C 2018
Notebookcheck

Asus NovaGo TP370QL (Snapdragon 835) Convertible Preview

PC with smartphone SoC. The Asus NovaGo is one of the first devices equipped with a Snapdragon 835 processor, which is usually used for smartphones and tablets. We got our hands on a pre-production sample and tested how the compact convertible handles Windows and daily tasks.

Modern smartphone SoCs provide decent performance and their big advantage is the efficiency. Laptop manufactures start to use these chips in laptops and convertibles with a focus on long battery runtimes and excellent connectivity. Many of these devices are shipped with Windows 10 S by default, but it only supports apps from the Windows Store. This sounds familiar, because Windows RT from 2012 followed a similar concept – with limited success.

However, there is one new feature, because Windows now supports the emulation of 32-bit applications. Microsoft is currently working on the support for 64-bit apps as well, so many modern applications would run. The NovaGo TP370QL is primarily designed for students as well as business users who travel frequently according to Asus. The Snapdragon processor includes an LTE modem, so you are independent of Wi-Fi networks with a corresponding SIM card and you do not always need your smartphone.

The success of the device will obviously depend on the price, especially for students. We do not have a specific price for the Asus NovaGo yet, but it should be north of 600 Euros. This means it also competes with full-fledged Windows laptops like the Acer Spin 5Acer Switch 3Microsoft Surface Pro or Lenovo Yoga 720 12.

We managed to run our usual benchmark suite with some exceptions due to the 32-bit limitation. We were particularly interested in the performance during daily tasks and whether there are any limitations when you use the NovaGo for your tasks.

Note: This is a pre-production unit, so we do not add a rating for the Asus NovaGo TP370QL at this point.

Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Graphics adapter
Memory
8192 MB 
, LPDDR4x onboard
Display
13.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 166 PPI, Capacitive, IPS, glossy: yes
Storage
256 GB NVMe, 256 GB 
Connections
2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, Audio Connections: 3.5mm, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Fingerprint Reader
Networking
802.11a/b/g/n (a/b/g/n), LTE
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 1.49 x 316 x 221 ( = 0.06 x 12.44 x 8.7 in)
Battery
52 Wh Lithium-Polymer, Battery runtime (according to manufacturer): 22 h
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD 720p
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
1.392 kg ( = 49.1 oz / 3.07 pounds), Power Supply: 200 g ( = 7.05 oz / 0.44 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The design of the NovaGo TP370QL reminds us a lot of the manufacturer’s ZenBooks and you will immediately know it is from Asus. The majority of the chassis is blueish/gray, which looks good, but especially the lid attracts fingerprints. There are some design elements including the polished edge around the lid as well as the touchpad. The two display hinges also have silver colored covers. The display frame on the other hand is mostly black and glossy due to the touchscreen. Asus advertises a good screen-to-body ratio of 78 %, but only the two sides are comparatively narrow. The bezels are pretty thick above and below the screen. 

The stability of the plastic construction is okay, but especially the base unit could be sturdier. Slight pressure on the center of the base quickly warps the surface and there will be quiet, but unpleasant creaking sounds. The display is better in this respect, not least thanks to the additional glass layer of the touchscreen. Both hinges are stiff in general, and is not easy to open the lid with just one hand, but they cannot prevent bouncing of the display during light vibrations.

You can obviously use the NovaGo as a laptop, but the 360° hinges provide more usage modes like tablet or stand mode. The keyboard is automatically deactivated. However, the NovaGo weighs 1.4 kg, and it is not very comfortable to use it as a tablet for longer periods.

Our test model is smaller than the 13.3-inch Acer Spin 5, but all the other competitors are equipped with smaller displays and are much more compact. It is basically no problem to transport the NovaGo in regular backpacks or bags, but there are more mobile alternatives.

Size Comparison

Connectivity

The port selection is more on the traditional side, because you get two regular USB ports (3.1 Gen. 1) as well as an HDMI output. The combined slot for a Nano SIM and a microSD reminds us of a smartphone and you also need a sharp object (preferably the provided SIM tool) to remove the tray.

We were quite surprised that there is no USB Type-C port, which could also be used to charge the device. Instead, you get a regular wall connector PSU with a proprietary connector. This is unfortunate, especially for frequent travelers that prefer to use an universal power adapter for all their devices.

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!

