Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Asus TUF FX504GD (Core i5-8300H, GTX 1050)

Allen Ngo (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 06/03/2018

Gamer iniciante. A Asus tornou a sua econômica série FX ainda mais acessível reduzindo a capacidade da bateria, poder de GPU, e uma série de portas. O resultado final é definitivamente mais leve para a carteira, mas a tela TN e o HD primário desaceleram o sistema.

Asus FX504GD (FX Serie)
Processador
Intel Core i5-8300H
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) - 6144 MB, Análises do: 1354 MHz, Memoría: 7008 MHz, GDDR5, 388.73, Optimus
Memória
8192 MB 
, DDR4-2666, PC4-21300
Pantalha
15.6 polegadas 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, AU Optronics B156HTN03.8, TN LED, ID: AUO38ED, Brilhante: não
placa mãe
Intel HM370
Disco rígido
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172, 1027 GB 
, 5400 rpm
Placa de Som
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Conexões
1 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Conexões Audio: 3.5 mm combo
Funcionamento em rede
Realtek RTL8168/8111 Gigabit-LAN (10/100/1000MBit), Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.2
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 25 x 384 x 262
Bateria
48 Wh Lítio-Polímero
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Características adicionais
Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Asus Hello, 12 Meses Garantia
peso
2.3 kg, Suprimento de energia: 505 g
Preço
700 USD

 

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: Kensington Lock
Right: Kensington Lock
Rear: No connectivity (Status LEDs)
Rear: No connectivity (Status LEDs)
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, HDMI 1.4, USB 2.0, 2x USB 3.0, 3.5 mm combo audio
Left: AC adapter, Gigabit RJ-45, HDMI 1.4, USB 2.0, 2x USB 3.0, 3.5 mm combo audio
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus FX504GD
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
657 MBit/s ∼100%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
513 MBit/s ∼78% -22%
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
141 MBit/s ∼21% -79%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus FX504GD
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
614 MBit/s ∼100%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
458 MBit/s ∼75% -25%
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3168
316 MBit/s ∼51% -49%
242.9
cd/m²
250.6
cd/m²
246.6
cd/m²
236.7
cd/m²
260
cd/m²
228.6
cd/m²
220.5
cd/m²
257.2
cd/m²
222.1
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 260 cd/m² Médio: 240.6 cd/m² Minimum: 15.76 cd/m²
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 260 cd/m²
Contraste: 473:1 (Preto: 0.55 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 7 | 0.8-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 5.27
ΔE Greyscale 6.1 | 0.64-98 Ø6.6
61% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 35.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 1.97
Asus FX504GD
AU Optronics B156HTN03.8, TN LED, 15.6, 1920x1080
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
LG Philips LP156WF6-SPK3, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Asus FX503VM-EH73
AU Optronics B156HAN06.1, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
ID: LG Philips LGD053F, Name: 156WF6, Dell P/N: 4XK13, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
CMN N156HGE-EAL, TN LED, 15.6, 1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Response Times
-43%
-48%
-42%
-27%
43%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
41.6 (19.6, 22)
39 (21, 18)
6%
36.8 (19.6, 17.2)
12%
41 (20, 21)
1%
34.4 (22.4, 12.4)
17%
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
60%
Response Time Black / White *
15.2 (10, 5.2)
29 (16, 13)
-91%
31.6 (18.4, 13.2)
-108%
28 (15, 13)
-84%
26 (20, 6)
-71%
11.2 (6, 5.2)
26%
PWM Frequency
21000 (90)
200 (99)
Screen
19%
21%
39%
3%
56%
Brightness middle
260
283
9%
235.9
-9%
257
-1%
265.7
2%
313
20%
Brightness
241
281
17%
235
-2%
229
-5%
243
1%
300
24%
Brightness Distribution
85
91
7%
91
7%
84
-1%
87
2%
78
-8%
Black Level *
0.55
0.39
29%
0.27
51%
0.17
69%
0.63
-15%
0.33
40%
Contrast
473
726
53%
874
85%
1512
220%
422
-11%
948
100%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
7
6.1
13%
4.81
31%
5.34
24%
9.6
-37%
1.29
82%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
22.52
11.08
51%
21.55
4%
9.99
56%
18.5
18%
2.04
91%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
5.27
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.1
5.69
7%
3.1
49%
4.82
21%
12.7
-108%
0.69
89%
Gamma
1.97 122%
2.44 98%
2.31 104%
2.46 98%
2.01 119%
2.43 99%
CCT
7894 82%
6702 97%
6984 93%
6587 99%
13654 48%
6550 99%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
35.5
37
4%
36
1%
38
7%
76
114%
60
69%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
61
58
-5%
56
-8%
60
-2%
100
64%
94
54%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-12% / 8%
-14% / 9%
-2% / 25%
-12% / -2%
50% / 54%

