Notebookcheck

Kabına sığmayan güç: Dell XPS 15 7590 Core i9 ve GeForce GTX 1650 OLED Laptop

Allen Ngo, 👁 Allen Ngo, 08/15/2019

Pushing limits. XPS 15 yeni Core i9 seçenekleri, yeni GTX Turing grafik seçenekleri ve yeni 4K UHD OLED seçenekleriyle geri döndü. En iyi serinin en iyi şekilde sunabileceği en son serinin neler sunabileceğini görmek için XPS 15 7590'ın en yüksek seviye yapılandırmasını test ediyoruz.

Dell unveiled its XPS 15 7590 at Computex 2019 as a relatively minor update to last year's XPS 15 9570. Aside from the expected upgrade to Intel 9th gen Core ix and Nvidia Turing GTX options, the latest model addresses the infamous "nose cam" similar to the latest XPS 13 9380 model. Current SKUs range from the Core i5-9300H to the unlocked Core i9-9980HK, 1080p matte to 4K IPS touch or 4K OLED non-touch, and UHD Graphics 630 to the GeForce GTX 1650 GPU. The wide selection of SKUs allows for an equally wide range of prices from $1000 to over $2600 USD.

The configuration we'll be looking at today is the higher-end SKU with the Core i9 CPU, OLED display, and GeForce GTX GPU to represent the best that the XPS 15 7590 has to offer — in theory, at least. Our review below will show why Dell may still be packing in too much power for this aging chassis to handle. We fully intend to check out the Core i5 and Core i7 SKUs as well in the near future to get a bigger picture of the 7590 series and to find out which SKU is the most balanced.

We recommend checking out our existing reviews on the XPS 15 9550, 9560, and 9570 for more information on the chassis, ports, keyboard, speakers, and other physical features since the 7590 is essentially the same design all over again. Our findings and experience with this particular 7590 review unit reflect the following driver versions as noted by the screenshots below.

The XPS 15 series competes directly with other flagship 15.6-inch Ultrabooks including the Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580, HP Spectre x360 15, Gigabyte Aero 15, and the MacBook Pro 15.

More Dell XPS 15 reviews:

List of drivers as tested on our Core i9 XPS 15 7590 unit
List of drivers as tested on our Core i9 XPS 15 7590 unit
XPS laptops are particularly sensitive to driver versions as so we've elected to explicitly mention them here
XPS laptops are particularly sensitive to driver versions as so we've elected to explicitly mention them here
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 (XPS 15 Seri)
İşlemci
Intel Core i9-9980HK
Grafik kartı
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) - 4096 MB, Çekirdek: 1395 MHz, Bellek: 2001 MHz, GDDR5, 431.6, Optimus
Bellek
32768 MB 
, DDR4, 1333.3 MHz, 19-19-19-43, Dual-Channel
Görüntü
15.6 inç 16:9, 3840 x 2160 pixel 282 PPI, Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029, OLED, Dell P/N: 0HHFM, parlak: evet, HDR
Anakart
Intel CM246
Harddisk
Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02, 1024 GB 
Ses kartı
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Bağlantılar
2 USB 3.0, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Ses çıkışları: 3.5 mm combo, Kart okuyucular: SD reader, 1 Parmak izi okuyucu
Network
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW) (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6), Bluetooth 5
Boyut
yükseklik x genişlik x derinlik (mm): 17 x 357 x 235
Batarya
97 Wh Lithium-Polymer
İşletim sistemi
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Ek özellikler
Hoparlörler: Stereo, Klavye: Chiclet, Klavye ışığı: evet, McAfee LiveSafe, Dell Update, Power Manager, CinemaColor, Customer Connect, Mobile Connect, 12 Ay Garanti
Ağırlık
2 kg, Güç kaynağı: 424 g
Fiyat
2300 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

Visually, this is the same chassis that many of us are already familiar with. The magnesium alloy outer lid and bottom base with carbon fiber keyboard deck hold up really well despite launching almost five years ago. The most notable change is the re-positioned webcam along the top edge of the screen instead of the bottom. Dell had to shift the screen slightly lower by a millimeter or two to make room for the camera, but the overall chassis dimensions are identical to the XPS 15 9570/9560.

Carbon fiber palm rests have a luxurious first impression. Unfortunately, unsightly grease will accumulate quickly
Carbon fiber palm rests have a luxurious first impression. Unfortunately, unsightly grease will accumulate quickly
A normal webcam at last! Note the bluish tint of the edge-to-edge glass OLED screen which is not present on an IPS panel
A normal webcam at last! Note the bluish tint of the edge-to-edge glass OLED screen which is not present on an IPS panel
Lid opened to maximum angle (~140 degrees)
Lid opened to maximum angle (~140 degrees)
Charging via USB Type-C is possible if you have a universal USB Type-C charging adapter
Charging via USB Type-C is possible if you have a universal USB Type-C charging adapter
XPS 15 shares the same design language as the smaller XPS 13
XPS 15 shares the same design language as the smaller XPS 13
Fingerprint-enabled Power button. No white glass-fiber unlike on the XPS 13
Fingerprint-enabled Power button. No white glass-fiber unlike on the XPS 13
361 mm 250 mm 19.3 mm 2.2 kg356 mm 250 mm 20 mm 2.2 kg357 mm 235 mm 17 mm 2 kg357 mm 235 mm 17 mm 2 kg355 mm 235 mm 17.8 mm 2.2 kg354 mm 220 mm 18 mm 1.6 kg

