Notebookcheck Logo

Apple Touch Bar gibi ama daha iyisi: Asus ZenBook Duo UX481 Laptop incelemesi

Two Screens, One Laptop.

Asus, her yıl en ince dizüstü bilgisayarları üretmenin yanı sıra yenilik yapmanın başka yolları olduğunu kanıtlamak istiyor. ScreenPad Plus ekran en iyi ihtimalle hem pratik hem de paha biçilmezdir, ancak bazı ergonomik dezavantajlar içerir.
Laptop / Notebook Touchscreen Comet Lake

15.6 inç ZenBook Pro Duo 15 incelememizde, ikincil ScreenPad ekranının 14 inçlik bir form faktöründe daha iyi çalışabileceğini, çünkü kullanıcıların tam boyutlu 15.6'dan 14 inçlik bir alt not defteri ile seyahat etme olasılıklarının daha yüksek olacağını belirtti. -inç modeli. Asus görünüşe göre aynı şeyi düşünüyordu - 14 inç ZenBook Duo, daha büyük kardeşinde bulunan Core H serisi CPU ve GeForce GTX GPU'nun yerini daha fazla güç tasarrufu sağlayan Core U serisi ve GeForce MX parçalarıyla değiştiriyor. Basitçe söylemek gerekirse, ZenBook Duo UX481, üst düzey ZenBook Pro 15'in görünümünü ve özelliklerini uygun fiyatlı bir VivoBook S15 işlemcileri ile birleştiriyor. Test ettiğimiz ünite bir Core i7-10510U Comet Lake-U CPU ile tamamen dolu geliyor, GeForce MX250 GPU, 16 GB LPDDR3 RAM ve 1 TB Intel NVMe SSD 1500 $ karşılığında. 14 inç 1080p birincil dokunmatik ekran ve 12,6 inç ikincil (1920 x 515) dokunmatik ekran tüm yapılandırmalarda standarttır. Amazon ve B gibi perakendeciler

Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL (ZenBook Duo UX481 Seri)
İşlemci
Intel Core i7-10510U 4 x 1.8 - 4.9 GHz, Comet Lake-U
Grafik kartı
NVIDIA GeForce MX250 - 2048 MB VRAM, Çekirdek: 937 MHz, Bellek: 1502 MHz, GDDR5, 445.87, Optimus
Bellek
16 GB 
, 1333.3 MHz, 16-20-20-45, Dual-Channel
Görüntü
14.00 inç 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 157 PPI, 10-point capacitive, Chi Mei N140HCE-EN2, IPS, CMN14D5, 60 Hz
Anakart
Intel Comet Lake-U PCH-LP Premium
Harddisk
Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8, 1024 GB 
Ses kartı
Intel Comet Lake PCH-LP - cAVS
Bağlantılar
3 USB 3.0, 2 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, Ses çıkışları: 3.5 mm combo, Kart okuyucular: MicroSD reader
Network
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201 (a/b/g/h/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5/ax = Wi-Fi 6/), Bluetooth 5
Boyut
yükseklik x genişlik x derinlik (mm): 19 x 323 x 223
Batarya
70 Wh Lithium-Polymer
İşletim sistemi
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Primary Camera: 0.9 MPix
Ek özellikler
Hoparlörler: Stereo, Karman Kardon, Klavye: Chiclet, Klavye ışığı: evet, McAfee LiveSafe, 12 Ay Garanti
Ağırlık
1.8 kg, Güç kaynağı: 329 g
Bağlantılar
Asus anasayfa
Asus notebook kısmı
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Rating
Date
Model
Weight
Height
Size
Resolution
Price
82.7 %
v7 (old)
05/2020
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
i7-10510U, GeForce MX250		1.8 kg19 mm14.00"1920x1080
84.2 %
v7 (old)
05/2020
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
i7-10710U, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q		1.3 kg16 mm14.00"3840x2160
85 %
v6 (old)
06/2019
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620		1.2 kg12 mm14.00"3840x2160
84 %
v7 (old)
03/2020
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
i5-1035G7, Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)		1.3 kg14.5 mm13.50"2256x1504
81.2 %
v7 (old)
02/2020
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
R7 3700U, Vega 10		1.4 kg16 mm14.00"1920x1080

Kasa

Şasi en iyi şekilde minyatür bir ZenBook Pro Duo olarak tanımlanabilir. Asus, orijinalin sağlam yapısını ve izlenimini korurken, devasa 15.6 inçlik versiyonu daha yönetilebilir 14 inçlik bir boyuta daralttı. Özellikle kapak, Acer Aspire A514 veya MSI Prestige 14 gibi diğer birçok alt defterdeki kapaklardan daha güçlü ve bükülmeye ve bükülmeye karşı daha dayanıklıdır. ve sıkıca paketlenmiş bileşenler içinde.

Yoğunluktan bahsetmişken, sistemi ilk alırken entegre bir ikincil ekrana sahip olmanın dezavantajları belirginleşir. 1,8 kg ve 19 mm kalınlığında sistem, Lenovo IdeaPad S940, Huawei MateBook X Pro veya Asus'un kendi ZenBook 14'ü gibi sıradan 13.9 inç veya 14 inçlik dizüstü bilgisayarlardan yaklaşık 500 g daha ağır ve birkaç milimetre daha kalındır. Aslında, ZenBook Duo neredeyse 15,6 inç Dell XPS 15 (1,9 kg) kadar ağırdır ve bu nedenle çift ekranlı dizüstü bilgisayarla sık sık seyahat etmeyi planlıyorsanız ağırlık kesinlikle dikkate alınması gereken bir şeydir.

Keyboard is pushed to the front to make room for the 12.6-inch ScreenPad
Keyboard is pushed to the front to make room for the 12.6-inch ScreenPad
ErgoLift hinge opened to maximum angle (~150 degrees)
ErgoLift hinge opened to maximum angle (~150 degrees)
Hinges feel firmer and less likely to teeter than the hinges on the Surface Laptop 3 15
Hinges feel firmer and less likely to teeter than the hinges on the Surface Laptop 3 15
Fingerprints accumulate quickly on the spun-metal outer finish
Fingerprints accumulate quickly on the spun-metal outer finish
Exhaust grilles hidden underneath the hinges. Heat exits upwards instead of the sides
Exhaust grilles hidden underneath the hinges. Heat exits upwards instead of the sides
Bottom panel designed with sharp corners and flat slanted surfaces
Bottom panel designed with sharp corners and flat slanted surfaces
❌
323 mm 223 mm 19 mm 1.8 kg324 mm 212 mm 16 mm 1.4 kg323.5 mm 217.1 mm 15.4 mm 1.2 kg319 mm 215 mm 16 mm 1.3 kg320 mm 199 mm 12 mm 1.2 kg304 mm 217 mm 14.6 mm 1.3 kg297 mm 210 mm 1 mm 5.7 g

Bağlantı

Daha büyük 15,6 inç ZenBook Pro Duo'da bulunan tüm bağlantı noktaları burada bulunur, ancak iki önemli fark vardır. Birincisi, ZenBook Duo bir MicroSD okuyucuyu entegre ederken daha büyük versiyon bunu entegre etmiyor. İkincisi, 14 inçlik modeldeki USB Type-C bağlantı noktası, Zenbol 14 kapak kılıflarında olduğu gibi Thunderbolt 3'ü desteklemiyor. Bağlantı noktası konumlandırma başka bir sorun değildir.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: MicroSD reader, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB 3.1 Gen. 1 Type-A
Right: MicroSD reader, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB 3.1 Gen. 1 Type-A
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, HDMI, USB 3.1 Gen. 2 Type-A, USB 3.1 Gen. 2 Type-C
Left: AC adapter, HDMI, USB 3.1 Gen. 2 Type-A, USB 3.1 Gen. 2 Type-C

SD Kart Okuyucu

Entegre yaylı MicroSD okuyucu ortalama aktarım hızları sunar. UHS-II MicroSD kartımızdan masaüstünüze 1 GB değerinde fotoğraf taşımak, XPS 13'teki 7 saniyeye veya ZenBook 14'teki 26 saniyeye kıyasla yaklaşık 13 saniye sürer.

