This small box contains Nvidia RTX 3080 graphics, and it connects to this small 13” 8 core Ryzen
laptop with a single cable to offer significantly better performance in games. I’m going to show
you just how well this setup performs in games and applications to help you decide if it’s worth it.
The external graphics, or eGPU, is a custom design by ASUS called the XG Mobile, and it’s available
with RTX 3060, 3070, or 3080 graphics, and I’ve got the highest 3080 model here.
ASUS are using laptop GPUs in the XG mobile rather than the desktop variants,
so despite the same names like RTX 3080, this does mean they’re specced differently.
The mobile 3080 I’ve got has less CUDA cores and slower memory than the desktop card,
however it is also available with more memory, my unit has 16 gigs of GDDR6.
The XG mobile with 3080 is able to run up to the full 150 watt limit of the laptop GPU, and the
3070 runs at 125 watts or 140 watts with dynamic boost, so again full power laptop GPU. I think
there’s meant to be a 3060 model, but I can’t find specs for it just yet, but considering the higher
end models are full laptop GPUs I’d assume that one would be a max power limit variant too. Now
150 watts is significantly higher when compared to the 35 watt GTX 1650 in the ASUS Flow X13 laptop.
At the moment, the X13 is the only laptop that can work with the XG Mobile,
but ASUS are hoping that the XG Mobile is just the start and that it will be compatible with
future laptops other than just the X13, but for now this is the only one that works with it.
With the XG Mobile connected to the X13, it means the GTX 1650 in the laptop is idle,
allowing the 8 core Ryzen processor to perform better. There’s just more power and thermal
headroom available for it because we’ve moved the graphics workload externally. Additionally,
when the XG mobile is connected to the X13 the laptop will be fully powered,
and it’s using a direct PCIe connection. It looks like Oculink, however ASUS have confirmed
the pin-out is different in case you wanted to try and run a desktop GPU or something.
Traditional eGPUs are limited to Thunderbolt 3 or 4 speeds of 40 gbit per second with 4 PCIe 3.0
lanes, which can be a bottleneck. The XG Mobile has 8 PCIe 3.0 lanes with 63Gb/s of bandwidth
dedicated to the graphics, so around 57% more bandwidth compared to a traditional Thunderbolt
eGPU, but there are of course a bunch of other positives and negatives for both the XG Mobile
and Thunderbolt eGPUs. I’ll be comparing both of those in a future video dedicated to the topic, so
make sure you’re subscribed for that one, because so far the results are looking very interesting.
If we run a game with the XG Mobile connected using the laptop’s screen,
the signal goes via integrated Vega graphics to reach the display. This is essentially a similar
bottleneck to a laptop with Optimus, but we can avoid it and get better performance by
connecting an external screen directly to the DisplayPort or HDMI outputs of the XG Mobile.
It would have been cool if the XG mobile connected directly to the display of the
X13 for improved performance, but I suppose that just wasn’t possible for some reason.
The goal of this video is to see what sort of a performance boost the XG Mobile gives us in
games compared to just using the GTX 1650 graphics of the X13 by itself, with the secondary goal of
seeing just how much extra performance you can get by attaching an external monitor to the XG Mobile.
So with that in mind,
let’s start out with the gaming tests followed by content creator workloads afterwards.
Cyberpunk 2077 was tested in little China with the street kid life path. These are the results
with ray tracing off, we’ll look at ray tracing on in the next graph. Under the 1080p section
I’ve got three results. The bottom one is with the laptop’s GTX 1650 only, so without the eGPU.
The result above is with the RTX 3080 connected to the laptop, but with the laptop screen in use,
and the result above it is with an external monitor connected to the XG mobile with the
laptop’s screen off. Above that I’ve also tested 1440p and 4K with the external screen.
Unfortunately I could not set these resolutions with the laptop’s panel, and that’s why the laptop
screen was only tested at 1080p. Anyway for the results, the game is basically unplayable with
the ultra setting preset on the 1650, but adding the 3080 gives far more playable frame rates.
I’ve also tested with the RT Ultra preset and set DLSS to quality mode. Obviously I’ve got no
result from the GTX 1650 as it’s not capable of ray tracing, but the 3080 eGPU was still able to
surpass 60 FPS at 1080p, and there was no real difference between using the laptop screen or
an external monitor. Interestingly the frame rates are actually a little higher at 1440p
and 4K with ray tracing on, likely thanks to the improvements associated with DLSS.