Connectivity

Port options are still competitive after all these years. The full-size SD reader in particular is becoming increasingly uncommon on newer Ultrabooks like the Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580 or the HP Spectre x360 15. The Thunderbolt 3 port offers the full four PCIe lanes that eGPU enthusiasts will want to take advantage of.

The battery indicator button is back yet again which we suspect very few users will even use. This is more likely a relic of the past with a high chance of being omitted on future XPS 15 models.

Recharging the system via USB Type-C is possible and we can confirm this when connecting a 130 W Dell USB Type-C charger to the XPS 15 7590.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: SD reader, USB 3.1 Gen. 1, Battery indicator, Noble Lock
Right: SD reader, USB 3.1 Gen. 1, Battery indicator, Noble Lock
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, USB 3.1 Gen. 1, HDMI 2.0, USB Type-C + Thunderbolt 3, 3.5 mm combo
Left: AC adapter, USB 3.1 Gen. 1, HDMI 2.0, USB Type-C + Thunderbolt 3, 3.5 mm combo

SD Card Reader

Fully inserted SD card
Fully inserted SD card

Transfer rates from the integrated SD card reader are some of the fastest on any laptop save for the UHS-III card reader on the Razer Blade Pro 17. Moving 1 GB worth of pictures from our UHS-II test card takes about 6 to 7 seconds compared to ~15 seconds on the Asus ZenBook UX533. Our only complaint is that a fully inserted SD card does not sit flush against the edge making it unsafe for transport in contrast to the spring-loaded SD card reader of the Razer Blade Pro 17.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
195 MB/s ∼100% +13%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
176.6 MB/s ∼91% +2%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
172.4 MB/s ∼88%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
149.3 MB/s ∼77% -13%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
65.6 MB/s ∼34% -62%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
241 MB/s ∼100% +25%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
207.82 MB/s ∼86% +8%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
193.8 MB/s ∼80% +1%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
192.1 MB/s ∼80%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
78 MB/s ∼32% -59%

Communication

All current SKUs come standard with a Killer AX1650x WLAN module to be Wi-Fi 6 ready. Intel will be pushing Wi-Fi 6 more heavily onto Ultrabooks soon and so this is simply Dell's way of future-proofing its XPS lineup. The Killer AX1650x is the gaming variant of the Intel AX200 similar to how the Killer 1550 is the gaming variant of the Intel 9560. More details on Killer-specific WLAN features can be found on our review of the Killer 1535 here.

Note that performance can be faster than what we've recorded below since our current server setup is limited by a 1 Gbps line. Unless if you have a compatible router, don't expect to be fully exploiting Wi-Fi 6 speeds anytime soon. We didn't experience any issues related to connectivity during our time with the test unit.

M.2 2230 WLAN module sits much closer to the rear of the system when compared to most other laptops
M.2 2230 WLAN module sits much closer to the rear of the system when compared to most other laptops
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
688 MBit/s ∼100% +2%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
682 MBit/s ∼99% +1%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
674 MBit/s ∼98%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
651 (min: 547, max: 681) MBit/s ∼95% -3%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
630 MBit/s ∼92% -7%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
596 (min: 521, max: 646) MBit/s ∼87% -12%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
718 MBit/s ∼100% +11%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
716 MBit/s ∼100% +11%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
655 MBit/s ∼91% +2%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
644 (min: 499, max: 661) MBit/s ∼90% 0%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Killer Wi-Fi 6 AX1650x Wireless Network Adapter (200NGW)
644 MBit/s ∼90%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
633 (min: 482, max: 722) MBit/s ∼88% -2%

Maintenance

Not much has changed internally over the XPS 15 9570 as expected from a visual standpoint. RAM, WLAN, and M.2 storage are all still upgradeable and a lower battery capacity option (56 Wh) is still available on lesser SKUs for users who want secondary 2.5-inch SATA III storage.

While the cooling solution between the various XPS 15 SKUs may appear mostly identical, the Core i9 7590 SKUs come equipped with copper pipes and fins instead of the usual aluminum. Dell says this change will help cool the demanding hardware more effectively even though our benchmark data below will show that this might not be enough.

Dell has implemented additional cooling measures over the VRM MOSFET components that lie directly above the processors.

XPS 15 7590
XPS 15 7590
XPS 15 9570 for comparison
XPS 15 9570 for comparison
Additional cooling for the VRM modules unlike on last generation models. The positioning of the chips have changed slightly in order to accommodate the new heat spreaders
Additional cooling for the VRM modules unlike on last generation models. The positioning of the chips have changed slightly in order to accommodate the new heat spreaders

Accessories and Warranty

There are no extras in the box other than the usual paperwork. A USB-to-Ethernet adapter or cleaning cloth would have been nice additions.