SD Card Reader
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
148.9 MB/s +89%
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
146.3 MB/s +86%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
78.8 MB/s
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26.4 MB/s -66%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
187.3 MB/s +126%
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
176.5 MB/s +113%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 microSDXC 64GB)
82.9 MB/s
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
37.1 MB/s -55%

İletişim

Netgear RAX200 yönlendiricimizle eşleştirildiğinde hiçbir bağlantı veya kararlılık sorunu yaşamadık.

Soldered Intel Wi-Fi 6 module
Soldered Intel Wi-Fi 6 module
Networking
iperf3 transmit AX12
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1645 (1401min - 1773max) MBit/s +15%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1434 (736min - 1523max) MBit/s
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
1166 (1012min - 1299max) MBit/s -19%
MSI GF75 Thin 10SCXR
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1030 (722min - 1235max) MBit/s -28%
iperf3 receive AX12
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1379 (858min - 1529max) MBit/s
MSI GF75 Thin 10SCXR
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201
1295 (1184min - 1487max) MBit/s -6%
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX200
1242 (1133min - 1283max) MBit/s -10%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
1130 (1072min - 1174max) MBit/s -18%

Web kamerası

ColorChecker
2 ∆E
3.9 ∆E
11.6 ∆E
7.3 ∆E
15.3 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
5.6 ∆E
11.2 ∆E
12.2 ∆E
14.6 ∆E
9.7 ∆E
8.8 ∆E
8.6 ∆E
8 ∆E
13.8 ∆E
7.1 ∆E
17.5 ∆E
13.5 ∆E
4.8 ∆E
3.6 ∆E
6.9 ∆E
10.2 ∆E
7.6 ∆E
3.4 ∆E
ColorChecker Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL: 8.99 ∆E min: 1.95 - max: 17.51 ∆E

Bakım

Alt panel on adet T5 Torx vida ile sabitlenmiştir. Bu vidaların çoğu, bir çift çok cımbız olmadan çıkarılması zor olan kauçuk eklerin arkasındadır. İçeri girdikten sonra kullanıcılar yalnızca tek M.2 depolama sürücüsünü yükseltebilir.

Aksesuarlar ve Garanti

Asus, her perakende kutusunda aktif bir stylus kalem ve bir taşıma kılıfı içerir. Standart bir yıllık sınırlı garanti geçerlidir.

Giriş cihazları

Arkadan aydınlatmalı tuşlar, net geri bildirim ve basıldığında sessiz sesle 1.4 mm seyahat sunar. Klavyeyi eski Zephyrus GX501'in süngerimsi tuşları üzerinde bir gelişme olarak görüyoruz. Bununla birlikte, klavyenin açık konumlandırılması, kullanıcıların daha rahat bir yazma deneyimi için dizüstü bilgisayardan daha uzakta oturmaları ve kendi avuç içi dayanaklarını sağlamaları gerektiği anlamına gelir. Biraz alışmak gerekiyor ve uçaklar gibi dar alanlarda veya hatta masa olmayan trenlerde çalışmak zor olabilir.

Dokunmatik

Yüzey alanının büyük bir kısmı klavye ve ScreenPad için ayrıldığından anlaşılabilir bir şekilde, touchpad çubuğun kısa ucunu aldı. Sadece 5,5 x 7 cm'de, her türlü ciddi iş yükü için çok sıkışık. Pürüzsüz yüzey ve özel fare tuşları, doğru tıklamaları biraz daha kolaylaştırır, ancak mümkün olduğunda dokunmatik ekranı, birlikte verilen kalemi veya harici bir fareyi kullanmak isteyeceksiniz.

Keyboard layout has changed from the ZenBook Pro Duo. The Shift key is now much shorter in order to make room for larger Arrow keys
Keyboard layout has changed from the ZenBook Pro Duo. The Shift key is now much shorter in order to make room for larger Arrow keys
ScreenPad settings is the only way to control brightness and install ScreenPad-specific applications
ScreenPad settings is the only way to control brightness and install ScreenPad-specific applications
Key feedback is actually excellent, but how you positioning your hands whilst typing takes getting used to
Key feedback is actually excellent, but how you positioning your hands whilst typing takes getting used to
Small trackpad with quiet dedicated mouse keys
Small trackpad with quiet dedicated mouse keys

Görüntüle

Birincil ekran, MSI PS42, MSI Modern 14 ve Acer Swift 3 SF314'te de bulunan bir Chi Mei N140HCE-EN2 IPS panelidir. Bu nedenle, ZenBook Duo burada pek çok sürpriz sunmuyor çünkü bu dört sistem iyi kontrast oranı, iyi tepki süreleri ve tam sRGB kapsamı gibi benzer ekran özelliklerini paylaşıyor. Bununla birlikte, Asus, yukarıda belirtilen 14 inç modellere kıyasla ekranı biraz kalınlaştıran mat bir dokunmatik ekran kaplaması içeriyordu. Resim, sonuç olarak parlak bir alternatiften biraz daha grenlidir, ancak bu çoğu mat panelde yaygındır. Ekran parlaklığı neredeyse XPS 13, Surface Laptop 3 veya IdeaPad S940 gibi çoğu amiral gemisi Ultrabook kadar parlak değildir. İç mekanda veya sınıfta kullanım için iyi olacak, ancak dizüstü bilgisayarı açık havada sık kullanmayı planlıyorsanız daha iyi seçenekler var.

Because of the different viewing angles between the two displays and the user, attributes like glare, contrast, and colors will look different on the second screen relative to the main screen
Because of the different viewing angles between the two displays and the user, attributes like glare, contrast, and colors will look different on the second screen relative to the main screen
Second display has the exact same width and PPI as the main screen. Windows recognizes it as a second (1920 x 515) monitor
Second display has the exact same width and PPI as the main screen. Windows recognizes it as a second (1920 x 515) monitor
Webcam and IR with no shutter
Webcam and IR with no shutter
Narrow bezels that Asus markets as NanoEdge
Narrow bezels that Asus markets as NanoEdge

Şovun yıldızı elbette Asus'un ScreenPad Plus olarak adlandırdığı 12,6 inç ikincil mat dokunmatik ekran. Gerçek bir 1: 1 çift ekran deneyimi için birincil ekranla aynı ekran genişliğini ve PPI'yı sunar. Görüntüleme koşulları mükemmel olduğunda, ScreenPad çoklu görev, sohbet, e-posta gönderme ve diğer birçok uygulama için paha biçilmez hale gelir, çünkü bir masaüstü PC'deki ikinci bir monitör gibi davranır. İkinci ekranın en büyük dezavantajı gözleriniz ve gözleriniz neredeyse her zaman sizinle ana ekran arasındaki görüş açısından daha geniş olacaktır. IPS ekrana geniş bir açıdan bakmaya çalıştığınızda, renklerin, kontrastın ve parlaklığın değişebileceğini ve aynı şeyin Ekran Paneli için söylenebileceğini fark edeceksiniz. Bu nedenle, ikinci ekrandaki ekran içeriği, ana ekran kadar canlı değil, daha karanlık olma eğilimindedir. Bunu daha kötü renk üretimi ve daha yoğun parlama ile birleştirin ve video oynatma veya profesyonel düzenleme yerine multimedya kontrolü ve büyük metinler için en iyi şekilde çalışan bir ekranınız var.

