Notebookcheck

Aorus X5 v8 (i7-8850H, GTX 1070, Full HD) Laptop Review

Florian Glaser, 👁 Florian Glaser, Felicitas Krohn (translated by Sabrina Hartmann), 05/24/2018

Praiseworthy six cores. Gigabyte equipped the 2018 version of the Aorus X5 with a hexa-core CPU belonging to Intel's Coffee Lake series. The CPU is accompanied by a GeForce GTX 1070 and a 144 Hz display. Find out in our review whether the 15-inch laptop is on a par with other gaming devices.

Aorus X5 v8

While Gigabyte's – also very powerful – Aero 15X targets not only the gaming sector but also the multimedia sector, its 15-inch brother Aorus X5 is a high-end platform meant primarily for gaming.

Aorus X5 v8 (X5 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop) - 8192 MB, Core: 1443 MHz, Memory: 8000 MHz, GDDR5, ForceWare 391.25
Memory
16384 MB 
, 2x 8 GB SO-DIMM DDR4-2666, dual-channel, all slots occupied, max. 32 GB
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, AU Optronics B156HAN07.0 (AUO70ED), IPS, Full HD, 144 Hz, G-Sync, X-Rite Pantone, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, 512 GB 
, SSD + HGST Travelstar 7K1000 HTS721010A9E630, 1 TB HDD, 7200 rpm. 2x M.2 Type 2280 & 1x 2.5 inch
Soundcard
Realtek ALC1220 @ Intel Cannon Lake PCH
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 3 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 1x headphones, 1x microphone, Card Reader: SD, SDHC, SDXC, Brightness Sensor
Networking
Killer E2500 Gigabit Ethernet Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter (b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 23 x 390 x 272 ( = 0.91 x 15.35 x 10.71 in)
Battery
92.24 Wh Lithium-Polymer
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2x 1.5-watt speaker + 2x 2-watt woofer, Keyboard: chiclet, RGB, Keyboard Light: yes, 200-watt power supply, warranty card, quick start guide, USB stick with drivers, Adobe Reader XI, several tools from the manufacturer, Killer Performance Suite, MS Office 365 Trial, XSplit Broadcaster Trial, XSplit Gamecaster Trial, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.65 kg ( = 93.48 oz / 5.84 pounds), Power Supply: 706 g ( = 24.9 oz / 1.56 pounds)
Price
2700 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Despite the laptop's low height of 2.3 cm, the manufacturer installed a GeForce GTX 1070 and a Core i7-8850H. Additionally, our test edition at a price of 2700 Euros (~$3161) was equipped with 16 GB DDR4 RAM (2x 8 GB @2666 MHz) and a combination of a 512 GB SSD and a 1 TB HDD. The display is a matte 144 Hz panel based on IPS technology and supporting G-Sync. According to our information, a 4K version will be released as well.

As there have been no changes to the laptop's visual appearance, this review will not go further into detail about the case, the connectivity, and the input devices. The respective details can be found in the review of the predecessor model.

Drivers Update
Drivers Update
Command & Control
Command & Control
OC Gauge
OC Gauge

The competitors of the Aorus X5 v8 include other slim gaming devices released in 2017 and 2018, such as the Asus ROG Zephyrus M GM501, the MSI GS65 Stealth Thin, the Acer Predator Triton 700 and the aforementioned Aero 15X. All of these can be found in our mobile gaming top 10. Because of its relatively high weight (2.7 kg), the Aorus X5 v8 did not make it onto this list. We will determine if it is still convincing enough to make it into the "normal" gaming top 10.

Size Comparison

390 mm / 15.4 inch 272 mm / 10.7 inch 23 mm / 0.906 inch 2.7 kg5.84 lbs393 mm / 15.5 inch 266 mm / 10.5 inch 18.9 mm / 0.744 inch 2.4 kg5.27 lbs384 mm / 15.1 inch 261 mm / 10.3 inch 20 mm / 0.787 inch 2.5 kg5.53 lbs358 mm / 14.1 inch 248 mm / 9.76 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 1.8 kg4.07 lbs356 mm / 14 inch 250 mm / 9.84 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 2.1 kg4.58 lbs

Independent journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible but we intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers and support us!