The standard one-year limited warranty applies. As one of the world's largest OEMs and providers of IT services, Dell also offers a wider range of warranty extensions than most. Buyers can sign up for up to 4 years of premium support and 2 years of extended battery service if desired.

Input Devices

Keyboard and Trackpad

The input devices have not changed since the early XPS 15 9550 days meaning that our 2015 comments still apply here. Since then, however, newer Ultrabooks have come to market with crisper and firmer keys for a less spongy feel. We personally prefer the keyboard on the Spectre x360 15 over the XPS 15 as its keys have stronger and "clickier" feedback when pressed in addition to an integrated NumPad. Meanwhile, the glass clickpad continues to be reliable without any major issues even though it's not as accurate as touchpads with dedicated mouse keys.

Large clickpad (10.5 x 8.5 cm) with shallow but clicky integrated mouse keys
Large clickpad (10.5 x 8.5 cm) with shallow but clicky integrated mouse keys
Same keyboard layout and clickpad as the last generation XPS 15 9570/9560
Same keyboard layout and clickpad as the last generation XPS 15 9570/9560
Key feedback was great back in 2015, but the newer HP Spectre offers both deeper travel and crisper feedback
Key feedback was great back in 2015, but the newer HP Spectre offers both deeper travel and crisper feedback
Small and cramped Arrow keys are spongier than the rest of the keys
Small and cramped Arrow keys are spongier than the rest of the keys

Display

All 15.6-inch 4K UHD OLED laptops thus far have been sourcing their panels from Samsung. Thus, they all offer very similar visual experiences between them. In the case of the XPS 15, OLED addresses one of our biggest gripes about the series: slow black-white and gray-gray response times. The IPS panels of XPS 15 laptops have always had very noticeable ghosting especially now that fast 3 ms and 5 ms IPS panels are becoming more commonplace. The glossy OLED panel offers the crispness of 4K UHD IPS with essentially infinite contrast and no ghosting to be the best-looking XPS 15 display yet. It's tough to go back to the "regular" 60 Hz 4K UHD IPS SKU after growing accustomed to 60 Hz 4K UHD OLED.

There are a few drawbacks to the OLED panel. While bright at 400 nits, Dell's baseline 1080p IPS matte option is actually brighter at 500 nits. Secondly, it has the potential to consume more power than IPS depending on what is displayed as shown on our Power Consumption section. Thirdly, OLED is limited to a refresh rate of 60 Hz meaning that 120/144/240 Hz IPS panels, which aren't available on the XPS 15 yet, feel smoother to use. And lastly, only higher-end SKUs of the XPS 15 7590 with Core i7 and discrete GeForce graphics can be configured with OLED.

No OLED touchscreen option despite the edge-to-edge Gorilla Glass overlay
No OLED touchscreen option despite the edge-to-edge Gorilla Glass overlay
The XPS 15 still carries one of the narrowest side bezels for its size class
The XPS 15 still carries one of the narrowest side bezels for its size class
Absolutely no uneven backlight bleeding on our OLED unit
Absolutely no uneven backlight bleeding on our OLED unit
Samsung OLED subpixel array
Samsung OLED subpixel array
412.5
cd/m²
414.4
cd/m²
403.4
cd/m²
410.1
cd/m²
421.2
cd/m²
410.1
cd/m²
425.8
cd/m²
431.3
cd/m²
422.6
cd/m²
Parlaklığın yayılımı
Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maksimum: 431.3 cd/m² Ortalama: 416.8 cd/m² Minimum: 4.81 cd/m²
Aydınlatma: 94 %
Batarya modunda parlaklık: 418.4 cd/m²
Kontrast: ∞:1 (Siyah: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.06 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6
ΔE Greyscale 2.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
99.6% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 81% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.15
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Samsung 156WR04, SDCA029, OLED, 15.6, 3840x2160
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
LQ156D1, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
BOE07D8, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
AU Optronics AUO30EB, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Samsung SDCA029, OLED, 15.6, 3840x2160
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Sharp LQ156M1JW03 (SHP14C5), IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-605%
-1650%
-1785%
2%
13038%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
2.3 (1.1, 1.2)
52.4 (27.6, 24.8)
-2178%
45 (21, 24)
-1857%
57 (26, 31)
-2378%
2.4 (1, 1.4)
-4%
12.8 (6.8, 6)
-457%
Response Time Black / White *
2.4 (1.1, 1.3)
31.6 (18, 13.6)
-1217%
37 (23, 14)
-1442%
31 (16, 15)
-1192%
2.2 (1.2, 1)
8%
10.4 (6, 4.4)
-333%
PWM Frequency
59.52 (100)
1000 (25)
1580%
60 (80)
1%
23810 (10)
39903%
Screen
-28%
-18%
-9%
7%
8%
Brightness middle
421.2
451.9
7%
311
-26%
330
-22%
373
-11%
293
-30%
Brightness
417
414
-1%
303
-27%
310
-26%
375
-10%
270
-35%
Brightness Distribution
94
81
-14%
81
-14%
87
-7%
93
-1%
87
-7%
Black Level *
0.36
0.24
0.37
0.29
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.06
5.62
7%
5.1
16%
4.03
33%
3.98
34%
1.69
72%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
11.89
19.1
-61%
8.91
25%
6.74
43%
6.28
47%
3.37
72%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.8
6.9
-146%
4.93
-76%
4.49
-60%
2.81
-0%
2.3
18%
Gamma
2.15 102%
2.2 100%
2.44 90%
2.57 86%
2.62 84%
2.3 96%
CCT
6235 104%
6254 104%
7641 85%
6744 96%
6434 101%
6758 96%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
81
71.8
-11%
58
-28%
61
-25%
78
-4%
63
-22%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.6
98.5
-1%
88
-12%
94
-6%
97
-3%
98.5
-1%
Contrast
1255
1296
892
1010
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
2.69
2.48
1.96
1.24
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-317% / -185%
-834% / -344%
-897% / -364%
5% / 5%
6523% / 3562%

