The Asus ROG FX502 is an impressive gaming laptop and is a favorite of the Pros who use it. It comes with a ton of features, including a curved 15.6″ 1080p anti-glare display, an 8th gen Intel Core i7-8750H (6-core, 12MB cache, up to 4.1GHz) CPU, 16GB of DDR4-2666MHz RAM, and a 256GB NVMe SSD.
It’s been a few months since I’ve reviewed the FX series, the Intel Kaby Lake version of the older FX series. And since that time I’ve been able to run some tests on the Asus TUF Gaming FX505DM in order to see if this laptop can hold its own against a much newer generation of laptops.
Today, we will be testing two of the most popular gaming laptops available on the market today: the Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506QM and the HP Pavilion F15 FX506HM. These two are the last of the Asus TUF Gaming series and the HP Pavilion F15 FX506HM.
The TUF Gaming is Asus’s most affordable gaming and performance laptop brand, and one of the most popular laptops on the market thanks to its superb features and low price.
We’ve evaluated various iterations of the TUF Gaming series over the years, including their 2024 TUF Gaming A15, which was released earlier this year and is built on AMD Ryzen and Nvidia RTX hardware.
This article builds on previous one by allowing us to compare the 2024 TUF A15 to the newer 2024 TUF Gaming F15 series, both of which are built on the Tiger Lake 11th gen hardware platform.
Apart from the CPUs, the 2024 A15 and F15 are nearly identical in most areas. However, the platform variations have an impact on the everyday experience with these laptops in a handful of ways, therefore this post will help you pick between the two TUFs.
ASUS TUF A15 FA506QM vs. F15 FX506HM spec comparison
| ASUS TUF Gaming A15 FA506QM 2024 | ASUS TUF Gaming F15 FX506HM 2024 | |
| Display | Panda LM156LF-2F01 panel, 15.6-inch, 1920 x 1080 px IPS 144 Hz, 16:9, non-touch, matte | Chi Mei N156HRA-EA1 panel, 15.6-inch, 1920 x 1080 px IPS 144 Hz, 16:9, non-touch, matte |
| Processor | AMD Cezanne, 8C/16T, up to Ryzen 7 5800H | Tiger Lake 11th-gen Intel Core i7-11800H, 8C/16T Intel Tiger Lake 11th-gen Intel Tiger Lake 11th-gen Intel Tiger Lake 11th-gen Intel Tiger Lake 11th-gen Intel Tiger Lake 11 |
| Video | Laptop 6GB AMD Radeon Vega + Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 90-95W AMD Radeon Vega + Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 | Laptop 6GB Intel Iris Xe + Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 90-95W |
| Memory | DDR4-3200 memory up to 32 GB (2x DIMMs) | DDR4-3200 memory up to 32 GB (2x DIMMs) |
| Storage | 2x PCIe x4 gen3 M.2 | 2x PCIe x4 gen4 M.2 |
| Connectivity | Wireless 6 (Mediatek MT7921) 22, Gigabit LAN (Realtek RTL8168/8111), Bluetooth 5.0 | |
| Ports | HDMI 2.0b, LAN, headphone/mic, Kensington Lock 2x USB-A 3.2 gen1, 1x USB-A 2.0, 1x USB-C gen2 with DP and data, HDMI 2.0b, LAN, headphone/mic | 1x USB-C with Thunderbolt 4, HDMI 2.0b, LAN, headphone/mic, Kensington Lock 3x USB-A 3.2 gen1 |
| Battery | Power adaptor with 90 Wh and 200 W | Power adaptor with 90 Wh and 200 W |
| Size | 360 mm (14.17”) x 256 mm (10.079”) x 24.9 mm (.98”) (h) | |
| Weight | Power brick and cables, 2.23 kg (4.9 lbs),.59 kg (1.3 lbs), EU version | |
| Extras | single-zone RGB backlit keyboard, webcam, stereo speakers, Gray (metal lid) or Black (non-metal lid) (with plastic lid) | |
Construction and design
You’re undoubtedly familiar with the design and construction of these TUFs by now, as it hasn’t changed much in over a year. The main chassis and undersize are made of textured plastic, with the choice of a matte-gray metallic exterior or a black plastic exterior, which can be carried between regions and configurations.