* ... smaller is better

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
15.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10 ms rise
↘ 5.2 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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 11 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
41.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 19.6 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 52 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (41.6 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 10727 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 588200) Hz was measured.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
6835
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
20061
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
6482
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
70.38 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
6.2 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.72 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
103.12 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
604 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
170 Points
Ajuda
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5676 Points ∼87% +13%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
5174 Points ∼79% +3%
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP
5130 Points ∼79% +2%
Asus FX504GD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
5018 Points ∼77%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
4849 Points ∼74% -3%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7300HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
4746 Points ∼73% -5%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
7238 Points ∼76% +56%
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP
5054 Points ∼53% +9%
Asus FX504GD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
4646 Points ∼49%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7300HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
4608 Points ∼48% -1%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
4390 Points ∼46% -6%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
4940 Points ∼81% +26%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4504 Points ∼74% +15%
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP
3928 Points ∼64% 0%
Asus FX504GD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
3909 Points ∼64%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
3807 Points ∼62% -3%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7300HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
3651 Points ∼60% -7%
PCMark 10 - Score
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5059 Points ∼65% +33%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
4856 Points ∼63% +28%
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP
4568 Points ∼59% +20%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7300HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
3995 Points ∼51% +5%
Asus FX504GD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
3808 Points ∼49%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
3380 Points ∼44% -11%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3909 pontos
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
4646 pontos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5018 pontos
Ajuda
Asus FX504GD
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
Asus FX503VM-EH73
SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Average Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
17374%
-10%
38862%
24089%
28%
Write 4K
0.27
51.19
18859%
0.42
56%
158.4
58567%
94.43
34874%
0.535 (0.179 - 1.27, n=4)
98%
Read 4K
0.586
24.82
4135%
0.41
-30%
45.04
7586%
37.65
6325%
0.552 (0.28 - 0.93, n=4)
-6%
Write Seq
86.83
313.1
261%
55.58
-36%
621.6
616%
1335
1437%
81.1 (55.6 - 101, n=4)
-7%
Read Seq
113.2
458.3
305%
114.3
1%
1592
1306%
1404
1140%
118 (113 - 125, n=4)
4%
Write 4K Q32T1
0.242
208.1
85892%
0.238
-2%
434.2
179321%
268.6
110892%
0.584 (0.238 - 1.22, n=4)
141%
Read 4K Q32T1
0.963
279.3
28903%
0.942
-2%
589.8
61146%
332.8
34459%
1.07 (0.695 - 1.68, n=4)
11%
Write Seq Q32T1
98.43
337.9
243%
68.16
-31%
630.4
540%
1375
1297%
86.4 (68.2 - 98.4, n=4)
-12%
Read Seq Q32T1
110.2
545.3
395%
69.62
-37%
2108
1813%
2627
2284%
102 (69.6 - 114, n=4)
-7%
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
Velocidade de Transferência Mínima: 47 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Máxima: 137.2 MB/s
Velocidade de Transferência Média: 100.6 MB/s
Tempo de Acesso: 20.2 ms
Índice de Explosão: 135.5 MB/s
Uso da CPU: 3.4 %
3DMark
Fire Strike Extreme Graphics
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5373 Points ∼27% +97%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7300HQ
4851 Points ∼24% +77%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
4623 Points ∼23% +69%
Asus GL703GE-ES73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8750H
3701 Points ∼19% +35%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
3517 Points ∼18% +29%
Dell XPS 15 9575 i7-8705G
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
3245 Points ∼16% +19%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
2733 Points ∼14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (2459 - 2817, n=21)
2667 Points ∼13% -2%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1988 Points ∼10% -27%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Combined
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
4335 Points ∼35% +84%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7300HQ
