Notebookcheck

Asus ROG Zephyrus GX501 Laptop Review

Florian Glaser, Klaus Hinum, J. Simon Leitner (translated by Andreas Osthoff), 07/01/2017

Slim with a powerful GPU. Asus has once again managed to have the slimmest device. For now. This time it is the ROG Zephyrus GX501 gaming laptop. Despite its height of just 17.9 millimeters (~0.7 in), the 15-inch notebook is shipped with an Intel Core i7 quad-core CPU and the Nvidia GTX 1080 with the brand-new "Max-Q" design. We have already had the chance to review the ultra-slim gamer. Update: Higher rating thanks to second test model.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a loyal reader of notebookcheck? Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Especially wanted: 
English-Swedish-Translator - 
Details here
Review Editor - 
Details here
News Editor - Details here

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asus ROG Zephyrus GX501
Asus ROG Zephyrus GX501

For the original German review, see here.

How slim should gaming laptops be? The answer seems to be simple: As slim as possible. Who wants to carry around a bulky machine? But: How slim can gaming notebooks be? Obviously less than 18 millimeters (~0.7 in) right now, despite high-end components with i7-7700HQ CPU and GTX 1080 graphics card. Great, top-notch performance in an attractive super-slim chassis. As it is so often the case, however, there is a catch, and maybe even more than one...

The specifications of the 15-inch device are excellent. Besides the previously mentioned high-end hardware, our test model of the Zephyrus GX501VI is equipped with 24 GB of DDR4 RAM and a 1 TB PCIe SSD (German retail model comes with only a 500 GB drive). You also get a matte 120 Hz panel with the Full HD resolution and G-Sync support. The package is obviously not cheap: 3000 Euros (~$3405) is a steep price, even for a powerful gaming laptop.

Update 07/15/17: The manufacturer asked us to review another test model provided by them because they measured better results in their lab (primarily for temperature and system noise). Our additional tests actually showed lower emissions, so the temperature rating is increased by 5% and the noise rating by 4%. The effect on the final rating is one percent more from 84 to 85%. All corresponding values, screenshots, and text passages were adjusted.

Asus Zephyrus GX501 (Zephyrus GX501 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q - 8192 MB, Core: 1227 MHz, Memory: 2500 MHz, GDDR5X, ForceWare 382.22
Memory
24576 MB 
, consisting if 8 GB + 16 GB DDR4-2400 SO-DIMM, dual-channel
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel 141 PPI, AUO B156HAN04.2 (AUO42ED), IPS, 120Hz, G-Sync, Full-HD, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel HM175
Storage
Samsung SSD SM961 1TB M.2 MZVKW1T0HMLH, 1024 GB 
, Samsung SSD SM961 (MZVKW1T0HMLH-00000), 1 TB PCIe 3.0 x4, M.2 Type 2280
Soundcard
Realtek ALC295 @ Intel Sunrise Point-LP PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
4 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 DisplayPort, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: headphones & microphone combined (3.5 mm stereo jack), Brightness Sensor
Networking
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 17,9 x 379 x 262 ( = 0.67 x 14.92 x 10.31 in)
Battery
50 Wh Lithium-Ion, 4 cells
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0, Keyboard: Chiclet, RGB, Keyboard Light: yes, 230-watt PSU, warranty information, Quick-start guide, screw driver, USB-3.0 to RJ45-LAN adapter, rubberized palm rests, Gaming mouse Strix Impact, several manufacturer tools, XSplit Gamecaster Trial, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.25 kg ( = 79.37 oz / 4.96 pounds), Power Supply: 670 g ( = 23.63 oz / 1.48 pounds)
Price
3000 EUR

 

Case

The gaming laptop is placed within the high-end segment and its casing is correspondingly made of aluminum and magnesium. The C-cover basically bends around the corners towards the bottom, which creates a surrounding polished edge. The GX501 design is very subtle except for the copper colored rear edge, the subtly lit ROG logo on the lid and the two red LEDs on the inside around the fans. It almost looks like everything had to submit to the goal of creating a slim chassis.

The torsion resistance of the base unit is generally very good on our pre-production sample, we can only slightly dent the center area above the keyboard with concentrated pressure. This part of the chase is partially perforated and supports the fresh air delivery for the components inside the case. The display unit can be twisted with some force, but there are no picture distortions.

The real highlight of the Asus GX501 is visible when you open the lid. An integrated mechanism lifts the magnesium bottom plate from the base unit at the rear, so the notebook is sitting at a small angle. This brings important additional millimeters for the cooling by creating a generous surrounding opening for fresh air. The principle appears to be logical and functional, but you might accuse Asus of some cheating here since the ROG GX501 is only super-slim as long as the lid is closed.

