System Performance

Intel’s Coffee Lake is a nice upgrade, offering up to six cores in the 45-Watt H series, compared to four in Kaby Lake. MSI offers either the Core i7-8750H, Core i7-8850H, or the Core i9-8950HK, with the latter installed in the review unit. The Core i9-8950HK offers six cores, 12 threads, and a 2.9-4.8 GHz operating window at stock speeds. There’s 12 MB of cache, and of course the 45-Watt TDP.

The review unit also comes with 2 x 16 GB DDR4-2667, and there’s two more SODIMM slots if you need more memory than that. The base models come with just a single 16 GB stick, so while you do lose out on the dual-channel memory, it’s nice that if you do want to upgrade to 32 GB of memory, you don’t need to buy two sticks of memory.

To test system performance, the GT75 Titan was run through our standard laptop tests. Comparisons are against similar systems and a few others, but if you want to compare it to any laptop we’ve tested, you can use our online Bench.


PCMark 8 - Home

PCMark 8 - Creative

PCMark 8 - Work

PCMark 10 - Essentials

PCMark 10 - Productivity

PCMark 10 - Digital Content Creation

PCMark 10 - Overall

PCMark tests all aspects of a system, including the CPU, GPU, and storage. The extra cores in the GT75 Titan help propel it to the tops of these tests, even compared to the Clevo P870DM2 with it’s desktop class Core i7-6700K CPU.


Cinebench R15 - Single-Threaded Benchmark

Cinebench R15 - Multi-Threaded Benchmark

Cinebench is a pure CPU test, and with both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests, we can take a look at both the single-core performance as well as when all six cores and twelve threads are in use. With a maximum turbo frequency of 4.8 GHz, the Core i9-8950HK pulls out a nice lead on the single-threaded result, and the extra cores absolutely demolish the quad-cores in previous laptops.


x264 HD 5.x

x264 HD 5.x

Another CPU test, x264 does a video conversion over two passes. The workload is quite long, and on Ultrabooks it can bump into the thermal limits of a device, but on these desktop replacement systems that’s not an issue. The MSI GT75 Titan once again flexes its extra two cores here and wipes the floor against even the fastest quad-core models we’ve tested.

Web Tests

All of our web tests are done with the latest version of Microsoft Edge, and unlike our other tests, web performance is often dictated by the browser. Over time, browsers tend to get faster at certain tasks, so even the same device may show different results later in its life.

Mozilla Kraken 1.1

Google Octane 2.0

WebXPRT 2015

Interestingly, the Kraken 1.1 and Octane results are a bit lower for this laptop compared to some of the previous generation devices we’ve tested. However the WebXPRT results do show an improvement. At the end of the day, laptops with H series CPUs tend to not struggle with web workloads regardless.

Storage Performance

You can get the GT75 Titan with just a 1 TB 7200 rpm drive, or MSI offers models with 256 and 512 GB SATA SSDs, and models with either a single 512 GB NVMe, or two 512 GB NVMe in RAID. There’s three total M.2 slots, so after purchase, there’s room to upgrade as well. It’s nice that all models come with the 1 TB spinning drive though, since the install size for games these days can be well over 100 GB per game.

As enthusiasts, it can be a bit disheartening that SSDs have become commodities for laptop manufacturers, but that is certainly the case. The review unit we received from MSI ships with the Samsung PM981 512 GB SSD. This 64-layer TLC drive is one of the best performing TLC drives around, and if you want to read more about it please check out our review.

The Samsung PM981 is perhaps not quite as fast as their Pro series with MLC NAND, but for most people, the speed difference is mostly academic. The PM981 can saturate a PCI 3.0 x4 link on reads, and still does awfully well on writes.

SSDs in laptops is a bit of a lottery, but this GT75 Titan has a great SSD. They offer this in RAID 0 as well for 1 TB total, which is going to perform marginally better, but likely not enough for anyone to really notice except on synthetic tests.