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
194 MB/s ∼100%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
191 MB/s ∼98% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (11.7 - 202, n=218)
91.6 MB/s ∼47% -53%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
242 MB/s ∼100% +1%
Aorus X5 v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
240 MB/s ∼99%
Average of class Gaming
  (13.4 - 257, n=216)
110 MB/s ∼45% -54%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
683 MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Acer Predator Triton 700
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
682 MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
682 MBit/s ∼100% +1%
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
673 MBit/s ∼99%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
660 MBit/s ∼97% -2%
Average of class Gaming
  (132 - 702, n=203)
593 MBit/s ∼87% -12%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Killer Wireless-AC 1550 Wireless Network Adapter
662 MBit/s ∼100% +13%
Aorus X5 v8
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
587 MBit/s ∼89%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
585 MBit/s ∼88% 0%
Acer Predator Triton 700
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
551 MBit/s ∼83% -6%
Average of class Gaming
  (131 - 721, n=203)
538 MBit/s ∼81% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
379 MBit/s ∼57% -35%

Display - X-Rite Makes the Difference

In contrast to the predecessor that was equipped with a UHD display, the current model utilizes a significantly faster 144 Hz display (also IPS). The display of the older X5 had response times of 26.4 ms (black to white) and 44 ms (gray to gray), while the new 144 Hz display impressed us with fairly quick, but not quite perfect times of 12 and 18.8 ms, respectively. The MSI GT75 8RG, among others, proves that even faster times are possible, but it utilizes TN technology which has far worse viewing angles.

256
cd/m²
270
cd/m²
239
cd/m²
248
cd/m²
271
cd/m²
249
cd/m²
258
cd/m²
274
cd/m²
268
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 274 cd/m² Average: 259.2 cd/m² Minimum: 12 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 87 %
Center on Battery: 271 cd/m²
Contrast: 1004:1 (Black: 0.27 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.81 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2
ΔE Greyscale 1.09 | 0.64-98 Ø6.4
93% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 61% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.45
Aorus X5 v8
AU Optronics B156HAN07.0 (AUO70ED), IPS, 1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
LGD05C0, IPS, 1920x1080
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
AU Optronics B156HAN08.0 (AUO80ED), IPS, 1920x1080
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
AUO B156HAN07.1 (AUO71ED), IPS, 1920x1080
Acer Predator Triton 700
AUO B156HAN04.2 (AUO42ED), IPS, 1920x1080
Response Times
9%
-1%
39%
-143%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
18.8 (10, 8.8)
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
11%
17.6 (9.2, 8.4)
6%
6.6 (3.4, 3.2)
65%
44.8 (21.2, 23.6)
-138%
Response Time Black / White *
12 (7.6, 4.4)
11.2 (6, 5.2)
7%
12.8 (7.6, 5.2)
-7%
10.4 (5.2, 5.2)
13%
29.6 (15.6, 14)
-147%
PWM Frequency
Screen
10%
-9%
-89%
-88%
Brightness middle
271
313
15%
254
-6%
307
13%
291
7%
Brightness
259
300
16%
262
1%
296
14%
277
7%
Brightness Distribution
87
78
-10%
89
2%
89
2%
84
-3%
Black Level *
0.27
0.33
-22%
0.22
19%
0.25
7%
0.22
19%
Contrast
1004
948
-6%
1155
15%
1228
22%
1323
32%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
1.81
1.29
29%
2.37
-31%
5.74
-217%
5.52
-205%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
3.33
2.04
39%
4.71
-41%
11.32
-240%
10.72
-222%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.09
0.69
37%
1.58
-45%
6.44
-491%
6.59
-505%
Gamma
2.45 90%
2.43 91%
2.48 89%
2.48 89%
2.44 90%
CCT
6435 101%
6550 99%
6785 96%
8395 77%
7816 83%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
61
60
-2%
60
-2%
60
-2%
58
-5%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
93
94
1%
92
-1%
93
0%
89
-4%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
1.84
1.94
Total Average (Program / Settings)
10% / 10%
-5% / -8%
-25% / -68%
-116% / -97%

* ... smaller is better

Our only points of criticism were the moderate luminosity (about 260 cd/m²) and the strong backlight bleeding that was visible in the lower right corner of our test device. Other than that, a contrast of about 1000:1 is as decent for a gaming laptop as is an sRGB color-space coverage of 93%. The X5 v8 still covers 61% of the AdobeRGB color space.