4000 Points ∼33% +69%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
3663 Points ∼30% +55%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
2733 Points ∼22% +16%
Asus GL703GE-ES73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8750H
2722 Points ∼22% +15%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
2361 Points ∼19%
Dell XPS 15 9575 i7-8705G
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
2282 Points ∼19% -3%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (2099 - 2361, n=29)
2280 Points ∼19% -3%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1652 Points ∼13% -30%
Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
1135 Points ∼9% -52%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Physics
Asus GL703GE-ES73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8750H
14558 Points ∼57% +59%
Dell XPS 15 9575 i7-8705G
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
11246 Points ∼44% +23%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
10498 Points ∼41% +15%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
9756 Points ∼38% +7%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
9551 Points ∼37% +5%
Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
9241 Points ∼36% +1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (5524 - 11971, n=33)
9150 Points ∼36% 0%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
9136 Points ∼35%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7300HQ
6664 Points ∼26% -27%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4710 Points ∼18% -48%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11483 Points ∼28% +81%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7300HQ
10263 Points ∼25% +61%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
9608 Points ∼24% +51%
Asus GL703GE-ES73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8750H
7953 Points ∼20% +25%
Dell XPS 15 9575 i7-8705G
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
7348 Points ∼18% +16%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7321 Points ∼18% +15%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
6356 Points ∼16%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (5329 - 6393, n=33)
6011 Points ∼15% -5%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4133 Points ∼10% -35%
Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
3291 Points ∼8% -48%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Asus GL703GE-ES73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8750H
8828 Points ∼50% +26%
Dell XPS 15 9575 i7-8705G
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
8633 Points ∼49% +23%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
8343 Points ∼47% +19%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7952 Points ∼45% +13%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
7696 Points ∼44% +10%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
7025 Points ∼40%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (5312 - 7607, n=31)
6802 Points ∼39% -3%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7300HQ
6264 Points ∼36% -11%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4466 Points ∼25% -36%
Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
4000 Points ∼23% -43%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Asus FX503VM-EH73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14550 Points ∼29% +104%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 7300HQ
13075 Points ∼26% +83%
Asus Strix GL502VY-DS71
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 6700HQ
12472 Points ∼24% +75%
Dell XPS 15 9575 i7-8705G
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, 8705G
10118 Points ∼20% +42%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
9824 Points ∼19% +38%
Asus GL703GE-ES73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8750H
9128 Points ∼18% +28%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (6744 - 8223, n=31)
7663 Points ∼15% +7%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
7133 Points ∼14%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4826 Points ∼9% -32%
Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
4392 Points ∼9% -38%
3DMark 11 Performance
6971 pontos
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
128216 pontos
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
18404 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5656 pontos
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
2702 pontos
3DMark Time Spy Score
1729 pontos
Ajuda
BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
Alienware 13 R3 (i5-7300HQ, GTX 1050 Ti)
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7300HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
69.8 fps ∼100% +11%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ, Lite-On CV1-8B128
69.5 fps ∼100% +10%
Asus GL503VD-DB74
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, ADATA SX7000NP 256 GB
66 fps ∼95% +5%
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
64.3 (min: 20.9, max: 125.4) fps ∼92% +2%
Asus FX504GD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
63 fps ∼90%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
55.5 fps ∼80% -12%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, 8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
27.9 fps ∼40% -56%
baixo média alto ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 192.7167.8151.563fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 119.972.240.922.2fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 85.971.838.231.9fps