Red Dead Redemption 2 was tested with the games benchmark tool. With the high setting preset,
we’re looking at a low 27 FPS on the GTX 1650 at 1080p, however we’re able to boost
this by a massive 270% with the RTX 3080 in the XG mobile eGPU. Like the last game,
there’s basically no difference between using the laptop’s screen or an external screen,
and even the highest 4K resolution was still able to surpass 60 FPS.
Microsoft Flight Simulator was tested in the Sydney landing challenge. The 1650 was around
20 FPS with the high setting preset at 1080p now, and although the 3080 isn’t offering quite
as large of a boost compared to the last game, it’s still able to offer an 88% higher average
FPS with the laptop’s screen. If you’re able to use an external monitor though, well it’s
possible to gain a further 20% boost in average frame rate compared to using the laptop’s screen.
I’ve tested Control with and without ray tracing, let’s start with ray tracing off results.
Again like most other games the 4K performance with the 3080 is higher than what the laptop
alone is capable of offering at 1080p. While you can certainly play this game at lower settings on
the 1650, it’s no match for the eGPU, even 1440p is offering well above 60 FPS at max settings.
Here’s how much the performance dips down by enabling ray tracing with the highest option.
Like we saw in Cyberpunk, activating ray tracing really seems to lower the
performance difference between the laptop screen and external screen at 1080p.
I suspect this is because the 3080 is doing more of the work now,
and a lower frame rate means both less information to send back over the cable to the laptop,
and less information for the laptop’s integrated graphics to process and send to the display.
DLSS is where the magic happens, boosting the 1080p frame rate to 90 FPS,
and now with the higher frame rate there’s a little bigger gap between the 1080p results,
though not by too much when compared to most of the other titles tested. 1440p is once more
above 60 FPS, while the 4K result is now higher than running without ray tracing thanks to DLSS.
Let’s shift gears and see what happens to more esports orientated titles.
Fortnite was tested with the exact same replay file in all configurations.
Using the external screen with the eGPU raised the average FPS by around 10%
here, but both were significantly better when compared to the laptop’s 1650 graphics. Again like
other games, even 4K max settings with the eGPU is performing better than 1080p with the 1650.
CS:GO is a game that I’ve shown to be bottlenecked severely by integrated graphics in the past due to
its crazy high frame rate, and we’re seeing this here too. The eGPU with an external screen was
reaching 50% higher average FPS compared to the laptop’s screen, but that said the laptop screen
was only a little below 300 FPS which is likely plenty, especially given the difference in 1% lows
was so small. Like many others, 4K with the eGPU was doing better than the laptop alone at 1080p.
Rainbow Six Siege was tested with the games benchmark using Vulkan. Now I was really
interested to see how the 1% lows with the eGPU did here, because the last few times I’ve tested
this game with a Thunderbolt based eGPU have resulted in extremely poor 1% low performance,
however that was not the case here. I can only assume the difference is down to the direct
PCIe connection, but again I’ll compare the XG mobile with a Thunderbolt eGPU in a future video.
Like CS:GO, above average gains by using an external monitor due to the high frame rates,
but again 250 FPS on the laptop screen at 1080p is still excellent.
Battlefield 5 was tested in campaign mode walking through the same part of the game
in all configurations. 4K with the 3080 at max settings was working surprisingly well
and averaging above 60 FPS, even the 1% low is ahead of the average FPS from the 1650 at 1080p.
If you’re after higher frame rate, the eGPU at 1080p was able to offer a 196% higher FPS over
the laptop alone, then using an external screen was able to give an additional 20%
higher frame rate compared to eGPU plus laptop screen.
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla was performing quite poorly at max settings on the 1650,
perhaps a limit of the 4 gig VRAM, regardless the 3080 is able to offer serious improvements and
take it from a powerpoint slide show to usable, with even 60 FPS possible in this test at 1440p
max settings, and no one’s forcing you to run at max settings so higher would be possible too.
Watch Dogs Legion was also tested with the games benchmark.