CalMAN: Grayscales (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Grayscales (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (X-Rite Pantone)
CalMAN: Grayscales (Native Color)
CalMAN: Grayscales (Native Color)
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps (Native Color)
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps (Native Color)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (Native Color)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (Native Color)

The panel's biggest highlight, other than its lavish refresh rate, is its certification for X-Rite Pantone, which lends the 15-inch device a rather accurate color representation (see screenshots).

Aorus X5 v8 vs. sRGB (93%)
Aorus X5 v8 vs. sRGB (93%)
Subpixels
Subpixels
Aorus X5 v8 vs. AdobeRGB (61%)
Aorus X5 v8 vs. AdobeRGB (61%)

In the "Native Color" mode, which deactivates the X-Rite profile, the display has a slight blue tint but an even better brightness (more than 300 cd/m² in the center of the screen).

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
12 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 7.6 ms rise
↘ 4.4 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. » 10 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.5 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
18.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 10 ms rise
↘ 8.8 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 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 9 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (40.7 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 9813 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Performance - A Feast for Gamers

Thanks to the preinstalled tool Command & Control, not only the image reproduction can be adjusted; the energy-saving mode and the fan control can also be adjusted. We used the fan control mode "Normal" for our measurements. Those looking to overclock the 15-inch device have to use the fan profile "Gaming" or the manual controls.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
HWiNFO
GPU-Z
Latencies

Processor

Most of the Coffee Lake laptops we have tested so far were powered by a Core i7-8750H, but the Aorus X5 v8 is equipped with the slightly more powerful Core i7-8850H. Under load, it clocks at 2.6 to 4.3 GHz instead of 2.2 to 4.1 GHz, which is noticeable in the benchmarks. The 15-inch device manages to outperform the competitors Asus GM501, Gigabyte Aero 15X and MSI GS65 by 8 to 20% in the multi-core test of Cinebench R15.

Single-core rendering
Single-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
GPU under load
GPU under load

The performance deviations of the 8750H devices can be explained by the different efficiency in using Turbo. Despite its small to medium advantage, even the Core i7-8850H installed in the X5 v8 does not exhaust its Turbo Boost to its fullest potential, as evidenced by our Cinebench loop.

Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
182 Points ∼100%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼96% -4%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
175 Points ∼96% -4%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Intel Core i7-8750H
170 Points ∼93% -7%
Acer Predator Triton 700
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
156 Points ∼86% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (79 - 212, n=444)
153 Points ∼84% -16%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
1265 Points ∼100%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Intel Core i7-8750H
1168 Points ∼92% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Core i7-8750H
1133 Points ∼90% -10%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
1053 Points ∼83% -17%
Average of class Gaming
  (196 - 1979, n=445)
774 Points ∼61% -39%
Acer Predator Triton 700
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
734 Points ∼58% -42%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
2.08 Points ∼100%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
2 Points ∼96% -4%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.98 Points ∼95% -5%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Intel Core i7-8750H
1.92 Points ∼92% -8%
Acer Predator Triton 700
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.82 Points ∼88% -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (0.71 - 2.38, n=413)
1.684 Points ∼81% -19%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Aorus X5 v8
Intel Core i7-8850H
13.85 Points ∼100%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Intel Core i7-8750H
13.29 Points ∼96% -4%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Core i7-8750H
12.93 Points ∼93% -7%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Intel Core i7-8750H
11.82 Points ∼85% -15%
Acer Predator Triton 700
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.13 Points ∼59% -41%
Average of class Gaming
  (1.13 - 21.4, n=514)
7.33 Points ∼53% -47%

While the first iteration was still processed at 4.0 GHz (= maximum possible value for six cores under load), the clock speed dropped to 3.5 to 3.6 GHz from the second iteration onwards. However, given the laptop's low height, this result is acceptable.

01020304050607080901001101201301401501601701801902002102202302402502602702802903003103203303403503603703803904004104204304404504604704804905005105205305405505605705805906006106206306406506606706806907007107207307407507607707807908008108208308408508608708808909009109209309409509609709809901000101010201030104010501060107010801090110011101120113011401150116011701180119012001210122012301240125012601270Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
6841
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
36819
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
2.08 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
13.85 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
182 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1265 Points
Help

System Performance

Even though the X5 v8 does not have the fastest SSD of our comparison field, the 15-inch device scored first in our system benchmarks. The high-end laptop easily claimed the first place for both PCMark 10 and PCMark 8. The subjective operating speed was rather convincing as well. Windows booted pleasantly fast and reacted quickly in general (starting of programs, loading times, etc.).