Only minor uneven backlight bleeding on the primary display
Only minor uneven backlight bleeding on the primary display
There is more uneven backlight bleeding on the secondary display than the primary display
There is more uneven backlight bleeding on the secondary display than the primary display
RGB subpixel array with matte overlay for main display
RGB subpixel array with matte overlay for main display
RGB subpixel array with matte overlay for second display. Both screens are slightly grainier than a glossy alternative
RGB subpixel array with matte overlay for second display. Both screens are slightly grainier than a glossy alternative
ScreenPad Plus
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% 34.4 ms combined
Response Time Black / White * 26.8 ms combined
Brightness Middle 301 nits (280 if on battery power)
Contrast 772:1
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 4.77
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. 8.82
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated 4.15
Greyscale DeltaE2000 3.4
Gamma 2.08
CCT 6640
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) 37.7 percent
Color Space (Percent of sRGB) 59.4 percent
Windows screenshot showing the full combined resolution of the two displays (1920 x (1080 + 515) pixels)
Windows screenshot showing the full combined resolution of the two displays (1920 x (1080 + 515) pixels)
267.2
cd/m²		290.9
cd/m²		282.2
cd/m²
272.9
cd/m²		301
cd/m²		288.9
cd/m²
276
cd/m²		295.2
cd/m²		289.9
cd/m²
Parlaklığın yayılımı
Chi Mei N140HCE-EN2 tested with X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maksimum: 301 cd/m² (Nits) Ortalama: 284.9 cd/m² Minimum: 17 cd/m²
Aydınlatma: 89 %
Batarya modunda parlaklık: 301 cd/m²
Kontrast: 717:1 (Siyah: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.01 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.92, calibrated: 0.97
ΔE Greyscale 2.2 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
99.5% sRGB (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
63.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 1.6.3 3D)
68.9% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.5% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
67.1% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.19
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Chi Mei N140HCE-EN2, IPS, 14", 1920x1080		Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
CEC PA LM140LF-3L03, IPS, 14", 1920x1080		Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
Tianma XM, IPS, 13.9", 3000x2000		Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
B140ZAN01.3, IPS, 14", 3840x2160		Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
BOE NV140QUM-N53, IPS, 14", 3840x2160		MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
IPS, 14", 3840x2160
Display
-3%
-3%
16%
15%
Display P3 Coverage
67.1
66.7
-1%
65.9
-2%
87.5
30%
83
24%
sRGB Coverage
99.5
92.3
-7%
95.2
-4%
99.7
0%
99.7
0%
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage
68.9
67.5
-2%
67.6
-2%
81.1
18%
83.1
21%
Response Times
-39%
-15%
-54%
-61%
-59%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
31.2 ?(15.6, 15.6)
36 ?(19, 17)
-15%
40.4 ?(19.2, 21.2)
-29%
57.2 ?(30, 27.2)
-83%
49.2 ?(22, 27.2)
-58%
55 ?(27, 28)
-76%
Response Time Black / White *
25.6 ?(14.8, 10.8)
26 ?(15, 11)
-2%
25.6 ?(11.6, 14)
-0%
32 ?(17.2, 14.8)
-25%
32.2 ?(19.2, 13.2)
-26%
36 ?(22, 14)
-41%
PWM Frequency
24750 ?(29)
44 ?(20)
-100%
201.6 ?(99)
-99%
Screen
-124%
-34%
-57%
-103%
16%
Brightness middle
301
253
-16%
442.7
47%
594.5
98%
532
77%
567
88%
Brightness
285
245
-14%
428
50%
536
88%
513
80%
516
81%
Brightness Distribution
89
78
-12%
84
-6%
83
-7%
90
1%
86
-3%
Black Level *
0.42
0.225
46%
0.31
26%
0.43
-2%
0.41
2%
0.445
-6%
Contrast
717
1124
57%
1428
99%
1383
93%
1298
81%
1274
78%
Colorchecker dE 2000 *
1.01
8.89
-780%
2.24
-122%
4.87
-382%
6.88
-581%
1.55
-53%
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. *
3.42
4.56
-33%
7.19
-110%
7.9
-131%
12.65
-270%
5.14
-50%
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated *
0.97
4.9
-405%
1.11
-14%
2.83
-192%
2.52
-160%
1.24
-28%
Greyscale dE 2000 *
2.2
6.33
-188%
9.7
-341%
6.7
-205%
10.5
-377%
1.48
33%
Gamma
2.19 100%
2.52 87%
1.42 155%
2.091 105%
1.98 111%
2.19 100%
CCT
6605 98%
6745 96%
6227 104%
6891 94%
7394 88%
6741 96%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
63.2
60
-5%
61.6
-3%
72
14%
74.1
17%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
99.5
91
-9%
95
-5%
100
1%
99.7
0%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-55% / -87%
-17% / -26%
-32% / -43%
-50% / -75%
-22% / 2%

* ... smaller is better

Asus, ZenBook Duo dizüstü bilgisayarı için yüzde 72 NTSC veya tam sRGB kapsamı tanıtıyor. Ancak yakalama, bunun sadece ana ekran için geçerli olmasıdır. İkincil ekran, ana ekranda yüzde 100 ve yüzde 63'e kıyasla sRGB ve AdobeRGB'nin sırasıyla sadece yüzde 59 ve yüzde 38'ini kapsıyor. Grafik düzenleyicileri, renkler iki ekran arasında 1: 1 olmayacağından önemli iş yükleri için ana ekranı kullanmaya devam etmelidir.

vs. sRGB (Primary display)
vs. sRGB (Primary display)
vs. AdobeRGB (Primary display)
vs. AdobeRGB (Primary display)
vs. sRGB (Secondary display)
vs. sRGB (Secondary display)
vs. AdobeRGB (Secondary display)
vs. AdobeRGB (Secondary display)

Asus, ZenBook Duo için Pantone sertifikalı kalibrasyonun reklamını yapıyor ancak yine de bu sadece ana ekran için geçerli. X-Rite renkölçer ile yaptığımız bağımsız ölçümlerimiz, ana panelde sırasıyla sadece 2,2 ve 0,93'lük ortalama DeltaE değerleri ile çok hassas gri tonlama ve renkler gösteriyor. Buna karşılık, ikinci ekrandaki ortalama gri tonlama ve renkli DeltaE değerleri sırasıyla 3.4 ve 4.38'de daha yüksektir. İkinci ekranı kendimiz daha da kalibre etmeye çalışmak, panelin sınırlı renk alanı nedeniyle önemli gelişmeler sağlamaz. Bu, ikinci ekrandaki renklerin zayıf olduğu anlamına gelmez, ancak ana ekrana göre daha canlı değildir.

