Breve Análise do Asus TUF A15 com AMD Renoir e gráficos Nvidia Graphics
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
82.7 % v7 (old) | 06/2020 | Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile | 2.2 kg | 24.9 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
82.3 % v7 (old) | 08/2019 | Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile | 2.2 kg | 26 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
78.8 % v7 (old) | 02/2020 | MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 R7 3750H, Radeon RX 5500M | 2.3 kg | 27.5 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
80.8 % v7 (old) | 10/2019 | MSI GL65 9SEK i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile | 2.3 kg | 27.5 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
81.5 % v7 (old) | 07/2019 | HP Omen 15-dc1020ng i5-9300H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile | 2.3 kg | 25 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 | |
83.3 % v6 (old) | 05/2019 | Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU R7 3750H, GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q | 2.1 kg | 20.4 mm | 15.60" | 1920x1080 |
Os Top 10
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Multimídia
» Os Top 10 Portáteis de Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Leves para Jogos
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Acessíveis de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 Portáteis Premium de Escritório/Empresariais
» Os Top 10 dos Portáteis Workstation
» Os Top 10 Subportáteis
» Os Top 10 Ultrabooks
» Os Top 10 Conversíveis
» Os Top 10 Tablets
» Os Top 10 Smartphones
» A melhores Telas de Portáteis Analisadas Pela Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos portáteis abaixo dos 500 Euros da Notebookcheck
» Top 10 dos Portáteis abaixo dos 300 Euros
Size Comparison
|
iluminação: 88 %
iluminação com acumulador: 280 cd/m²
Contraste: 1867:1 (Preto: 0.15 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.89 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 4.79
ΔE Greyscale 4.08 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
58% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
37% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
40.22% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
58.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
38.92% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.33
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 LM156LF-2F01, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE BOE 084D, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 AU Optronics B156HAN08.0 (AUO80ED), IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI GL65 9SEK AU Optronics B156HAN13.0, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP Omen 15-dc1020ng LGD05CE, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU Panda LM156LF-CL03, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 61% | 64% | -6% | -1% | 4% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 38.92 | 63.6 63% | 66.4 71% | 36.63 -6% | 38.37 -1% | 40.33 4% |
sRGB Coverage | 58.5 | 91.7 57% | 91 56% | 55 -6% | 57.6 -2% | 60.6 4% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 40.22 | 65.2 62% | 66.6 66% | 37.85 -6% | 39.69 -1% | 41.69 4% |
Response Times | 62% | 68% | -2% | -21% | -9% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 34 ? | 8.8 ? 74% | 7 ? 79% | 26.4 ? 22% | 40 ? -18% | 34 ? -0% |
Response Time Black / White * | 24 ? | 12 ? 50% | 10.4 ? 57% | 30 ? -25% | 29.6 ? -23% | 28 ? -17% |
PWM Frequency | 21280 ? | |||||
Screen | 15% | 11% | -4% | -7% | -11% | |
Brightness middle | 280 | 299 7% | 310 11% | 277.3 -1% | 251 -10% | 240.1 -14% |
Brightness | 254 | 290 14% | 310 22% | 256 1% | 232 -9% | 231 -9% |
Brightness Distribution | 88 | 89 1% | 86 -2% | 86 -2% | 76 -14% | 85 -3% |
Black Level * | 0.15 | 0.29 -93% | 0.29 -93% | 0.2 -33% | 0.17 -13% | 0.34 -127% |
Contrast | 1867 | 1031 -45% | 1069 -43% | 1387 -26% | 1476 -21% | 706 -62% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.89 | 3.7 37% | 4.78 19% | 5.25 11% | 6.2 -5% | 4.2 29% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 19 | 7 63% | 8.1 57% | 19.43 -2% | 18.6 2% | 17.8 6% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.79 | 2 58% | 2.36 51% | 4.39 8% | 4.8 -0% | 4.09 15% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 4.08 | 4.1 -0% | 4.78 -17% | 3.5 14% | 4.2 -3% | 2.8 31% |
Gamma | 2.33 94% | 2.19 100% | 2.43 91% | 2.1 105% | 2.32 95% | 2.2 100% |
CCT | 7303 89% | 7166 91% | 7739 84% | 6895 94% | 7454 87% | 6925 94% |
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 37 | 59.3 60% | 59 59% | 35 -5% | 36.5 -1% | 38.4 4% |
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 58 | 91.5 58% | 91 57% | 55 -5% | 57.4 -1% | 60.4 4% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 46% /
29% | 48% /
28% | -4% /
-4% | -10% /
-8% | -5% /
-8% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 13 ms rise | |
↘ 11 ms fall | ||