* ... smaller is better

The Samsung panel promises 100 percent DCI-P3 coverage to offer similar color reproduction as many OLED smartphones including the iPhone 8 and Google Pixel 3. Our own independent calculations show 81 percent 3D coverage of the AdobeRGB standard to be wider than on the 4K UHD IPS XPS 15 9570. In other words, it's capable of displaying deeper colors than most other IPS Ultrabooks where ~60 percent AdobeRGB coverage is more common.

X-Rite colorimeter measurements show color temperature to be slightly warmer than expected. Thus, deltaE of colors and grayscale will trend higher when at higher saturation levels. An end-user calibration would address this, but it's not necessary for most users.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
Grayscale
Grayscale
Saturation Sweeps (against sRGB)
Saturation Sweeps (against sRGB)
ColorChecker (against sRGB)
ColorChecker (against sRGB)

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
2.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.1 ms rise
↘ 1.3 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
2.3 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 1.1 ms rise
↘ 1.2 ms fall
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 0 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 59.52 Hz ≤ 100 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 59.52 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 100 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 59.52 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9354 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

After checking out a handful of OLED laptops, we've noticed that they all exhibit unique PWM behaviors not found on standard IPS laptops and the XPS 15 OLED is no different. Our results below show a pulse-width modulation frequency of 59.52 Hz even when at the maximum brightness setting. This frequency changes to 240.4 Hz when the brightness is set to 51 percent or lower not unlike what we discovered on the Razer Blade 15 OLED. Unless if your eyes are super-sensitive to onscreen flickering, however, then you're likely not going to notice.

Pulse-width modulation of 59.52 Hz from 52 percent to 100 percent brightness
Pulse-width modulation of 59.52 Hz from 52 percent to 100 percent brightness
Pulse-width modulation changes in both behavior (sinusoidal) and frequency (240.4 Hz) when brightness is set to 51 percent and below
Pulse-width modulation changes in both behavior (sinusoidal) and frequency (240.4 Hz) when brightness is set to 51 percent and below

Outdoor visibility seems better than a typical IPS panel. The bright backlight and very high contrast of OLED help to alleviate washed out colors and text when outside. Viewing from slight angles will introduce a blue hue to impact visibility and colors that would otherwise not occur on an IPS display. This will impact the viewing experience of peripheral users if sharing the laptop outdoors.

Viewing angles are better than IPS in that contrast and grayscale remain almost the same from extreme angles whereas an IPS panel will have slight but noticeable shifting. Unique to OLED, however, is that extreme angles (~150 degrees or more) will introduce a rainbow banding effect that impacts colors as shown by a screenshot below. This thankfully does not occur when looking directly at the screen from a normal angle.

Outdoors on a bright cloudy day. Note the blue hue if viewing from an angle
Outdoors on a bright cloudy day. Note the blue hue if viewing from an angle
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors on a bright cloudy day
Outdoors on a bright cloudy day
Note the blue-green color band that appears when viewing from extreme angles
Note the blue-green color band that appears when viewing from extreme angles
Wide OLED viewing angles
Wide OLED viewing angles

Performance

The XPS 15 series has always been about offering high performance Ultrabooks with Intel Core H-series CPUs and dedicated GPU options. However, Dell may be packing in *too* much performance for the higher-end SKUs as our results below will show. With that said, very few ultra-thin alternatives exist with the same unlocked Core i9 CPU and GTX 1650 graphics options as found on our specific configuration.

LatencyMon shows poor interrupt times yet again despite what Dell may have suggested in the past. The issue occurs more frequently when the wireless is enabled and so we recommend disabling the wireless if low latency is priority.