Left side: Power, 2x USB 3.1 Gen.1 (Type-A)
Left side: Power, 2x USB 3.1 Gen.1 (Type-A)
Right side: Power button, volume rocker, 3.5 mm stereo jack, HDMI, Nano-SIM & microSD
Right side: Power button, volume rocker, 3.5 mm stereo jack, HDMI, Nano-SIM & microSD

SD Card Reader

There is a combined tray for the Nano SIM and the microSD card (can be used simultaneously), which is familiar from many smartphones. A quick installation of the memory card is therefore not possible since you always need a sharp object to remove the tray.

We checked the performance of the SD reader with our reference card from Toshiba (Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II), but our usual benchmark (AS SSD) we use to determine the maximum transfer rate did not work. This means we can only give you the numbers while we copied a folder with .jpg images. 37.4 MB/s is not a good result, though.

Communication

This is one area where the smartphone SoC has an advantage over common laptop processors, because both the WLAN module as well as the LTE modem are directly integrated into the chip and do not require additional components. Bluetooth 4.1 is supported as well.

The WLAN module supports all modern standards including the fast 802.11ac (MU-MIMO, Wifi-Direct) and manages very good results in our standardized WLAN test with the router Linksys EA8500. We can confirm impression; the wireless connection was always stable during our review period.

The integrated LTE modem carries the designation Qualcomm X16 and supports Gigabit LTE (4x4 MIMO antennas) with a maximum downstream rate of up to 1 Gbps (upstream: 150 Mbps).

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
802.11a/b/g/n
569 MBit/s ∼100%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
560 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Marvell AVASTAR Wireless-AC Network Controller
550 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Average of class Convertible
  (38.3 - 678, n=108)
476 MBit/s ∼84% -16%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
347 MBit/s ∼61% -39%
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
338 MBit/s ∼59% -41%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
802.11a/b/g/n
670 MBit/s ∼100%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Marvell AVASTAR Wireless-AC Network Controller
655 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
573 MBit/s ∼86% -14%
Average of class Convertible
  (39.2 - 685, n=108)
489 MBit/s ∼73% -27%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
349 MBit/s ∼52% -48%
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
343 MBit/s ∼51% -49%

Security & Maintenance

The security equipment was not forgotten by Asus, because the NovaGo features a touch based fingerprint scanner located in the touchpad, and an IR webcam with facial recognition via Windows Hello. Both methods are reliable to unlock the device.

Fingerprint scanner in the touchpad
Fingerprint scanner in the touchpad
Internal layout Asus NovaGo
Internal layout Asus NovaGo

The whole bottom panel is secured by 10 Torx screws (T5) and can easily be removed. However, there is not much to do once your inside. The battery is just screwed and could – in theory – be replaced, but all the other components are soldered.

Input Devices

Keyboard

Our test model does not use a German keyboard layout, but is otherwise pretty much standard fare. Only the small arrow keys take some time getting used to. The keys copy the color scheme of the chassis and have white lettering, which is excellent to see. However, there is unfortunately no background illumination for the keyboard. The typing experience of the rather shallow keys is a bit spongy compared to good business laptops, but definitely usable for common tasks. You should not have any problems unless you want to write a book on the device.

Touchpad/Touchscreen

The ClickPad is sufficiently sized at 11.5 x 7 cm and works really well. This is also a result of the implementation as a Microsoft Precision touchpad. Both regular cursor movements as well as gestures with up to four fingers are perfectly executed. You can click the pad down in the lower half, which is accompanied by an even, but somewhat loud clicking sound. Contrary to some cheaper laptops, however, it does not sound cheap. We already mentioned that the fingerprint scanner is located in the upper right corner of the touchpad, but it did not distract us.

You can obviously use the capacitive touchscreen for inputs as well. It recognizes up to 10 inputs simultaneously and works – as you expect from a modern touchscreen – without any problems.

Input devices
Input devices

Display – NovaGo with 1080p Panel

Subpixel array
Subpixel array
Visible backlight bleeding
Visible backlight bleeding

Asus equips the NovaGo TP370QL with a 13.3-inch IPS panel and the 1080p resolution. We were not able to determine the panel ID since our usual tools (even portable versions) did not work. 1920 x 1080 pixels result in crisp pictures, but the picture appears a bit grainy, especially on bright surfaces. We usually know this phenomenon from matte screens, but not touchscreens.