For the sake of example, the Intel-based TUF F15 has a black exterior, whereas the AMD-based TUF A15 has a gray exterior. However, just to be sure, both are accessible in both selections. If at all feasible, use the gray metal lid; it’s more durable and hides smudges better.
In addition, in these images, the AMD model is on the left, while the Intel model is on the right. Each one has a Ryzen/Core sticker to assist you distinguish between them.
Review of the Asus TUF Gaming A15 vs F15
The interior’s brushed plastic feels a little cheap for 2024, but the build quality is adequate, and the Nitro 5 and Legion 5 are likewise plastic in this class. However, their simpler design language gives them a more serious appearance.
The TUFs are otherwise quite useful. The displays are held in place by two robust hinges, large rubber feet provide a secure grip on the desk, and the edges are gentle on the wrists. The screen is single-handedly adjustable, but only to roughly 140 degrees, not all the way back.
Unlike their ROG versions, Asus keeps a camera on the top of the screen, on that notch-type thicker bezel, but no biometrics, and the status LEDs are still uncomfortably located beneath the display, in the line of sight.
The IO, on the other hand, is largely lined on the left side. The Tuf F15 series, which is powered by Intel, has a slight advantage here thanks to Thunderbolt 4 connectivity through USB-C and a quicker set of USB-A ports, but the two are otherwise equal. The F15 doesn’t have a card reader or the ability to charge through USB-C, so it’s not really a complete TB4 port.
Your text will be rewritten by QuillBot. Start by typing or pasting something into this box, then hit the enter key.
Trackpad and keyboard
The keyboards on the 2024 A15 and F15 versions are also identical, with a full layout including a NumPad and single-zone RGN illumination. The NumPad part is a little tighter than the main set of keys, and the arrows are also a little narrow, but it’s a good layout overall.
The smooth plastic keycaps are comfortable to hold and travel 1.8 millimeters into the frame. The feedback is a touch soft and spongy at first, so it may take some getting used to, but after a few days of use, I found these laptops to be reliable and quiet typers.
The keys are RGB lighted, with single-zone control using the Armory Crate app’s AURA software. The illumination is consistent and bright enough, with only a small amount of light shining out from beneath the keycaps. A separate Caps-Lock indication was also included by Asus.
Asus chose an immovable plastic touchpad and dedicated click buttons for the mouse. The surface is plastic and small for today’s standards, but it works well for everyday use, taps, and gestures, and it doesn’t rattle. The click buttons are smooth and silent, and they function exactly as they should.
There are no biometrics on this laptop at the moment.
Screen
Asus offers a few different panel options for the TUF Gaming series, and you should pay particular attention to this because they differ in terms of color fidelity and response times.
Ideally, you should seek for a TUF configuration with a 240 Hz screen, as that is a Sharp IPS panel that is both high-quality and speedy. However, you’ll usually see it on the A15’s RTX 3070 configurations, occasionally on the 3060 A15s and especially the 3060 F15 models, and very seldom on the 3050Ti machines.
Both of our 3060 panels are 144 Hz and come from different manufacturers. The A15 has the Panda LM156LF-2F03 panel we saw in the 2024 A15s, while the F15 gets the Chi Mei N156HRA-EA1 panel found on Asus’s TUF Dash F15. With around 60% sRGB coverage, they’re both awful in terms of color accuracy.
The Chi Mei, on the other hand, is a somewhat better choice, with better blacks, contrast, viewing angles, and uniformity. When the A15 is plugged in, it is dimmer than the Panda panel, at sub-300 nits, but darker when the laptop is on battery, which explains the variations in the photographs below.
