Unfortunately, this deal is no longer valid
ASUS ROG Zephyrus G GA502DU 15.6 Inch FHD 120 Hz, NVIDIA GTX 1660Ti 6 GB, AMD Ryzen R7-3750H, 512 GB SSD, 8 GB RAM £999.99 Amazon Prime Excl
189° Expired

ASUS ROG Zephyrus G GA502DU 15.6 Inch FHD 120 Hz, NVIDIA GTX 1660Ti 6 GB, AMD Ryzen R7-3750H, 512 GB SSD, 8 GB RAM £999.99 Amazon Prime Excl

£999.99£1,199.9917%Amazon Deals
12
Posted 15th Jul

This deal is expired. Here are some options that might interest you:

Features & details
  • The all ROG Zephyrus G with potent performance to bring an ultra-slim gaming laptop with high power; home to NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660Ti 6 GB graphics and powered by AMD Ryzen R7-3750H processor
  • The NVIDIA GeForce 1660Ti 6 GB graphics, make it the ideal gaming companion for those who play Battlefield V; Apex Legends; The Division 2
  • Packing a whopping 512 GB PCI-e SSD, the Zephyrus G will not struggle with your favourite games, videos and photos
  • Travel effortlessly between work and play with a compact body that's just 20 mm thin and weighs a mere 2.1 kg
  • Super-narrow bezels shrink to just 6.2 mm on three sides, giving the ROG Zephyrus G an 81 Percent screen-to-body ratio that draws you deeper into the action
Community Updates

Groups

12 Comments
Hmmm...be aware that you might not be getting what you might be expecting with this laptop. Check out this review...

notebookcheck.net/Asu…tml

The Ryzen 7 (Zen + not Zen 2) is more like an i5 than an i7. It also seems that when gaming, it's more sensitive to having single channel memory (like this one). I was genuinely surprised that this machine, with a notionally super fast 1660 ti, could only just manage 33 FPS with Assassin's Creed Odyssey (1080p, ultra settings).

For me, this might be the more sensible choice...

hotukdeals.com/dea…575
Joe90_guy15/07/2019 07:13

Hmmm...be aware that you might not be getting what you might be expecting …Hmmm...be aware that you might not be getting what you might be expecting with this laptop. Check out this review...https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-ROG-Zephyrus-G-GA502DU-Ryzen-7-3750H-GTX-1660-Ti-Max-Q-Laptop-Review.421577.0.htmlThe Ryzen 7 (Zen + not Zen 2) is more like an i5 than an i7. It also seems that when gaming, it's more sensitive to having single channel memory (like this one). I was genuinely surprised that this machine, with a notionally super fast 1660 ti, could only just manage 33 FPS with Assassin's Creed Odyssey (1080p, ultra settings).For me, this might be the more sensible choice...https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/medion-erazer-x6805-gaming-laptop-i5-8300h-8gb-ram-1060-6gb-3262575#comment-38062679



I wouldn't describe a 1660 Ti as "super fast".

In fact, bit of a waste of this CPU pairing it with such a weak GPU.
ollie8715/07/2019 10:36

I wouldn't describe a 1660 Ti as "super fast".In fact, bit of a waste of …I wouldn't describe a 1660 Ti as "super fast".In fact, bit of a waste of this CPU pairing it with such a weak GPU.



You might want to check out the following review of a Lenovo laptop with the same 1660 ti but with an Intel i7 CPU...



AC Odyssey (1080P, Ultra) jumps from 33 to 46 FPS. Similarly Metro Exodus goes from 35 FPS to 41. Fortnite up from 78 to 114 FPS. Overwatch up from 116 to 134 FPS. Witcher 3 jumps from 49 to 79 FPS.

I could go on but I rather think I've proved my point don't you?
Edited by: "Joe90_guy" 15th Jul
Joe90_guy15/07/2019 15:13

You might want to check out the following review of a Lenovo laptop with …You might want to check out the following review of a Lenovo laptop with the same 1660 ti but with an Intel i7 CPU...[Video] AC Odyssey (1080P, Ultra) jumps from 33 to 46 FPS. Similarly Metro Exodus goes from 35 FPS to 41. Fortnite up from 78 to 114 FPS. Overwatch up from 116 to 134 FPS. Witcher 6 goes from 49 to 79 FPS. I could go on but I rather think I've proved my point don't you?


Mmhmm, and with an i5? Or i3?
Edited by: "ollie87" 15th Jul
Joe90_guy15/07/2019 15:18

Comment deleted


Cool your mammary glands. Personal attacks aren’t allowed here, be civil.

The 1660/1660 Ti are budget GPUs, usually pairing them with high end CPUs (even mobile ones) is pointless.
8GB RAM on a laptop of this spec is just silly. Poor show, Asus.
Joe90_guy15/07/2019 07:13

Hmmm...be aware that you might not be getting what you might be expecting …Hmmm...be aware that you might not be getting what you might be expecting with this laptop. Check out this review...https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-ROG-Zephyrus-G-GA502DU-Ryzen-7-3750H-GTX-1660-Ti-Max-Q-Laptop-Review.421577.0.htmlThe Ryzen 7 (Zen + not Zen 2) is more like an i5 than an i7. It also seems that when gaming, it's more sensitive to having single channel memory (like this one). I was genuinely surprised that this machine, with a notionally super fast 1660 ti, could only just manage 33 FPS with Assassin's Creed Odyssey (1080p, ultra settings).For me, this might be the more sensible choice...https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/medion-erazer-x6805-gaming-laptop-i5-8300h-8gb-ram-1060-6gb-3262575#comment-38062679


One assumes you can tell the difference between an expensive 6 core high end i7 9750 that you cite benches to compare against this mid range 3750H 4 core Ryzen mobile part? It's hardly a surprise the 45 watt 6 core CPUI is going to be faster than a 4 core limited to 35 watts.

You then link to a machine with an i5 8300H, which this CPU is more of a match for. Except that machine only has a GTX1060 whereas this has a 1660Ti.

I assure you this will wipe the floor with an i5 8300H + GTX1060 combination in the majority of games, especially at higher resolutions or as games grow more demanding, as they always do.

The main downer here as has been noted is the 8GB of memory, presumably single channel. The first thing anyone needs to do is open this machine and make it 16GB dual channel. Performance will increase noticeably.
lucas415/07/2019 17:01

8GB RAM on a laptop of this spec is just silly. Poor show, Asus.


Ought to be upgradeable but not sure if it's 4+4 or 8+0.
vulcanproject15/07/2019 17:15

One assumes you can tell the difference between an expensive 6 core high …One assumes you can tell the difference between an expensive 6 core high end i7 9750 that you cite benches to compare against this mid range 3750H 4 core Ryzen mobile part? It's hardly a surprise the 45 watt 6 core CPUI is going to be faster than a 4 core limited to 35 watts.You then link to a machine with an i5 8300H, which this CPU is more of a match for. Except that machine only has a GTX1060 whereas this has a 1660Ti.I assure you this will wipe the floor with an i5 8300H + GTX1060 combination in the majority of games, especially at higher resolutions or as games grow more demanding, as they always do.The main downer here as has been noted is the 8GB of memory, presumably single channel. The first thing anyone needs to do is open this machine and make it 16GB dual channel. Performance will increase noticeably.


Funny, I thought what I said was all perfectly clear & logical.

This machine uses a Ryzen 7. Note the last digit. It conveys the suggestion that it competes against the Intel i7 (the lowest variant currently on sale being the i7-9750H). It does not. It functions more like an i5. The guys at Notebookcheck say there's only a few percent difference between the R7 3750H & the R5 3550H (see link)...

notebookcheck.net/Not…tml

Am I surprised that the expensive i7-9750 beats the cheaper R7 3750H? Not really but if there's essentially the same CPU being sold as the even cheaper R5 3550H & I've paid extra for the R7, then I might feel like I've been duped.

And regarding this machine beating out the Medion with its i5-8300H & 1060, you may well be right but it's £268 CHEAPER & in my opinion the more cost-effective purchase!!

And TBH, in terms of AC Odyssey (my fave game at the mo) I'm not sure that the difference is going to be that massive. 37 FPS is very weak or are you going to disagree with that too?
Joe90_guy15/07/2019 19:54

Funny, I thought what I said was all perfectly clear & logical.This …Funny, I thought what I said was all perfectly clear & logical.This machine uses a Ryzen 7. Note the last digit. It conveys the suggestion that it competes against the Intel i7 (the lowest variant currently on sale being the i7-9750H). It does not. It functions more like an i5. The guys at Notebookcheck say there's only a few percent difference between the R7 3750H & the R5 3550H (see link)...https://www.notebookcheck.net/Not-worth-it-AMD-Ryzen-7-3750H-is-only-4-to-8-percent-faster-than-the-Ryzen-5-3550H.426841.0.htmlAm I surprised that the expensive i7-9750 beats the cheaper R7 3750H? Not really but if there's essentially the same CPU being sold as the even cheaper R5 3550H & I've paid extra for the R7, then I might feel like I've been duped. And regarding this machine beating out the Medion with its i5-8300H & 1060, you may well be right but it's £268 CHEAPER & in my opinion the more cost-effective purchase!! And TBH, in terms of AC Odyssey (my fave game at the mo) I'm not sure that the difference is going to be that massive. 37 FPS is very weak or are you going to disagree with that too?


It wasn't logical to compare a high end expensive CPU only seen in high end machines to the CPU in this. AMD can name their processors whatever they want, it doesn't mean they correlate identically to whatever Intel name theirs. AMD can call their processors the Ryzen 777777777, it doesn't mean you compare it to an Intel i7 if it's not in the same tier......

That is made clear when you view the spec sheet, AMD might have call it a Ryzen 7, but it clearly only has 4 cores. Whereas the Intel has 6 cores, is much higher end, and much more expensive.

Yes, the Medion is cheaper. They also typically have pants build quality in my experience. It's heavier, it has a much fatter case, the screen has has thicker bezels, it's SSD is smaller, it's screen is inferior, it's GPU is much slower, it'll be considerably slower for games, and that's why it is £268 less than this.

Often when it comes to computers you pay £268 more then you expect the machine to be faster and better specced.

Sure enough, this Asus is way better specced and justifies the £268 comfortably ...............
By
vulcanproject15/07/2019 20:11

It wasn't logical to compare a high end expensive CPU only seen in high …It wasn't logical to compare a high end expensive CPU only seen in high end machines to the CPU in this. AMD can name their processors whatever they want, it doesn't mean they correlate identically to whatever Intel name theirs. AMD can call their processors the Ryzen 777777777, it doesn't mean you compare it to an Intel i7 if it's not in the same tier......That is made clear when you view the spec sheet, AMD might have call it a Ryzen 7, but it clearly only has 4 cores. Whereas the Intel has 6 cores, is much higher end, and much more expensive. Yes, the Medion is cheaper. They also typically have pants build quality in my experience. It's heavier, it has a much fatter case, the screen has has thicker bezels, it's SSD is smaller, it's screen is inferior, it's GPU is much slower, it'll be considerably slower for games, and that's why it is £268 less than this. Often when it comes to computers you pay £268 more then you expect the machine to be faster and better specced. Sure enough, this Asus is way better specced and justifies the £268 comfortably ...............


Has June 15th been declared National Let's Be Obtuse Day because it's beginning to feel like that.

First off Intel have i3, i5 & i7. AMD have (surprise, surprise!) Ryzen 3, 5 & 7. Yes they could call them whatever but importantly THEY DON'T! And guess what, people who are not IT experts assume a degree of equivalence.

Second, you can compare anything to anything. Really! I am not in breach of some supremely ordained book of rules by comparing an R7 to an i7. In fact both Notebookcheck & Jarrod Tech did exactly that. And lest you have forgotten, it's not that long ago that i7's had FOUR cores; not six.

Third, regarding Medion vs ASUS, I've owned three of the former & one of the latter. TBH, I found them indistinguishable in terms of built quality & reliability.

And finally, that 'pants' 1060 GPU in the Medion appears to play AC Odyssey at 40 FPS (1080p & ultra). So 3 FPS more for £268 less. Dont believe me? Have a read of this...

notebookcheck.net/Ass…tml

Pwned!
Edited by: "Joe90_guy" 15th Jul
Joe90_guy15/07/2019 21:01

By Has June 15th been declared National Let's Be Obtuse Day because it's …By Has June 15th been declared National Let's Be Obtuse Day because it's beginning to feel like that.First off Intel have i3, i5 & i7. AMD have (surprise, surprise!) Ryzen 3, 5 & 7. Yes they could call them whatever but importantly THEY DON'T! And guess what, people who are not IT experts assume a degree of equivalence.Second, you can compare anything to anything. Really! I am not in breach of some supremely ordained book of rules by comparing an R7 to an i7. In fact both Notebookcheck & Jarrod Tech did exactly that. And lest you have forgotten, it's not that long ago that i7's had FOUR cores; not six.Third, regarding Medion vs ASUS, I've owned three of the former & one of the latter. TBH, I found them indistinguishable in terms of built quality & reliability.And finally, that 'pants' 1060 GPU in the Medion appears to play AC Odyssey at 40 FPS (1080p & ultra). So 3 FPS more for £268 less. Dont believe me? Have a read of this...https://www.notebookcheck.net/Assassin-s-Creed-Odyssey-Notebook-and-Desktop-Benchmarks.337682.0.htmlPwned!


It's July. Apparently you haven't been keeping up with the month we are in, let alone what are comparable processors.....

It doesn't matter what AMD call their processors. You compared a high end Intel CPU to a mid range AMD one, to cast the AMD processor in a poor light and disparage it's performance. This is useful how? This is like comparing a Bentley Continental 'GT' to a VW Golf 'GT' based on what? They are both called GT and therefore they are comparable? People might think they are comparable because they share a name badge? They might, until they did a tiny bit of research and it became apparent they clearly aren't in the same segment.......

You claiming to know better- so you should not make such a comparison. It's worthless to the point you were attempting to form.

Your reading comprehension is also severely lacking. Nowhere did I say that the GTX1060 was 'pants' in this discussion. I did however point out it was definitely slower than the GTX1660Ti Max Q in this.

The tests on the website you link to between laptops rarely give perfect representative comparisons. Because so many variants of laptops exist it can be difficult to test GPU like for like. They frequently are not paired with an identical CPU and memory configuration. What's more cooling and thermal power limits can vary performance between laptops even sharing identical hardware.

Therefore those tests are a rough guide only. Anyone that uses them as a perfect representation is seriously mistaken. There is however more to this than meets the eye:

AC:Odyssey benchmarks interestingly are something you are clinging to and for good reason- it's garbage. The game is unoptimised and so heavily CPU reliant which favours Intel. Ok, that's how some fairly bad ports are, but the benchmark used to produce these results is also garbage and useless, since it does not give out consistent results one run to the next: overclock3d.net/rev…w/6

Your obsession with the Medion is somewhat disturbing. I pointed out extensively why this machine costs more: it's blatantly better specced in multiple areas! Overall it's a faster gaming machine, when you don't use a horribly CPU limited title coupled to a shonky benchmark....

That doesn't make the Medion a bad proposition. But that machine also doesn't make this bad value at £268 more.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text