Off the back of the release of two new Blade 15 series (NVIDIA GeForce RTX and Intel 10th Gen models), Razer has also unveiled two new variations of its slightly smaller Blade Stealth 13 models. Splitting them down the middle, one is designed for gamers, while the other is for content creators on the go, with both featuring an Intel Core i7-1065G7 quad-core processor, NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 4 GB graphics card, and a 512 GB PCIe 3.0 NVMe M.2 storage drive. 

Kicking things off with the main differences between the two new models, the gamer-focused Razer Blade Stealth 13 model comes with a high-spec 13.3-inch FHD 1080p screen with a 120 Hz refresh rate. For those looking for a creator-focused notebook, the new Blade 13 is also available with a 13.3" 4K touch display, with both models variants including factory display calibration with 100% sRGB coverage, and 4.9 mm slim side bezels.

The other minor difference between the two new variants is that the 4K touchscreen does make that model slightly heavier, with a total weight of 1.48 kg, compared to 1.41 kg on the 120 GHz 1080p model. The dimensions of both Razer Blade Stealth 13 models sit at 304.6 x 210 x 15.3 mm (WxDxH).

Razer claims the Blade Stealth 13 features the world's fastest 13.3-inch display with a 120 Hz refresh rate, marketing it as the world's thinnest 13-inch ultrabook with such specifications.

Included within the Temper 6 CNC precision milled anodized aluminium frame is an Intel Core i7-1065G7 quad-core Ice Lake processor which operates with a base core clock speed of 1.3 GHz, boosting up to 3.9 GHz, and sporting a TDP of just 25 W.

Powering the 4K touchscreen and 1080p 120 Hz screens is an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with 4 GB of GDDR6 VRAM, with an Max-Q efficiency design and a 35 W TDP. For memory there's 16 GB of low-power DDR4-3733 as a 2 x 8 GB dual channel configuration which is soldered in and can't be upgraded. For users that demand high-speed storage, Razer has preinstalled a 512 GB PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD as standard. An Intel AX201 Wi-Fi 6 wireless interface is installed which includes support for BT 5.1 connectivity as well.

The Razer Blade Stealth 13 models include a keyboard with single-zone full key backlighting powered by Razer's popular Chroma RGB, and a Microsoft Precision glass touchpad. There is a single Thunderbolt 3 USB Type-C port which uses 4 PCIe lanes, a USB 3.1 G2 Type-C which can provide power via PD, and two USB 3.1 G1 Type-A ports. It includes an HD 720 infrared webcam installed into the top bezel, with a 3.5 mm headphone/microphone combo port, and an integrated array microphone. 

Razer Blade Stealth 13 Intel 10th Gen Refresh Specifications
  Razer Blade Stealth 13 (4K Touch) Razer Blade Stealth 13 (1080p)
CPU Intel Core i7-1065G7 (1.3 GHz Base, 3.9 GHz Turbo) - 25 W TDP
GPU NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 4 GB Max-Q - 35 W TDP
Display 13.3 Inch 4K Touchscreen 13.3 Inch 1080p 120 Hz
Memory 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) LPDDR4-3733
Storage 512 GB PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD
Networking Intel AX201 Wi-Fi 6 /w BT 5.1
Power 100 W USB Type-C Power Adapter
Battery 53.1 Wh 
Ports 1 x Thunderbolt 3 USB Type-C
1 x USB 3.1 G2 Type-C (Powered)
2 x USB 3.1 G1 Type-A
1 x 3.5 mm Headphone/Microphone
Dimensions (WxDxH) 304.6 x 210 x 15.3 mm
Weight 1.48 kg 1.41 kg
Price (USD) Starts at $2000 Starts at $1800

Expanding upon the two previously announced Razer Blade 15 series models, the two new Stealth 13 models come with a 25W CPU and a 35W GPU.

In general, the new Stealth 13s fall into the second category of premium laptops available today, starting off from 15W Athena compatible Ultrabooks, 25W CPU + 35-50W GPUs such as today's models in up to 13" form-factors, 35W+65W 14" models, and finally the higher-end 45W+80W 15" devices.

Prices for the new Razer Blade Stealth 13 start at $1800 for the 1080p 120 Hz version, with a higher $2000 starting point for the 4K touchscreen model. Both can be purchased and customized at Razer.com, with stock expected to filter into retailers around the world soon.

Related Reading

Source: Razer

POST A COMMENT

37 Comments

View All Comments

  • dwade123 - Tuesday, April 21, 2020 - link

    Thank you Razer for sticking with Nvidia and Intel. We want higher FPS. Not higher Cinebench score and lower FPS on a gaming laptop. Reply
  • yetanotherhuman - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    Actually, that's just wrong, the best Intel mobile chip performs worse than the best AMD mobile chip these days. Nothing to do with Cinebench. Reply
  • yetanotherhuman - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    We're talking pure single thread workloads. Yes. AMD wins. At lower power. There is no benefit to Intel in laptops now. Reply
  • Qasar - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    only a few years ago, then intel fans were claiming only cinebench numbers mattered Reply
  • yetanotherhuman - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    You obviously haven't realised that AMD is better in pure single thread workloads in laptops now. Intel is behind in the laptop space in every metric: single thread, multithread and power. Reply
  • ajp_anton - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    Intel can turbo a lot higher, so for short bursts, Intel still wins on single-threaded. But of course in laptops, Intel can't turbo for very long, and since AMD is more power efficient, they win in the long run. Reply
  • Valantar - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    Not on 10nm, which this has. Look at the specs of the Ice Lake chips - while they have an IPC advantage (~18% over Skylake and its derivatives, so around 10% over Zen 2) it also doesn't boost past 4GHz. Reply
  • ajp_anton - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    You're right, Ice Lake doesn't. I meant Intel in general, as in their 14nm Skylake chips that can boost above 5GHz even in laptops. Reply
  • Qasar - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    yetanotherhuman dwade123 is an intel shill, if its not made by intel, its garbage, and junk, as other posts by him, have said. Reply
  • Retycint - Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - link

    How about you stop being blindly loyal to billion-dollar brands and look at the actual FPS numbers from actual benchmarks. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now