It is comparatively easy to remove this plate, which is secured by four screws. Asus has even provided the corresponding screw driver in the box. Once the plate is removed, you can access both fans and also clean them if necessary. It is obviously possible to remove all foreign objects that might be inside. It is important that you make sure there are no objects in the gap before you close the lid, otherwise you could damage the laptop. The upgrade options are very limited since the access to all the other components requires a complicated dismantling and should not be performed by users.

You can see a big difference compared to typical desktop replacements with the GTX 1080 (like the Asus G701VIK). Considering the chassis height of almost 1.8 cm (~0.7 in) and a weight of around 2.25 kg (~4.9 lb), you can find suitable rivals in our Multimedia Top 10 and the mobile Gaming Top 10 lists. These include models such as the Gigabyte Aero 15 or the MSI GS63VR, which are also slimmer than 2 cm (~0.8 in). We will also use the Asus FX502VM, the Alienware 15 R3 and the Schenker XMG P507 as comparison devices. They are between 2 and 3 cm (~0.8 to ~1.2 in) high, but are limited to the GeForce GTX 1060 or GTX 1070.

Note: We spotted some build quality defect on our test model. The front edge of the bottom panel is not perfectly even, and the bottom edge of the HDMI port was bent or slightly cracked, respectively.

Size Comparison

Connectivity

Ports

The port variety is decent considering the slim form factor. While we get a fan exhaust, the power input, HDMI 2.0, two USB 3.0 ports and one combined stereo jack for headphone sand microphones (we would have preferred separate connectors) on the left side, there is one Thunderbolt 3 ports (also supports DisplayPort and USB 3.1 Gen. 2), two more USB 3.0 ports and a slot for a Kensington Lock on the right. Potential buyers will have to do without a card reader, an RJ45-LAN port as well as a conventional Mini-DisplayPort.

The port layout is convenient for right handers in particular, but the ports should be further towards the rear for left handers with an external mouse.

Left side: Power, HDMI 2.0, 2x USB 3.0 (1x with charge), 3.5 mm stereo jack
Left side: Power, HDMI 2.0, 2x USB 3.0 (1x with charge), 3.5 mm stereo jack
Right side: Thunderbolt 3 (incl. DisplayPort & USB 3.1 Gen. 2), 2x USB 3.0, slot for Kensington Lock
Right side: Thunderbolt 3 (incl. DisplayPort & USB 3.1 Gen. 2), 2x USB 3.0, slot for Kensington Lock

Communication

Wireless communications are handled by an Intel chip. The Dual-Band Wireless-AC 8265, which supports the standards 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac and Bluetooth 4.1, can compete with the popular gaming modules Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 and 1535, respectively, in terms of receiving data, but they are faster when they transmit (compare table). Our test is performed at a distance of 1 meter (~3 ft) to the router. There were no problems during the review period and we had no problem accessing the Internet, even through several walls (around 180 to 300 Mbps @10 meters/~33 ft).

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
683 MBit/s ∼100%
Alienware 15 R3
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
681 MBit/s ∼100% 0%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
678 MBit/s ∼99% -1%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
674 MBit/s ∼99% -1%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
662 MBit/s ∼97% -3%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
541 MBit/s ∼79% -21%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
594 MBit/s ∼100% +44%
Alienware 15 R3
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
560 MBit/s ∼94% +36%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
513 MBit/s ∼86% +24%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8260
513 MBit/s ∼86% +24%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
413 MBit/s ∼70%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
346 MBit/s ∼58% -16%

Accessories

The box content is rather generous for a notebook. Not only do you get the aforementioned screw driver, but also a quick-start guide, warranty manual as well as an adapter for USB 3.0 to RJ45, which is a good solution considering the lack of a dedicated Ethernet port. Our test model is also shipped with a nice gaming mouse called Strix Impact, as well as a rubberized external palm rest. The latter makes the typing experience much more comfortable since the keyboard (similar to the MSI GT83VR) is sitting right at the front. This was probably necessary to keep the GTX 1080 Max-Q cool in such a slim construction.

Warranty

The warranty period in Germany and Austria is 24 months (pick-up & return service).

Software

The main software addition is the powerful Gaming Center, which combines several sub applications and tools such as ROG Aura (configuration of the keyboard illumination), Sonic Studio II (Sound adjustment) and Sonic Radar II (better tracking of enemies in games).

The most important element is called Turbo Gear. It is a tool for optional overclocking. While the Standard mode of the GX501 (which we use for our tests) uses the default clocks, the clock of the GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q is overclocked by around 5% from 1227-1336 to 1297-1436 MHz in the Extreme mode. This is not a huge bump and the effect on the system noise as well as the performance is also limited. The 3DMark 11 GPU score is only 3% higher (24169 vs. 23540 points).