Barulho

Ocioso
29 / 29.2 / 29.7 dB
Carga
44.3 / 47.7 dB
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silencioso
40 dB(A)
audível
50 dB(A)
ruidosamente alto
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm de distância)   environment noise: 28.1 dB(A)
Asus FX504GD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7300HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR
Asus FX503VM-EH73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7300HQ, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Noise
0%
-3%
-3%
-5%
-11%
off / environment *
28.1
30.6
-9%
27.8
1%
31
-10%
28
-0%
29
-3%
Idle Minimum *
29
31.9
-10%
29.6
-2%
32.7
-13%
32.2
-11%
30
-3%
Idle Average *
29.2
31.9
-9%
29.6
-1%
32.7
-12%
32.2
-10%
31
-6%
Idle Maximum *
29.7
31.9
-7%
29.6
-0%
32.7
-10%
32.2
-8%
35
-18%
Load Average *
44.3
34.6
22%
37.3
16%
38.7
13%
40.9
8%
49
-11%
Witcher 3 ultra *
40.7
39.3
3%
49.8
-22%
39
4%
45.4
-12%
51
-25%
Load Maximum *
47.7
41.7
13%
53.7
-13%
44.6
6%
48.6
-2%
54
-13%

* ... smaller is better

 41 °C46.4 °C36.8 °C 
 34.4 °C55.8 °C35.4 °C 
 30.8 °C27.2 °C26.4 °C 
Máximo: 55.8 °C
Médio: 37.1 °C
39.8 °C42 °C44.4 °C
41 °C51.4 °C41.6 °C
28.8 °C29.4 °C38.4 °C
Máximo: 51.4 °C
Médio: 39.6 °C
alimentação elétrica  55 °C | Temperatura do quarto 23 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
The maximum temp on the upper side is 55.8 °C, compared to the average of 35.9 °C ranging from 21.1 °C to 71 °C for class Gaming.
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.937253536.73133.533.84033.435.2503233.86332.533.78031.831.110028.330.512528.530.516028.740.920027.445.92502750.931526.653.440025.953.950024.854.863024.659.680024.864.7100023.964.8125023.860.2160023.762.6200023.466.3250023.661.7315023.366400023.570.4500023.369.8630023.365.9800023.460.31000023.359.21250023.3511600023.456.3SPL3677.5N2.638.8median 23.8Asus FX504GDmedian 59.6Delta1.66.135.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHzmedian 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus FX504GD audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (70.44 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.3% higher than median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 77% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 17% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 18%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 35% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

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 (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 9%, average was 19%, worst was 47%
Compared to all devices tested
» 2% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.3 / 0.42 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 7.2 / 10.2 / 10.9 Watt
Carga midlight 93.3 / 102.5 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus FX504GD
8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LX015-1U7172, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW128HEGR, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus FX503VM-EH73
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), SanDisk SD8SN8U128G1002, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), Toshiba NVMe THNSN5128GP, TN LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577 4K
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, SK hynix SC311 M.2, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Power Consumption
15%
-35%
-44%
-65%
3%
Idle Minimum *
7.2
5.2
28%
12.8
-78%
14.6
-103%
14
-94%
5.5
24%
Idle Average *
10.2
8.3
19%
15.4
-51%
17.2
-69%
18
-76%
10.5
-3%
Idle Maximum *
10.9
10.1
7%
15.9
-46%
17.3
-59%
22
-102%
10.9
-0%
Load Average *
93.3
62.7
33%
78
16%
82.7
11%
91
2%
72
23%
Load Maximum *
102.5
100
2%
143.4
-40%
136.7
-33%
173
-69%
130.4
-27%
Witcher 3 ultra *
95.8
94
2%
107.3
-12%
107
-12%
142
-48%
97.4
-2%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
7h 29min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
3h 43min
Carga (máximo brilho)
0h 56min
Asus FX504GD
8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 48 Wh
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBN 80WK0042GE
7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 45 Wh
Asus FX503VM-EH73
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 64 Wh
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
7300HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 56 Wh
MSI GP62 7REX-1045US
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 41 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 94.24 Wh
Battery Runtime
42%
7%
74%
-30%
126%
Reader / Idle
449
634
41%
340
-24%
665
48%
259
-42%
762
70%
WiFi v1.3
223
310
39%
276
24%
405
82%
174
-22%
513
130%
Load
56
81
45%
67
20%
108
93%
41
-27%
156
179%