PCMark 10 - Score
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
6154 Points ∼100%
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, 2x SK Hynix Canvas SC300 512GB M.2 (HFS512G39MND) (RAID 0)
5277 Points ∼86% -14%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5194 Points ∼84% -16%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5095 Points ∼83% -17%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5059 Points ∼82% -18%
Average of class Gaming
  (2603 - 7171, n=142)
5058 Points ∼82% -18%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5953 Points ∼100%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5676 Points ∼95% -5%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5662 Points ∼95% -5%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
5621 Points ∼94% -6%
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, 2x SK Hynix Canvas SC300 512GB M.2 (HFS512G39MND) (RAID 0)
5211 Points ∼88% -12%
Average of class Gaming
  (2484 - 6515, n=334)
4965 Points ∼83% -17%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5773 Points ∼100%
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, 2x SK Hynix Canvas SC300 512GB M.2 (HFS512G39MND) (RAID 0)
5160 Points ∼89% -11%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
4665 Points ∼81% -19%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
4627 Points ∼80% -20%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4504 Points ∼78% -22%
Average of class Gaming
  (2554 - 6093, n=352)
4243 Points ∼73% -27%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
5773 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5953 points
Help

Storage Devices

The high Windows performance is no surprise, as the operating system works on a modern solid state drive. Gigabyte installed a model by Toshiba utilizing NVMe technology. The THNSN5512GPU7 with a capacity of 512 GB is the same model that has been used for the Aero 15X. The M.2 drive's performance is not quite equal to the current Samsung SSDs, but the values measured in the AS SSD benchmark are still decent at 1813 MB/s for sequential reading and 966 MB/s for sequential writing. The difference is barely noticeable anyway.

SSD
SSD
SSD
SSD
HDD
HDD
HDD
HDD

The manufacturer integrated a 1 TB HDD by HGST as the secondary storage device. The Travelstar 7K1000 works at 7200 rpm and performs well for an HDD, but games and frequently used programs should still be installed onto the SSD instead if possible.

Aorus X5 v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
Acer Predator Triton 700
2x SK Hynix Canvas SC300 512GB M.2 (HFS512G39MND) (RAID 0)
AS SSD
6%
58%
44%
52%
Score Total
2515
2536
1%
4122
64%
3649
45%
3282
30%
Score Write
954
939
-2%
2051
115%
1446
52%
1243
30%
Score Read
1061
1092
3%
1346
27%
1471
39%
1350
27%
4K Write
84.51
80.44
-5%
107.15
27%
90.23
7%
92.99
10%
4K Read
23.21
23.36
1%
48.94
111%
43.42
87%
41.47
79%
Seq Write
965.76
1163.11
20%
1834.04
90%
1580.23
64%
2371.95
146%
Seq Read
1813.23
2212.97
22%
1266.1
-30%
2090.99
15%
2517.2
39%
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2637 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1618 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 361.7 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 296.6 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 1469 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1358 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 31.21 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 88.62 MB/s

Graphics

The graphics are calculated by Nvidia's second most powerful Pascal chip without Max-Q design. The GeForce GTX 1070 is definitely powerful enough for operation in 1920x1080 pixels and even the WQHD resolution of 2560x1440 pixels still works well. However, at 4K, gamers have to compromise between performance and image quality.

3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Acer Predator Triton 700
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
18120 Points ∼100% +5%
Aorus X5 v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
17257 Points ∼95%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
17046 Points ∼94% -1%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
15156 Points ∼84% -12%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
14780 Points ∼82% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (385 - 40636, n=472)
10660 Points ∼59% -38%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Acer Predator Triton 700
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
23694 Points ∼100% +9%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
21925 Points ∼93% 0%
Aorus X5 v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
21823 Points ∼92%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
19162 Points ∼81% -12%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
18687 Points ∼79% -14%
Average of class Gaming
  (513 - 50983, n=546)
12459 Points ∼53% -43%

There were no surprises regarding the performance of the X5 v8 in our benchmark course. 3DMark 11 and the Fire Strike test of 3DMark 13 rank the 15-inch device as equal to the Asus GM501, which is also equipped with a GTX 1070. Because of the Max-Q version, the Gigabyte Aero 15X and the MSI GS65 fall behind by over 10%. The GTX 1080 Max-Q in the Acer Triton 700, however, is faster by several percentage points, but this still does not justify the much higher price.