Gaming Center
Gaming Center
Aura
Aura
Sonic Studio II
Sonic Studio II
Sonic Radar II
Sonic Radar II

Input Devices

Keyboard

The keyboard is one area where you definitely notice the slim construction. The key travel is very shallow and the layout is a matter of taste as well. The strange grouping of the F-keys (F1 to F4 are separated, the rest are not) was a bit annoying, just like the combined Ins/Del and the lack of a Print key. Our final test model was equipped with a U.K layout (picture on the right), while the model on the preview event featured the U.S. layout (picture on the left).

The Zephyrus also features an RGB background illumination, which – as mentioned before – can be adjusted via software (special marking of the WASD or QWER areas possible) and there are also some effects (static, pulsating & color changes). We are not completely happy with the feedback and the typing experience. The stability is not perfect, so the keystroke is not particularly precise and a bit spongy. One advantage is the moderate typing noise, which is quieter than on many other keyboards. The size of most keys is decent as well (letters & numbers: 16 x 14 mm/~0.63 x 0.55 in); only the directional keys are too small for gaming.

U.S. version
U.S. version
U.K. version
U.K. version

Touchpad

The touchpad with the dedicated mouse buttons is sitting right next to the keyboard to make room for the cooling. This is not impractical for games, but we are pretty sure most gamers will use external keyboards anyway. However, this is often not possible on a train or a plane so the unusual layout is an advantage. The size is not perfect for Windows applications (Office, web, ...). You have to reposition the finger quite often for longer cursor movements due to the narrow width of just 6 cm (~2.4 in). The height of 7.5 cm (~3 in) on the other hand is sufficient.

Precision and tactile impression are good and the smooth surface provides decent gliding capabilities. Gestures are obviously supported as well, so you can zoom, scroll or rotate elements. Clever: As with the MSI GT83VR, you can transform the touchpad into a numeric keypad via a button (see pictures).

Chiclet keyboard …
Chiclet keyboard …
… with RGB illumination
… with RGB illumination
Touchpad with numpad function
Touchpad with numpad function

Display

Unlike many other rivals, Asus does not use the TN, but modern IPS technology for its 120 Hz panel. This results in some advantages and disadvantages. One positive aspect is the viewing angle stability. A TN panel quickly tends to picture distortions, while IPS panels provide stable pictures from wider angles. Colors also appear richer, which enhances games, videos, and photos.

313
cd/m²
320
cd/m²
305
cd/m²
325
cd/m²
328
cd/m²
325
cd/m²
278
cd/m²
279
cd/m²
272
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 328 cd/m² Average: 305 cd/m² Minimum: 37 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 328 cd/m²
Contrast: 1312:1 (Black: 0.25 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 6.02 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 6.32 | - Ø
92% sRGB (Argyll) 60% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.28
Asus Zephyrus GX501
AUO B156HAN04.2 (AUO42ED), 1920x1080
Alienware 15 R3
HPJGK_B156HTN (AUO51ED), 1920x1080
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
AUO B156HTN05.2 (AUO52ED), 1920x1080
Asus FX502VM-AS73
1920x1080
Gigabyte Aero 15
N156HCA-EA1 (CMN15D7), 1920x1080
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
3840x2160
Response Times
44%
46%
19%
-20%
17%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
40.4 (23.2, 17.2)
25 (12, 13)
38%
24 (12, 12)
41%
28.4 (11.2, 17.2)
30%
42.8 (23.6, 19.2)
-6%
28 (15.6, 12.4)
31%
Response Time Black / White *
24 (11.6, 12.4)
12 (4, 8)
50%
12 (4, 8)
50%
22.4 (6, 16.4)
7%
32 (18.8, 13.2)
-33%
23.6 (15.2, 8.4)
2%
PWM Frequency
26000 (20)
1351 (39)
Screen
-24%
-32%
-32%
-5%
-32%
Brightness
305
382
25%
365
20%
205
-33%
316
4%
263
-14%
Brightness Distribution
83
93
12%
85
2%
92
11%
90
8%
92
11%
Black Level *
0.25
0.39
-56%
0.5
-100%
0.69
-176%
0.36
-44%
0.44
-76%
Contrast
1312
990
-25%
714
-46%
304
-77%
889
-32%
623
-53%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
6.02
10.2
-69%
9.93
-65%
4.7
22%
4.62
23%
8
-33%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
6.32
11.28
-78%
10.32
-63%
1.8
72%
6
5%
9.1
-44%
Gamma
2.28 105%
2.23 108%
2.11 114%
2.23 108%
2.46 98%
2.24 107%
CCT
8194 79%
11383 57%
10096 64%
6975 93%
6761 96%
5020 129%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
60
59
-2%
58
-3%
36.2
-40%
60
0%
45.7
-24%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
92
90
-2%
89
-3%
56.6
-38%
92
0%
72.1
-22%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
10% / -11%
7% / -17%
-7% / -22%
-13% / -8%
-8% / -22%

