Breve Análise do Portátil Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (i9-8950HK, GTX 1050 Ti, 4K UHD)
| SD Card Reader - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
| Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II) | |
| Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD (Toshiba Exceria Pro UHS-II) | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II) | |
| Networking | |
| iperf3 transmit AX12 | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh | |
| Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 | |
| iperf3 receive AX12 | |
| Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh | |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 357.6 cd/m²
Contraste: 1022:1 (Preto: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.12 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.91, calibrated: 4.23
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
100% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
87.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
99.1% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
85.9% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.17
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE AU Optronics B156ZAN03.1, IPS, 15.6", 3840x2160 | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh Sharp SHP149A LQ156M1, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD B156ZAN03.1, IPS, 15.6", 3840x2160 | HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100 BOE06C3, IPS, 15.6", 3840x2160 | Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6", 1920x1080 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560) 15.4", 2880x1800 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -20% | 0% | -24% | -22% | ||
| Display P3 Coverage | 85.9 | 66 -23% | 86.6 1% | 66.6 -22% | 63.6 -26% | |
| sRGB Coverage | 100 | 96.5 -3% | 100 0% | 86.9 -13% | 93.8 -6% | |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 99.1 | 66.7 -33% | 99.5 0% | 63.5 -36% | 64.9 -35% | |
| Response Times | -22% | -23% | -12% | 57% | -10% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 44 ? | 49 ? -11% | 52 ? -18% | 41.2 ? 6% | 16.8 ? 62% | 42.4 ? 4% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 22.8 ? | 30 ? -32% | 29 ? -27% | 29.6 ? -30% | 11.2 ? 51% | 28 ? -23% |
| PWM Frequency | 961 ? | 1000 | ||||
| Screen | 13% | -2% | -22% | 14% | 25% | |
| Brightness middle | 357.6 | 413 15% | 380 6% | 338.7 -5% | 313 -12% | 534 49% |
| Brightness | 350 | 378 8% | 371 6% | 325 -7% | 300 -14% | 502 43% |
| Brightness Distribution | 85 | 86 1% | 87 2% | 91 7% | 78 -8% | 86 1% |
| Black Level * | 0.35 | 0.29 17% | 0.28 20% | 0.28 20% | 0.33 6% | 0.31 11% |
| Contrast | 1022 | 1424 39% | 1357 33% | 1210 18% | 948 -7% | 1723 69% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.12 | 2.44 41% | 4.38 -6% | 4.9 -19% | 1.29 69% | 1.8 56% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 9.91 | 4.46 55% | 7.59 23% | 8.7 12% | 2.04 79% | 3.8 62% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 4.23 | 2.48 41% | ||||
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.8 | 2.48 -38% | 3.6 -100% | 5.5 -206% | 0.69 62% | 2.4 -33% |
| Gamma | 2.17 101% | 2.43 91% | 2.32 95% | 2.08 106% | 2.43 91% | 2.27 97% |
| CCT | 6613 98% | 7006 93% | 6860 95% | 7498 87% | 6550 99% | 6563 99% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 87.5 | 62 -29% | 88 1% | 63.5 -27% | 60 -31% | 77.92 -11% |
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 100 | 96 -4% | 100 0% | 86.92 -13% | 94 -6% | 99.94 0% |
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -10% /
3% | -8% /
-4% | -19% /
-21% | 16% /
12% | 8% /
19% |
* ... smaller is better
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 22.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 12 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 10.8 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. » 47 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 22 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 22 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 not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8719 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. | |||
| PCMark 10 - Score | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 | |
| Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh | |
| Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD | |
| HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100 | |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 | 3661 pontos | |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 | 4456 pontos | |
| PCMark 10 Score | 5358 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11 | Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00 Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ | HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100 Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD | -234% | -4% | 17% | -46% | |
| Copy Game MB/s | 728 | 465.9 -36% | 878 21% | 1134 56% | |
| Copy Program MB/s | 430.9 | 117.2 -73% | 393.4 -9% | 534 24% | |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 1045 | 632 -40% | 1533 47% | 1936 85% | |
| Score Total | 4065 | 750 -82% | 3548 -13% | 3781 -7% | 2536 -38% |
| Score Write | 1547 | 58 -96% | 1515 -2% | 1556 1% | 939 -39% |
| Score Read | 1679 | 492 -71% | 1342 -20% | 1493 -11% | 1092 -35% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.036 | 0.889 -2369% | 0.033 8% | 0.026 28% | 0.046 -28% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.04 | 0.086 -115% | 0.059 -48% | 0.04 -0% | 0.119 -198% |