3DMark 06 Standard
38437 points
3DMark 11 Performance
18621 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
172098 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
37234 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
15226 points
Help

Just like the Intel processors, the Nvidia GPUs can overclock automatically. The Turbo works really well in the Aorus X5 v8. Even under protracted gaming load, the GTX 1070 is clearly above its standard value of 1443 MHz. After 60 minutes of The Witcher 3 (Full HD, Ultra), the DirectX 12 chip leveled off at around 1700 MHz. In an ideal situation, it reaches up to 1873 MHz.

01234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556575859606162Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra

Gaming Performance

The fact that the GTX 1070 is great for gaming is proven as soon as the user tries a game on the Aorus X5 v8. Even more-demanding titles can be played fluently on maximum settings, although the 144 Hz panel is not always provided with the corresponding FPS numbers. In combination with the G-Sync technology, however, the screen content still appears less edgy than it does on classic 60 Hz laptops, be it for gaming or just during desktop operation.

low med. high ultra
The Witcher 3 (2015) 11360fps
Fortnite (2018) 166127fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 53.3fps
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018) 87.865.2fps
Far Cry 5 (2018) 9490fps

By the way, Nvidia's graphics-switching Optimus is not included for the X5 v8, so the processor's graphics chip (UHD Graphics 630) remains inactive constantly.

The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
62.9 fps ∼100% +5%
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
60 fps ∼95%
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
59.4 fps ∼94% -1%
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
52.7 fps ∼84% -12%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
52.4 fps ∼83% -13%
Average of class Gaming
  (12.6 - 115, n=247)
46.7 fps ∼74% -22%

Emissions - The Usual Weak Spots

Noise Emissions

As is the case for most gaming laptops, the noise level is one of this laptop's biggest flaws. At 45 to 55 dB, the 15-inch device is very loud, so it is recommended to use headphones. Other slim competitors have similarly bad results during 3D operation. The main rival by Asus, namely the GM501, also reaches an average of 50 dB after 60 minutes of The Witcher 3.

Noise level idle
Noise level idle
Noise level load
Noise level load
Noise level speaker
Noise level speaker

The X5 v8 is much quieter in idle mode, but 33 to 35 dB is still a noise level that is clearly audible (the value of 40 dB refers to the boot procedure). Tip: Those preferring quietness during undemanding activities should select the fan setting "Quiet" in the Command & Control tool, which turns off the fans completely (only the HDD will still be audible afterwards).

Noise Level

Idle
33 / 35 / 40 dB(A)
HDD
33 dB(A)
Load
45 / 55 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 30 dB(A)
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Average of class Gaming
 
Noise
4%
11%
5%
5%
8%
off / environment *
30
29
3%
30
-0%
29
3%
31
-3%
29.4 (27.7 - 32, n=249)
2%
Idle Minimum *
33
30
9%
30
9%
30
9%
33
-0%
31.5 (28 - 41.7, n=672)
5%
Idle Average *
35
31
11%
31
11%
31
11%
34
3%
32.8 (28 - 46.6, n=672)
6%
Idle Maximum *
40
35
12%
34
15%
33
17%
40
-0%
34.7 (28 - 50.4, n=672)
13%
Load Average *
45
49
-9%
43
4%
49
-9%
41
9%
40.5 (30.3 - 58, n=673)
10%
Witcher 3 ultra *
50
51
-2%
42
16%
50
-0%
43
14%
Load Maximum *
55
54
2%
44
20%
52
5%
48
13%
47.7 (38.9 - 64, n=673)
13%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

The extremely slim build also takes its toll on the temperature development. During the stress test with the tools Furmark and Prime95, the CPU and GPU heated up to almost 90 °C (about 70 and 86 °C @The Witcher 3) without any throttling.