* ... smaller is better

The IPS display falls behind TN panels in terms of response times. 24 ms black-to-white and 40 ms grey-to grey for the AUO panel (B156HAN04.2) of the Zephyrus is much slower than MSI's 120 Hz panels (7 or 26 ms @MSI GT73VR). That the picture still looks smoother compared to a typical 60 HZ screen is a result of Nvidia's G-Sync technology, which is used by more and more gaming laptops. It synchronizes the frame rate of the graphics card with the panel refresh rate. G-Sync was deactivated for the benchmarks and the other measurements, just like the automatic brightness control. The picture mode, which can be adjusted via ROG GameVisual in the Gaming Center, was set to the default sRGB setting.

CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale
CalMAN: Grayscale (calibrated)
CalMAN: Grayscale (calibrated)
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
CalMAN: Saturation Sweeps (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)
CalMAN: ColorChecker (calibrated)
Asus ROG GX501 vs. sRGB (92%)
Asus ROG GX501 vs. sRGB (92%)
Asus ROG GX501 vs. AdobeRGB (60%)
Asus ROG GX501 vs. AdobeRGB (60%)

The display measurements are generally good or even very good. A luminance of around 300 nits is also sufficient for outdoor usage as long as you avoid direct sunlight. Both the black value (0.25 cd/m²) and contrast (~1300:1) are also great. The color accuracy on the other hand is not perfect. CalMAN reveals a distinct blue cast, but it can be removed with a calibration (our icc file is linked in the display box above). We can reduce the DeltaE-2000 values for the grayscale and the colors from almost 6 to less than 3.

Outdoor use
Outdoor use
Subpixel array
Subpixel array
Viewing angles
Viewing angles

The color gamut of 92% sRGB is respectable for gaming and multimedia users. Professional users, who pay attention to the wider AdobeRGB standard, get a coverage of only 60%. Annoying: Our test model showed significant backlight bleeding in the upper right corner. It was only visible on dark pictures, but this should not occur in such an expensive machine. The somewhat wobbly lid construction is probably the reason for the backlight bleeding (Update: The second test model did not suffer from backlight bleeding!). Every buyer has to decide for himself whether 1920x1080 pixels are sufficient for a 15-inch laptop. The performance of the GTX 1080 Max-Q is at least suitable for the 120 Hz panel; the Pascal chip would rarely manage more than 60 FPS in combination with 3K or 4K screens.

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
24 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 11.6 ms rise
↘ 12.4 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. » 28 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (26.7 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
40.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 23.2 ms rise
↘ 17.2 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. » 46 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (42.8 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: 57 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 6262 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Performance

We start the performance section with some system screenshots of the GX501.

Processor

CPU calculations are handled by one of the most successful quad-core models from Intel's Kaby Lake generation. The Core i7-7700HQ is currently the choice for many high-end notebooks, so the implementation here is not surprising. The Turbo Boost feature, which can raise the core clock above the base frequency, works perfectly on the Zephyrus. We determined between 3.4 and 3.8 GHz in the Cinebench R15 benchmark, which is the maximum value for multi and single-core load, respectively.

Single-core rendering
Single-core rendering
Multi-core rendering
Multi-core rendering

The high clock can also be sustained for long periods. Our 30-minute Cinebench loop delivers steady scores for the 15-inch laptop. The CPU benchmarks also determine excellent scores for the GX501 in general, which is on par with other 7700HQ notebooks both in Cinebench R15 as well as Cinebench R11.5.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730740Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
162 Points ∼100% +1%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼99% +1%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
161 Points ∼99% +1%
Alienware 15 R3
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
160 Points ∼99% 0%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
160 Points ∼99%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
140 Points ∼86% -12%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼100% +1%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼100% +1%
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
742 Points ∼100% +1%
Alienware 15 R3
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
737 Points ∼99% 0%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
735 Points ∼99%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
725 Points ∼98% -1%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.84 Points ∼100% +1%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.82 Points ∼99% 0%
Alienware 15 R3
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.82 Points ∼99% 0%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.82 Points ∼99%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.77 Points ∼96% -3%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.67 Points ∼91% -8%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Gigabyte Aero 15
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.23 Points ∼100% +1%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.18 Points ∼99% 0%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.16 Points ∼99% 0%
Alienware 15 R3
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.16 Points ∼99% 0%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.15 Points ∼99%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
7.99 Points ∼97% -2%

The processor also supports the Hyperthreading technology, which means that it can execute 8 threads simultaneously. We never encountered CPU throttling, but the Turbo Boost is deactivated under maximum load due to the temperature. The integrated processor GPU HD Graphics 630 cannot be used because of the missing switchable graphics (Nvidia Optimus).

Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
6015
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
22470
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
11462
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.82 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
8.15 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
67.7 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
160 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
735 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
101 fps
Help

System Performance

The Zephyrus also performs very well in the system benchmarks. The 15-inch laptop ranks either first (Home Score) or third (Work Score) among the competition, but the advantage of the Alienware 15 R3 and Gigabyte Aero 15 is extremely small, so they are basically on par. Subjectively, the system is very responsive, including boot times, data transfers, application launches or loading times. This is, however, not surprising thanks to the fast SSD.

PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Alienware 15 R3
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
5299 Points ∼100% 0%
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
5290 Points ∼100% 0%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD SM961 1TB M.2 MZVKW1T0HMLH
5289 Points ∼100%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
5268 Points ∼99% 0%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
5180 Points ∼98% -2%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
2722 Points ∼51% -49%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD SM961 1TB M.2 MZVKW1T0HMLH
5057 Points ∼100%
Alienware 15 R3
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
4966 Points ∼98% -2%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
4765 Points ∼94% -6%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
4320 Points ∼85% -15%
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
4248 Points ∼84% -16%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVKW512HMJP m.2 PCI-e
4141 Points ∼82% -18%
PCMark 10 - Score
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, Samsung SSD SM961 1TB M.2 MZVKW1T0HMLH
5125 Points ∼100%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
5057 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5289 points
Help

Storage Devices

In order to keep the case as compact as possible, Asus has not included a 2.5-inch drive and has only implemented the M.2 technology. The manufacturer ships the laptop with a PCIe drive to utilize the full potential of the technology. Unlike the conventional SATA-III SSDs (e.g. Asus FX553VD), PCIe drives are not limited at 550 MB/s. Our test model is equipped with the 1 TB version of the Samsung SM961. The performance is excellent. CrystalDiskMark 5.2 determines sequential transfer rates of up to 3445 (read) and 1848 MB/s (write), respectively. The latter is reminiscent of the Samsung 960 Evo in the Schenker XMG A517.

Asus Zephyrus GX501
Samsung SSD SM961 1TB M.2 MZVKW1T0HMLH
Schenker XMG A517
Samsung SSD 960 Evo 500GB m.2 NVMe
Asus FX553VD-DM249T
Hynix HFS128G39TND
CrystalDiskMark 5.2
28%
-65%
Write 4K
149
196
32%
71.24
-52%
Read 4K
45
49
9%
28.6
-36%
Write Seq
1049
1652
57%
135.9
-87%
Read Seq
954
1856
95%
506.5
-47%
Write 4K Q32T1
463
591
28%
136.1
-71%
Read 4K Q32T1
547
627
15%
288.6
-47%
Write Seq Q32T1
1848
1706
-8%
136.4
-93%
Read Seq Q32T1
3445
3389
-2%
549.4
-84%

GPU Performance

With the Max-Q design, Nvidia wants to bring the performance of the GeForce GTX 1080 and GeForce GTX 1070 into ultra-slim notebooks. So far, slim notebooks were limited to a GeForce GTX 1050 (Ti) or GeForce GTX 1060. The two top models from the Pascal generation offer sufficient performance for smooth gameplay in all modern games at the highest settings. We want to check whether this is also the case for the Max-Q versions, but we start with some specifications. According to Nvidia, the new models have been optimized for efficiency both in terms of hardware as well as software via drivers.

GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q design ...
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q design ...
... with a 120 Hz display ...
... with a 120 Hz display ...
... and G-Sync support
... and G-Sync support

Most of the basic specifications remind us of the standard versions from 2016. The tuned GTX 1080 also gets 250 shaders and 8 GB GDDR5X video memory (256-bit interface) clocked at 2500 MHz. However, there are differences in the core clocks. Instead of 1582 to 1771 MHz, the Max-Q version only runs at 1227 to 1366 MHz.

Turbo Gear Standard
Turbo Gear Standard
Turbo Gear Extreme
Turbo Gear Extreme

The GPU Boost is very high at up to 1709 MHz (Turbo Gear Standard) or 1772 MHz (Turbo Gear Extreme), respectively, but the regular GTX 1080 is still faster in synthetic benchmarks. MSI's GT73VR is 15% faster in the 3DMark 13 Fire Strike Test; 22% in 3DMark 11.

