Breve Análise do Portátil Asus VivoBook Pro 15 (i7-7700HQ, GTX 1050)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 246 cd/m²
Contraste: 515:1 (Preto: 0.48 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.39 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91
ΔE Greyscale 5.25 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
60% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
38% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
41.27% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
59.8% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
39.92% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.48
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T INNOLUX N156HGA-EAB, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD CMN15E8 (N156HCE-EN1), , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Gigabyte Sabre 15G ID: LGD0533, Name: LG Display LP156WF6-SPK3, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV AU Optronics AUO41ED, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S BOE CQ NV156HFM-N42, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) Sharp SHP1453 LQ156M1, , 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | 59% | -2% | -5% | 1% | 70% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 39.92 | 65.7 65% | 38.97 -2% | 38.03 -5% | 40.56 2% | 68.9 73% |
| sRGB Coverage | 59.8 | 90.3 51% | 58.2 -3% | 56.5 -6% | 59.4 -1% | 98.9 65% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 41.27 | 65.9 60% | 40.3 -2% | 39.29 -5% | 41.9 2% | 70.9 72% |
| Response Times | -31% | -30% | -55% | -62% | -163% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 44 ? | 38.8 ? 12% | 32 ? 27% | 44.4 ? -1% | 46 ? -5% | 54 ? -23% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 13 ? | 27.2 ? -109% | 25.6 ? -97% | 27.2 ? -109% | 34 ? -162% | 52.4 ? -303% |
| PWM Frequency | 25000 ? | 25910 ? 4% | 20000 ? -20% | 20000 ? -20% | ||
| Screen | 36% | -18% | -16% | 23% | 46% | |
| Brightness middle | 247 | 335 36% | 248.4 1% | 209.7 -15% | 277 12% | 400 62% |
| Brightness | 224 | 313 40% | 241 8% | 193 -14% | 268 20% | 392 75% |
| Brightness Distribution | 85 | 83 -2% | 84 -1% | 75 -12% | 91 7% | 89 5% |
| Black Level * | 0.48 | 0.27 44% | 0.3 37% | 0.19 60% | 0.26 46% | 0.26 46% |
| Contrast | 515 | 1241 141% | 828 61% | 1104 114% | 1065 107% | 1538 199% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 5.39 | 4.7 13% | 7.5 -39% | 7.8 -45% | 5.05 6% | 4.9 9% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 7.98 | 8.1 -2% | 25.2 -216% | 24.1 -202% | 8.93 -12% | 11 -38% |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 5.25 | 5.8 -10% | 6.5 -24% | 7.3 -39% | 2.97 43% | 7.2 -37% |
| Gamma | 2.48 89% | 2.06 107% | 2.19 100% | 2.39 92% | 2.39 92% | 2.11 104% |
| CCT | 7609 85% | 6518 100% | 7852 83% | 5771 113% | 6466 101% | 6911 94% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 38 | 58.7 54% | 37 -3% | 39.3 3% | 38 0% | 64.2 69% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 60 | 90.1 50% | 57.9 -3% | 56.5 -6% | 59 -2% | 98.9 65% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | 21% /
28% | -17% /
-17% | -25% /
-19% | -13% /
3% | -16% /
23% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 13 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 10 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 3 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. » 30 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 25 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 19 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. » 71 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (32.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM detected | 25000 Hz | ≤ 30 % brightness setting |  |
The display backlight flickers at 25000 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 30 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 25000 Hz is quite high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8705 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| Cinebench R11.5 | |
| CPU Multi 64Bit | |
| Gigabyte Sabre 15G | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| CPU Single 64Bit | |
| Gigabyte Sabre 15G | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| Cinebench R10 | |
| Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3833 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4934 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN | Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S Hynix HFS128G39TND | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CrystalDiskMark 3.0 | 142% | 9% | -3% | -80% | |
| Read Seq | 483.9 | 1434 196% | 522 8% | 510 5% | 123 -75% |
| Write Seq | 408.3 | 1365 234% | 476.6 17% | 137.6 -66% | 74.2 -82% |
| Read 512 | 319 | 614 92% | 399.7 25% | 362.1 14% | 101.7 -68% |
| Write 512 | 346.7 | 688 98% | 185.4 -47% | 137.2 -60% | 42.51 -88% |
| Read 4k | 24.77 | 60.6 145% | 33.12 34% | 35.18 42% | 10.84 -56% |
| Write 4k | 79.4 | 158 99% | 89.8 13% | 104.8 32% | 1.021 -99% |
| Read 4k QD32 | 246.1 | 617 151% | 400.9 63% | 375.8 53% | 69.8 -72% |
| Write 4k QD32 | 241.5 | 525 117% | 140.2 -42% | 138.1 -43% | 1.057 -100% |
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| Gigabyte Sabre 15G | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| Gigabyte Sabre 15G | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 7558 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 20059 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 5452 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| The Witcher 3 | |
| 1024x768 Low Graphics & Postprocessing (sort by value) | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| 1366x768 Medium Graphics & Postprocessing (sort by value) | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| 1920x1080 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off) (sort by value) | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD | |
| Gigabyte Sabre 15G | |
| HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV | |
| Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 111.4 | 69.8 | 31.02 | 20 |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 124.2 | 69.3 | 39.12 | 31.59 |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN | Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Gigabyte Sabre 15G GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D128 | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i5-7300HQ, Hynix HFS128G39TND | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i5-7300HQ, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 7% | -7% | -5% | 7% | -6% | |
| off / environment * | 30.5 | 29.4 4% | 28.2 8% | 29.3 4% | 30 2% | 30.3 1% |
| Idle Minimum * | 30.6 | 29.4 4% | 33 -8% | 32.3 -6% | 30 2% | 31.6 -3% |
| Idle Average * | 30.9 | 29.9 3% | 33.3 -8% | 32.3 -5% | 30 3% | 31.6 -2% |
| Idle Maximum * | 31.9 | 29.9 6% | 34.7 -9% | 32.4 -2% | 31.1 3% | 33.4 -5% |
| Load Average * | 38.6 | 38.3 1% | 44.5 -15% | 44.4 -15% | 31.3 19% | 47.8 -24% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 47.3 | 39.8 16% | 49.2 -4% | |||
| Load Maximum * | 45.7 | 39.6 13% | 52.8 -16% | 49.2 -8% | 38.9 15% | 47.8 -5% |
* ... smaller is better
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 30.6 / 30.9 / 31.9 dB |
| HDD |
| 30.9 dB |
| Carga |
| 38.6 / 45.7 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: 30.5 dB(A) | ||
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 41.8 °C / 107 F, compared to the average of 36.9 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(+) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 36.8 °C / 98 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.2 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 38.8 °C / 102 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (34.8 °C / 94.6 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-6 °C / -10.8 F).