Stress test
Stress test
Full load top (Optris PI 640)
Full load top (Optris PI 640)
Full load bottom (Optris PI 640)
Full load bottom (Optris PI 640)

The case surface got rather warm as well. After 60 minutes of full load, the bottom of the case reached up to 62 °C, which speaks against placing the laptop on one's thighs during a gaming session. The top of the case is slightly cooler. A maximum of 47 °C in the WASD area and 42 °C near the wrist rest are far from good, but they are at least acceptable.

Max. Load
 50 °C
122 F
49 °C
120 F
41 °C
106 F
 
 47 °C
117 F
48 °C
118 F
43 °C
109 F
 
 42 °C
108 F
41 °C
106 F
40 °C
104 F
 
Maximum: 50 °C = 122 F
Average: 44.6 °C = 112 F
56 °C
133 F
61 °C
142 F
59 °C
138 F
58 °C
136 F
62 °C
144 F
60 °C
140 F
47 °C
117 F
48 °C
118 F
46 °C
115 F
Maximum: 62 °C = 144 F
Average: 55.2 °C = 131 F
Power Supply (max.)  58 °C = 136 F | Room Temperature 20 °C = 68 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(-) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 44.6 °C / 112 F, compared to the average of 32.9 °C / 91 F for the devices in the class Gaming.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 50 °C / 122 F, compared to the average of 39.3 °C / 103 F, ranging from 21.6 to 68.8 °C for the class Gaming.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 62 °C / 144 F, compared to the average of 41.7 °C / 107 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.2 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(-) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 41.6 °C / 107 F, compared to the device average of 32.9 °C / 91 F.
(-) The palmrests and touchpad can get very hot to the touch with a maximum of 42 °C / 107.6 F.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.7 °C / 83.7 F (-13.3 °C / -23.9 F).
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Average of class Gaming
 
Heat
-3%
6%
-1%
-13%
2%
Maximum Upper Side *
50
53
-6%
49
2%
52
-4%
61
-22%
45.6 (28 - 68.8, n=638)
9%
Maximum Bottom *
62
65
-5%
63
-2%
49
21%
69
-11%
49.2 (25.9 - 78, n=636)
21%
Idle Upper Side *
27
26
4%
24
11%
31
-15%
29
-7%
30.7 (21.6 - 46.8, n=589)
-14%
Idle Bottom *
29
30
-3%
25
14%
31
-7%
32
-10%
31.5 (21.1 - 50.3, n=587)
-9%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2039.245.12533.9403129.330.24035.737.45029.528.1632827.98026.134.910028.835.212527.636.816025.346.720024.255.925022.660.131520.562.940019.765.650018.764.863018.264.18001960.2100019.857.2125019.261.6160017.562.1200017.761.8250017.663.3315017.663400017.660.9500017.565.1630017.462.7800017.4641000017.463.31250017.364.61600017.152.5SPL30.574.8N1.437.5median 18.2median 62.1Delta2.54.342.243.937.642.431.330.136.440.7283226.237.227.746.525.555.92459.42165.521.569.121.1702067.918.663.917.86317.767.717.569.917.572.216.97216.772.316.87217.275.117.280.217.277.117.376.217.37117.366.917.364.817.157.817.245.629.586.31.367.1median 17.3median 69.11.84.2hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAorus X5 v8Asus Zephyrus M GM501
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Aorus X5 v8 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (75 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (11.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 5% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Asus Zephyrus M GM501 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(+) | good bass - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(±) | higher highs - on average 5.8% higher than median
(+) | highs are linear (6.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 10% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 86% worse
» The best had a delta of 6%, average was 17%, worst was 37%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management - G-Sync vs. Optimus

Power Consumption

In comparison to other Coffee Lake gaming devices, the X5 v8 consumes a relatively high amount of power. The Asus GM501, which is equipped with comparable hardware, has a power consumption of about 16 to 26 watts in idle mode, whereas the Gigabyte laptop has a much higher consumption of 25 to 33 watts. Max-Q devices such as the Aero 15X and the MSI GS65 prove that this can be done better. At 102 to 239 watts under load, the X5 v8 is an outlier here as well and has even higher power consumption than the Acer Triton 700, which has a slightly better gaming performance and benefits from the Max-Q design of the GTX 1080 for its energy management.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.5 / 1 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 25 / 31 / 33 Watt
Load midlight 102 / 239 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Average of class Gaming
 
