Asus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025) vs Medion Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025)
What TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025) does better (7) and where Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025) wins (2) — every spec side by side.
vs
8.2Display4.2
2.4Memory & storage2.4
8.5Battery & portability2.6
7.5Features & cooling2.9
Dimensions
Size comparison
TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025)
| TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025) | Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025) | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Depth | 269 mm | 267 mm | +2 mm |
| Width | 354 mm | 397 mm | −43 mm |
| Thickness | 27 mm | 25 mm | +2 mm |
| Weight | 2.2 kg | 2.4 kg | −0.2 kg |
Drawn to the same scale from the official dimensions (front and side).
Why is TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025) better than Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025)?
- Battery capacity90 Wh vs 49 Wh+84%
- Video memory16 GB vs 8 GB2×
- Resolution classQHD (1440p/1600p) vs Full HD (1080p/1200p)
- Thunderbolt or USB4Yes · Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025): No
- Refresh rate165 Hz vs 144 Hz+15%
- Weight2.2 kg vs 2.44 kg+11%
- Bluetooth5.3 vs 5+6%
Why is Erazer Defender P10 RTX 5070 (2025) better than TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)?
- Thickness27 mm vs 25 mm+8%
- Screen size16″ vs 17.3″+8%
Specifications
Side by side
| Graphics | ||
| Graphics card | GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop | GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop |
| GPU maker | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Video memory | 16 GB | 8 GB |
| Video memory type | GDDR7 | GDDR7 |
| GPU shader cores | 4,608 | 4,608 |
| Processor | ||
| Processor | Core i7-14650HX | Core i9-14900HX |
| CPU maker | Intel | Intel |
| CPU cores | 16 | — |
| Max CPU clock | 5.2 GHz | — |
| Display | ||
| Screen size | 16″ | 17.3″ |
| Resolution | 2560 × 1600 | 1920 × 1080 |
| Resolution class | QHD (1440p/1600p) | Full HD (1080p/1200p) |
| Refresh rate | 165 Hz | 144 Hz |
| Panel type | IPS | IPS |
| Aspect ratio | — | 16:9 |
| Memory & storage | ||
| RAM (up to) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM (base) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| RAM type | DDR5 | DDR5 |
| RAM speed | 5,600 MHz | — |
| SSD (up to) | 1,000 GB | 1,000 GB |
| SSD (base) | 1,000 GB | 1,000 GB |
| Battery & power | ||
| Battery capacity | 90 Wh | 49 Wh |
| Design & cooling | ||
| Weight | 2.2 kg | 2.44 kg |
| Thickness | 27 mm | 25 mm |
| Width | 354 mm | 397 mm |
| Depth | 269 mm | 267 mm |
| Colours | Grey | Black |
| Ports & wireless | ||
| Thunderbolt / USB4 | Thunderbolt 4 | — |
| Thunderbolt or USB4 | Yes | No |
| HDMI | HDMI 2.1 | — |
| HDMI 2.1 | Yes | — |
| (Mini) DisplayPort | — | Yes |
| Ethernet | — | 1 Gbit/s |
| Ethernet port | Yes | Yes |
| SD card reader | — | Yes |
| 3.5 mm audio jack | — | Yes |
| Wi-Fi standard | Wi-Fi 6 | Wi-Fi 6 |
| Bluetooth | 5.3 | 5 |
| Keyboard & camera | ||
| Backlit keyboard | Yes | — |
| Audio | ||
| Speakers | 2 speakers | — |
| Dolby Atmos | Yes | — |
Related comparisons
vs
Alienware Aurora 16 RTX 5070 (2025)vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)7.37.1
vsHP Omen 17 RTX 5070 (2025)vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)7.27.1
vsGigabyte Gaming A16 RTX 5070 Ti (2025)vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)7.47.1
vsAlienware Aurora 16 RTX 5060 (2025)vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)6.67.1
vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF607 RTX 4050 (2023)vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)6.07.1
vsAsus TUF Gaming F15 TUF507 RTX 4070 (2023)vsAsus TUF Gaming F16 TUF608 RTX 5070 (2025)7.77.1