3DMark - 1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
21026 Points ∼100% +15%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
18219 Points ∼87%
Alienware 15 R3
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
17675 Points ∼84% -3%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
16873 Points ∼80% -7%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
11633 Points ∼55% -36%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
11261 Points ∼54% -38%
Gigabyte Aero 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
11173 Points ∼53% -39%
3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
28675 Points ∼100% +22%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
23540 Points ∼82%
Alienware 15 R3
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
22810 Points ∼80% -3%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
21922 Points ∼76% -7%
Asus FX502VM-AS73
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
14732 Points ∼51% -37%
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
14450 Points ∼50% -39%
Gigabyte Aero 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
14265 Points ∼50% -39%
Unigine Heaven 4.0 - Extreme Preset DX11
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop)
132.3 fps ∼100% +19%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
111.3 fps ∼84%
Alienware 15 R3
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
109.6 fps ∼83% -2%
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop)
109.1 fps ∼82% -2%
Gigabyte Aero 15
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)
73.8 fps ∼56% -34%

This means that the GTX 1080 Max-Q is actually more comparable to the GeForce GTX 1070, which is only a few percent slower in the Alienware 15 R3 and Schenker XMG P507, but costs significantly less. Notebooks with the GTX 1060 (Asus FX502VMGigabyte Aero 15MSI GS63VR, ...) are beaten by around 60%. More information about Nvidia's Max-Q design is available in our dedicated article.

3DMark Vantage P Result
39562 points
3DMark 11 Performance
16821 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
140964 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
27935 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
14260 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
5390 points
Help

As with the CPU, the GPU can also maintain its performance for long periods. Our 60-minute test with “The Witcher 3” showed a steady clock of 1430 MHz for the GTX 1080 (~1480 MHz @Extreme Mode). The Full HD frame rate (ultra-settings) was always between 56 and 63 FPS.

0123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra

Gaming Performance

Our gaming benchmarks confirm the synthetic results. The GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q is once again closer to the GeForce GTX 1070 than the GTX 1080. The average performance ranking for all 24 tested titles is shown in the following table:

Graphics card Performance (Full HD/Ultra & UHD/High)
GeForce GTX 1080 +17%
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q Base
GeForce GTX 1070 -9%
GeForce GTX 1060 -35%

Every gamer has to decide whether the combination of a portable chassis and 10% additional performance is worth the high additional charge over a GTX 1070 notebook. Thanks to the Max-Q design, however, you can now get serious GPU performance in laptops slimmer than 2 cm (~0.8 in), which were so far limited to mainstream chips or entry-level high-end GPUs. The advantage over the GTX 1060 is more than considerable at around 50%.

The Witcher 3
3840x2160 High Graphics & Postprocessing (Nvidia HairWorks Off)
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
51 fps ∼100% +17%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
43.7 fps ∼86%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
38.3 fps ∼75% -12%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
24.9 fps ∼49% -43%
1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+)
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
74.2 fps ∼100% +20%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
61.9 fps ∼83%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
58 fps ∼78% -6%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
37.7 fps ∼51% -39%
Batman: Arkham Knight
3840x2160 High / On (Interactive Smoke & Paper Debris Off) AA:SM AF:8x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
56 fps ∼100% +17%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
48 fps ∼86%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
40 fps ∼71% -17%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
28 fps ∼50% -42%
1920x1080 High / On AA:SM AF:16x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
96 fps ∼100% +9%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
88 fps ∼92%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
77 fps ∼80% -12%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
57 fps ∼59% -35%
Star Wars Battlefront
3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
66.2 fps ∼100% +19%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
55.6 fps ∼84%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
49.9 fps ∼75% -10%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
33.4 fps ∼50% -40%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:FX
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
164 fps ∼100% +14%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
144 fps ∼88%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
128 fps ∼78% -11%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
88.4 fps ∼54% -39%
Assassin's Creed Syndicate
3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
47.2 fps ∼100% +18%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
40 fps ∼85%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
35.6 fps ∼75% -11%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
24.4 fps ∼52% -39%
1920x1080 Ultra High Preset AA:4x MSAA + FX
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
52.9 fps ∼100% +5%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
50.3 fps ∼95%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
45 fps ∼85% -11%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
30.8 fps ∼58% -39%
Rainbow Six Siege
3840x2160 High Preset AA:T AF:4x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
81.8 fps ∼100% +25%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
65.7 fps ∼80%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
62.7 fps ∼77% -5%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
42.7 fps ∼52% -35%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T AF:16x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
203 fps ∼100% +18%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
172 fps ∼85%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
163 fps ∼80% -5%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
115 fps ∼57% -33%
Rise of the Tomb Raider
3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX AF:4x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
50.1 fps ∼100% +15%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
43.6 fps ∼87%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
37.5 fps ∼75% -14%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
25.4 fps ∼51% -42%
1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
109 fps ∼100% +4%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
105 fps ∼96%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
84.6 fps ∼78% -19%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
59.1 fps ∼54% -44%
Far Cry Primal
3840x2160 High Preset AA:SM
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
48 fps ∼100% +17%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
41 fps ∼85%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
36 fps ∼75% -12%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
24 fps ∼50% -41%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:SM
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
101 fps ∼100% +16%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
87 fps ∼86%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
78 fps ∼77% -10%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
56 fps ∼55% -36%
The Division
3840x2160 High Preset AF:8x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
49.4 fps ∼100% +21%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
40.8 fps ∼83%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
37 fps ∼75% -9%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
24.2 fps ∼49% -41%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AF:16x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
96.3 fps ∼100% +15%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
83.8 fps ∼87%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
75.7 fps ∼79% -10%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
50.4 fps ∼52% -40%
Doom
3840x2160 High Preset AA:FX
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
65.8 fps ∼100% +22%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
53.9 fps ∼82%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
45.6 fps ∼69% -15%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
31.5 fps ∼48% -42%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:SM
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
140 fps ∼100% +9%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
128 fps ∼91%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
117 fps ∼84% -9%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
91.5 fps ∼65% -29%
Mirror's Edge Catalyst
3840x2160 High Preset AF:16x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
47.4 fps ∼100% +22%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
38.8 fps ∼82%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
36.4 fps ∼77% -6%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
24.8 fps ∼52% -36%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AF:16x
Asus G800VI Prototype
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 6820HK
117 fps ∼100% +20%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
97.8 fps ∼84%
MSI GT62VR-6RE16H21
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6700HQ
92.4 fps ∼79% -6%
Schenker XMG P507
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6700HQ
67.1 fps ∼57% -31%
Deus Ex Mankind Divided
3840x2160 High Preset AF:4x
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
35.5 fps ∼100% +20%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
29.6 fps ∼83%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
24.2 (min: 21) fps ∼68% -18%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:2xMS AF:8x
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
57.1 fps ∼100% +19%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
47.9 fps ∼84%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
41.2 (min: 32) fps ∼72% -14%
Battlefield 1
3840x2160 High Preset AA:T
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
57.9 fps ∼100% +18%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
50.9 (min: 43) fps ∼88% +4%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
49 fps ∼85%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
135 fps ∼100% +19%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
118 (min: 102) fps ∼87% +4%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
113 fps ∼84%
Titanfall 2
3840x2160 High / Enabled AA:TS AF:8x
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
58.4 fps ∼100% +25%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
46.6 fps ∼80%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
41.7 (min: 30) fps ∼71% -11%
1920x1080 Very High (Insane Texture Quality) / Enabled AA:TS AF:16x
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
141 fps ∼100% +25%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
113 fps ∼80%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
107 (min: 87) fps ∼76% -5%
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare
3840x2160 High / On AA:FX
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
75.7 fps ∼100% +19%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
63.7 fps ∼84%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
58.3 (min: 43) fps ∼77% -8%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
42.1 (min: 30) fps ∼56% -34%
1920x1080 Ultra / On AA:T2X SM
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
125 fps ∼100% +6%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
118 fps ∼94%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
113 (min: 95) fps ∼90% -4%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
90.8 (min: 68) fps ∼73% -23%
Dishonored 2
3840x2160 High Preset AA:TX
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
49.2 fps ∼100% +13%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
43.4 fps ∼88%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
35.9 (min: 30) fps ∼73% -17%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
31.2 (min: 26) fps ∼63% -28%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:TX
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
79.9 fps ∼100% +20%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
66.5 fps ∼83%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
65 (min: 45) fps ∼81% -2%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
58.6 (min: 47) fps ∼73% -12%
Watch Dogs 2
3840x2160 High Preset
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
41.4 fps ∼100% +19%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
34.9 fps ∼84%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
34.6 (min: 31) fps ∼84% -1%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
22.4 (min: 19) fps ∼54% -36%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset
MSI GT73VR 7RF-296
GeForce GTX 1080 (Laptop), 7820HK
71.7 fps ∼100% +7%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
66.7 fps ∼93%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
61.4 (min: 50) fps ∼86% -8%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
42.3 (min: 32) fps ∼59% -37%
Resident Evil 7
3840x2160 High / On AA:FXAA+T
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
47.4 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
43.4 (min: 36) fps ∼92% -8%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
28.4 (min: 24) fps ∼60% -40%
1920x1080 Very High / On AA:FXAA+T
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
140 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
131 (min: 113) fps ∼94% -6%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
85.8 (min: 73) fps ∼61% -39%
For Honor
3840x2160 High Preset AA:T AF:8x
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
47.9 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
43.4 (min: 34) fps ∼91% -9%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
30 (min: 23) fps ∼63% -37%
1920x1080 Extreme Preset AA:T AF:16x
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
115 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
108 (min: 78) fps ∼94% -6%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
72.4 (min: 41) fps ∼63% -37%
Ghost Recon Wildlands
3840x2160 Very High Preset AA:T AF:8x
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
34.1 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
32 (min: 24) fps ∼94% -6%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
22.3 (min: 16) fps ∼65% -35%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:T AF:16x
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
51.9 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
50.7 (min: 44) fps ∼98% -2%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
38.1 (min: 32) fps ∼73% -27%
Mass Effect Andromeda
3840x2160 High Preset (Resolution Scale Mode off) AA:T
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
35.1 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
32.8 (min: 29) fps ∼93% -7%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
21.4 (min: 19) fps ∼61% -39%
1920x1080 Ultra Preset (Resolution Scale Mode off) AA:T
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
74.3 (min: 65) fps ∼100% +2%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
73.2 fps ∼99%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
50.3 (min: 44) fps ∼68% -31%
Prey
3840x2160 High Preset AA:2TX SM AF:8x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
51.7 (min: 43) fps ∼100% +2%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
50.5 fps ∼98%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
38 (min: 32) fps ∼74% -25%
1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:2TX SM AF:16x
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
133 (min: 94) fps ∼100% +2%
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
131 fps ∼98%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
100 (min: 75) fps ∼75% -24%
Rocket League
3840x2160 High Quality AA:High FX
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
103 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
85.3 (min: 72) fps ∼83% -17%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
65.9 (min: 56) fps ∼64% -36%
1920x1080 High Quality AA:High FX
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
235 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
212 (min: 164) fps ∼90% -10%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
175 (min: 139) fps ∼74% -26%
Dirt 4 - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset AA:4xMS AF:16x
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
88.4 fps ∼100%
Asus G752VS
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 6820HK
79.5 (min: 67) fps ∼90% -10%
MSI GT62VR
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 6820HK
59.2 (min: 51) fps ∼67% -33%