A visible problem, especially in the upper half of the display, is the clouding. This is even worse when you apply some pressure from behind. We determine an average luminance of 280 nits. This is – also thanks to the excellent contrast ratio of more than 2000:1 – okay for indoor environments, but it is not sufficient outdoors (also see outdoor pictures below). We did not detect PWM flickering.

282
cd/m²
282
cd/m²
276
cd/m²
283
cd/m²
296
cd/m²
277
cd/m²
273
cd/m²
278
cd/m²
263
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 296 cd/m² Average: 278.9 cd/m² Minimum: 11.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 295 cd/m²
Contrast: 2467:1 (Black: 0.12 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.3 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 6.7 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
Gamma: 2.23
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
B133HAB01.0, , 1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
XR122EA2T, , 1920x1200, 12.2
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
LG Display LP123WQ112604, , 2736x1826, 12.3
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
AU Optronics AUO226D / B125HAN02.2, , 1920x1080, 12.5
Response Times
6%
27%
17%
30%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
55.6 (28.4, 27.2)
56 (18, 38)
-1%
37 (18, 19)
33%
42 (20, 22)
24%
32 (15, 17)
42%
Response Time Black / White *
31.2 (14.8, 16.4)
27 (8, 19)
13%
25 (14, 12)
20%
28 (18, 10)
10%
26 (16, 10)
17%
PWM Frequency
20000 (90)
Screen
-12%
-24%
2%
-19%
Brightness middle
296
245
-17%
364
23%
461
56%
285
-4%
Brightness
279
233
-16%
341
22%
444
59%
274
-2%
Brightness Distribution
89
87
-2%
85
-4%
93
4%
87
-2%
Black Level *
0.12
0.21
-75%
0.47
-292%
0.34
-183%
0.23
-92%
Contrast
2467
1167
-53%
774
-69%
1356
-45%
1239
-50%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.3
4.2
21%
3.4
36%
3.43
35%
5.6
-6%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9
8.75
3%
7.61
15%
5.55
38%
10.49
-17%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.7
3.94
41%
1.7
75%
3.08
54%
5.39
20%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.66 83%
2.36 93%
3.03 73%
2.2 100%
CCT
8233 79%
6096 107%
6750 96%
7014 93%
5925 110%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
38
59
64
41
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
59
91
99
64
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-3% / -9%
2% / -14%
10% / 5%
6% / -9%

* ... smaller is better

There is also a visible green/blue cast ex-works and the color temperature is too cool. You can see the color cast in the saturation screenshot, for example. Unfortunately, we could not calibrate the screen of the Asus NovaGo. The installation of the software (i1 Profiler) was no problem, but the NovaGo did not detect the actual measuring tool (i1 Pro2).

CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Grayscale
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps
CalMAN Saturation Sweeps
CalMAN ColorChecker
CalMAN ColorChecker

This also means we cannot use our usual method to determine the color gamut, but we have to use the CalMAN values instead. According to the specs, the smaller sRGB gamut is supposed to be covered completely, but we cannot quite confirm this. Still, the result would be sufficient for some picture editing in this color space, but the previously determined color deviations are just too high.

CalMAN Colorspace: 98.6 % sRGB
CalMAN Colorspace: 98.6 % sRGB
CalMAN Colorspace: 75.4 % AdobeRGB
CalMAN Colorspace: 75.4 % AdobeRGB

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
31.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 14.8 ms rise
↘ 16.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 80 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
55.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 28.4 ms rise
↘ 27.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 91 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41.1 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: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8677 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The compact convertible does not leave a very good impression outdoors. The background illumination is just not powerful enough to compensate for reflections on the glossy screen. Working in the shade is no problem as long as you can avoid reflections. The viewing angle stability of the IPS panel does not cause any criticism, though: You can see the display content without distortions from every angle, which is obviously important for a convertible.

In the sun (with reflection)
In the sun (with reflection)
In the sun (without reflection)
In the sun (without reflection)
Asus NovaGo with wide IPS viewing angles
Asus NovaGo with wide IPS viewing angles

Performance

The Asus NovaGo TP370QL with its mobile SoC Snapdragon 835 is clearly targeting users that do want to run complex applications on the device, but daily stuff like writing mails, web browsing and the use of productivity tools like Microsoft’s Office suite.

Windows 10 S is running by default, but this limits the usage scenarios quite a bit since you can only install apps from the Windows Store. The installation of x86 apps is not possible. However, you can upgrade to Windows 10 Pro for free, and we would recommend this for every user.