Grayscale before calibration (Primary display)
Grayscale before calibration (Primary display)
Saturation Sweeps before calibration (Primary display)
Saturation Sweeps before calibration (Primary display)
ColorChecker before calibration (Primary display)
ColorChecker before calibration (Primary display)
Grayscale after calibration (Primary display)
Grayscale after calibration (Primary display)
Saturation Sweeps after calibration (Primary display)
Saturation Sweeps after calibration (Primary display)
ColorChecker after calibration (Primary display)
ColorChecker after calibration (Primary display)
Grayscale before calibration (Secondary display)
Grayscale before calibration (Secondary display)
Saturation Sweeps before calibration (Secondary display)
Saturation Sweeps before calibration (Secondary display)
ColorChecker before calibration (Secondary display)
ColorChecker before calibration (Secondary display)
Grayscale after calibration (Secondary display)
Grayscale after calibration (Secondary display)
Saturation Sweeps after calibration (Secondary display)
Saturation Sweeps after calibration (Secondary display)
ColorChecker after calibration (Secondary display)
ColorChecker after calibration (Secondary display)

Display Response Times

ℹ
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
25.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14.8 ms rise
↘ 10.8 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 58 % 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
31.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15.6 ms rise
↘ 15.6 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. » 38 % 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)

ℹ
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 detected 24750 Hz ≤ 29 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 24750 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 29 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 24750 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 8743 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured.

Black-to-White (Secondary display)
Black-to-White (Secondary display)
Gray50-to-Gray80 (Secondary display)
Gray50-to-Gray80 (Secondary display)
No PWM detected on all brightness levels (Secondary display)
No PWM detected on all brightness levels (Secondary display)

Ekran boyutu küçük olsa da, ZenBook Duo dış mekanlarda sık kullanılan en iyi dizüstü bilgisayar değildir. Ekran arka ışığı, ortamın üstesinden gelmek için yeterince parlak değil ve mat katmana rağmen parlama var. Bu, kullanıcıya göre atipik görüntüleme açısı nedeniyle ScreenPad'de daha da kötüleşir. Aşağıdaki ekran görüntülerimiz dış mekanlarda her iki ekranın da nasıl yıkanacağını göstermektedir.Her iki ekrandaki görüş açıları hala herhangi bir IPS panelinden beklendiği gibi mükemmel. Bununla birlikte, geniş görüş açıları tek başına parlamayı önlemek için yeterli değildir.

Outdoors on a cloudy day (Primary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Primary display)
Outdoors under shade (Primary display)
Outdoors under shade (Primary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Primary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Primary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Secondary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Secondary display)
Outdoors under shade (Secondary display)
Outdoors under shade (Secondary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Secondary display)
Outdoors on a cloudy day (Secondary display)
Wide IPS viewing angles (Primary display)
Wide IPS viewing angles (Primary display)
Wide IPS viewing angles (Secondary display)
Wide IPS viewing angles (Secondary display)

Verim

Core U sınıfı CPU ve GeForce MX GPU, yüksek performanslı kullanıcıları hedefleyen Core H serisi ve GTX GPU'ların aksine hem orta sınıf hem de üst düzey Ultrabook'larda yaygın olarak bulunan bulgulardır. ZenBook Duo şu anda dört çekirdekli Core i7-10510U'da Ice Lake veya AMD seçeneği mevcut değil. MSI Modern 14. Temel GPU ve bellek saat hızları, MSI.System RAM'deki 1519 MHz ve 1752 MHz ile karşılaştırıldığında sırasıyla 937 MHz ve 1502 MHz'de daha yavaştır ve kullanıcı tarafından yükseltilemez. Bu dizüstü bilgisayar iki ekranı arasında çoklu görev yapmaktan ibaret olduğu için mümkünse 16 GB yapılandırmalar yapmanızı öneririz.

 

İşlemci

İşlemci performansı yüzeyde mükemmel ancak stresli ölçütleri tekrar tekrar çalıştırmak dizüstü bilgisayarın zaman içinde zayıf performans sürdürülebilirliğini ortaya çıkaracaktır. Örnek olarak, CineBench R15 Multi-Thread'ın bir döngüde çalıştırılması, düşmeden önce 767 puanlık ilk yüksek bir skorla sonuçlanır ve neredeyse yüzde 30'luk bir performans düşüşünü temsil etmek için 539 noktada sabitlenir. Buna karşılık, 15 inçlik Yüzey Kitabı 3'teki Core i7 Buz Gölü CPU'su aynı döngü testinde zaman içinde sadece yüzde 6 ila 7 oranında düşecekti. Bu, aşağıdaki Stres Testi bölümümüzde daha ayrıntılı olarak incelenmektedir. Daha fazla teknik bilgi ve karşılaştırma karşılaştırmaları için Core i7-10510U üzerindeki özel sayfamıza bakın. Çok iş parçacıklı performansı yaklaşık yüzde 50 artıracak altıgen çekirdekli Core i7-10710U, burada bir seçenek değil.

CineBench R15
CineBench R15
CineBench R20
CineBench R20
04590135180225270315360405450495540585630675720765810Tooltip
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø546 (533.24-766.64)
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77 GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø669 (651.9-718.51)
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 i7-1065G7 Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7, Toshiba KBG40ZNS256G NVMe; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø717 (684.67-772.41)
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10510U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø729 (708.72-835.15)
Acer Aspire 5 A514-52 UHD Graphics 620, i5-10210U, WDC PC SN520 SDAPNUW-512G; CPU Multi 64Bit: Ø431 (399.28-488)
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
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 (Multi Core)
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
2410 Points +64%
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7
1883 Points +28%
MSI GF63 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i5-9300H
1737 Points +18%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77
Intel Core i7-8565U
1645 Points +12%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
1630 Points +11%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Ryzen 7 3700U
1499 Points +2%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
1468 Points
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (1015 - 1897, n=38)
1412 Points -4%
Dynabook Portege A30-E-174
Intel Core i7-8550U
1138 Points -22%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
1038 Points -29%
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core)
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
460 Points +4%
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7
458 Points +4%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77
Intel Core i7-8565U
444 Points +1%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
441 Points
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
439 Points 0%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (362 - 497, n=37)
437 Points -1%
MSI GF63 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i5-9300H
418 Points -5%
Dynabook Portege A30-E-174
Intel Core i7-8550U
383 Points -13%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
370 Points -16%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Ryzen 7 3700U
334 Points -24%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77
Intel Core i7-8565U
181 Points +2%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
180 Points +1%
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7
180 Points +1%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (113 - 202, n=42)
178.4 Points 0%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
178 Points
MSI GF63 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i5-9300H
173 Points -3%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
172 Points -3%
Dynabook Portege A30-E-174
Intel Core i7-8550U
156 Points -12%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
146 Points -18%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Ryzen 7 3700U
135 Points -24%
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
1051 Points +37%
MSI GF63 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i5-9300H
797 Points +4%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
767 (533.24min - 766.64max) Points
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7
750 Points -2%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
736 Points -4%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77
Intel Core i7-8565U
683 Points -11%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Ryzen 7 3700U
672 Points -12%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (482 - 856, n=45)
666 Points -13%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
496 (406.64min - 496.34max) Points -35%
Dynabook Portege A30-E-174
Intel Core i7-8550U
494 Points -36%
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
1039 Seconds * -34%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (628 - 1051, n=31)
796 Seconds * -3%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
776 Seconds *
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
771 Seconds * +1%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
585 Seconds * +25%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
4774 MIPS
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (3747 - 4981, n=31)
4591 MIPS -4%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
4425 MIPS -7%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
4252 MIPS -11%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
3885 MIPS -19%
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
27115 MIPS +32%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
20557 MIPS
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
19168 MIPS -7%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (12196 - 21298, n=31)
17704 MIPS -14%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
13812 MIPS -33%
Geekbench 5.5 / Single-Core
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
1262 Points
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (977 - 1287, n=31)
1197 Points -5%
Geekbench 5.5 / Multi-Core
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
4079 Points
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (2474 - 4484, n=31)
3687 Points -10%
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U
6.032 fps +23%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
4.9 fps
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (3.41 - 6.04, n=31)
4.65 fps -5%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7
4.632 fps -5%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U
3.51 fps -28%
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
72.9 s *
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (50.7 - 77.8, n=27)
59.9 s * +18%
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U
0.81 sec *
Average Intel Core i7-10510U
  (0.637 - 0.81, n=28)
0.68 sec * +16%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
99.8 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
178 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
767 Points
Cinebench R20 CPU (Multi Core)
1468 Points
Cinebench R20 CPU (Single Core)
441 Points
Yardım

Sistem performansı

PCMark kriterleri, Core i7 CPU ve GeForce MX250 GPU ile donatılmış diğer dizüstü bilgisayarlara göre olmalarını beklediğimiz yerdir. PCMark 10 Dijital İçerik Oluşturma puanı ise ortalamanın altında. Farklı dizüstü bilgisayarlar arasındaki GPU performansını değerlendirmek söz konusu olduğunda, bu özel kıyaslama hiç bu kadar doğru olmamıştı. Test ünitesi ile zamanımız boyunca hiçbir yazılım veya donanım sorunu yaşamadık. İkinci ekranı ikinci doğa haline gelmeden önce kullanmak için hafif bir öğrenme eğrisi olduğunu unutmayın. Ekranın konumu, ZenBook Pro UX580'deki orijinal ScreenPad'den daha ergonomik bir kullanım sağlar.

PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10 | PCMark 8
PCMark 10
Score
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
5150 Points +21%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
4246 Points
Average Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3861 - 5409, n=11)
4243 Points 0%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10510U, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
4219 Points -1%
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
3870 Points -9%
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A
3851 Points -9%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3445 Points -19%
Essentials
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
9300 Points
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10510U, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
8892 Points -4%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (8021 - 9764, n=11)
8892 Points -4%
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
8785 Points -6%
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
8390 Points -10%
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A
7685 Points -17%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
7083 Points -24%
Productivity
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
7614 Points
Average Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (6625 - 7972, n=11)
7331 Points -4%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10510U, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
7051 Points -7%
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
6754 Points -11%
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
6674 Points -12%
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A
5823 Points -24%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5727 Points -25%
Digital Content Creation
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
6248 Points +113%
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A
3466 Points +18%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10510U, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
3251 Points +11%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (2621 - 5547, n=11)
3225 Points +10%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
2935 Points
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
2810 Points -4%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
2735 Points -7%
PCMark 8
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
3747 Points
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A
3604 Points -4%
Average Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3214 - 3958, n=8)
3594 Points -4%
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
3511 Points -6%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
3478 Points -7%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10510U, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
3182 Points -15%
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
3147 Points -16%
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
5266 Points
Average Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (4599 - 5443, n=8)
5026 Points -5%
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A
4842 Points -8%
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
4422 Points -16%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
UHD Graphics 620, i7-10510U, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G
4396 Points -17%
Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4339 Points -18%
Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
UHD Graphics 620, i7-8565U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
4209 Points -20%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3747 puan
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5266 puan
PCMark 10 Score
4246 puan
Yardım

DPC Gecikmesi

LatencyMon, birden çok tarayıcı sekmesi açarken ve Prime95'i sırayla çalıştırırken DPC gecikme sorunlarını gösterir. Neyse ki, YouTube'daki 4K video oynatma testimiz, atlanan karelerin olmadığını ortaya koyuyor. Entegre Intel GPU, video oynatımı sırasında tüm ağır kaldırma işlemlerini yaparken görülebilir.

DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
1812 μs *

* ... smaller is better

Depolama aygıtları

Anlaşılır şekilde, alan kısıtlamaları nedeniyle ikincil seçenek bulunmayan tek bir M.2 2280 yuvası var. Bazı SKU'ların PCIe x4 yerine PCIe x2 SSD'lerle gelebileceğini unutmayın. Test birimimizdeki 1 TB Intel 660p NVMe SSD, AS SSD kriterlerine göre daha pahalı Samsung PM981'in sıralı okuma ve yazma oranlarının yaklaşık yarısını döndürür. Bu, U sınıfı CPU ve güç tasarruflu GeForce MX GPU ile iyi bir şekilde dengelenir. Daha fazla karşılaştırma karşılaştırması için SSD ve HDD tablolarımıza bakın.

AS SSD
AS SSD
CDM 5.5
CDM 5.5
Single M.2 2280 slot
Single M.2 2280 slot
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8		Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A		Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP		Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G		MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR
AS SSD
0%
3%
14%
74%
Seq Read
1237
1417
15%
2416
95%
1786
44%
2300
86%
Seq Write
1069
781
-27%
1170
9%
1259
18%
2051
92%
4K Read
52.1
37.03
-29%
48.33
-7%
45.86
-12%
46.23
-11%
4K Write
134.7
80.1
-41%
103.1
-23%
147.9
10%
84.6
-37%
4K-64 Read
585
740
26%
1039
78%
885
51%
1552
165%
4K-64 Write
854
748
-12%
399.6
-53%
950
11%
1789
109%
Access Time Read *
0.05
0.047
6%
0.058
-16%
0.058
-16%
0.049
2%
Access Time Write *
0.117
0.045
62%
0.036
69%
0.074
37%
0.045
62%
Score Read
761
918
21%
1329
75%
1110
46%
1828
140%
Score Write
1095
906
-17%
620
-43%
1224
12%
2079
90%
Score Total
2255
2270
1%
2575
14%
2885
28%
4831
114%
Copy ISO MB/s
1714
739
-57%
1384
-19%
Copy Program MB/s
511
312.3
-39%
525
3%
Copy Game MB/s
1187
486.3
-59%
1008
-15%
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
-32%
-17%
24%
20%
Write 4K
140.7
118.8
-16%
116.5
-17%
151.5
8%
163.8
16%
Read 4K
55.6
41.62
-25%
42.18
-24%
45.83
-18%
48.6
-13%
Write Seq
1415
796
-44%
1079
-24%
2060
46%
2269
60%
Read Seq
1516
1101
-27%
1030
-32%
1973
30%
1963
29%
Write 4K Q32T1
474.5
234.7
-51%
225.7
-52%
489.8
3%
289.8
-39%
Read 4K Q32T1
403.4
313.8
-22%
302.9
-25%
386.2
-4%
373.6
-7%
Write Seq Q32T1
1796
842
-53%
1174
-35%
2703
51%
2395
33%
Read Seq Q32T1
1913
1645
-14%
3394
77%
3376
76%
3479
82%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-16% / -13%
-7% / -4%
19% / 18%
47% / 51%

