

Buy something else if price is the deciding factor, because the Blade 18 has no confirmed UK price in the supplied information. Without that figure, there is no responsible way to describe its value. The Asus ROG Strix Scar 17 is listed at £4,864 and is 53fps ahead on average across three shared games, but that does not automatically make it the better buy because the Razer’s price is unknown. Likewise, the MSI Thin GF63 is 58fps behind across three shared games, but its UK price is also unconfirmed.

Buy something else if you want a complete benchmark-based ranking. The Blade 18 has no supplied figures for Cyberpunk 2077 or Baldur’s Gate 3, so its three-game scoring-suite mean of 146fps cannot be fairly ranked against laptops with complete five-game averages. The partial data is enough to show strong performance in the measured games. It is not enough to support a definitive overall placement.

Finally, buy something else if your priority is known battery life, measured noise, measured temperatures, detailed chassis information or confirmed upgradeability. None of those areas is covered by the supplied fact sheet. The Blade 18’s performance data is attributable and useful, but it does not answer every ownership question. The right purchase decision here is evidence-led: choose it for the specifications and measured 1080p High performance that are known, and do not fill the remaining gaps with assumptions.