With an X-Rite i1 Display Pro sensor, here’s what we got in our tests:
- Chi Mei CMN1521 (N156HRA-EA1) panel hardware ID;
- 63.2 percent sRGB, 44.0 percent AdobeRGB, and 45.1 percent DCI-P3 coverage;
- Gamma (measured): 2.31;
- On power, the maximum brightness in the middle of the screen is 282.74 cd/m2;
- On power, the minimum brightness in the middle of the screen is 17.19 cd/m2;
- 1451:1 contrast at maximum brightness
- 7300 K is the white point;
- 0.19 cd/m2 at maximum brightness;
- PWM: No;
- GtG response time: 28 milliseconds (via NBC)
While the Panda panel on the AMD model is slightly brighter when the laptop is plugged in, it is still unremarkable.
- Panda LM156LF-2F01 is the panel hardware ID.
- 58.7% sRGB, 40.6 percent AdobeRGB, 41.7 percent DCI P3 coverage;
- Gamma (measured): 1.97;
- On power, the maximum brightness in the middle of the screen is 314.46 cd/m2;
- On power, the minimum brightness in the middle of the screen is 17.40 cd/m2;
- 1000:1 contrast at maximum brightness;
- 7000 K white point;
- 0.31 cd/m2 at maximum brightness;
- PWM: No
- GtG response time: 34 milliseconds (via NBC)
Both are also badly calibrated out of the box, and play games slowly, which can cause ghosting in fast-paced games. We had some faint leakage as well, which was more noticeable on the Chi Mei panel.
Your text will be rewritten by QuillBot. Start by typing or pasting something into this box, then hit the enter key.
Performance and hardware
With the exception of the CPUs, our test models are extremely similar:
Both are retail units identical to those found in stores, and they run on the latest software (BIOS 307 – A15, BIOS 303 – F15, Armoury Crate 4.1.5, GeForce 471.41 drivers) as of late July 2024.
Both the Ryzen 7 and the Core i7 processors are 8C/16T, with some similarities and variances. The latest i7 benefits from slightly higher speeds and additional Cache memory, faster PCIe gen4 storage, Thunderbolt 4 capability, and a few other advantages over the AMD platform, as outlined in this separate article comparing the Core i7-11800H with the Ryzen 7 5800H. At the same time, the Zen3 AMD architecture is more energy-efficient than the Tiger Lake technology from the previous generation, allowing it to run at reduced power, temperatures, and, in some situations, fan noise.
You’ve probably observed that both of these laptops come with single-rank memory, a dual-channel 2x 8GB kit. This has been documented to have an impact on AMD chip performance, but I have yet to fully verify its impact on Intel systems. We’ll go over this in more detail in a future piece.
Both laptops come with fast SSDs for storage. The Intel variant has a PCIe gen4 connection, but both are fast enough for regular use. Asus didn’t scrimp and save on this one, as they have in the past.
In the tested titles, both laptops use the identical RTX 3060 Laptop dGPU, which runs at 80-95W with Dynamic Boost. The official specs claim a GPU implementation of 90-95W, but we’ve seen the chip run at 80W in some games and up to 95W in others in our tests. We’ll go through that in more detail later.
The two TUFs are close but not identical internally, with minor layout changes. To get inside, you’ll need to remove the back panels, which will allow you access to the two storage drives, two M.2 SSD slots, as well as the batteries and thermal modules.
Both come with the same software bundle, with Armoury Crate and MyAsus serving as the control apps. Both laptops have the Silent, Performance, and Turbo settings, but not the configurable Manual option that is only available on the higher-tier ROG devices.
For a related topic, the BIOS on the Intel-based TUF F15 does not support undervolting, which is something that is only available on ROG laptops. Undervolting isn’t possible using XTU/Throttlestop, and Ryzen Master isn’t available on the AMD model.