System specs
System specs
Very clean Windows installation
Very clean Windows installation

Processor

We already had a look at the raw CPU performance of the Snapdragon 835 in a preview article, but the scores were provided by an external source. Our own results are sometimes much lower.

It is not easy o classify the processor due to the incompatibility with modern benchmarks like Geekbench 4 or Cinebench R15. Some applications also have to be emulated, which affects the performance even further.

The ideal scenario is that the NovaGo is on par with smartphones equipped with the same Snapdragon 835 and slightly slower than Intel Pentium CPUs as well as older Core i3 processors. However, our test sample is much slower in some benchmarks. We will repeat the tests with the final test-sample of the NovaGo.

Geekbench 3
32 Bit Multi-Core Score
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
11866 Points ∼100% +180%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
6935 Points ∼58% +64%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
6047 Points ∼51% +43%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
5270 Points ∼44% +24%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
4627 Points ∼39% +9%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
4384 Points ∼37% +3%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
4240 Points ∼36%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (3960 - 4240, n=2)
4100 Points ∼35% -3%
32 Bit Single-Core Score
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
3189 Points ∼100% +173%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
3107 Points ∼97% +166%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
2829 Points ∼89% +143%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
2510 Points ∼79% +115%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
2018 Points ∼63% +73%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
1396 Points ∼44% +20%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
1166 Points ∼37%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (1144 - 1166, n=2)
1155 Points ∼36% -1%
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Total Score
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
4135.9 ms * ∼100%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
3434.1 ms * ∼83% +17%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (2425 - 4813, n=19)
3219 ms * ∼78% +22%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
3108 ms * ∼75% +25%
OnePlus 5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
2621.7 ms * ∼63% +37%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
2401 ms * ∼58% +42%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
1681.7 ms * ∼41% +59%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel Core i3-6100U
1661.9 ms * ∼40% +60%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
1652.3 ms * ∼40% +60%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
1428 ms * ∼35% +65%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
1320 ms * ∼32% +68%
Octane V2 - Total Score
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
27818 Points ∼100% +165%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
23605 Points ∼85% +125%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel Core i3-6100U
21581 Points ∼78% +106%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
21368 Points ∼77% +104%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
21322 Points ∼77% +103%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
17131 Points ∼62% +63%
OnePlus 5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
11945 Points ∼43% +14%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
11308 Points ∼41% +8%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
11290 Points ∼41% +8%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (3086 - 14300, n=20)
11209 Points ∼40% +7%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
10484 Points ∼38%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
223.45 Points ∼100% +212%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
208.95 Points ∼94% +192%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
172.36 Points ∼77% +141%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
158.09 Points ∼71% +121%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
157.15 Points ∼70% +119%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
120.48 Points ∼54% +68%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel Core i3-6100U
90.86 Points ∼41% +27%
Sony Xperia XZ2 Compact
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
88.444 Points ∼40% +24%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
79.1 Points ∼35% +10%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel Pentium N4200
78.773 Points ∼35% +10%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
78.274 Points ∼35% +9%
OnePlus 5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
71.6 Points ∼32% 0%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
71.6 Points ∼32%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
  (52.9 - 80.4, n=19)
66.1 Points ∼30% -8%
Google Pixel 2 XL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
64.709 Points ∼29% -10%
Acer Aspire 1 A114-31-C472
Intel Celeron N3450
52.5 Points ∼23% -27%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
5526 Points ∼100% +732%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
5476 Points ∼99% +725%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
4338 Points ∼79% +553%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
4071 Points ∼74% +513%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
3587 Points ∼65% +440%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
3203 Points ∼58% +382%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
1630 Points ∼29% +145%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
1503 Points ∼27% +126%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
664 Points ∼12%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
 
664 Points ∼12% 0%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Fujitsu Lifebook E558 E5580MP581DE
Intel Core i5-8250U
17166 Points ∼100% +437%
Acer Aspire 3 A315-51-30YA
Intel Core i3-8130U
12142 Points ∼71% +280%
Lenovo V330-15IKB
Intel Core i3-7130U
9828 Points ∼57% +207%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel Core m3-7Y30
8846 Points ∼52% +177%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
Intel Pentium Gold 4415U
8169 Points ∼48% +155%
HP 250 G6 2UB93ES
Intel Core i3-6006U
7293 Points ∼42% +128%
Asus VivoBook Flip 14 TP401NA
Intel Pentium N4200
4909 Points ∼29% +54%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
3198 Points ∼19%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
 
3198 Points ∼19% 0%
Jumper EZbook 3
Intel Celeron N3350
2654 Points ∼15% -17%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
664
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
3198
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
0.27 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
1.59 Points
Help

System Performance & Storage Devices

This section is usually very short when we review modern laptops. Many of the are equipped with fast SSDs, so the subjective performance impression is usually excellent. They boot up quickly, inputs are quickly executed and even more complex applications like Photoshop launch within seconds.