The screen shows good response rates in our tests, but may be too slow for competitive gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 50 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (21 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
34 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16 ms rise | |
↘ 18 ms fall | ||
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 42 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (32.9 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM not detected | |||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Cinebench R15: CPU Single 64Bit | CPU Multi 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 -mmt1 | 7z b 4
Geekbench 5.5: Single-Core | Multi-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
Average of class Gaming (427 - 856, n=190, last 2 years) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (430 - 524, n=32) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
MSI GL65 9SEK | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU |
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
Average of class Gaming (2179 - 13832, n=190, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (1986 - 4176, n=32) | |
MSI GL65 9SEK | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 |
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
Average of class Gaming (176.6 - 318, n=194, last 2 years) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (190 - 220, n=37) | |
MSI GL65 9SEK | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 |
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit | |
Average of class Gaming (905 - 5663, n=197, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (1003 - 1833, n=38) | |
MSI GL65 9SEK | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 |
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (259 - 535, n=30) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
Average of class Gaming (87 - 555, n=185, last 2 years) |
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
Average of class Gaming (4168 - 7581, n=189, last 2 years) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (5071 - 5780, n=31) | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU |
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 | |
Average of class Gaming (23795 - 140932, n=189, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (29844 - 49562, n=31) | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU |
Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core | |
Average of class Gaming (986 - 2210, n=190, last 2 years) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (1233 - 1371, n=29) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 |
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core | |
Average of class Gaming (4557 - 23194, n=190, last 2 years) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (5715 - 8620, n=29) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 |
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
Average of class Gaming (6.72 - 38.9, n=189, last 2 years) | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (7.27 - 14.1, n=27) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE | |
HP Omen 15-dc1020ng | |
Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU |
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (30.2 - 84.3, n=30) | |
Average of class Gaming (31.4 - 96.6, n=186, last 2 years) | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 |
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 | |
Average Intel Core i7-10875H (0.546 - 0.662, n=29) | |
Average of class Gaming (0.3609 - 0.759, n=190, last 2 years) |
* ... smaller is better
Cinebench R15 Multi-Thread Loop
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 4698 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 | 7841 pontos | |
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 5773 pontos | |
PCMark 10 Score | 5095 pontos | |
Ajuda |
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 |
* ... smaller is better
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 Kingston OM8PCP3512F-AB | Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G | MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ | MSI GL65 9SEK WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G | HP Omen 15-dc1020ng WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G | Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8 | Average Kingston OM8PCP3512F-AB | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6 | 30% | -20% | 10% | 35% | -17% | -5% | |
Write 4K | 219.8 | 158.8 -28% | 105.4 -52% | 150.2 -32% | 112.1 -49% | 132.2 -40% | 194.5 ? -12% |
Read 4K | 50.2 | 29.11 -42% | 33.24 -34% | 43.46 -13% | 42.01 -16% | 55.5 11% | 47.3 ? -6% |
Write Seq | 979 | 1584 62% | 1029 5% | 1412 44% | 1964 101% | 986 1% | 978 ? 0% |
Read Seq | 1990 | 1694 -15% | 1098 -45% | 1340 -33% | 2065 4% | 1318 -34% | 1299 ? -35% |
Write 4K Q32T1 | 516 | 536 4% | 322.1 -38% | 482.2 -7% | 318.2 -38% | 220.3 -57% | 505 ? -2% |
Read 4K Q32T1 | 298.3 | 363.9 22% | 352 18% | 535 79% | 406.7 36% | 315.5 6% | 301 ? 1% |
