Notebookcheck

Breve Análise do Portátil Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (i9-8950HK, GTX 1050 Ti, 4K UHD)

Allen Ngo (traduzido por Ricardo Soto), 07/03/2018

Vendo duplo. A Asus deseja competir com o Touch Bar da Apple com uma ideia ainda mais maluca de tornar o touchpad tradicional em uma tela secundária de 1080p. Surpreendentemente, ela é, de fato, bastante útil e mais do que apenas uma novidade. Vemos que este recurso exclusivo poderia se tornar um recurso padrão na série carro chefe da Asus em outra geração, onde todos os outros pontos fracos podem ser ironizados.

Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (Zenbook Pro 15 Serie)
Processador
Intel Core i9-8950HK
Placa gráfica
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) - 4096 MB, Análises do: 1493 MHz, Memoría: 7008 MHz, GDDR5, 397.31, Optimus
Memória
16384 MB 
, Dual-Channel, 1333.3 MHz, 17-17-17-39
Pantalha
15.6 polegadas 16:9, 3840 x 2160 pixel 282 PPI, Capacitiva de 10 pontos, AU Optronics B156ZAN03.1, IPS, AUO31EB, Brilhante: sim
placa mãe
Intel HM370
Disco rígido
Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), 1024 GB 
Placa de Som
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Conexões
4 USB 3.0, 4 USB 3.1 Gen2, 2 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, Conexões Audio: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: MicroSD, Brightness Sensor
Funcionamento em rede
Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Tamanho
altura x largura x profundidade (em mm): 18.9 x 365 x 251
Bateria
71 Wh Lítio-Polímero, 8 células
Sistema Operativo
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: VGA
Características adicionais
Alto falantes: Stereo, Teclado: Chiclet, Iluminação do Teclado: sim, Asus Sync, 12 Meses Garantia
peso
1.88 kg, Suprimento de energia: 529 g
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, HDMI, 2x Thunderbolt 3
Left: AC adapter, HDMI, 2x Thunderbolt 3
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, MicroSD reader, 2x USB 3.1
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, MicroSD reader, 2x USB 3.1
SDCardreader Transfer Speed - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
191 MB/s ∼100% +198%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro UHS-II)
156.4 MB/s ∼82% +144%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II)
64.2 MB/s ∼34%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
682 MBit/s ∼100% +3%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
662 MBit/s ∼97%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
542 MBit/s ∼79% -18%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
584 MBit/s ∼100%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
539 MBit/s ∼92% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
379 MBit/s ∼65% -35%
348.4
cd/m²
378.6
cd/m²
371.5
cd/m²
328.1
cd/m²
357.6
cd/m²
348.3
cd/m²
323.3
cd/m²
351.8
cd/m²
341.9
cd/m²
Distribuição do brilho
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Máximo: 378.6 cd/m² Médio: 349.9 cd/m² Minimum: 19.1 cd/m²
iluminação: 85 %
iluminação com acumulador: 357.6 cd/m²
Contraste: 1022:1 (Preto: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.12 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 4.23
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
100% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 87.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 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
Response Times
-22%
-23%
-12%
57%
-10%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
44 (22, 22)
49 (25, 40)
-11%
52 (25, 27)
-18%
41.2 (23.2, 18)
6%
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
62%
42.4 (20.4, 22)
4%
Response Time Black / White *
22.8 (12, 10.8)
30 (16, 14)
-32%
29 (15, 14)
-27%
29.6 (16.4, 13.2)
-30%
11.2 (6, 5.2)
51%
28 (14.8, 13.2)
-23%
PWM Frequency
961 (10)
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 DeltaE2000 *
4.12
2.44
41%
4.38
-6%
4.9
-19%
1.29
69%
1.8
56%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.91
4.46
55%
7.59
23%
8.7
12%
2.04
79%
3.8
62%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.23
2.48
41%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
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)
-5% / 8%
-13% / -5%
-17% / -20%
36% / 21%
8% / 19%

* ... 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
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 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 28 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (41 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: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8640 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