Again quite low results with the 1650 due to low VRAM compared to the 16 gig
in the 3080. I don’t think the game needs super high frame rate to play,
4K wouldn’t be too bad and realistically you could of course drop down a little from ultra to boost
FPS. 1440p meanwhile was right on 60 FPS with the eGPU even with max settings. Interestingly
the 1% low at 1080p with the eGPU and laptop screen was higher than using an external screen.
The Witcher 3 saw the same behaviour, and both were reproducible. I’m not exactly sure what
the deal was, but average FPS was still higher with the external screen. It’s not really that
much of a difference, just interesting and different compared to the other games. Anyway
again 4K max settings on the 3080 is running fine, around double the FPS of the 1650 at 1080p.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider was tested with the games benchmark. Close to
60 FPS with max settings at 4K on the eGPU, above 100 FPS at 1440p,
all of which were significantly higher compared to the 1650 at 1080p.
Death Stranding was tested walking around, 4K even with max settings on
the eGPU was around 60 FPS even for the 1% low, a great result,
and like most other games a fair bit better than 1080p from the 1650.
Here’s how much of a performance boost we’re looking at in these 13 games with the RTX 3080
eGPU at 1080p with laptop screen compared to the laptop only. I think this is the
most important result, as such a portable eGPU will probably be something you take with you,
an external screen may be less likely. The ray tracing results are all listed as 0 because the
1650 isn’t capable of ray tracing, but otherwise there are pretty big gains with the XG mobile.
Here’s how much of an extra performance boost that’s on offer when connecting an external
monitor to the XG Mobile and not using the laptop screen. There were only extremely minor
differences any time ray tracing was involved, which are all towards the bottom of the graph.
Otherwise titles that could produce high frame rates like CS:GO were higher up on the graph,
as these are less limited by the laptop’s integrated graphics.
Now let’s consider price. You find updated prices
linked down in the description, as prices will change over time.
At the moment the X13 laptop only is $1500 USD,
or you can get it bundled with the RTX 3080 XG mobile for $2800 total. I’ve also factored
in $300 for a 1440p high refresh rate screen, but you could of course spend less than this.
Here’s how cost per frame looks at 1080p based on these prices.
Basically the cost per frame lowers the more that’s spent as the performance also increases.
$2800 for the X13 and XG mobile is a very expensive package, but compared
to the X13 alone it’s offering a much better experience relative to the additional price.
From an additional performance perspective relative to the extra cost, adding an external
monitor instead of using the laptop screen does seem worth it. In this example it costs around
10% more money for about a 12% performance boost which sounds reasonable to me, plus you get the
benefit of a larger screen with higher refresh rate instead of looking at a 13” for hours.
Now you can absolutely buy a high end gaming PC for less money than this setup that will
also outperform it. The X13 and eGPU are really for those that need ultimate
portability with the option of performance on the go that’s still relatively portable,
and the fact is I don’t think anyone else has a solution quite this portable just yet,
and small and portable does equal more money - that’s just the way it goes.
It’s not all about gaming though, I’ve also tested the X13 and
XG Mobile in content creator workloads to see what the differences are.
The V-Ray benchmark uses the GPU to render out a scene, and the XG Mobile was able to reach a score
380% higher than the 1650, so a huge improvement if you’re looking at 3D modelling type workloads.
Blender was tested with the Open Data benchmark using CUDA, and the difference was even larger
here, the 3080 eGPU was completing the Classroom test over 600% faster.
Adobe Premiere was tested with the Puget Systems benchmark, and the differences were
less pronounced here. The eGPU setup was scoring just 36% higher than the 1650. In my experience
this software seems to care about CPU performance more so than GPU, and that’s reflected here.
DaVinci Resolve was also tested with the Puget Systems benchmark.
The 3080 was scoring more than 200% higher than the 1650 here,
which makes sense as this test depends more on the GPU compared to Premiere.
So depending on the workload there can be fairly substantial gains with the XG Mobile,
and there’s a lot more to cover on the XG mobile, I’ll cover things like
thermals and fan noise in the upcoming full review. I’m already working on a comparison
between the 3080 in the XG Mobile and a desktop 3080 in a traditional Thunderbolt eGPU enclosure,
and so far the results are quite interesting, so definitely make sure you’re subscribed for
that upcoming comparison. Otherwise for now you can see how the X13 performs in games at 720p
and 1080p with just the 1650 graphics, so I’ll see you over in that one!