Performance and benchmarks of the Asus TUF A15 and F15
So, now that that’s out of the way, let’s talk about sustained CPU performance in the Cinebench loop test, which repeats the same test 15+ times in a loop with a 1-2 second delay between runs.
On the highest Turbo setting, the two have identical performance, but the AMD model has 2-4 percent higher sustained scores, despite the fact that it runs at a lower sustained power of 74+W, and the Intel model runs at 79+W. This allows the AMD unit to run slightly quieter, with fans increasing to 42-43 dB at head-level, compared to 44-45 dB on Intel units. In both cases, the temperatures are in the high-80s.
On the Performance profiles, the fans get quieter in both situations, with the AMD model once again having a noise advantage. On Performance, however, the Intel version uses more sustained power, whilst the AMD arrangement uses 45W after a few cycles.
On Silent, the CPUs are limited in both circumstances, with the Intel model drawing 30W and the AMD model drawing only 20W.
Finally, the AMD model outperforms the Intel model in the Performance mode while unplugged, able to run at 35W continuous vs. 30W continuous on the Intel model.
Here’s how the two stack up against other current laptops in their respective categories.
These findings were also validated in the more demanding Cinebench R23 test, in which the CPUs ended up running at the same 74+W and 79+W sustained TDPs, but the Intel CPU scored somewhat higher than the AMD.
Similar results were shown in the 3DMark CPU profile test, where the Intel i7-11800H outperformed the AMD R7-5800H across the board, with up to 15% higher scores in some cases.
Finally, on both systems, we ran the combined 3Dmark stress test, which cycles TimeSpy 20 times in a succession and looks for performance loss as the temperature rises. Both laptops performed admirably in the test.
However, when it comes to real benchmark results, the i7 + 3060 F15 combo outperforms the R7 + 3060 machine in nearly every category, including CPU and GPU scores. The Intel variant had a larger and quicker SSD, which had a minor impact on PassMark and PCMark scores but not on the others.
Although the two GPUs on these two notebooks are similar, I expect single-rank memory to have a greater influence on the more memory-intensive AMD architecture, which could potentially explain the variations in GPU results in 3DMark and Uniengine.
| Ryzen 7 + 3060 TUF A15 | Intel i7 + 3060 TUF F15 | |
| Fire Strike is the thirteenth test in the 3DMark series. | 17472 (Graphics: 18651, Physics: 23300, and Combination: 9448) | 18651 (Graphics 20538, Physics 23509, and Combination 9331) |
| Port Royal in 3DMark 13 | 4411 | 4669 |
| Time Spy – 3DMark 13 | 7400 (7218 graphics, 8640 CPU) | (Graphics – 7869, CPU – 9406) 8066 (Graphics – 7869, CPU – 9406) |
| 1080p Medium Uniengine Superposition | 13915 | 14643 |
| 1080p Extreme Uniengine Superposition | 4595 | 4844 |
| Handbrake 1.3.1 (encodes 4K to 1080p): | The average frame rate is 39.78 frames per second. | The average frame rate is 43.63 frames per second. |
| PassMark10 | (4894) (CPU: 22598 3D Graphics: 11571, Disk: 16661) | 3950 (CPU: 23081 3D Graphics: 13681, Disk: 18068) |
| PCMark 10 | 6668 (E – 10333, P – 9022, DCC – 8633) (E – 10333, P – 9022, DCC – 8633) (E – 10333, P – | 6799 (E – 10234, P – 8764, DCC – 9509) (E – 10234, P – 8764, DCC – 9509) (E – 10234, P |
| 64-bit GeekBench 5.0.1 | 1419 single-core, 7376 multi-core | 1545 single-core, 8107 multi-core |
| R15 CineBench (best run) | CPU Single Core 230 cb, CPU 2176 cb | CPU Single Core 227 cb, CPU 2161 cb |
| R20 CineBench (best run) | CPU Single Core 551 cb, 4901 cb | CPU Single Core 572 cb, CPU 5327 cb |
| R23 CineBench (best run) | CPU Single Core 1395 cb, CPU 12668 cb | CPU Single Core 1494 cb, CPU 13226 cb |
| 64-bit x265 HD Benchmark | 29.34 fps | 29.48 frames per second |
On the same Turbo profiles, we ran some Workstation-related loads. The variations are minor, but they favor the Intel setup once again.
