For colors, it's very accurate at maximum brightness - I was told it was calibrated to 100% brightness for Adobe RGB and it might be even better at lower brightness levels - and with just a little tweaking could probably hit anyone's accuracy threshold.īecause of different implementations, brightness varies across the OLED panels, too. It covers 100% of DCI-P3 and about 93% of the Adobe RGB color gamuts, all the white points come within 250K of their targets, gamma is very consistently close to 2.2 above 20% gray (OLED gamma has a discontinuity roughly below 20% because it has different shadow-detail characteristics than monitors with less perfect blacks, for which a gamma of 2.2 became standard) and the gray scale is reasonably neutral. In this case, it makes it a lot more out-of-the-box flexible than the one-profile-fits-all versions of other OLED laptops I've tested.Īs tested (using Portrait Displays' Calman 5 Ultimate and an X-Rite i1Display Pro), the display is very accurate for a nonpro screen. Panel, the software profiling and supporting hardware are what differentiates them from each other. Oddly, the Native profile it loads is sRGB rather than just a full-monitor gamut, which is what "native" usually means in this context. ![]() For example, it comes with a Pantone-certified software profile for print work, plus four color temperature software-calibration profiles (D5800, D6000, D6500 and D6800), which you can swap among via the ControlCenter rather than using Windows' system. ![]() Though not as robust as the color management of a mobile workstation, which generally has profiles stored in hardware, it's one of the broader systems I've seen in a prosumer laptop. But the Asus has some drawbacks relative to the Gigabyte that are hard to overlook: The keyboard is uncomfortable without the wrist rest, it's got mediocre battery life and it's relatively heavy. The Asus's primary display is a touchscreen, which is one thing I miss in the Gigabyte. ![]() Its primary competitor is the Asus Pro Duo, a dual-screen OLED laptop that costs the same for a similar configuration but downgrades to an RTX 2060 in favor of a 1TB SSD. Shoppers looking for more affordable options in the near term should consider the previous gen 3060-Ti, which offers excellent real-world performance for $400 USD.Our $2,500 test configuration, the XA model with a six-coreĬore i7-9750H, 16GB RAM and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, performed relatively well. Most gamers, who are best off playing at 1080p, should wait for the upcoming, better value, 4060 series cards. PC gamers still looking to join AMD’s “2%” GPU club (Steam stats: 5000/6000 series combined mkt share) need to work on their critical thinking skills: Influencers are paid handsomely to promote inferior products. Although the 7900 XTX does outperform the 4070-Ti on paper, the 4070-Ti is more power efficient (quieter), has a broader feature set (RT/DLSS 3.0) and offers far better game compatibility (drivers). Users tempted to consider the 7900 XT/X by AMD’s army of sponsored Advanced Marketers (youtube, reddit, twitter, forums etc.) should be aware that AMD have a history of releasing benchmark busting, heavily marketed, sub standard products. Since the 4070-Ti only has 12GB-192-bit memory (vs 24GB-384-bit in the 3090-Ti) it is relatively weaker (5-10%) at 4K. ![]() The 4070-Ti is around 50% faster than the 3070-Ti and offers similar performance to the 3090-Ti at less than half the price. It features 7,680 cores with base / boost clocks of 2.3 / 2.6 GHz, 12 GB of memory, a 192-bit memory bus, 60 3rd gen RT cores, 240 4th gen Tensor cores, DLSS 3 (with frame generation), a TDP of 285W and an MSRP of $800 USD. The RTX 4070-Ti is based on Nvidia’s Ada Lovelace architecture.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |