But just how well does this small package perform in games? Ive tested 20 different games at all setting levels and also compared it with other laptops to help you decide if its worth it.. This is the late 2019 version of the Razer Blade Stealth 13 for the specs, its got a 10th gen Intel i7 1065G7 ice lake. Quad core CPU Nvidia, GTX, 1650, Max Q, graphics, 16gb of memory in dual channel and a 13.3 1080p 60Hz screen. At first. You might be thinking this is a lower specced laptop, but its a 13 inch thin and light machine.. At the moment. This is pretty much as good as you can get at this size, so keep that in mind before complaining that its only got 1650 Max Q graphics., Basically its for people that want to prioritize size and portability, but are still happy to pay more. For some level of gaming performance, as you could definitely pay less to get a larger laptop with higher specs. Ive done all testing with gaming mode enabled and the fan set to max speed in the Razer Synapse software, so that we can get the best possible performance.. Well only be looking at gaming performance in this video, so if youre new to the channel you'll definitely want to get subscribed for the upcoming full review. Lets start out by going through all games at all setting levels then afterwards well see how the Razer Blade Stealth Compares with some other laptops.

Red Dead Redemption 2 was tested using the games built in benchmark tool., It wasnt possible to run the test at ultra settings due to the 4gb VRAM limit of the 1650 Max Q, but given were only seeing 30 FPS at high settings Anyway, thats, probably not that big of a deal. Battlefield, 5 was tested in campaign mode without RTX and medium settings felt ok. For the most part, however, the low setting preset was able to push us above the 60 FPS sweet, spot. Apex Legends was tested with either all settings at maximum or all settings on the lowest possible values, as it doesnt have predefined setting presets. Even maxed out. It was still playing ok with above 60 FPS on average, but for a competitive first person. Shooter like this minimum settings with over 100 FPS would be a better experience. Call of Duty. Modern Warfare was tested in campaign mode and Ive also tested it with the settings either maxed out or at minimum. With minimum settings. It was still easily playable, with above 60 FPS. Borderlands 3 was tested. Using the games built in benchmark, only low settings or below were able to offer a 60 FPS average frame rate and above. Control was only really playable with the low setting preset, which I dont think is too much of an issue. As I think, the game still looks pretty decent, even at minimum settings. Shadow of the Tomb Raider was tested with the built in benchmark and like many of these more demanding games, only low settings and below was able to hit 60 FPS averages and above.

Ghost Recon Breakpoint was also tested with the benchmark tool and this time low settings wasnt quite able to average 60 FPS in this test, but it should still be playable. Far Cry. New Dawn was tested with the built in benchmark and, despite this being more of a CPU heavy test, our 15 watt chip is almost able to hit 60 FPS with low settings.. Fortnite was tested with the replay feature and as a less demanding game. Epic settings was only just a little below 60 FPS with medium settings well above 100 FPS. So a good example of a less demanding game, thats still able to hit high frame rates even on this hardware. Overwatch is another less demanding game and was tested in the practice range.. Even at epic settings. The 1 low was above the refresh rate of the screen, so it was still playing smoothly with 100 FPS and above achieved at ultra settings and below. CSGO was tested using the Ulletical FPS benchmark and as a game that depends primarily on CPU power. The results are down due to the 15 watt CPU, however. Well above 100 FPS was still possible with all settings. Maxed out., Dota 2 was tested playing in the middle lane and as another primarily CPU heavy game. The results are lower compared to other higher specced gaming laptops Ive tested.. Despite that, though, ultra settings still averaged above 120 FPS, while high settings had a 1 low that was even higher than the screens refresh rate.

Rainbow. Six Siege was tested with the built in benchmark and even the highest ultra setting preset was averaging above 60 FPS with the 1 low, not too far behind comparatively.. The Division. 2 was also tested with the built in benchmark, and it was just possible to reach 60 FPS with the medium setting preset, as this is more of a resource heavy game compared to the last few. PUBG was tested using the replay feature and high settings was still Able to run over 60 FPS with minimum settings surpassing 100 FPS, which could still be worthwhile for reducing input, lag. Assassins, Creed Odyssey was tested with the built in benchmark and as more of a CPU heavy test. The results are on the lower side, but it doesnt need a super high frame rate to play. The frame rates at low should be usable. Watch. Dogs 2 is a resource heavy game, but I think it still plays fine with a stable, 30 FPS. So no issues playing even with the very high setting preset, which was close to 30 FPS for the 1 low.. The Witcher 3 was playing ok at high settings. However, low settings was able to push us up to a 60 FPS average.. Ultra settings was a bit more stuttery, as shown by the average being lower than the 1 low from high settings.. F1 2019 was tested using the games benchmark tool and, although max settings was only just below 60 FPS stepping down just one level boosted, even the 1 low above this with almost 100 FPS on average.

Next lets also take a look at how this config of the Razer Blade Stealth compares with other laptops use these results as a rough guide only as they were tested at different times with different drivers. In Shadow of the Tomb Raider Ive got the Razer Blade Stealth highlighted in red near similarly specced machines.. In this case, it was at the bottom, but performing the same as the MSI Prestige 15, which has the same 1650 Max Q, graphics, though with 6 CPU cores, rather than the 4, in the Blade Stealth.. These are the results from Far Cry 5 with ultra settings. In the built in benchmark., This seems to be more of a CPU heavy test, so its now slightly behind the Prestige 15, with better CPU and the Blade Stealth is now slightly ahead of the Lenovo L340, which also has a quad core CPU. But the higher powered 1650 granted that one uses single channel memory. The Battlefield 5 results were interesting well at least compared to the MSI Prestige 15, which was performing significantly lower for some reason in this test.. In any case, the performance isnt too much below the 1650 laptops., Although Ive only compared a few games at max settings as weve seen, the Razer Blade Stealth is definitely playing most games perfectly fine at 1080p. You just need to drop down to low to medium settings. In most cases. Honestly, this is quite impressive. You need to keep in mind that this is a 13 inch laptop, most others at this size max out with the MX250.

, Its lightweight and much more portable, compared to most other laptops. This is pretty much the best you can get at this size at the moment.. As a result, it does cost more than more powerful, larger gaming laptops. However, some people are happy to pay more for a more portable option that can still perform well enough. So a laptop like this is likely only an option for a smaller group of people., Its also available with a 4K screen, but if you get that theres no way youll be gaming at 4K, with these specs, though so youll have to run them at 1080p anyway.. Given the lower performance, I dont think its an issue that its only available with 60Hz options.. It would be a different story, testing with an eGPU enclosure. Let me know if youd be interested in a video on that, and let me know what you thought of the gaming performance from the Razer Blade Stealth with GTX 1650 Max Q, graphics down in the comments..