| Ryzen 7 + 3060 TUF A15 | Intel i7 + 3060 TUF F15 | |
| Blender 2.90 – CPU Compute BMW Car Scene | 3m 22s | 3m 9s |
| Blender 2.90 – CPU Compute – Classroom Scene | 9m 57s | 8m 46s |
| Blender 2.90 – GPU, CUDA – Classroom scene | 3m 37s | 2m 20s |
| 3DSMax SPECviewerf 2024 | 71.67 | 83.33 |
| Catia SPECviewerf 2024 | 46.53 | 50.79 |
| Creo SPECviewerf 2024 | 66.1 | 83.89 |
| 2020 SPECviewerf – Energy | 17.49 | 19.98 |
| Maya SPECviewerf 2024 | 210.33 | 243.02 |
| Medical SPECviewerf 2024 | 24.75 | 25.08 |
| 2020 SPECviewerf – SNX | 15.25 | 15.97 |
| SW SPECviewerf 2024 | 138.02 | 157.52 |
the outcome of the game
We also played a few games on our two devices to test how the two CPUs affected the experience. In the supported titles, both units use the same type and amount of RAM (2x 8 GB single rank RAM in dual channel) and the same Nvidia RTX 3060 Laptop dGPU at 80 to 95W of power with Dynamic Boost 2.0.
Here are some observations from the Turbo profiles at these laptops’ native FHD screen resolution, which we’ll explore later below.
| Optimus FHD Turbo | 80-95W TUF A15 Ryzen 7 5800H + RTX 3060 | Core i7-11800H + RTX 3060 80-95W TUF F15 |
| Battlefield V is a first-person shooter that was (DX 12, Ultra Preset, RTX OFF) | 101 frames per second (51 frames per second – 1% low) | 111 frames per second (59 frames per second – 1% low) |
| The year is 2077, and the setting is Cyberpunk (DX 12, Ultra Preset, RTX OFF) | 52 frames per second (42 frames per second – 1% low) | 52 frames per second (40 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Dota 2 is a game developed by Valve Corporation (DX 11, Best Looking Preset) | 112 frames per second (68 frames per second – 1% low) | 115 frames per second (72 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Far Cry 5 is the fifth installment in the Far Cry series (DX 11, Ultra Preset, SMAA) | 97 frames per second (78 frames per second – 1% low) | 105 frames per second (81 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Exodus from the Metro (DX 12, Ultra Preset, RTX OFF) | 52 frames per second (34 frames per second – 1% low) | 52 frames per second (32 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Shadow of Mordor is a film set in Middle Earth. | 137 frames per second (99 frames per second – 1% low) | 143 frames per second (100 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 is a sequel to Red Dead Redemption (DX 12, Ultra Optimized, TAA) | 74 frames per second (51 frames per second – 1% low) | 83 frames per second (56 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Tomb Raider: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA) | 81 frames per second (42 frames per second – 1% low) | 83 frames per second (45 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Strange Brigade is a band of misfits who (Vulkan, Ultra Preset) | 138 frames per second (108 frames per second – 1% low) | 145 frames per second (111 frames per second – 1% low) |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is the third installment of The Witcher franchise (DX 11, Ultra Preset, Hairworks On 4) | 94 frames per second (67 frames per second – 1% low) | 97 frames per second (68 frames per second – 1% low) |
- In campaign mode, Battlefield V and The Witcher 3 were recorded with Fraps/in-game FPS counter.