Pro

+ SATA III de 2,5 polegadas + slot M.2 NVMe
+ Suporte para memória Intel Optane
+ Temperaturas do núcleo relativamente baixas
+ Sem modulação por largura de pulso
+ Desempenho estável da GPU
+ Econômico

Contra

- Painel TN barato; espaço de cor estreito
- Comportamento estranho do Turbo Boost da CPU
- Trackpad propenso a manchas de digitais
- A tela mate é um pouco granulada
- Sem USB Type-C e leitor de SD
- Manutenção mais difícil
- Alto-falantes internos pobres
- Curta duração da bateria
In review: ASUS TUF FX504GD
In review: ASUS TUF FX504GD

Recebemos gratamente portáteis de jogos mais baratos e acessíveis, desde que preservem os recursos principais e ofereçam uma experiência equilibrada. Muitos recortes podem fazer com que as desvantagens se tornem uma distração. Por $700 USD, o FX504 sacrifica qualidade da tela e não inclui SSD para uma experiência geral mais pobre. É melhor os usuários investirem de $100 a $200 a mais em um pequeno SSD primário e em uma tela IPS de qualidade.

Os portáteis de jogos existentes com sistemas i5-7300HQ ou i7-7700HQ não precisam se atualizar para o i5-8300H se os jogos forem uma prioridade. Em vez disso, investir em um sistema com o antigo i7-7700HQ e GTX 1060 seria tremendamente mais frutífero do que um sistema com o mais recente i5-8300H e GTX 1050 ou 1050 Ti.

O FX504 falha quando comparado a outros sistemas de jogos econômicos. Alternativas como o Legion Y520Sabre 15, e Inspiron 7577 têm maior duração de bateria e mais recursos de portas, incluindo USB tipo C e leitores de cartões SD. Os jogadores em um orçamento podem querer considerar o FX503 em vez do FX504, já que o primeiro é essencialmente o mesmo sistema, mas com maior facilidade de manutenção, duração mais longa da bateria e opções de CPU e GPU mais balanceadas.

O FX504GD é um dos portáteis de jogos mais baratos disponíveis com a GTX 1050. No entanto, recomendamos que você gaste um pouco mais nos SKUs mais avançados com opções IPS e SSD ou até mesmo com o velho FX503 com processador Intel GTX 1060 por aproximadamente o mesmo preço.

Asus FX504GD - 05/24/2018 v6
Allen Ngo

Acabamento
75 / 98 → 77%
Teclado
89%
Mouse
75%
Conectividade
41 / 81 → 51%
Peso
61 / 10-66 → 91%
Bateria
73%
Pantalha
79%
Desempenho do jogos
88%
Desempenho da aplicação
92%
Temperatura
84 / 95 → 89%
Ruído
83 / 90 → 92%
Audio
60%
Camera
50 / 85 → 59%
Médio
73%
79%
Gaming - Médio equilibrado

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Asus TUF FX504GD (Core i5-8300H, GTX 1050)
Allen Ngo, 2018-06- 3 (Update: 2018-06-17)