Write Seq Q32T1 | 982 | 2536 158% | 1036 5% | 1454 48% | 2534 158% | 987 1% | 978 ? 0% |
Read Seq Q32T1 | 1907 | 3458 81% | 1606 -16% | 1744 -9% | 3438 80% | 1416 -26% | 1930 ? 1% |
Write 4K Q8T8 | 981 | 981 ? 0% | |||||
Read 4K Q8T8 | 300.9 | 301 ? 0% | |||||
AS SSD | 63% | -9% | 10% | 66% | -10% | -9% | |
Seq Read | 1682 | 2927 74% | 1423 -15% | 1315 -22% | 2955 76% | 907 -46% | 1570 ? -7% |
Seq Write | 904 | 2149 138% | 958 6% | 1378 52% | 2440 170% | 926 2% | 904 ? 0% |
4K Read | 60.2 | 42.43 -30% | 33.2 -45% | 25.31 -58% | 40.56 -33% | 47.26 -21% | 48.2 ? -20% |
4K Write | 164.8 | 147.1 -11% | 80.7 -51% | 118.2 -28% | 118.6 -28% | 98.7 -40% | 118.9 ? -28% |
4K-64 Read | 472.5 | 1286 172% | 816 73% | 839 78% | 1283 172% | 321.5 -32% | 415 ? -12% |
4K-64 Write | 845 | 1432 69% | 708 -16% | 720 -15% | 1538 82% | 736 -13% | 829 ? -2% |
Access Time Read * | 0.087 | 0.065 25% | 0.1 -15% | 0.116 -33% | 0.084 3% | 0.064 26% | 0.1294 ? -49% |
Access Time Write * | 0.02 | 0.026 -30% | 0.047 -135% | 0.091 -355% | 0.032 -60% | 0.045 -125% | 0.0371 ? -86% |
Score Read | 701 | 1621 131% | 991 41% | 996 42% | 1619 131% | 459 -35% | 619 ? -12% |
Score Write | 1101 | 1794 63% | 885 -20% | 976 -11% | 1901 73% | 927 -16% | 1036 ? -6% |
Score Total | 2143 | 4208 96% | 2365 10% | 2485 16% | 4323 102% | 1641 -23% | 1955 ? -9% |
Copy ISO MB/s | 675 | 1043 55% | 1279 89% | 1418 110% | 905 34% | 977 ? 45% | |
Copy Program MB/s | 248.4 | 252.7 2% | 889 258% | 392.5 58% | 496.9 100% | 373 ? 50% | |
Copy Game MB/s | 535 | 483.6 -10% | 1218 128% | 907 70% | 819 53% | 610 ? 14% | |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 47% /
49% | -15% /
-13% | 10% /
10% | 51% /
55% | -14% /
-12% | -7% /
-7% |
* ... smaller is better
Continuous read performance: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
3DMark 11 Performance | 17390 pontos | |
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 72466 pontos | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 34649 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 14757 pontos | |
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 7382 pontos | |
3DMark Time Spy Score | 6256 pontos | |
Ajuda |
baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
BioShock Infinite (2013) | 232 | 209 | 189 | 119 |
The Witcher 3 (2015) | 191 | 160 | 105 | 60.5 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 103.8 | 94.7 | 85.4 | 81.3 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 99.7 | 124 | 85.2 | |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 69.9 | 63.9 | 55.6 |
Barulho
Ocioso |
| 30.2 / 30.2 / 30.2 dB |
Carga |
| 40 / 49 dB |
| ||
30 dB silencioso 40 dB(A) audível 50 dB(A) ruidosamente alto |
||
min: , med: , max: Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância) environment noise: 30.2 dB(A) |
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.9 °C / 109 F, compared to the average of 40.5 °C / 105 F, ranging from 21.2 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 49.9 °C / 122 F, compared to the average of 43.2 °C / 110 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 26.4 °C / 80 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.9 °C / 91 F, compared to the device average of 33.9 °C / 93 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 26.9 °C / 80.4 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.9 °C / 84 F (+2 °C / 3.6 F).
Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (77.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.7% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 55% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 37% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 132%
Compared to all devices tested
» 35% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 58% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
desligado | 0.5 / 0.7 Watt |
Ocioso | 5.4 / 10 / 10.5 Watt |
Carga |
135 / 147 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, Kingston OM8PCP3512F-AB, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile, WDC PC SN720 SDAPNTW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 R7 3750H, Radeon RX 5500M, Kingston RBUSNS8154P3512GJ, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | MSI GL65 9SEK i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP Omen 15-dc1020ng i5-9300H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, WDC PC SN720 SDAQNTW-512G, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU R7 3750H, GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile | Average of class Gaming | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -56% | -68% | -230% | 20% | -36% | -64% | -88% | |
Idle Minimum * | 5.4 | 14.5 -169% | 14 -159% | 41 -659% | 4.04 25% | 7.4 -37% | 11.5 ? -113% | 13.5 ? -150% |
Idle Average * | 10 | 18.5 -85% | 18 -80% | 45.3 -353% | 7.2 28% | 8.6 14% | 16.5 ? -65% | 18.9 ? -89% |
Idle Maximum * | 10.5 | 20 -90% | 32 -205% | 47.1 -349% | 11.4 -9% | 39.1 -272% | 23.7 ? -126% | 26.8 ? -155% |