* ... smaller is better

CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
AS SSD
DiskSpd
hddimg
Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 1913 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1796 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 403.4 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 474.5 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1516 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1415 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 55.6 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 140.7 MB/s

GPU Performansı

3DMark karşılaştırmaları, Asus birimimizdeki GeForce MX250'nin, diğer 21 dizüstü bilgisayardan alınan veritabanımızdaki ortalama MX250'den yaklaşık yüzde 16 ila 18 daha yavaş olduğunu gösteriyor. Açıkçası, iki dahili ekranın desteklenmesi GPU'ya zarar veriyor. Performansın, daha eski 10 W GeForce MX150 ile donatılmış ZenBook 14 UX433'e en çok benzemesini bekleyin. Flip tarafında, ana ekranda bir oyun oynarken sohbet programları veya videolar için kullanışlı olacaktır. İkinci ekranda herhangi bir kullanıcı girişinin odağı ana oyundan uzaklaştıracağını ve muhtemelen pencereyi en aza indirgeyeceğini veya kilitleyeceğini unutmayın. Daha fazla teknik bilgi ve karşılaştırma karşılaştırmaları için GeForce MX250'deki özel sayfamıza bakın.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Time Spy
Time Spy
3DMark | 3DMark 11
3DMark
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i5-8300H
79420 Points +298%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10510U
48573 Points +143%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, i7-10510U
27059 Points +36%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (13805 - 23863, n=25)
21491 Points +8%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, R7 3700U
20784 Points +4%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, i7-10510U
19952 Points
Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, i7-8565U
18633 Points -7%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7
16268 Points -18%
Asus VivoBook 15 X510UQ-BQ534T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, i5-8250U
12306 Points -38%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i5-8300H
10970 Points +269%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10510U
7784 Points +162%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, i7-10510U
5616 Points +89%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (2939 - 3885, n=29)
3531 Points +19%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, R7 3700U
2999 Points +1%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7
2973 Points 0%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, i7-10510U
2972 Points
Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, i7-8565U
2874 Points -3%
Asus VivoBook 15 X510UQ-BQ534T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, i5-8250U
2174 Points -27%
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i5-8300H
3510 Points +295%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10510U
2883 Points +225%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, i7-10510U
1634 Points +84%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (881 - 1169, n=22)
1070 Points +20%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, i7-10510U
888 Points
Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, i7-8565U
862 Points -3%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, R7 3700U
852 Points -4%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7
825 Points -7%
Asus VivoBook 15 X510UQ-BQ534T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, i5-8250U
626 Points -30%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance GPU
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i5-8300H
13871 Points +284%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10510U
11119 Points +208%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, i7-10510U
7291 Points +102%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7
4630 Points +28%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3585 - 4942, n=29)
4404 Points +22%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, R7 3700U
4165 Points +15%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, i7-10510U
3613 Points
Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, i7-8565U
3560 Points -1%
Asus VivoBook 15 X510UQ-BQ534T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, i5-8250U
2992 Points -17%
1280x720 Performance Combined
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, i5-8300H
8788 Points +121%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10510U
8406 Points +112%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q, i7-10510U
7112 Points +79%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (3532 - 4638, n=29)
4250 Points +7%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU), i7-1065G7
4163 Points +5%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
NVIDIA GeForce MX250, i7-10510U
3973 Points
Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, i7-8565U
3707 Points -7%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10, R7 3700U
3247 Points -18%
Asus VivoBook 15 X510UQ-BQ534T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, i5-8250U
2648 Points -33%
3DMark 11 Performance
3991 puan
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
12710 puan
3DMark Fire Strike Score
2758 puan
3DMark Time Spy Score
995 puan
Yardım
Dota 2 Reborn | The Witcher 3
Dota 2 Reborn - 1920x1080 ultra (3/3) best looking
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV
AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q
103.8 (92.3min) fps +85%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
101.7 fps +82%
MSI GF75 Thin 10SCXR
Intel Core i5-10300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
87.5 (76.4min) fps +56%
MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
Intel Core i7-10710U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
64.4 (55.3min) fps +15%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
56 (50.6min) fps
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (7.8 - 67.5, n=21)
53.6 fps -4%
Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
AMD Ryzen 7 3700U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
30.2 (28.1min) fps -46%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
16.9 (15.9min) fps -70%
The Witcher 3
1024x768 Low Graphics & Postprocessing
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV
AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q
232.2 fps +298%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
172.2 fps +195%
MSI GF75 Thin 10SCXR
Intel Core i5-10300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
169.4 fps +191%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
156.1 fps +168%
MSI GF63 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
146 (109min) fps +150%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
144.6 fps +148%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
100.5 fps +72%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (47.4 - 70, n=24)
60.8 fps +4%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
58.3 fps
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
56.4 fps -3%
Dell Inspiron 15 5000 5585
AMD Ryzen 7 3700U, AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
53.8 fps -8%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Core i7-1065G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
52.7 fps -10%
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
50.7 (17min - 59max) fps -13%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
49 fps -16%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
Intel Core i7-10510U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
20.7 fps -64%
Dell XPS 13 7390 Core i7-10710U
Intel Core i7-10710U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
19.7 fps -66%
HP Elite Dragonfly-8MK79EA
Intel Core i5-8265U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
17.1 fps -71%
1366x768 Medium Graphics & Postprocessing
Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV
AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q
168.2 fps +398%
Dell G5 15 5587
Intel Core i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
122.3 fps +262%
MSI GF75 Thin 10SCXR
Intel Core i5-10300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
116.6 fps +245%
MSI GF63 Thin 9SC
Intel Core i5-9300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
99 (75min) fps +193%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FT-DB77
Intel Core i7-8565U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
93.6 fps +177%
Asus ZenBook 15 UX534FTC-A8190T
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
87.2 fps +158%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX563FD-A1027T
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
57.6 fps +70%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 15 i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
36.8 fps +9%
Lenovo Yoga C940-14IIL 81Q9
Intel Core i7-1065G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
36.3 fps +7%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX250
  (30 - 40, n=27)
35.3 fps +4%
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
Intel Core i7-10510U, NVIDIA GeForce MX250
33.8 fps
Dell XPS 13 9300 Core i7-1065G7
Intel Core i7-1065G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
33.5 (29min - 39max) fps -1%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 3 13 Core i5-1035G7
Intel Core i5-1035G7, Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
31 fps -8%
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
Intel Core i7-10510U, Intel UHD Graphics 620
11 fps -67%
Dota 2 Reborn | The Witcher 3
05101520253035Tooltip
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8: Ø33.2 (31-35)
düşükortayüksekultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 58.3 33.8 18 9.8
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) 114 102 62.3 56
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) 64.8 45.5 42.5

Emissions

System Noise

The cooling solution consists of twin 30 mm to 35 mm fans with three heat pipes. When idling on desktop, the fans remain idle for a completely silent experience. If multi-tasking or video streaming, fan noise will hover in the 29.1 dB(A) range to still be very quiet and generally unnoticeable.

Running higher loads like 3DMark 06 will steadily increase the fan noise until it hits a ceiling of 39.1 dB(A) towards the end of the first benchmark scene. This appears to be the maximum fan noise of the system as results are the same when gaming or when running Prime95 and FurMark loads. Perhaps not coincidentally, this 39 dB(A) maximum can also be observed on the ZenBook 14 UM431DA and Zenbook 14 UX433FN.

We're not able to notice any coil whine or electronic noise from our test unit.