| 4K-64 Write | 1273 | 19.19 -98% | 1278 0% | 1262 -1% | 742 -42% |
| 4K-64 Read | 1431 | 301.8 -79% | 1153 -19% | 1206 -16% | 847 -41% |
| 4K Write | 100.9 | 5.12 -95% | 110.9 10% | 141.1 40% | 80.4 -20% |
| 4K Read | 37.78 | 32.5 -14% | 51.5 36% | 51.9 37% | 23.36 -38% |
| Seq Write | 1729 | 340.3 -80% | 1262 -27% | 1530 -12% | 1163 -33% |
| Seq Read | 2099 | 1574 -25% | 1373 -35% | 2342 12% | 2213 5% |
* ... smaller is better
| 3DMark 11 | |
| 1280x720 Performance GPU | |
| Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T | |
| Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8 | |
| Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK | |
| Dell G5 15 5587 | |
| Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (8304 - 10402, n=36) | |
| Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Asus FX504GD | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| 1280x720 Performance Combined | |
| Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK | |
| Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8 | |
| Dell G5 15 5587 | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T | |
| Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 | |
| Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (6104 - 9172, n=35) | |
| Asus FX504GD | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| 3DMark | |
| 1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics | |
| Dell G5 15 5587 | |
| Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8 | |
| Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T | |
| Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK | |
| Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (43721 - 53978, n=37) | |
| Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Asus FX504GD | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics | |
| Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8 | |
| Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T | |
| Dell G5 15 5587 | |
| Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (6792 - 8376, n=38) | |
| Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T | |
| Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Asus FX504GD | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Fire Strike Extreme Graphics | |
| Dell G5 15 5587 | |
| Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (3452 - 3945, n=15) | |
| Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T | |
| Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74 | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Asus FX504GD | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 8990 pontos | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 24182 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 6504 pontos | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score | 3372 pontos | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 2281 pontos | |
Ajuda | ||
| BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF) | |
| MSI GV62 8RE-016US | |
| Gigabyte Aero 14-K7 | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (61 - 97, n=23) | |
| Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x | |
| MSI GV62 8RE-016US | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile (27.8 - 40.7, n=16) | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE | |
| Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh | |
| baixo | média | alto | ultra | 4K | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BioShock Infinite (2013) | 270.5 | 157.4 | 149.9 | 66.5 | |
| The Witcher 3 (2015) | 88.3 | 44.6 | 24.2 | 15.8 | |
| Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) | 95 | 50 | 29 | 15 | |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) | 75.5 | 39.6 | 34.8 | 14.1 | |
| Ashes of the Singularity (2016) | 51.4 | 36.2 | 28.5 | ||
| Overwatch (2016) | 108.3 | 58.7 | 31.4 |
Barulho
| Ocioso |
| 28.6 / 29.9 / 30.5 dB |
| Carga |
| 42.5 / 44.8 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: 28 dB(A) | ||
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, i9-8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0) | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, i5-8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11 | HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100 GeForce MX150, i5-8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, i7-8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7 | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560) Radeon Pro 560, i7-7820HQ | Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, i7-7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise | 1% | 6% | -11% | 2% | -3% | |
| off / environment * | 28 | 30.3 -8% | 28.4 -1% | 29 -4% | 30.8 -10% | 28.3 -1% |
| Idle Minimum * | 28.6 | 30.3 -6% | 28.4 1% | 30 -5% | 31 -8% | 30.4 -6% |
| Idle Average * | 29.9 | 30.3 -1% | 28.4 5% | 31 -4% | 31 -4% | 31 -4% |
| Idle Maximum * | 30.5 | 30.3 1% | 28.4 7% | 35 -15% | 31 -2% | 31.2 -2% |
| Load Average * | 42.5 | 37.1 13% | 41.6 2% | 49 -15% | 31.3 26% | 43.3 -2% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 44.8 | 43.3 3% | 36.1 19% | 51 -14% | 46.2 -3% | |
| Load Maximum * | 44.8 | 43 4% | 41.6 7% | 54 -21% | 41.8 7% | 46.2 -3% |
* ... smaller is better
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.4 °C / 108 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 50.8 °C / 123 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.8 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 34.6 °C / 94 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 31.8 °C / 89.2 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.8 °C / 83.8 F (-3 °C / -5.4 F).