LatencyMon with WLAN off. The long interrupt time would not occur until about 15 minutes after starting the test
LatencyMon with WLAN off. The long interrupt time would not occur until about 15 minutes after starting the test
LatencyMon with WLAN on. Long interrupt times would occur every few minutes
LatencyMon with WLAN on. Long interrupt times would occur every few minutes

Processor

CPU performance is not very consistent. Scores will look excellent if you're only running benchmarks once and then call it a day, but weaknesses become apparent when running CPU heavy tasks for extended periods. As shown by our CineBench R15 Multi-Thread loop graph below, the Dell system is unable to maintain high Turbo Boost clock rates for very long at all with noticeable performance drops of about 15 percent to 20 percent almost immediately. After accounting for throttling, raw multi-thread performance is only about 15 percent faster than the older Core i9-8950HK in the XPS 15 9570. Our thicker Schenker gaming laptop equipped with the same unlocked i9-9980HK as our XPS 15 7590 is able to maintain higher Turbo Boost clock rates over time for roughly 12 percent faster performance.

The tendency for the Core i9 CPU in the XPS to throttle sooner also means that it is the slowest iteration of the i9-9980HK we've seen thus far. Results are about 15 percent slower than the average i9-9980HK in our database. If you want the best that the 9th gen Core i9 has to offer, then you would be better off with the much larger MSI GE75 or Schenker.

Undervolting by 0.115 V will produce better scores on average much like what we discovered on the last generation XPS 15 9570. We're able to record a stable performance boost of about 8 to 15 percent when undervolted. Pushing our luck even further to -0.125 V would result in a system crash.

Since the high Turbo Boost clock rate is so short-lived on the XPS 15, the Core i9 SKU will most benefit users who want that short burst of CPU power instead of performance sustainability.

See our dedicated page on the Core i9-9980HK for more technical information and benchmarks.

CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R20
CineBench R20
CineBench R15
CineBench R15
CineBench R15 Underbolt (-0.115 V)
CineBench R15 Underbolt (-0.115 V)
Intel XTU Undervolt settings
Intel XTU Undervolt settings
01020304050607080901001101201301401501601701801902002102202302402502602702802903003103203303403503603703803904004104204304404504604704804905005105205305405505605705805906006106206306406506606706806907007107207307407507607707807908008108208308408508608708808909009109209309409509609709809901000101010201030104010501060107010801090110011101120113011401150116011701180119012001210122012301240125012601270128012901300131013201330134013501360137013801390140014101420143014401450146014701480149015001510152015301540155015601570158015901600161016201630164016501660167016801690170017101720173017401750Tooltip
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1314 (1090.6-1600.38)
MSI GE75 9SG GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9880H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1619 (1602.44-1728.31)
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2060 GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 9750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1066 (1058.57-1172.68)
Alienware m17 P37E GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8950HK, SK Hynix PC401 512GB M.2 (HFS512GD9TNG); CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1206 (1178.9-1238.2)
Schenker GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK; CPU Multi 64Bit; Undervolting: Ø1728 (1721.24-1742.16)
Schenker GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop), 9980HK; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1427 (1404-1600.26)
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK Undervolt , ; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1412 (1188.92-1700.03)
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø1095 (1008.45-1230.43)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K
207 Points ∼95% +3%
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
203 Points ∼93% +1%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK
201 Points ∼92%
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
  (190 - 205, n=6)
200 Points ∼92% 0%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK Undervolt
 
193 Points ∼89% -4%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
192 Points ∼88% -4%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
191 Points ∼88% -5%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Intel Core i9-8950HK
190 Points ∼87% -5%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Intel Core i7-9750H
178 Points ∼82% -11%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
171 Points ∼78% -15%
Dell G5 15 5590
Intel Core i7-8750H
165 Points ∼76% -18%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-15IKB 81AC001AGE
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼74% -20%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
144 Points ∼66% -28%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
144 Points ∼66% -28%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K
1979 Points ∼45% +52%
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
  (1305 - 1930, n=7)
1646 Points ∼38% +26%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK Undervolt
 
1617 Points ∼37% +24%
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
1465 Points ∼33% +12%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1408 Points ∼32% +8%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
1359 Points ∼31% +4%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK
1305 (min: 1090.6, max: 1369.3, 99th percentile: 1367.66) Points ∼30%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Intel Core i7-9750H
1253 Points ∼29% -4%
Dell G5 15 5590
Intel Core i7-8750H
1191 Points ∼27% -9%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1163 Points ∼27% -11%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
815 Points ∼19% -38%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
805 Points ∼18% -38%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
769 Points ∼18% -41%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-15IKB 81AC001AGE
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
683 Points ∼16% -48%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK
2.28 Points ∼93%
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
 
2.28 Points ∼93% 0%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
2.16 Points ∼89% -5%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
1.64 Points ∼67% -28%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1.63 Points ∼67% -29%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
0.65 Points ∼27% -71%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK
17.2 Points ∼39%
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
 