So how does the Asus NovaGo with its smartphone processor and UFS flash storage perform? The initial impression is very positive, because Windows runs very smoothly on the smartphone components. Subjectively, the handling is not quite as responsive as on laptops with PCIe-SSDs or fast SATA-III models, but better compared to systems with eMMC storage and especially conventional hard drives.

We have to differentiate two scenarios when we talk about the system performance, once with the native Windows applications and apps from the Windows Store, as well as emulated x86 applications. The native apps, which also includes the Edge browser, run very smoothly and you will have a hard time noticing a difference compared to a regular notebook. Web browsing, which is obviously an important scenario for this device, is therefore no problem. We also checked how the Asus convertible handles the playback of YouTube videos. Even high-resolution 4K videos are no problem with the Edge browser. A quick look at the Task Manager (see pictures below) shows that the integrated GPU does the majority of work, while the average CPU load is at ~10 % and the playback is completely smooth.

4K YouTube video via Edge browser
4K YouTube video via Edge browser
4K YouTube video via Chrome browser
4K YouTube video via Chrome browser

If you use a different browser, however, like we did with Google Chrome, the situation changes a bit. The CPU load is increased to 12 – 40 % due to the additional emulation and the video playback is not quite as smooth as with Edge. Browsing the web via Chrome was still a good experience though. The installation of x86 apps was quick during and we did not encounter any issues during our tests, but you will notice bigger differences when you try to use more demanding applications. The current 3DMark, which is launched after a couple of seconds on standard laptops, for example, took long 42 seconds on the NovaGo.

To be fair, the NovaGo was definitely not designed for the execution of complex applications, but potential users should be aware of these limitations. Overall, we can say that the native apps run very well and simple emulated apps are also okay.

Another advertised feature is Instant-On, the immediate wake up from standby. The performance of the convertible is actually quite impressive and comparable to smartphones waking up from standby.

We also performed our usual PCMark test, but only the current PCMark 10 as well as the PCMark 8 Home test were working, while the other sub tests crashed. However, the results are not perfectly comparable with regular Windows systems due to the emulation.

PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Liteonit CV3-8D128
3699 Points ∼100% +229%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
HD Graphics 610, 4415U, Ramxel S121 RTNRB256RFM4KWDL
3230 Points ∼87% +187%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
HD Graphics 520, 6100U, Hynix HFS128G39TND
3224 Points ∼87% +187%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
HD Graphics 615, 7Y30, Samsung PM971 KUS020203M
2896 Points ∼78% +158%
Average of class Convertible
  (741 - 4741, n=238)
2732 Points ∼74% +143%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
HD Graphics 505, N4200, Hynix HCG4a2 64 GB
2066 Points ∼56% +84%
Acer Aspire 1 A114-31-C472
HD Graphics 500, N3450, Hynix HBG4a2 32 GB eMMC
1864 Points ∼50% +66%
Jumper EZbook 3
HD Graphics 500, N3350, Toshiba 064G93 64 GB eMMC
1592 Points ∼43% +42%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Adreno 540, 835, 256 GB NVMe
1124 Points ∼30%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
1124 Points ∼30% 0%
PCMark 10 - Score
Average of class Convertible
  (1006 - 4347, n=62)
3072 Points ∼100% +197%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
HD Graphics 615, 7Y30, Samsung PM971 KUS020203M
2509 Points ∼82% +142%
Lenovo IdeaPad V110-15IKB 80TH001SGE
HD Graphics 610, 4415U, Ramxel S121 RTNRB256RFM4KWDL
2492 Points ∼81% +141%
Jumper EZbook 3
HD Graphics 500, N3350, Toshiba 064G93 64 GB eMMC
1195 Points ∼39% +15%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Adreno 540, 835, 256 GB NVMe
1036 Points ∼34%
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998), Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
1036 Points ∼34% 0%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
1124 points
Help
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
256 GB NVMe
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Hynix HCG4a2 64 GB
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Samsung PM971 KUS020203M
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Liteonit CV3-8D128
Google Pixel 2 XL
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
OnePlus 5
64 GB UFS 2.1 Flash
Average 256 GB NVMe
 