- Games like Far Cry 5, Middle Earth, Strange Brigade, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Tomb Raider were recorded using the Benchmark utility that came with the game.
- Based on these settings, a Red Dead Redemption 2 optimized profile was created.
The tests mentioned above are rasterization-only tests, and here are some RTX findings.
| Optimus FHD Turbo | 80-95W TUF A15 Ryzen 7 5800H + RTX 3060 | Core i7-11800H + RTX 3060 80-95W TUF F15 |
| Battlefield V is a first-person shooter that was (DX 12, Ultra Preset, RTX ON, DLSS OFF) | 71 frames per second (51 frames per second – 1% low) | 75 frames per second (51 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 (DLSS Auto, DX 12, Ultra Preset + RTX) | 41 frames per second (32 frames per second – 1% low) | 44 frames per second (35 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Tomb Raider: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA, RTX Ultra) | 50 frames per second (21 frames per second – 1% low) | 57 frames per second (25 frames per second – 1% low) |
Once again, the Intel setup offers a minor advantage of up to 10% on specific titles.
However, we noted substantial differences in how the two systems handle different games and how Dynamic Boost 2.0 distributes power between the CPU and GPU. The Intel model, for the most part, allocates more power to the CPU and takes it away from the GPU, resulting in a 5-10W reduction in GPU power. Given that the Intel arrangement is newer, and drivers may further modify this feature, framerates on the Intel variant may improve even more.
The Intel version of Cyberpunk 2077, for example, uses 40W CPU and 85W GPU, while the AMD version uses 20W CPU and 95W GPU. Despite this, the framerates recorded by both are identical. The components in the Intel laptop, on the other hand, run at much greater temperatures.
The Intel variant uses 5W more power on both the CPU and GPU in Red Dead 2.
The Witcher 3 and Far Cry 5 are also available on Turbo.
Overall, while power allocations varied between titles, the Intel model tends to assign 5-10W more combined CPU+GPU power to the components on the Turbo modes, which is why it runs hotter internally, especially on the GPU side. On Turbo, the fan noise is about 45-46 dB, which is comparable between the two.
At this point, I believe that’s because the Intel model is newer and operates on less refined software, whereas the mature AMD configuration has been gimped through previous BIOS updates to keep the thermals at bay and assuage complaints about the thermal module not being up to the task. If that’s the case, I’d anticipate the Intel model to be limited as well, as it currently runs hot, especially on the GPU side, with temperatures averaging in the mid-80s and close to the 87C thermal-throttle limit in all of the games tested.
We noted that lifting both of these laptops from the desk allowed for a considerable decrease in CPU/GPU temps and even a minor rise in GPU clocks in some games, much as we did with our earlier looks at these Asus TUF designs. This is due to the little rubber feet that clog the intakes while these laptops are on a desk, preventing adequate fresh air from reaching the fans. If you plan to play a lot of games, the A15/F15 series is a good option for an external cooling pad.
On both laptops, quieter Performance profiles (42-43 dB) are offered, with significantly reduced CPU and GPU power settings. On both laptops, the components get quite hot on this profile, near the GPU throttling limit and at 85-95 C on the CPUs, rendering both profiles unusable for gaming.
Silent modes are also available, which limit power and performance while maintaining fan noise between the tested titles at 36-38 dB. In this instance, the temperatures are fine, but you won’t be able to play most recent games at their highest settings on these Silent profiles.
Finally, you can play games on these two laptops while they are unplugged, but the experience is limited, and you shouldn’t anticipate more than 1 to 2 hours of battery life on a single charge.
Noise, heat, connectivity, speakers, and other factors are all factors to consider.
As you can see from the figure below, the thermal modules and intakes/outputs of the 2024 TUF A15 and F15 series are fairly similar.
Both laptops have open backs with partial cutouts over the fans, but the intakes are slightly choked due to the low-profile rubber feet on the D panel, which is why, as previously said, elevating the laptop from the desk allows for improved internal temperatures and a modest performance improvement.