Power Consumption
31%
39%
20%
-2%
15%
Idle Minimum *
25
14
44%
7
72%
16
36%
28
-12%
20 (3.8 - 113, n=633)
20%
Idle Average *
31
18
42%
11
65%
19
39%
33
-6%
25.5 (6.8 - 119, n=633)
18%
Idle Maximum *
33
22
33%
20
39%
26
21%
41
-24%
30.6 (8.3 - 122, n=633)
7%
Load Average *
102
91
11%
98
4%
103
-1%
94
8%
104 (14.1 - 319, n=624)
-2%
Load Maximum *
239
173
28%
182
24%
223
7%
222
7%
168 (21.9 - 590, n=623)
30%
Witcher 3 ultra *
194
142
27%
132
32%
164
15%
160
18%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

Gigabyte tries to make up for the lack of the graphics switching with an especially powerful battery. With 94 Wh, in line with the Aero 15x, the X5 v8 leaves behind not only the Asus GM501 (55 Wh) by far but also the Acer Triton 700 (54 Wh). Solely the MSI GS65 is able to keep up to at least some extent with 82 Wh. Due to the hefty power consumption, the runtimes are still shorter than those of the MSI laptop – with the exception of the load test. Instead of a maximum of 8.5 hours, the X5 v8 can only reach 5 hours in the idle test (more than 12 hours for the Aero 15X). For everyday operation, for example while surfing the Internet or during the playback of HD movies, the battery runtime amounts to about 3 to 4 hours.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
4h 54min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
3h 36min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 27min
Aorus X5 v8
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8850H, 92.24 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, 94.24 Wh
MSI GS65 8RF-019DE Stealth Thin
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, 82 Wh
Asus Zephyrus M GM501
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 8750H, 55 Wh
Acer Predator Triton 700
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, 54 Wh
Average of class Gaming
 
Battery Runtime
124%
43%
-22%
-40%
6%
Reader / Idle
294
762
159%
507
72%
237
-19%
150
-49%
334 (39 - 1174, n=614)
14%
H.264
216
504
133%
356
65%
159
-26%
106
-51%
244 (88 - 506, n=129)
13%
Load
87
156
79%
81
-7%
70
-20%
70
-20%
78.6 (18 - 202, n=580)
-10%
WiFi v1.3
513
362
164
144
251 (78 - 622, n=294)

Verdict - Good Overall Appearance

Pros

+ certified for X-Rite Pantone
+ superb performance
+ RGB lighting
+ useful tools
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ 144 Hz panel
+ NVMe SSD
+ G-Sync

Cons

- right fan rattles under pressure on certain parts of the case
- temperature- and noise development in 3D operation
- the CPU could make better use of the Turbo
- high power consumption
- backlight bleeding
The Aorus X5 v8, courtesy of Gigabyte Germany.
The Aorus X5 v8, courtesy of Gigabyte Germany.

The 2018 version of the Aorus X5 v8 is able to stand up to its rivals in most areas. Not only the rather robust metal case but also the connectivity, the input devices and the display were convincing. The 144 Hz IPS panel offers a perfect compromise between speed and image quality (keyword X-Rite Pantone).

A couple of the biggest flaws are the high temperature- and noise development, but this is an issue with a lot of slim gaming devices. Overall, we would place the X5 v8 at a level with the Asus GM501, which had very similar performance results.

The strongest rival, however, comes from the same manufacturer as the X5 v8. Those who can easily do without G-Sync in 3D applications and are fine with the loss of a few FPS might want to consider purchasing the Aero 15X instead. The 15-inch sibling is equipped with a more compact and lighter case and has a much better battery life, not to mention the lower price (2500 vs. 2700 Euros, ~$2926 vs. ~$3161).

Aorus X5 v8 - 05/15/2018 v6
Florian Glaser

Chassis
78 / 98 → 79%
Keyboard
83%
Pointing Device
78%
Connectivity
71 / 81 → 88%
Weight
59 / 10-66 → 87%
Battery
71%
Display
90%
Games Performance
97%
Application Performance
99%
Temperature
74 / 95 → 77%
Noise
61 / 90 → 67%
Audio
80%
Average
78%
87%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 2 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Aorus X5 v8 (i7-8850H, GTX 1070, Full HD) Laptop Review
Florian Glaser, 2018-05-24 (Update: 2018-05-25)