17.2 Points ∼39% 0%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
15.76 Points ∼36% -8%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
14.98 Points ∼34% -13%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
9.21 Points ∼21% -46%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
7.4 Points ∼17% -57%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
 
7877 Points ∼73%
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
7682 Points ∼71%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
7243 Points ∼67%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
6539 Points ∼60%
Dell G5 15 5590
Intel Core i7-8750H
6338 Points ∼58%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
4770 Points ∼44%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
4286 Points ∼40%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
2682 Points ∼25%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
 
45527 Points ∼70%
Schenker XMG Ultra 15 Turing
Intel Core i7-9700K
42677 Points ∼65%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
38810 Points ∼59%
Dell G5 15 5590
Intel Core i7-8750H
34465 Points ∼53%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
29330 Points ∼45%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H
24623 Points ∼38%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
23118 Points ∼35%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
20687 Points ∼32%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
1896.87 s * ∼22%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
197.075 s * ∼2%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
120.923 s * ∼1%
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
 
110 s * ∼1%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i9-9980HK
  (7.64 - 13290, n=4)
3435 Seconds * ∼15%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U
1248.27 Seconds * ∼6%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
677.2 Seconds * ∼3%
Asus ROG GA502DU
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
649.703 Seconds * ∼3%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
465.128 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
2.28 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
17.2 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
86.04 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
201 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1305 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
138.92 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Yardım

System Performance

PCMark results are consistently higher than what the last generation XPS 15 9570 was able to offer and even many gaming laptops with GeForce RTX graphics. The only exception is in the Digital Creation benchmark which favors systems with higher-end GPUs.

We didn't experience any wake-sleep fan issues that some last generation models suffered from including on our last XPS 15 9570. We will say, however, that power consumption when in Sleep mode would sometimes be as high as 9 W to 19 W likely due to Microsoft's Modern Standby mode. Even the bottom of the notebook would grow warm just by being in Sleep mode. When most other laptops are in Sleep mode, consumption would be just under 2 W.

PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
10929 Points ∼91% +79%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
7101 Points ∼59% +16%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
6110 Points ∼51%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
5444 Points ∼45% -11%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
4884 Points ∼41% -20%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4204 Points ∼35% -31%
Productivity
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
8416 Points ∼87% +12%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
7494 Points ∼77%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
7212 Points ∼74% -4%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
6879 Points ∼71% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
6834 Points ∼71% -9%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
6722 Points ∼69% -10%
Essentials
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
10150 Points ∼92% +5%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
9701 Points ∼88%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
9269 Points ∼84% -4%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
8951 Points ∼81% -8%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
8237 Points ∼75% -15%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
8233 Points ∼75% -15%
Score
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
7006 Points ∼90% +28%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
5469 Points ∼70%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
5439 Points ∼70% -1%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
5059 Points ∼65% -7%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
4636 Points ∼60% -15%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4443 Points ∼57% -19%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
6140 Points ∼94% +29%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
5381 Points ∼83% +13%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
4762 Points ∼73%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
4620 Points ∼71% -3%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
4520 Points ∼69% -5%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
4316 Points ∼66% -9%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K, 2x SK Hynix PC400 512GB (RAID 0)
5607 Points ∼92% +48%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
4052 Points ∼67% +7%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
3840 Points ∼63% +1%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK, Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
3799 Points ∼62%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H, Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
3638 Points ∼60% -4%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
3494 Points ∼57% -8%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3799 puan
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4762 puan
Yardım

Storage Devices

The three XPS 15 9570 SKUs we tested last year all came with three different SSDs from Samsung, Lite-On, and Toshiba. It's more than likely that Dell sources multiple OEMs for all its storage needs in contrast to Razer and its exclusive Blade 15/17 Samsung SSD offerings. This approach can make it challenging for users who may prefer a specific brand of SSD when purchasing an XPS.

Our 7590 SKU comes equipped with a 1 TB Toshiba XG6 NVMe M.2 drive which is an upgrade from the Toshiba XG5 as found on one of our last XPS 15 9570 SKUs. The XG6 offers about the same theoretical sequential read speeds over the XG5 (3180 MB/s vs. 3000 MB/s) but with much faster sequential write speeds (2960 MB/s vs. 2100 MB/s). CDM 5.5 results show write speeds to be faster than the XG5 especially when writing at smaller block sizes.

Note that results will vary between different storage capacities especially since there could be multiple SSD manufacturers involved.