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN | Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Gigabyte Sabre 15G GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Liteonit CV3-8D128 | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i5-7300HQ, Hynix HFS128G39TND | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i5-7300HQ, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat | -9% | -8% | 6% | -16% | -14% | |
| Maximum Upper Side * | 41.8 | 43.6 -4% | 43.6 -4% | 41.8 -0% | 47.2 -13% | 47.6 -14% |
| Maximum Bottom * | 36.8 | 44.5 -21% | 40.2 -9% | 33.4 9% | 42.2 -15% | 42.1 -14% |
| Idle Upper Side * | 26.2 | 28 -7% | 27.8 -6% | 24.4 7% | 31.8 -21% | 29.9 -14% |
| Idle Bottom * | 25.9 | 26.7 -3% | 29.2 -13% | 23.8 8% | 29.5 -14% | 29.8 -15% |
* ... smaller is better
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T audio analysis
(-) | not very loud speakers (71.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 10.1% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 0% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 3% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 92% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.3 / 0.5 Watt |
| Ocioso | 4.7 / 7.7 / 10.9 Watt |
| Carga |
82 / 120 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN, TN, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Gigabyte Sabre 15G i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Liteonit CV3-8D128, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Samsung CM871a MZNTY128HDHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Hynix HFS128G39TND, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, WDC WD10SPCX-75KHST0 + SanDisk Z400s M.2 2242 32 GB Cache, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | -2% | -14% | -19% | -27% | -12% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 4.7 | 5.05 -7% | 8 -70% | 8.29 -76% | 8.4 -79% | 6.6 -40% |
| Idle Average * | 7.7 | 8.2 -6% | 10.9 -42% | 8.9 -16% | 13.1 -70% | 9 -17% |
| Idle Maximum * | 10.9 | 12.2 -12% | 11 -1% | 10.2 6% | 14.2 -30% | 10.7 2% |
| Load Average * | 82 | 82 -0% | 76.7 6% | 77.1 6% | 50 39% | 77.5 5% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 109 | 93.1 15% | 94.9 13% | |||
| Load Maximum * | 120 | 120 -0% | 106.4 11% | 136.6 -14% | 111 7% | 130 -8% |
* ... smaller is better
| Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 47 Wh | Asus ZenBook Pro UX550VD i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 73 Wh | Gigabyte Sabre 15G i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 47 Wh | HP Pavilion 15t-X7P42AV i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 63.3 Wh | Acer Aspire VX15 VX5-591G-589S i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 52.5 Wh | Dell XPS 15 2017 9560 (7300HQ, Full-HD) i5-7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 56 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 32% | -19% | 32% | -16% | -7% | |
| Reader / Idle | 609 | 1061 74% | 493 -19% | 961 58% | 565 -7% | |
| H.264 | 352 | 465 32% | ||||
| WiFi v1.3 | 392 | 535 36% | 261 -33% | 389 -1% | 330 -16% | 334 -15% |
| Load | 82 | 70 -15% | 77 -6% | 115 40% | 84 2% | |
| Witcher 3 ultra | 68 |
Pro
Contra
O Asus VivoBook Pro 15 possui um chassi elegante e convence com uma operação eficiente durante o modo inativo, um peso conveniente, bons alto-falantes, e bom controle sobre as temperaturas.
Ainda temos problemas recomendando o VivoBook neste ponto, porque ocorrem fechamentos, afogamentos extremos com a energia da bateria e comportamento pulsante da ventoinha. Todos esses problemas devem ser corrigidos por atualizações de software. No entanto, a tela também fica atrás dos rivais e a seleção da portas é escassa. Ainda é um dos dispositivos mais caros aqui.
Atualmente, os aspectos negativos definem a impressão geral. Não é necessariamente um problema do aparelho, mas parece mais um problema de firmware. A Asus deve corrigir rapidamente esses problemas, para que o VivoBook possa ser um bom portátil. Também pensamos que o preço atualmente é muito alto, e alguns dos rivais são mais econômicos.
O Asus VivoBook Pro 15 ainda está lutando contra alguns erros, tais como fechamentos/latências, severos afogamentos com a energia da bateria e controle ruim da ventoinha. Você também recebe um painel TN relativamente bom, portanto, o preço atualmente não está justificado.
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
- 10/09/2017 v6 (old)
Christian Hintze
Price comparison