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
-32%
171%
99%
30%
Write 4k QD32
50.36
33.54
-33%
172
242%
153.5
205%
75.7 (50.4 - 101, n=2)
50%
Read 4k QD32
56.45
30.39
-46%
301.8
435%
295.8
424%
93.4 (56.5 - 130, n=2)
65%
Write 4k
25.17
26.31
5%
98.76
292%
68.08
170%
41.1 (25.2 - 57, n=2)
63%
Read 4k
14.28
11.43
-20%
40.11
181%
28.01
96%
12.5 (10.8 - 14.3, n=2)
-12%
Write 512
204.8
140
-32%
241
18%
153
-25%
296 (205 - 387, n=2)
45%
Read 512
412
231.6
-44%
261.1
-37%
225.6
-45%
365 (319 - 412, n=2)
-11%
Write Seq
211.4
149.3
-29%
669.9
217%
195.6
-7%
326 (211 - 440, n=2)
54%
Read Seq
589.3
272.2
-54%
690.5
17%
449.7
-24%
520 (450 - 589, n=2)
-12%
256 GB NVMe
Sequential Read: 589.3 MB/s
Sequential Write: 211.4 MB/s
512K Read: 412 MB/s
512K Write: 204.8 MB/s
4K Read: 14.28 MB/s
4K Write: 25.17 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 56.45 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 50.36 MB/s

GPU Performance

We are already familiar with the Adreno 540 GPU from many smartphones or tablets, respectively. The graphics adapter handles normal Windows operation very well and we already showed that the playback of high-resolution videos is no problem. Both 3DMark 11 and 3DMark 13 worked on the convertible and determine scores roughly on par with smaller Intel HD Graphics 505/615 GPUs depending on the benchmark. We once again have to take the emulation into account. We already mentioned the loading time of the current 3DMark was very long (42 seconds).

More technical information and benchmarks for the Adreno 540 GPU are available here.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1507 Points ∼100% +89%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel HD Graphics 615, Intel Core m3-7Y30
1251 Points ∼83% +57%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6100U
1213 Points ∼80% +52%
Average of class Convertible
  (173 - 7483, n=292)
1166 Points ∼77% +46%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Adreno 540, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
796 Points ∼53%
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
  (786 - 796, n=2)
791 Points ∼52% -1%
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
Intel HD Graphics 505, Intel Pentium N4200
726 Points ∼48% -9%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1028 Points ∼100% +102%
Average of class Convertible
  (132 - 5965, n=208)
950 Points ∼92% +87%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6100U
752 Points ∼73% +48%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel HD Graphics 615, Intel Core m3-7Y30
748 Points ∼73% +47%
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
  (508 - 518, n=2)
513 Points ∼50% +1%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Adreno 540, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
508 Points ∼49%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
8576 Points ∼100% +101%
Average of class Convertible
  (1023 - 37388, n=253)
6339 Points ∼74% +49%
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6100U
6249 Points ∼73% +47%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
Intel HD Graphics 615, Intel Core m3-7Y30
6096 Points ∼71% +43%
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
Qualcomm Adreno 540, Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (8998)
4259 Points ∼50%
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
4259 Points ∼50% 0%
3DMark 11 Performance
836 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
12459 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
2359 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
451 points
Help

Gaming Performance

Things are a little more complicated when it comes to games. It is not surprising that the Adreno 540 GPU is not a performance miracle. The more important question is whether older games can be launched in the first place. We tested two titles from 2013: Bioshock Infinite was no problem, but did not run smoothly even with the Low preset. The original Tomb Raider (2013) on the other hand refused to work.

You are on the safe side with casual games from the Windows Store. We tested the racing game Asphalt 8: Airborne. The FPS tool Fraps did not work, either, so we do not have any FPS numbers, but the subjective impression was good even with high graphics details.

low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 20.414.212.6fps

Emissions

System Noise

The Asus NovaGo is passively cooled and does not need a fan. We did not notice any electrical sound during our review period, either, so it is always a silent system.