Design GPU Performance


View All Comments

  • GreenReaper - Sunday, September 16, 2018 - link

    They're reviewing it because people in the world *other* than you might want to buy it. If your needs lie elsewhere, that's fine. It doesn't make the product or reviews of it worthless.

    If colour gamut or viewing angles were the sole purchasing criteria, we'd all be using IPS screens over TN/VA. At this point in my life, and the current state of the market, I might well buy one myself. But a 120Hz screen _can_ give you a more well-defined picture of a moving object than a higher-resolution 60Hz screen, and that *may* be more important to a buyer - especially if they're trying to hit a small point on that moving object. And as mentioned above, it can avoid what some see as downsides such as desktop scaling.

    There are reasons cameras have shutter speeds faster than 1/60sec as well, and one of them is because it gives you a sharper image of moving objects. Which, again, many games are full of. High-resolution textures would be wasted if they end up as a blurred mess.

    There's little point in benchmarking in 1440p on an 1080p laptop because that is not how it will actually be used - and you're unlikely to swap the monitor out later (although it would be possible to plug a larger one in, I guess - in fact, that would be a *great* way to get that 4K IPS action as well).

    For the inbuilt screen, antialiasing is a better way to provide image quality and use up the available video performance - and that's exactly what was tested with full-screen anti-aliasing and temporal anti-aliasing.

    If I were to criticise the reviews, it would be that they seem to be an average FPS, which doesn't really cut it nowadays - I want to see 99% values, or number of frames it doesn't meet the target, because that's when you notice performance dropouts. But in many games the laptop exceeds the 120 FPS target, while in others it's still above 90 FPS. So it should deliver this particular model's key feature - high-FPS gaming.
  • milkod2001 - Friday, September 14, 2018 - link

    For 17'' screen lappy 1080p is perfectly fine. Reply
  • RSAUser - Saturday, September 15, 2018 - link

    Not really, at 3ft distance and 17", you can definitely notice the difference in sharpness between 1080p and 4k, heck, I can notice it between 1440p and 4k.
    The TN panel should have at least been 1440p.
  • milkod2001 - Tuesday, September 18, 2018 - link

    Yeah, well how is windows scaling working on 17''laptop with 4k screen? Reply
  • ralstonater - Monday, October 1, 2018 - link

    I have the 4k-071 model and I can verify that the scaling works and looks just fine on my laptop :) Reply
  • milkod2001 - Tuesday, September 18, 2018 - link

    At 3ft distance if you can notice any difference in sharpness between 1080 and 4k on 17''screen you must be using 1'' thick glasses with some laser enhancements and binoculars attached. Bet you got there night vision too. Haha. Reply
  • darkich - Sunday, September 16, 2018 - link

    You're either crazy either have serious eyesight impairment.
    1080p TN on a 17" laptop with this price and this GPU is an absolute insult to common sense.
    If you are fine with paying that much money for staring into something that looks worse than a $300 tablet screen, further comment.
  • milkod2001 - Tuesday, September 18, 2018 - link

    The absolute insult for me would be paying nearly 3 grand for laptop. No matter how great it is, it is aimed at stupid people. 17'' laptop will sit on table 100% of times. Why not spend 3grand on desktop with 2 times better performance and at least 27''screen? Kinda silly, don't you agree?

    1080p on 17" is perfectly fine. I don't expect 4k on 17'' screen scaling great using Windows.
  • zoxo - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link

    120Hz screen Reply
  • DanNeely - Thursday, September 13, 2018 - link

    The extra size should make this significantly quieter than a thin and light gaming laptop.

    This will comfortably do 1080p 120hz, and has a decent margin to keep being able to do so for a few years before frame rates fall too low vs something with a lower end GPU that thermal throttles harder because of size.

    That said, I really would like to see 15.6/17.3" 1440p laptop screens since that appears to be the sweet spot for current generation GPUs.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now