The twin fans are smaller than the fan on most other laptops
The twin fans are smaller than the fan on most other laptops
All heat is pushed through the back center of the system
All heat is pushed through the back center of the system
Soldered RAM modules adjacent to the CPU
Soldered RAM modules adjacent to the CPU
Soldered VRAM modules adjacent to the GPU
Soldered VRAM modules adjacent to the GPU
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
GeForce MX250, i7-10510U, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8		Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
Vega 10, R7 3700U, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A		Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
GeForce MX150, i5-8250U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP		MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, i7-10710U, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR		Asus Zenbook 14 UX433FN-A6023T
GeForce MX150, i7-8565U, Intel SSD 660p SSDPEKNW512G8
Noise
1%
-3%
-7%
-5%
off / environment *
28.3
29.8
-5%
27.9
1%
30.3
-7%
30.7
-8%
Idle Minimum *
28.3
28
1%
27.9
1%
30.3
-7%
30.7
-8%
Idle Average *
28.3
28
1%
27.9
1%
30.3
-7%
30.7
-8%
Idle Maximum *
28.3
28
1%
27.9
1%
30.3
-7%
30.7
-8%
Load Average *
39.1
36.8
6%
36.2
7%
40.2
-3%
38.8
1%
Witcher 3 ultra *
39.1
45
-15%
Load Maximum *
39.1
39
-0%
45.2
-16%
43.5
-11%
39.3
-1%

* ... smaller is better

Ses yüksekliği

Boşta
28.3 / 28.3 / 28.3 dB
Çalışırken
39.1 / 39.1 dB
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
sessiz
40 dB(A)
duyulabilirlik
50 dB(A)
gürültülü
  
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm uzaklık)   environment noise: 28.3 dB(A)

Temperature

Surface temperature development is more similar to the gaming Zephyrus GX501 or GX531 than to the namesake ZenBook 15 or ZenBook 14 due to the positioning of the keyboard. Owners can expect the keys to be cool at around 28 C no matter the onscreen load whereas sections of the keyboards on most other laptops like the ZenBook 14 can become as warm as 47 C when under high processing stress. The bottom hot spot can reach almost 48 C when gaming as shown by our temperature maps below. We think that surface temperatures could have been even cooler had Asus installed more ventilation grilles instead of the small ones here.

No rear or side exhaust. Instead, heat escapes upwards toward the screen
No rear or side exhaust. Instead, heat escapes upwards toward the screen
AC adapter after running extreme loads for over an hour
AC adapter after running extreme loads for over an hour
Maksimum yük
 35 °C38.4 °C36.8 °C 
 35.6 °C36.6 °C35 °C 
 28 °C27.6 °C27.6 °C 
Maksimum: 38.4 °C
Ortalama: 33.4 °C
41.2 °C48 °C41.6 °C
36.4 °C34.6 °C35.6 °C
32.2 °C33.6 °C33 °C
Maksimum: 48 °C
Ortalama: 37.4 °C
Güç kaynağı  51 °C | Oda sıcaklığı 21 °C | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.4 °C / 92 F, compared to the average of 31.3 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 38.4 °C / 101 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 48 °C / 118 F, compared to the average of 39.2 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.8 °C / 82 F, compared to the device average of 31.3 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 32.6 °C / 91 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 28 °C / 82.4 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 (+0.8 °C / 1.4 F).
System idle (top)
System idle (top)
System idle (bottom)
System idle (bottom)
Witcher 3 stress (top)
Witcher 3 stress (top)
Witcher 3 stress (bottom)
Witcher 3 stress (bottom)
Prime95+FurMark stress (top)
Prime95+FurMark stress (top)
Prime95+FurMark stress (bottom)
Prime95+FurMark stress (bottom)

Stress Test

We stress the system with synthetic loads to identify for any potential throttling or stability issues. When running Prime95, the CPU would boost up to 3.8 GHz for the first few 20 seconds or so until hitting a core temperature of 96 C. Thereafter, clock rates drop to just 2.3 to 2.4 GHz in order to maintain a cooler core temperature of 65 C. The significant dip in Turbo Boost performance from 3.8 GHz to 2.4 GHz is reflective of the steep drop in performance observed during our CineBench loop test mentioned above.

Running Witcher 3 is more representative of real-world stressful loads. The CPU and GPU would stabilize at 65 C and 67 C, respectively, compared to 73 C and 75 C on the Huawei MateBook X Pro with the GeForce MX150 when under similar conditions. These temperatures are reasonable considering the low-power CPU and GPU involved.

Running on batteries will limit performance. A 3DMark 11 run on battery power returns Physics and Graphics scores of 7725 and 1163, respectively, compared to 8449 and 3613 points when on mains.

System idle
System idle
Witcher 3 stress
Witcher 3 stress
Prime95 stress
Prime95 stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
System Idle -- -- 44 37
Prime95 Stress 2.3 - 2.4 -- 65 47
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 2.1 - 2.2 835 69 66
Witcher 3 Stress ~4.2 1366 65 67

Speakers

Speakers near front corners. Audio quality is alright if not typical of an Ultrabook
Speakers near front corners. Audio quality is alright if not typical of an Ultrabook
Pink noise at maximum volume. Maximum volume causes no static, but the keyboard surface will vibrate slightly to the touch
Pink noise at maximum volume. Maximum volume causes no static, but the keyboard surface will vibrate slightly to the touch
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.342.140.3253839.8383138.938.138.94039.937.639.95036.438.336.46336.239.736.28038.134.838.110039.633.939.612547.234.747.216055.933.755.920051.335.151.325058.531.558.531562.231.962.240063.631.263.650066.130.366.16306829.86880066.729.466.7100070.828.970.8125071.728.871.716006828.768200067.328.667.3250066.428.366.4315063.128.563.14000652865500061.22861.2630060.92860.9800060.527.960.5100006127.9611250059.827.959.81600056.727.756.7SPL78.740.978.7N44.54.144.5median 62.2median 28.8median 62.2Delta5.21.15.235.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.72.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus ZenBook Duo UX481FLApple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (78.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 9.8% lower than median
(-) | bass is not linear (16.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 5.5% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 56% of all tested devices in this class were better, 8% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 18%, worst was 45%
Compared to all devices tested
» 40% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 52% 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%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Idling on desktop consumes between 3 W and 11 W depending on the brightness level and if the secondary display is on. Enabling the second display will consume an additional 4 W to 5 W.

When running 3DMark 06, our system consumes an average of 53 W compared to 47 W on the Asus Zenbook 14 UX433 with the GeForce MX150 even though the ZenBook Duo offers about the same level of GPU performance. It's safe to assume that the slightly higher power consumption can be at least partly attributed to the second display.

We're able to record a maximum draw of 63.6 W from the small (6.5 x 6.5 x 3 cm) 65 W AC adapter when running Prime95 and FurMark simultaneously. This high of a consumption rate is only temporary as shown by our graphs below. The observation reinforces both the falling clock rates and declining CineBench loop test scores mentioned above.