Temperature

The temperature development of the passively cooled convertible is completely unproblematic. Our shot of the internal layout already showed the location of the SoC as well as the heat pipes directly above the keyboard section. This area warms up under load and radiates the heat to the surrounding areas. After an hour maximum load, which is simulated by the tools Prime95 and a loop of the 3DMark Ice Storm test in this case (FurMark did not work), we only measured around 40 °C at the hotspot on the bottom and ~38 °C above the keyboard, respectively.

This is noticeable when you touch the spot, but not worrisome. The rest of the case including the palm rests stays comfortably cool. The stress test is a rather unrealistic scenario for the test model, anyway, which will probably never happen in real life. You do not have to worry about the temperatures in practice.

Max. Load
 34.1 °C
93 F
38.3 °C
101 F
33.8 °C
93 F
 
 28.5 °C
83 F
29.4 °C
85 F
28.8 °C
84 F
 
 25.1 °C
77 F
25.3 °C
78 F
25.5 °C
78 F
 
Maximum: 38.3 °C = 101 F
Average: 29.9 °C = 86 F
37.8 °C
100 F
40.3 °C
105 F
38.6 °C
101 F
28.5 °C
83 F
30.1 °C
86 F
28.1 °C
83 F
26.2 °C
79 F
26.3 °C
79 F
26.4 °C
80 F
Maximum: 40.3 °C = 105 F
Average: 31.4 °C = 89 F
Power Supply (max.)  31.5 °C = 89 F | Room Temperature 20.8 °C = 69 F | Voltcraft IR-900
Stress test top
Stress test top
Stress test bottom
Stress test bottom

Speakers

Asus uses the so called Smart-Amp technology for the two stereo speakers to improve the volume and low frequency coverage. We can measure a high maximum volume of 84 dB(A), and both the mids and high tones are very linear. Subjectively, we like the performance. There is not much bass, which is obviously noticeable when you listen to music, but the overall impression is positive. You also get a regular 3.5 mm stereo jack if you want to use headphones or external speakers.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2035.934.32531.8313135.332.34033.730.65041.240.96330.328.28027.72810026.435.712524.743.616023.952.620022.259.225021.462.931520.86640018.968.950018.567.36301870.680017.571.610001766.6125016.869.9160016.869.1200017.270.825001772.731501776.2400017.274.4500017.473.1630017.672.5800017.770.31000017.769.71250017.665.11600017.455SPL29.884N1.361.6median 17.6median 69.1Delta1.85.8hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus NovaGo TP370QL
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus NovaGo TP370QL audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 11%, average was 22%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 8% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

The low power consumption is another advantage of the Asus NovGo. The Snapdragon SoC is very efficient compared to regular laptop CPUs, because the communication modules are already integrated. Our test model clearly beats the competitors in all scenarios. Only the results for standby and turned off could be improved.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.5 / 0.59 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 2.2 / 4.5 / 5.2 Watt
Load midlight 8.8 / 11.2 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
835, Adreno 540, 256 GB NVMe, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
6100U, HD Graphics 520, Hynix HFS128G39TND, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 13.3
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
N4200, HD Graphics 505, Hynix HCG4a2 64 GB, IPS, 1920x1200, 12.2
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
7Y30, HD Graphics 615, Samsung PM971 KUS020203M, IPS, 2736x1826, 12.3
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Liteonit CV3-8D128, IPS, 1920x1080, 12.5
Average Qualcomm Adreno 540
 
Average of class Convertible
 
Power Consumption
-92%
-93%
-99%
-105%
49%
-129%
Idle Minimum *
2.2
4.1
-86%
4.1
-86%
3.1
-41%
3.7
-68%
0.852 (0.45 - 2.2, n=18)
61%
4.8 (2.2 - 23, n=331)
-118%
Idle Average *
4.5
6.8
-51%
9.3
-107%
8.8
-96%
5.7
-27%
2.02 (0.84 - 4.5, n=18)
55%
7.96 (4.2 - 32.3, n=331)
-77%
Idle Maximum *
5.2
7.9
-52%
9.8
-88%
9.8
-88%
6.9
-33%
2.12 (0.85 - 5.2, n=18)
59%
9.44 (5.15 - 61, n=331)
-82%
Load Average *
8.8
20.4
-132%
18.9
-115%
22.7
-158%
29.6
-236%
4.69 (2.71 - 8.8, n=18)
47%
26.2 (1.4 - 94, n=330)
-198%
Load Maximum *
11.2
26.8
-139%
19
-70%
23.6
-111%
29.4
-163%
8.46 (6.96 - 11.2, n=18)
24%
30.4 (11.2 - 117, n=330)
-171%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