Load Average * | 135 | 81.6 40% | 64 53% | 94.9 30% | 80.8 40% | 65.9 51% | 107.5 ? 20% | 106.7 ? 21% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 144 | 132 8% | 123 15% | 149.4 -4% | 93.6 35% | 106.9 26% | ||
Load Maximum * | 147 | 208.1 -42% | 193 -31% | 214.2 -46% | 144.5 2% | 141.3 4% | 199.7 ? -36% | 249 ? -69% |
* ... smaller is better
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172 R7 4800H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, 48 Wh | Lenovo Legion Y540-15IRH-81SX00B2GE i7-9750H, GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile, 57 Wh | MSI Alpha 15 A3DDK-034 R7 3750H, Radeon RX 5500M, 51 Wh | MSI GL65 9SEK i7-9750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, 51 Wh | HP Omen 15-dc1020ng i5-9300H, GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile, 52.5 Wh | Asus ROG Zephyrus G15 GA502DU R7 3750H, GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, 76 Wh | Average of class Gaming | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -51% | -40% | -47% | 19% | 31% | -1% | |
Reader / Idle | 587 | 240 -59% | 349 -41% | 262 -55% | 951 62% | 916 56% | 565 ? -4% |
H.264 | 322 | 234 -27% | 482 50% | 408 ? 27% | |||
WiFi v1.3 | 370 | 145 -61% | 245 -34% | 230 -38% | 385 4% | 482 30% | 375 ? 1% |
Load | 116 | 76 -34% | 49 -58% | 60 -48% | 71 -39% | 123 6% | 85.4 ? -26% |
Witcher 3 ultra | 59 | 78.3 ? |
Pro
Contra
Veredicto - Preço Competitivo e Desempenho Sólido
O Asus TUF A15 FA506 é um portátil para jogos com ótimo hardware por um preço justo. O aparelho pode ser adquirido de vários revendedores online por menos de 1.300 Euros (~$1.470), e vem com a novíssima CPU AMD Ryzen 7 4800H, que supera a sua contraparte Intel graças aos seus oito núcleos. A anterior é uma sólida CPU de jogos e adequada como base para uma máquina de jogos, que roda até mesmo jogos muito exigentes com detalhes no máximo quando emparelhada com a Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060.
Por falar de visual, a tela instalada oferece uma ótima relação de contraste e uma rápida taxa de atualização de 144-Hz. Além disso, não há PWM e, portanto, não há fadiga ocular adicional durante o uso prolongado. Dito isto, ficamos desapontados com a pequena gama de cores. Enquanto isso, a carcaça é decente, embora sua sensação não tenha nos convencido inteiramente devido à construção plástica. Pelo contrário, não temos nenhuma reclamação quando se trata de desempenho bruto, que pode ser parcialmente atribuído ao SoC da AMD. Dispositivos similares nesta classe de preço tendem a ser limitados a processadores com 6 núcleos. É difícil reclamar de dois núcleos adicionais pelo mesmo preço.
Com bom desempenho e um preço competitivo, o Asus TUF A15 FA506 vale definitivamente a pena considerar se você está procurando um portátil para jogos de baixo custo.
Além disso, a duração da bateria é surpreendentemente boa, o que não pode ser tomado como garantido, particularmente em um dispositivo de jogos. Se você está interessado neste sistema, vale a pena dar uma olhada nas opções de atualização de RAM e armazenamento. Infelizmente, nosso modelo só está equipado com a configuração mínima de memória para um portátil de jogos. Dito isto, 8 GB de RAM e 512 GB de armazenamento SSD ainda são suficientes para muitas tarefas e aplicações.
The Asus TUF A15 FA506 is a gaming laptop with great hardware for a fair price. The device can be purchased from various online retailers for below 1300 Euros (~$1470), and it comes with the brand-new AMD Ryzen 7 4800H CPU, which outperforms its Intel counterpart thanks to its eight cores. The former is a solid gaming CPU and suitable as a foundation for a gaming machine, which runs even very demanding games at maximum details when paired with the Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060.
Speaking of visuals, the installed display offers a great contrast ratio and a fast 144-Hz refresh rate. Furthermore, there is no PWM and thus, no additional eyestrain during prolonged use. That being said, we were disappointed with the small color gamut. Meanwhile, the case is decent, although its feel did not entirely convince us due to the full plastic construction. By contrast, we have no complaints at all when it comes to raw performance, which can be partially attributed to the AMD SoC. Similar devices in this price class tend to be limited to 6-core processors. It is hard to complain about two additional cores for the same price.
With good performance and a competitive price, the Asus TUF A15 FA506 is definitely worth considering if you are looking for an inexpensive gaming laptop.
Furthermore, the battery life is surprisingly good, which cannot be taken for granted, particularly on a gaming device. If you are interested in this system, RAM and storage upgrade options are worth taking a look at. Unfortunately, our model is only equipped with the bare minimum memory configuration for a gaming laptop. That being said, 8 GB of RAM and 512 GB of SSD storage are still sufficient for many tasks and applications.
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA506IV-HN172
- 06/09/2020 v7 (old)
Sebastian Bade