AS SSD
AS SSD
CDM 5.5
CDM 5.5
Only one M.2 slot available with optional secondary 2.5-inch SATA III bay
Only one M.2 slot available with optional secondary 2.5-inch SATA III bay
Interestingly, the motherboard components to support the secondary 2.5-inch SATA drive are still present even if configuring without a 2.5-inch drive
Interestingly, the motherboard components to support the secondary 2.5-inch SATA drive are still present even if configuring without a 2.5-inch drive
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Intel SSD 600p SSDPEKKW512G8L
AS SSD
-4%
-22%
-45%
-4%
Copy Game MB/s
1823.85
1119.94
-39%
700.4
-62%
Copy Program MB/s
983.98
515.14
-48%
328.55
-67%
Copy ISO MB/s
3182.39
2576.73
-19%
1651.54
-48%
Score Total
3638
4507
24%
2845
-22%
2684
-26%
2732
-25%
Score Write
1693
2059
22%
1220
-28%
1127
-33%
1029
-39%
Score Read
1294
1616
25%
1075
-17%
1071
-17%
1137
-12%
Access Time Write *
0.039
0.044
-13%
0.027
31%
0.057
-46%
0.033
15%
Access Time Read *
0.05
0.061
-22%
0.08
-60%
0.147
-194%
0.045
10%
4K-64 Write
1456.13
1814.74
25%
1047.43
-28%
956.6
-34%
772.67
-47%
4K-64 Read
1077.98
1453.01
35%
974.82
-10%
845.02
-22%
871.09
-19%
4K Write
98.3
94.4
-4%
131.57
34%
92.75
-6%
109.79
12%
4K Read
43.25
30.73
-29%
41.81
-3%
24.62
-43%
56.84
31%
Seq Write
1386.27
1500.4
8%
411.81
-70%
773.05
-44%
1464.36
6%
Seq Read
1723.09
1319.61
-23%
578.98
-66%
2017.79
17%
2094.81
22%

* ... smaller is better

Toshiba XG6 KXG60ZNV1T02
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2906 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 2813 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 388.5 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 509.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1861 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1729 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 45.23 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 104.3 MB/s

GPU Performance

The Turing GTX 1650 offers 15 to 50 percent faster graphics performance over the Pascal GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q as found on last generation XPS 15 9570 SKUs. As mentioned before, Turing GPUs are highly optimized for DX12 meaning that you'll have to be playing DX12-compatible games if you want that massive 50 percent boost over the GTX 1050 Ti. If you plan on mainly playing DX11 titles or older or running other applications that don't utilize DX12, however, then you won't be exploiting all the benefits of the GTX 1650. Users can expect gaming performance to be about 10 to 25 percent slower than the popular mobile GTX 1060.

When compared to the average GTX 1650 GPU in our database taken from 11 other laptops, the XPS 15 9570 comes out at the bottom to be about 4 to 8 percent slower than expected.

Dell says it has no plans to introduce faster GTX 1660 Ti or GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q SKUs at the moment. The GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GPU has a 10 W higher power envelope than the GTX 1650 and such a configuration would be straining the XPS 15 cooling system even more than it already is.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Time Spy
Time Spy
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Ultra
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
10720 Points ∼75% +220%
Alienware m17 P37E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8950HK
7446 Points ∼52% +122%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
6526 Points ∼46% +95%
Dell G5 15 5590
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
5977 Points ∼42% +78%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
5043 Points ∼35% +50%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
3626 Points ∼25% +8%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (3353 - 3700, n=16)
3508 Points ∼25% +5%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1700
3440 Points ∼24% +3%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK
3353 Points ∼24%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
2805 Points ∼20% -16%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H
2278 Points ∼16% -32%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
27080 Points ∼67% +217%
Alienware m17 P37E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8950HK
20323 Points ∼50% +138%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
18117 Points ∼45% +112%
Dell G5 15 5590
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
15415 Points ∼38% +81%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
13188 Points ∼32% +55%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
11332 Points ∼28% +33%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1700
11010 Points ∼27% +29%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
9537 Points ∼23% +12%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (8532 - 9536, n=17)
9264 Points ∼23% +9%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK
8532 Points ∼21%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H
7428 Points ∼18% -13%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK
7374 Points ∼18% -14%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U
5622 Points ∼14% -34%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
161161 Points ∼87% +256%
Dell G5 15 5590
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
95292 Points ∼52% +111%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
89505 Points ∼48% +98%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
80615 Points ∼44% +78%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1700
68629 Points ∼37% +52%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
61392 Points ∼33% +36%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
56763 Points ∼31% +25%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (38016 - 61286, n=12)
54186 Points ∼29% +20%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK
45246 Points ∼25%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK
42202 Points ∼23% -7%
Alienware m17 P37E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8950HK
38256 Points ∼21% -15%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U
35858 Points ∼19% -21%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
17290 Points ∼76% +96%
Alienware m17 P37E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8950HK
12538 Points ∼55% +42%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
12175 Points ∼54% +38%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
12103 Points ∼54% +38%
Dell G5 15 5590
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
9728 Points ∼43% +11%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
9459 Points ∼42% +7%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1700
8946 Points ∼40% +2%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H
8877 Points ∼39% +1%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK
8801 Points ∼39%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (6528 - 12056, n=15)
8761 Points ∼39% 0%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK
8450 Points ∼37% -4%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
6839 Points ∼30% -22%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U
6774 Points ∼30% -23%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop), 9900K
38485 Points ∼75% +211%
Alienware m17 P37E
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q, 8950HK
28083 Points ∼55% +127%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q, 9750H
23133 Points ∼45% +87%
Dell G5 15 5590
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop), 8750H
20196 Points ∼40% +63%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 9750H
17457 Points ∼34% +41%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1700
15264 Points ∼30% +23%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (12388 - 13575, n=17)
13210 Points ∼26% +7%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
12620 Points ∼25% +2%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop), 9980HK
12388 Points ∼24%
MSI GT72S-6QEG16SR421BW
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK
12193 Points ∼24% -2%
Dell XPS 15 9570 i7 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8750H
9079 Points ∼18% -27%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q, 8950HK
9032 Points ∼18% -27%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, 8565U
7016 Points ∼14% -43%
3DMark 11 Performance
12340 puan
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
30573 puan
3DMark Fire Strike Score
7356 puan
3DMark Time Spy Score
3676 puan
Yardım

