In Fortnite, the Gram 16 managed only 13 frames per second (fps) in 1080p and high graphics – most Intel Iris Xe laptops topped 30 fps with the same settings. In performance mode, the Gram 16 hit 33 fps, which is only average for the class but much better than in optimal mode.

I didn’t bother test the Gram 16 using our creative content benchmarks because of the lack of discrete graphics and lower-wattage CPU. It just can’t compete with the XPS 15 and 17 and MacBook Pro 16 for creative professionals, which is one of the primary demographics of larger-screen laptops. Don’t buy this laptop expecting powerhouse performance.

Display

Laptops with taller displays – or 3:2 – are increasingly common, and it won’t be long before the old-school 16:9 widescreen display is in the minority. Thanks to small bezels, you’re immediately faced with a large, luxurious expanse for getting real work done.

Unfortunately, the panel itself is a mixed bag compared to other premium laptops. On the one hand, it enjoys a wide color gamut at 88% of AdobeRGB (75% is closer to average for all but the best displays) and 100% of sRGB. But those colors aren’t particularly accurate at a DeltaE of just 2.67 (1.0 or less is considered excellent). The XPS 15’s 4K display came in at 0.65 and the MacBook Pro 16 managed 1.41.

The display’s brightness came in at 313 nits, just meeting our preferred 300-nit threshold. The XPS 15 4K put out 442 nits and the MacBook Pro 16 was a nit brighter than the Dell at 443 nits. Where the Gram 16’s display really suffers is in its contrast, which was just 830:1. Good premium displays these days exceed a 1,000:1 contrast ratio – the XPS 15 4K comes in at 1,480:1 and the MacBook Pro 16 at 1,250:1.

I enjoyed the Gram 16’s display for its size and aspect ratio, and I was fine with its colors and brightness – but then again, I’m not a creative pro, so wide and accurate colors aren’t that important to me.