It goes without saying that if you're interested in gaming at QHD resolution, this is the laptop you want to be using. In most modern games, if you can afford it, you're essentially paying to never have to worry about the settings, resolutions, or frame rates.
By the way, the Counter-Strike: Global Offensive number is not a mistake. Although it won't matter on the 240Hz panel, the frame rate is so absurdly high compared to anything a gaming laptop has ever managed on any game that I felt compelled to mention it.
AMD's 3D V-Cache is one of the main factors that contribute to these staggering results. The first mobile processor with this technology is the X3D chip, which has more cache than AMD's existing desktop X3D range.
For those who are unaware, cache is fast memory that resides on the CPU. It is quite easy to get to. I like to think of it as the CPU's "pocket," saving the chip from having to search through the system RAM for something it needs if it is already in the cache. However, caching is also similar to a pocket in that it has a limited capacity. These kinds of devices measure it in megabytes, whereas RAM is measured in gigabytes.
AMD can add more cache to the CPU thanks to 3D V-Cache. This might significantly affect gaming laptops because games in particular demand extremely fast data processing from CPUs. The X3D should not be purchased to be used in an office because cache does not significantly affect productivity jobs like office work and other types of productivity chores. It is as much of a "gaming laptop" as gaming laptops get, just like the rest of the Strix family. It is exclusively for use in games. (After all, it weighs more than six pounds and is almost an inch thick. My back did not appreciate me carrying it in a backpack to and from the office.)
Asus ROG Strix Scar X3D benchmarks
| Title |
Frames per second
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | |
| Native | 123 |
| FHD | 149 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | |
| Native (ray tracing on) | 133 |
| Native (ray tracing off) | 196 |
| FHD (ray tracing on) | 212 |
| FHD (ray tracing off) | 283 |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | |
| Native | 173 |
| FHD | 203 |
| CS:GO | |
| Native | 545 |
| FHD | 692 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | |
| Native | 142 |
| FHD | 181 |
Asus ROG Strix Scar X3D specs (as reviewed)
- 17-inch IPS QHD, 240Hz display, 3ms, 300 nits, 100 percent DCI-P3
- AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D, 55W default TDP, 5.4GHz boost, clock, 16 cores / 32 threads
- Nvidia RTX 4090, 150W+25W, 16GB VRAM
- UP to 64GB Dual Channel DDR5 4800MHz (2 x SODIMM slot)
- 2 x PCIE 4.0 SSD M.2 Slots, up to 1 x 2TB 4x4 SSD included (up to 7000MB/S)
- 720p webcam
- Wi-Fi 6E + BT 5.2
- 90Whr battery
- 330W adapter
Things I don’t like quite as much
The webcam is bad. It’s a grainy 720p affair. I mean, the last Strix I reviewed didn’t have a webcam at all, so I’m glad to see that we’re making progress. But still — $3699.99, 720p, in 2023.
Well, battery life. It's not a Zephyrus. This device lasted for three and a half hours of ordinary (non-gaming) office use before it failed. (Battery Saver was enabled, medium brightness, and Silent mode were used.) Here, the MSI Titan GT77 laptop has a tiny advantage over the X3D because it has a larger battery. I got around one hour and a half more usage time from the MSI. That said, I believe you need to, like, go for a swim or something to clear your head if you're buying one of these massive six-pound computers and are basing your decision on battery life. The good news is that Red Dead Redemption 2 played flawlessly for 54 minutes on the X3D's battery. I was actually astonished when the game abruptly ended because it was so playable throughout, with barely a stutter. The X3D was charged by the bundled 330W charger very quickly as well, reaching 60 percent in only 37 minutes.Agree to Continue: Asus ROG Strix Scar X3D
The mandatory policies, for which an agreement is required, are:
- A request for your region
- Microsoft Software License Terms
Optional things to agree to:
- Device privacy settings: Find My Device, inking and typing, advertising ID, location, diagnostic data, tailored experiences
- Microsoft 365 free trial
- Join Xbox Game Pass
- Provide your name, email region, and phone number to allow McAfee to send you service-related email and text notices
That’s two mandatory agreements and nine optional ones
AMD completed the task. It made the Strix Scar X3D a blisteringly powerful laptop that easily outperforms the competition and brought 3D V-Cache to the mobile market. The decision should be rather straightforward for those with $3,700 to spare: purchase the X3D if frame rates are your top priority and you want the best of the best. You should start looking elsewhere as soon as you start caring about other factors, such as webcam quality, portability, or battery life. Personally, I'm more curious in the X3D's potential in the gaming laptop market. I was testing this and it brought back memories of testing the ROG Zephyrus G14 in 2020. I can still picture me repeatedly verifying those numbers. AMD had completely altered our perception of what a gaming laptop was capable of. And it might have just repeated that, in my opinion.
Recently, AMD unveiled the new Ryzen 9 7945HX3D, a processor with 16 cores, 32 threads, a boost clock up to 5.4GHz, a TDP of over 55W, and a massive 144MB of total cache. It would be the "fastest mobile gaming processor in the world," according to the manufacturer. AMD insisted that this chip will provide a superior gaming experience.
Well, I now possess the processor. It's within the enormous 17-inch ROG Strix Scar X3D laptop from Asus, which is covered in RGB. And people, I am seeing some utterly absurd figures from this. This Scar is having lunch on Intel. It greatly exceeds the capabilities of any gaming laptop I have ever examined.
Currently, this gadget costs $3,699.99 and also has 32GB of RAM, 1TB of storage, an Nvidia RTX 4090 GPU, and a 240Hz QHD screen. It's a premium purchase, much like many of the best gaming laptops available today. This is likely to be one of those goods that many customers will buy more as a statement than as a practical purchase. And in this instance, the assertion is one that, as soon as AMD revealed this processor, we all kind of believed to be true: Intel is in trouble.