On these laptops, you’ll find Turbo, Performance, and Silent modes, all with comparable fan settings: 45-46 dB at head-level for Turbo, 42-43 dB for Performance, and 36-38 dB for Silent. Internal and external temperatures differ between the A15 and F15 configurations, based on our tests, owing to the F15’s increased CPU+GPU power. It’s possible that this will change in the future.
Aside from gaming, the two laptops offer a seamless experience in regular use, with the Silent profile allowing the fans to turn off as long as the hardware does not exceed 60 degrees Celsius, but this takes a toll on the overall snappiness. With everyday multitasking, the fans spin on the Performance profile, but they never get too loud. I haven’t heard any coil whine on these two TUFs, but there’s no guarantee you won’t hear it on yours, so make sure you test for it well.
On this chassis, here’s what to expect in terms of external temperatures:
The gaming FLIR readings are shown below.
*Gaming – both computers on Turbo, on desk – 30 minutes of Red Dead 2 with fans set at 45-46 dB
Wireless 6 and Bluetooth 5 are provided by Mediatek chips on both of these machines, as well as Gigabit Lan via a Realtek chip. The WiFi module isn’t the fastest on the market, but it worked well both close to the router and at distances of 30 feet or more with obstructions in the way.
The audio hasn’t changed since the TUF A15s, and it’s about average for a mid-tier gaming laptop, with just average loudness of 75-77 dB at head-level and little bass. On this front, don’t hold your breath.
Finally, the camera is positioned on top of the screen, with microphones on either side. It’s fine for infrequent calls, but it’s grainy, so it’s not ideal.
Life of the battery
All of the 2024 TUF Gaming A15 and F15 versions have 90Wh batteries.
The battery life of the AMD-based TUF A15 was as follows, with the screen brightness set to roughly 120 nits (80 brightness).
- 12.5 W (about 6-7 hours of use) — text writing in Google Drive, Silent Mode, screen set to 80%, Wi-Fi turned on;
- 8 W (almost 11 hours of use) — 1080p fullscreen video in Edge, Silent Mode, screen at 80%, Wi-Fi ON;
- 7 W (over 12 hours of use) — Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Silent Mode, screen at 80%, Wi-Fi turned on;
- 15 W (4-6 hours of use) – Edge, Performance Mode, screen at 80%, Wi-Fi turned on;
- 60 W (1+ h of use) – Witcher 3, Performance Mode, screen at 80%, Wi-Fi turned on, no fps limit
The same tests were performed on the Intel-based TUF F15, but with the screen brightness adjusted to roughly 120 nits (70 brightness).
- 14 W (about 5-6 hours of use) — text writing in Google Drive, Silent Mode, 70% screen, Wi-Fi ON;
- 12.5 W (almost 7 hours of consumption) — 1080p fullscreen video on Youtube in Edge, Silent Mode, 70% screen, Wi-Fi ON;
- 10.5 W (about 8 hours of use) — Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Silent Mode, 70% screen, Wi-Fi ON;
- 18 W (4-5 hours of use) – Edge, Performance Mode, screen at 70%, Wi-Fi turned on;
- 60 W (1+ h of use) – Witcher 3, Performance Mode, 70% screen, Wi-Fi ON, no fps limit
With light loads and video streaming, it’s no surprise that the AMD model is more efficient, and the differences are significant. However, when it comes to word processing, daily browsing, and multitasking, the two are much closer in efficiency, with the AMD model still holding a little advantage.
For what it’s worth, while on batteries and on the iGPU, the system automatically turns the screen to 60Hz, which is something I wish every manufacturer would do.
Both setups come with 200W power bricks that are relatively small for what they are. The battery charges in roughly 2 hours, with quick charging for the first half hour, and there is no support for USB-C charging.
the cost and the availability
The TUF Gaming A15 and F15 are available in stores in most parts of the world in 2024, however the configurations vary by nation. For the most up-to-date configurations and costs in your area at the moment you’re reading this post, go to this site.