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 47% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 45% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 32% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.8 GHz, 555) audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.5% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.7% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (7.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 5% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
| desligado | 0.11 / 0.56 Watt |
| Ocioso | 11.7 / 18.5 / 22.8 Watt |
| Carga |
97.5 / 111.1 Watt |
   
| |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE i9-8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh i5-8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 1920x1080, 15.6" | HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6" | Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560) i7-7820HQ, Radeon Pro 560, , , 2880x1800, 15.4" | Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6" | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 42% | 28% | -17% | 32% | 32% | |
| Idle Minimum * | 11.7 | 2.9 75% | 11.6 1% | 14 -20% | 3.7 68% | 6.3 46% |
| Idle Average * | 18.5 | 5.8 69% | 13.8 25% | 18 3% | 16.2 12% | 7.9 57% |
| Idle Maximum * | 22.8 | 7.5 67% | 14.2 38% | 22 4% | 18 21% | 8.1 64% |
| Load Average * | 97.5 | 77.5 21% | 67.9 30% | 91 7% | 58.4 40% | 84.9 13% |
| Witcher 3 ultra * | 102.9 | 84 18% | 59 43% | 142 -38% | 96.3 6% | |
| Load Maximum * | 111.1 | 107 4% | 76.9 31% | 173 -56% | 89.6 19% | 102.4 8% |
* ... smaller is better
| Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE i9-8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, 71 Wh | Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh i5-8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, 97 Wh | HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100 i5-8550U, GeForce MX150, 79.2 Wh | Gigabyte Aero 15X v8 i7-8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 94.24 Wh | Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560) i7-7820HQ, Radeon Pro 560, Wh | Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T i7-7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, 73 Wh | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime | 101% | 42% | 44% | 35% | 18% | |
| Reader / Idle | 842 | 934 11% | 762 -10% | 1023 21% | ||
| WiFi v1.3 | 375 | 942 151% | 511 36% | 513 37% | 677 81% | 532 42% |
| Load | 76 | 114 50% | 136 79% | 156 105% | 67 -12% | 70 -8% |
| Witcher 3 ultra | 62 | 76 |
Pro
Contra
Não podemos dar um veredicto abrangente sobre o UX580 no momento, dado que tivemos acesso a uma amostra de pré-produção e a CPU Core i9 em nossa unidade não estava funcionando como esperado. Um julgamento mais completo sobre seu desempenho terá que esperar até que possamos testar novamente e reconfirmar os resultados em uma segunda unidade. Podemos, no entanto, dar a nossa opinião final sobre os recursos exclusivos do UX580.
O Screenpad é uma inovação que é mais prática do que o Touch Bar da Apple. O conceito central de uma tela secundária de 1080p 16:9 quando comparado à abordagem pouco ortodoxa da Apple tem suas vantagens inerentes para cargas de trabalho de multimídia e de produtividade. Nenhum aplicativo especial é necessário para que o Screenpad seja útil; a simples capacidade de ter uma tela secundária sempre disponível nos faz querer uma tela de trackpad em todos os portáteis. Os usuários de desktop com dois ou mais monitores saberão exatamente como as configurações de vários monitores podem ser benéficas em termos de eficiência e quão difícil seria voltar a um monitor. A este respeito, o UX580 é uma das ideias mais inovadoras que já vimos em um portátil Windows. Não podemos esperar até que o SDK se torne público para que os desenvolvedores explorem ainda mais o que uma segunda tela pode oferecer.
Embora o conceito tenha um potencial inexplorado, há desafios ergonômicos a serem superados. Olhar para cima e para baixo entre as telas separadas pode se tornar cansativo, enquanto o Apple Touch Bar está fisicamente mais próximo da tela principal. Além disso, a tela do trackpad pode ser desconfortável de usar sem um mouse externo, pois sua superfície está constantemente alternando entre o controle do cursor do mouse e o controle do aplicativo na tela. Há uma curva de aprendizado envolvida antes que a Asus Screenpad se torne algo mais natural.
Por fim, uma desvantagem importante na Screenpad é sua sobreposição granulada. Embora o texto apareça pequeno, mas nítido no Touch Bar ou até mesmo em um smartphone econômico de 1080p, o texto na Screenpad é mais granulado e em nenhum lugar tão nítido, especialmente no modo de tela estendida. Entendemos que o grosso revestimento mate era necessário para melhorar as propriedades de deslizamento do trackpad, mas isso é vem com o preço da qualidade da tela. Desde esta perspectiva, a Screenpad do UX580 se parece muito com um produto de primeira geração.
O UX580 parece o mesmo que o UX550 em quase todos os outros aspectos e, portanto, nossos comentários existentes ainda se aplicam aqui. Os alto-falantes são ainda melhores, a capacidade de manutenção é fácil e o chassi de alumínio é relativamente forte com as mesmas advertências de antes. Esperamos ver melhorias na duração da bateria e um possível salto para uma tela AMOLED/OLED mais nítida no futuro.
Price comparison