 
PCMark 10 - Score
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
5358 Points ∼69%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5059 Points ∼65% -6%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
4479 Points ∼58% -16%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4249 Points ∼55% -21%
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
3673 Points ∼47% -31%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5676 Points ∼87% +27%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
5271 Points ∼81% +18%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
4456 Points ∼68%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4401 Points ∼68% -1%
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
4217 Points ∼65% -5%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4504 Points ∼74% +23%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
4030 Points ∼66% +10%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
3661 Points ∼60%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3614 Points ∼59% -1%
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
3457 Points ∼57% -6%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3661 pontos
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4456 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
728.25
465.85
-36%
877.75
21%
1134.11
56%
Copy Program MB/s
430.94
117.21
-73%
393.38
-9%
534.36
24%
Copy ISO MB/s
1045.16
632.4
-39%
1533.01
47%
1936.38
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
1272.75
19.19
-98%
1277.8
0%
1262.39
-1%
742.09
-42%
4K-64 Read
1431.02
301.79
-79%
1153.13
-19%
1206.47
-16%
847.34
-41%
4K Write
100.89
5.12
-95%
110.86
10%
141.05
40%
80.44
-20%
4K Read
37.78
32.5
-14%
51.47
36%
51.93
37%
23.36
-38%
Seq Write
1728.67
340.31
-80%
1261.74
-27%
1530.14
-11%
1163.11
-33%
Seq Read
2098.63
1573.62
-25%
1373.14
-35%
2342.26
12%
2212.97
5%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2171 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1763 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 614 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 506.6 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 771.7 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1059 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 44.68 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 125 MB/s
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
10391 Points ∼57% +19%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
9333 Points ∼51% +7%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
8788 Points ∼48% +1%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK
8709 Points ∼48%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
8503 Points ∼47% -2%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7952 Points ∼44% -9%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
7838 Points ∼43% -10%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (6104 - 9042, n=29)
7739 Points ∼43% -11%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
7025 Points ∼39% -19%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4466 Points ∼25% -49%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
15182 Points ∼30% +71%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
14975 Points ∼29% +69%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
14302 Points ∼28% +62%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
13871 Points ∼27% +57%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
9824 Points ∼19% +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (8854 - 10402, n=30)
9655 Points ∼19% +9%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
9240 Points ∼18% +4%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK
8854 Points ∼17%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
7133 Points ∼14% -19%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4826 Points ∼9% -45%
3DMark
Fire Strike Extreme Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
5106 Points ∼26% +48%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
4405 Points ∼22% +28%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (3452 - 3945, n=14)
3690 Points ∼19% +7%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
3649 Points ∼18% +6%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
3517 Points ∼18% +2%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK
3452 Points ∼17%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
2733 Points ∼14% -21%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1988 Points ∼10% -42%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
11733 Points ∼29% +61%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
11512 Points ∼28% +58%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
10970 Points ∼27% +50%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
10248 Points ∼25% +41%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (7291 - 8376, n=31)
7769 Points ∼19% +7%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
7457 Points ∼18% +2%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7321 Points ∼18% 0%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK
7291 Points ∼18%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
6356 Points ∼16% -13%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4133 Points ∼10% -43%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
79420 Points ∼43% +82%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
71431 Points ∼39% +63%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
70020 Points ∼38% +60%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
59162 Points ∼32% +35%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
50205 Points ∼27% +15%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (43721 - 53978, n=31)
50078 Points ∼27% +15%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
48597 Points ∼26% +11%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK
43721 Points ∼24%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H
38881 Points ∼21% -11%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
25986 Points ∼14% -41%
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
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8300H, Samsung PM871b MZNLN128HAHQ
112 fps ∼100% +68%
Gigabyte Aero 14-K7
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVPW256HEGL
74.4 fps ∼66% +12%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (61 - 97, n=19)
73 fps ∼65% +10%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
67.5 fps ∼60% +2%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
66.5 fps ∼59%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U, SanDisk SD8SNAT256G1002
39.4 fps ∼35% -41%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8300H, Samsung PM871b MZNLN128HAHQ
59 fps ∼100% +70%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
  (27.8 - 40.7, n=15)
36.1 fps ∼61% +4%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
34.8 fps ∼59%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
33.2 fps ∼56% -5%
baixo média alto ultra4K
BioShock Infinite (2013) 270.5157.4149.966.5fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 88.344.624.215.8fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 95502915fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 75.539.634.814.1fps
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) 51.436.228.5fps
Overwatch (2016) 108.358.731.4fps