The TUF A15 costs roughly 1100 EUR in Europe, and the TUF F15 costs around 1250 EUR, although the latter comes with a 240 Hz screen. There are even more cheap RTX 3050Ti options, but the 3060s offer the best bang for your buck. Just try to get a setup with that 240 Hz screen; it’s a lot nicer panel in general.
Expect the Intel-based F15 models to retail for slightly more than the A15s for similar features, owing to the fact that the A15s have been around for a while and are now discounted, whilst the newer F15s are not.
Although the minor performance benefits may be worth the extra money, AMD configurations may still be the better-balanced options, thanks to their more efficient and cooler-running technology, and you can use the money to upgrade to a dual-rank RAM kit.
Finally, some thoughts
So, having spent time with both these variations of the TUF A15 and TUF F15 series, I’m still (in theory, and I’ll explain why in a minute) leaning towards the AMD-based A15 right now, because it’s a more mature product running on a more mature hardware/software platform, more widely available, and more affordable.
In our testing and tests, the Intel model outperforms the AMD equivalent, but it also runs hotter inside, and I’d think that upgrading the memory to a dual-rank kit would bring the A15 much closer to the F15 in terms of performance. You can do it with the remaining $100 USD/EUR from the cheaper A15.
In practice, however, it’s difficult to obtain an A15 with an RTX 3060 GPU and a 240 Hz display, as most people go for the 144 Hz panel, which is the meager Panda that I’d rather avoid. The 240hz screen is only available on the 3070 variants, which are considerably more expensive. The 3060 F15, on the other hand, appears to be mostly used with this far better 240 Hz screen with 100 percent sRGB color coverage, which is worth the extra money.
At the same time, the TUF series is up against powerful competitors like the Lenovo Legion 5 and the Acer Nitro 5. Both are respectable designs with AMD Ryzen or Intel Core processors, both are reasonably priced, and both may be simpler to get with a good screen on a 3060 configuration.
However, because the configuration and costs differ by country, there’s no way to determine which is a better value; you simply have to analyze all of them while buying in this sector and choose the one that best suits your demands and local budget. For a more in-depth look at how the two stack up against each other, I’ll write a separate piece.
Overall, the Asus Gaming TUF A15 and F15 lines for 2024 are competitive notebooks in their respective niches. In our benchmarks and gaming tests, the AMD-based A15 is the more efficient, cooler-running, and more cheap alternative, while the Intel-based F15 is the more powerful.
It’s worth noting that both come with single-rank memory, and upgrading it would improve the results in both situations, notably in the AMD setup. Also, if possible, choose the 240 Hz screen option; the 144 Hz panels on both TUF versions are of terrible quality.
With that in mind, we’ll end this review here, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on these two Asus TUF Gaming laptops, as well as which one you’d choose and why, so please leave your comments or questions in the box below.
Disclaimer: Our work is entirely funded by our readers. We may receive an affiliate commission if you purchase something after clicking on one of our links. Find out more.
Editor-in-Chief of Ultrabookreview.com, Andrei Girbea. I’ve been writing about mobile computers since the early 2000s, and you’ll usually find my reviews and comprehensive instructions on this site.
The Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506QM (R7 5800H, RTX 3060) is the company’s first 15-inch gaming laptop that integrates the latest Intel® Core™ i7-8086K processor and Nvidia® RTX™ 3060 graphics.
The Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506QM (R7 5800H, RTX 3060) features a 15-inch Full HD IPS display with a 144Hz refresh rate, and a 144Hz refresh rate. The device also arrives with an integrated GeForce® RTX™ 3060 graphics and a 512GB PCIe SSD. The Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506QM (R7 5800H, RTX 3060) is also equipped with. Read more about asus tuf ryzen 7 5800h rtx 3060 and let us know what you think.