Asus utilizes the chassis of the NovaGo very well and integrates a comparatively large battery with a capacity of 52 Wh. The manufacturer advertises runtimes of up to 22 hours during video playback, but we do not know the exact test settings. We cannot confirm this claim with our own tests, but the results are still very good. The both realistic tests at an adjusted luminance of 150 nits determine almost 17 hours (WLAN test) and almost 15 hours (video playback), respectively. We performed the WLAN test with the Edge browser, but the runtime should be lower with other browsers that have to be emulated. We will check this with the final test unit.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
31h 23min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Edge 41.16299.248.0)
16h 50min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
14h 41min
Load (maximum brightness)
9h 29min
Asus NovaGo TP370QL
835, Adreno 540, 52 Wh
Acer Spin 5 SP513-51
6100U, HD Graphics 520, 45 Wh
Acer Switch 3 SW312-31-P5VG
N4200, HD Graphics 505, 36 Wh
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) m3
7Y30, HD Graphics 615, 45 Wh
Lenovo Yoga 720-12IKB
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 36 Wh
Average of class Convertible
 
Battery Runtime
-64%
-69%
-43%
-70%
-60%
Reader / Idle
1883
749
-60%
933
-50%
688
-63%
759 (117 - 1985, n=271)
-60%
H.264
881
668
-24%
449 (206 - 1070, n=100)
-49%
WiFi v1.3
1010
463
-54%
309
-69%
682
-32%
359
-64%
446 (153 - 1010, n=208)
-56%
Load
569
133
-77%
198
-65%
89
-84%
148 (49 - 677, n=261)
-74%

Preliminary Verdict

In review: Asus NovaGo TP370QL. Test model courtesy of Asus Germany.
In review: Asus NovaGo TP370QL. Test model courtesy of Asus Germany.

It is not easy to find a real verdict on the NovaGo, because we have to look at the device itself but also Windows with its current limitations, which is just a part of the user experience. The device itself leaves a decent impression. The case looks nice and is well built, the input devices are usable, the operation is always silent, the speakers are comparatively good, and the surfaces barely warm up during day-to-day workloads.

The smartphone SoC also has two big advantages over regular laptop CPUs: integrated communication modules and low power consumption. The latter results in very long battery runtimes, which are easily sufficient to cover a full business day or a long flight. The integrated LTE module can certainly be an advantage, but it is questionable how often this feature is used since almost every user will also have a smartphone. An addition SIM-card usually means additional costs, too.

There are also drawbacks, including the luminance of the glossy display. If you are often on the road, you will have to find a good position to avoid reflections and work comfortably, especially in bright environments. The port situation also leaves room for improvements. We like the implementation of regular USB ports and even a full-size HDMI output, but the manufacturer unfortunately uses a proprietary charging connector instead of a universal USB-C port.

The next big topic is the limitations by Windows on ARM. As long as you are mainly using native Windows apps like the Edge browser, the system runs very well and smoothly, and there is no subjective performance difference compared to a full-fledged Windows laptop. Video playback is not problem, either, and the same applies for Cloud based services. The emulation of apps really depends on how challenging the app is. There is also no guarantee whether the app will run in the first place. Microsoft still works on the support for 64-bit apps, so we will just have to wait and see.

Finally, there is the question about the concept itself. Will the concept work or is it a second Windows RT. A lot depends on Microsoft’s ability to add support for 64-bit applications and how they will perform. There are numerous restrictions right now and this brings us to the second point, the price. We are most likely talking about retail prices north of 600 Euros, which means there are many full-fledged Windows alternatives without these limitations. You will have to waive integrated LTE and the battery runtimes will probably be shorter, but it is questionable whether these two aspects really impact the purchase decision.

Read all 4 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 > Asus NovaGo TP370QL (Snapdragon 835) Convertible Preview
Andreas Osthoff, 2018-05-12 (Update: 2018-05-12)
Andreas Osthoff
Andreas Osthoff - Senior Editor Business
I grew up with computers and modern consumer electronics. I am interested in the technology since I had my first computer, a Commodore C64, and started building my own PCs after that. My focus here at Notebookcheck is the business segment including mobile workstations, but I also like to test new mobile devices. It is always a great experience to review and compare new products. My free time is filled with a lot of sports, in the summer mainly on my bike.