Secondary display enabled at 10s mark. The second display consumes about 4 W to 5 W when on maximum brightness
Secondary display enabled at 10s mark. The second display consumes about 4 W to 5 W when on maximum brightness
Relatively constant power consumption when running the first benchmark scene of 3DMark 06
Relatively constant power consumption when running the first benchmark scene of 3DMark 06
Prime95+FurMark initiated at 10s mark. Consumption spikes to 63.6 W before falling and stabilizing at 48.9 W
Prime95+FurMark initiated at 10s mark. Consumption spikes to 63.6 W before falling and stabilizing at 48.9 W
Prime95 initiated at 10s mark. Consumption spikes to 63.6 W for approximately 20 seconds when Turbo Boost is at its highest before falling and stabilizing at 34.7 W
Prime95 initiated at 10s mark. Consumption spikes to 63.6 W for approximately 20 seconds when Turbo Boost is at its highest before falling and stabilizing at 34.7 W
Anlık tüketim
Kapalı / Bekleme modudarklight 0.27 / 1.07 Watt
Boştadarkmidlight 3.5 / 10 / 11 Watt
Çalışırken midlight 53 / 63.6 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
i7-10510U, GeForce MX250, Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8, IPS, 1920x1080, 14"		Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
R7 3700U, Vega 10, SK hynix BC501 HFM512GDHTNG-8310A, IPS, 1920x1080, 14"		Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
i5-8250U, GeForce MX150, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 3000x2000, 13.9"		Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
i7-10510U, UHD Graphics 620, WDC PC SN730 SDBPNTY-512G, IPS, 3840x2160, 14"		MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
i7-10710U, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB1T0HALR, IPS, 3840x2160, 14"		Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ, IPS, 3840x2160, 14"
Power Consumption
17%
-1%
-4%
-26%
-4%
Idle Minimum *
3.5
3.6
-3%
3.5
-0%
3.5
-0%
5.2
-49%
5.2
-49%
Idle Average *
10
7.2
28%
8.9
11%
10.8
-8%
12.2
-22%
10.2
-2%
Idle Maximum *
11
10.8
2%
12.3
-12%
12.5
-14%
14.3
-30%
11.9
-8%
Load Average *
53
38
28%
54.2
-2%
47.2
11%
67
-26%
42.1
21%
Witcher 3 ultra *
35.6
42.4
-19%
Load Maximum *
63.6
45.2
29%
52.1
18%
68.8
-8%
67
-5%
53.6
16%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Asus isn't putting that extra girth to waste; the ZenBook Duo integrates a much larger 70 Wh battery for its size compared to just ~50 Wh on most other 14-inch Ultrabooks like the IdeaPad S940 or ThinkPad X1 Carbon. This approach ensures runtimes that are just as long or even longer than the typical subnotebook despite the power-hungry displays of the ZenBook Duo. We're able to record a real-world WLAN runtime of 9.5 hours even with the secondary display enabled to be longer-lasting than the standard ZenBook 14 by almost three hours.

Charging from empty to full capacity will take just under two hours. The system cannot be charged via USB Type-C.

Batarya ömrü
Boşta (WLAN kapalı, minimum parlaklık)
22h 03min
WiFi Websurfing
9h 31min
Çalışırken (maksimum parlaklık)
3h 40min
Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL
i7-10510U, GeForce MX250, 70 Wh		Asus ZenBook 14 UM431DA-AM020T
R7 3700U, Vega 10, 47 Wh		Huawei Matebook X Pro i5
i5-8250U, GeForce MX150, 57.4 Wh		Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon G7 20R1-000YUS
i7-10510U, UHD Graphics 620, 51 Wh		MSI Prestige 14 A10SC-009
i7-10710U, GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, 52 Wh		Lenovo IdeaPad S940-14IWL
i7-8565U, UHD Graphics 620, 52 Wh
Battery Runtime
-30%
-16%
5%
-46%
-54%
Reader / Idle
1323
1068
-19%
1243
-6%
596
-55%
506
-62%
WiFi v1.3
571
404
-29%
557
-2%
598
5%
351
-39%
299
-48%
Load
220
125
-43%
133
-40%
125
-43%
103
-53%

Artılar

+ önceden kalibre edilmiş ana ekran; Yüzde 100 sRGB kapsamı
+ İkinci ekran çoklu görev için inanılmaz derecede faydalı
+ düşük ila düşük-orta yüklerde sessiz
+ uzun pil ömrü; büyük 70 Wh pil
+ net ve sessiz klavye tuşları
+ taşınabilir 14 inç form faktörü
+ sağlam, yüksek kaliteli şasi
+ MicroSD okuyucu

Eksiler

- açık klavye alışmak biraz zaman alır; büyük bir masa olmadan rahatça yazmak zor
- CPU performansı daha iyi olabilir; yüksek Turbo Boost saat oranlarını koruyamıyor
- ikinci ekran daha fazla parlama ve görüş açısı engelleri yaşama eğilimindedir
- ikinci ekranda ana ekrandan daha dar renk gamı var
- diğer 14 inç dizüstü bilgisayarlardan belirgin şekilde daha kalın ve daha ağır
- Thunderbolt 3 veya DisplayPort desteği yok
- lehimli RAM

Verdict

In review: Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL. Test unit provided by Asus
In review: Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL. Test unit provided by Asus

As any desktop user can attest, having two screens instead of one can really boost productivity and the ZenBook Duo is no different in this regard. It's tough going back to just one screen after becoming accustomed to spacious dual-screen setups and this is the key advantage that Asus is banking on.

For a laptop form factor, however, users will have to accept some compromises. Firstly, weight is the most obvious drawback as the system is several hundred grams heavier than a regular ZenBook 14. Secondly, colors on the second screen will not be as vivid as on the Pantone-certified main display. Thirdly, the wide viewing angle between the user and second screen will both accentuate glare and reduce apparent brightness more noticeably unless if ambient conditions are perfect. Fourthly, the uncommon keyboard positioning can be a learning curve especially if typing in tight work spaces. And lastly, the screens don't do very well when outdoors despite the compact 14-inch size and surprisingly long battery life. OLED could have potentially addressed many of these issues, but such an approach would have likely driven prices up significantly.

There are a couple other missing features we'd like to see on future revisions. A physical webcam privacy shutter and the ability to charge via USB Type-C, for example, are not available here even though they have become standard on most other flagship laptops.

If the above disadvantages don't bother you or if you think you can overcome them, then you'll find the portable ZenBook Duo and its second screen to be invaluable for your multi-tasking needs.

The Asus ZenBook Duo is at its best when working in an environment with controlled lighting and an external mouse to maximize the visibility and ergonomics of the secondary display. If you travel and like to save space, then the ZenBook Duo makes a lot of sense. If you have table space to spare, however, then a standard ZenBook 14 and a proper external monitor would get you further.

Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL - 05/01/2020 v7 (old)
Allen Ngo

İşcilik
85 / 98 → 87%
Klavye
78%
Mouse
73%
Bağlanılabilirlik
53 / 80 → 66%
Ağırlık
65 / 20-72 → 87%
Batarya
88 / 95 → 93%
Görüntü
85%
Oyun performansı
61 / 90 → 68%
Uygulama performansı
88 / 90 → 98%
Isınma
89%
Ses
94 / 95 → 99%
Audio
75%
Camera
44 / 85 → 51%
Ortalama
75%
83%
Multimedia - Ortalama Ağırlık

More articles related to this device

Asus ZenBook Duo UX481FL (ZenBook Duo UX481 Seri)

Price comparison

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo
> Notebooklar Hakkında Aradığınız Herşey > İnceleme > Apple Touch Bar gibi ama daha iyisi: Asus ZenBook Duo UX481 Laptop incelemesi
Allen Ngo, 2020-05-11 (Update: 2024-11- 4)