Barulho

Ocioso
28.6 / 29.9 / 30.5 dB
Carga
42.5 / 44.8 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 dB(A)
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
Radeon Pro 560, 7820HQ
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 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

 35.8 °C40 °C41.2 °C 
 32.6 °C42.4 °C31 °C 
 29.2 °C28 °C30.8 °C 
Máximo: 42.4 °C
Médio: 34.6 °C
45 °C50.8 °C44.6 °C
39.4 °C45.6 °C39.2 °C
35.4 °C37.4 °C35.6 °C
Máximo: 50.8 °C
Médio: 41.4 °C
alimentação elétrica  41.4 °C | Temperatura do quarto 21.4 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.6 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 30.9 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 42.4 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 36.4 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The maximum temperature on the bottom side is 50.8 °C / 123 F, compared to the average of 38.8 °C / 102 F, ranging from 21.5 to 82 °C for the class Multimedia.
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.8 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 30.9 °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 30.9 °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 29.2 °C / 84.6 F (-2.6 °C / -4.6 F).
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.437.92536.135.93134.633.54033.732.35032.632.76331.834.88030.930.91003031.512529.533.116028.644.420027.952.425027.359.331526.662.64002667.950025.667.26302569.780024.47510002472125023.769.5160023.674.8200023.671.7250023.370.2315023.169.1400023.372.1500023.170.7630023.175.4800022.979.91000022.876.41250022.768.41600022.768.9SPL35.985.4N2.666median 23.7median 69.5Delta1.96.740.638.132.233.332.633.833.739.534.339.629.448.828.652.227.35927.968.126.458.925.46723.967.922.666.123.374.922.875.721.573.42069.620.174.719.476.618.779.81873.318.173.217.874.717.871.817.874.318.17718.37018.272.318.268.318.572.131.5871.676.6median 19.4median 72.32.83.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GEApple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.8 GHz, 555)
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.88 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 (17.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 38% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

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 7.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (7.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Consumo de energia
desligadodarklight 0.11 / 0.56 Watt
Ociosodarkmidlight 11.7 / 18.5 / 22.8 Watt
Carga midlight 97.5 / 111.1 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
7820HQ, Radeon Pro 560, , , 2880x1800, 15.4
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 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%
Load Maximum *
111.1
107
4%
76.9
31%
173
-56%
89.6
19%
102.4
8%
Witcher 3 ultra *
102.9
84
18%
59.04
43%
142
-38%
96.3
6%

* ... smaller is better

Tempo de Execução da Bateria
Ocioso (sem WLAN, min brilho)
14h 02min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
6h 15min
Carga (máximo brilho)
1h 16min
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 71 Wh
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 97 Wh
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
8550U, GeForce MX150, 79.2 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 94.24 Wh
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
7820HQ, Radeon Pro 560,  Wh
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 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

+ Nítida tela táctil 4K UHD; cobertura AdobeRGB plena
+ A exclusiva Screenpad de 5,5 polegadas e 1080p é prática
+ A superfície do trackpad proporciona um deslizamento fluente
+ Sem modulação por largura de pulso
+ Duas portas Thunderbolt 3
+ Veloz WLAN Intel 9560
+ Fácil de fazer manutenção

Contra

- Sem leitor SD de tamanho completo; taxas de transferência poderiam ser mais rápidas
- O desempenho da GTX 1050 Ti está um pouco abaixo da média
- A Screenpad pode ser desconfortável sem um mouse
- Ruído de bobina perceptível do nosso modelo de teste
- Consumo de energia mais alto durante o modo inativo
- A RAM está soldada e não é atualizável
- A resposta do clickpad e suave e fraca
- Marcos mais grossos que os da concorrência
- A visibilidade em exteriores poderia ser melhor
- A Screenpad é muito granulada
- Duração de bateria mais curta
In review: Asus Zenbook Pro 15 UX580GE. Test model provided by Asus US
In review: Asus Zenbook Pro 15 UX580GE. Test model provided by Asus US

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.

Pricecompare

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Análises e revisões de portáteis e celulares > Análises > Análises > Breve Análise do Portátil Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (i9-8950HK, GTX 1050 Ti, 4K UHD)
Allen Ngo, 2018-07- 3 (Update: 2018-07- 9)