Gaming Performance

Real-world gaming performance paints a similar picture to the above findings, if not worse. When compared to other laptops with the same GTX 1650 GPU, frame rates on the XPS 15 7590 would be about 15 to 25 percent slower. This means that the performance delta between the GTX 1650 and last generation GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q are much narrower than anticipated. In other words, you can still game on the XPS 15, but don't expect it to be that much better than on last year's model. A "proper" gaming laptop with the exact same GTX 1650 GPU like the MSI GF75, for example, is able to deliver up to 30 percent faster frame rates than our XPS 15 in Shadow of the Tomb Raider.

Idling on Witcher 3 shows consistent frame rates throughout with no recurring dips. There is no throttling behavior to speak of on our unit; instead, performance is just slower than average for this particular GPU.

See our dedicated page on the GeForce GTX 1650 for more technical information and average benchmark comparisons.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Highest Preset AA:T
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
123 fps ∼100% +262%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
109 fps ∼89% +221%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2060
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
81 fps ∼66% +138%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
80.6 fps ∼66% +137%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
64 fps ∼52% +88%
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
45 fps ∼37% +32%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
43 fps ∼35% +26%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (34 - 46, n=5)
42 fps ∼34% +24%
Asus G752VY
Intel Core i7-6700HQ, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
39 (min: 31) fps ∼32% +15%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
34 fps ∼28%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
31 fps ∼25% -9%
BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
213.4 fps ∼100% +212%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
190.9 fps ∼89% +179%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
170 fps ∼80% +148%
Asus Strix Scar III G531GW
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
167.38 fps ∼78% +144%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2060
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
153.4 fps ∼72% +124%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
152 fps ∼71% +122%
Dell G5 15 5590
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
136.9 fps ∼64% +100%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
130 fps ∼61% +90%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
109.4 fps ∼51% +60%
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
90.4 fps ∼42% +32%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
87.7 fps ∼41% +28%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (68.5 - 90.8, n=11)
81.7 fps ∼38% +19%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
72.2 fps ∼34% +5%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
72.2 fps ∼34% +5%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Intel Core i9-8950HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
71.8 fps ∼34% +5%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
68.5 fps ∼32%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
59 fps ∼28% -14%
Rocket League - 1920x1080 High Quality AA:High FX
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (96.4 - 150, n=4)
128 fps ∼100% +33%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
112.5 fps ∼88% +17%
Asus GL703GE-ES73
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
108 fps ∼84% +12%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
96.4 fps ∼75%
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Alienware Area-51m i9-9900K RTX 2080
Intel Core i9-9900K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
101.1 fps ∼100% +181%
MSI GE75 9SG
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Laptop)
95.3 fps ∼94% +165%
Razer Blade 15 RTX 2080 Max-Q
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
78.3 fps ∼77% +118%
Asus Strix Scar III G531GW
Intel Core i9-9880H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Laptop)
67 (min: 55) fps ∼66% +86%
Razer Blade Pro 17 RTX 2060
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
65 fps ∼64% +81%
Gigabyte Aero 15 OLED XA
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
63.5 fps ∼63% +76%
Dell G5 15 5590
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Laptop)
60 fps ∼59% +67%
HP Pavilion Gaming 17-cd0085cl
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
48.5 fps ∼48% +35%
Asus GX531GM (Zephyrus S)
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
40 fps ∼40% +11%
MSI GF75 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i7-9750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
37.7 fps ∼37% +5%
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
37 fps ∼37% +3%
Dell XPS 15 7590 9980HK GTX 1650
Intel Core i9-9980HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
36 fps ∼36%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
  (33.1 - 38.1, n=16)
35.3 fps ∼35% -2%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX533FD
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
30 fps ∼30% -17%
Asus GL703GE-ES73
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
26 fps ∼26% -28%
Asus TUF FX705GE-EW096T
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
25.8 fps ∼26% -28%
HP Spectre x360 15-df0126ng
Intel Core i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
25.4 fps ∼25% -29%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Intel Core i9-8950HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
24.5 fps ∼24% -32%
Dell XPS 15 9570 Core i9 UHD
Intel Core i9-8950HK, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
23.5 fps ∼23% -35%
010203040506070