The Zephyrus can generally handle every game smoothly in the native Full HD resolution (1920x1080 pixels); even the 120 Hz panel is maxed out in some cases. The GTX 1080 Max-Q will only struggle in poorly optimized titles like “Deus Ex Mankind Divided” or resolutions higher than Full HD. External 120 Hz panel would not make much sense here – at least in high or maximum settings. However, the GX501 usually never drops below 30 FPS, even at 3840x2160 pixels.

Also great: The driver (we use the preloaded ForceWar 382.22) already seems to be very sophisticated. We never encountered graphics errors, crashes or blue screens during the gaming benchmarks. Only the shader preload in “Call of Duty Infinite Warfare”, which is running at the initial game launch or when the hardware changes, took very long at almost 5 minutes.

low med. high ultra4K
The Witcher 3 (2015) 11861.943.7fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 1248848fps
Star Wars Battlefront (2015) 16414455.6fps
Assassin's Creed Syndicate (2015) 74.450.340fps
Rainbow Six Siege (2015) 19717265.7fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 12510543.6fps
Far Cry Primal (2016) 928741fps
The Division (2016) 10783.840.8fps
Doom (2016) 13412853.9fps
Mirror's Edge Catalyst (2016) 10697.838.8fps
Deus Ex Mankind Divided (2016) 87.347.929.6fps
Battlefield 1 (2016) 13011349fps
Titanfall 2 (2016) 13111346.6fps
Call of Duty Infinite Warfare (2016) 12311863.7fps
Dishonored 2 (2016) 78.266.543.4fps
Watch Dogs 2 (2016) 86.766.734.9fps
Resident Evil 7 (2017) 16614047.4fps
For Honor (2017) 15511547.9fps
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017) 86.751.934.1fps
Mass Effect Andromeda (2017) 81.473.235.1fps
Warhammer 40.000: Dawn of War III (2017) 888641.9fps
Prey (2017) 13513150.5fps
Rocket League (2017) 235103fps
Dirt 4 (2017) 13688.4fps
Team Fortress 2 (2017) 124125fps
Playerunknown's Battlegrounds (2017) 1251111047927.1fps

Emissions

System Noise

One of the most interesting aspects of Nvidia's Max-Q design is the noise limit. The GeForce GTX 1080 is supposed to reach no more than 40 dB(A), a level many gaming laptops (also less powerful) clearly exceed. We can more or less confirm this target range as long as you run "standard" 3D applications. 35 to 40 dB(A) in 3DMark 06 (average 39 dB(A)) and 42 dB(A) on average after 60 minutes of “The Witcher 3” is a good result for such a slim high-end notebook. The GX501 is only very loud under maximum load with the tools FurMark and Prime95. Our measurement device shows up to 46 dB(A) in this impractical scenario.

System noise idle
System noise idle
System noise load
System noise load
Speaker measurements
Speaker measurements

The 15-inch system handles idle periods at a very subtle noise level between 32 and 34 dB(A), even though the fans cover higher frequencies, so they are subjectively louder compared to other gaming notebooks and could be annoying for sensitive users. The cooling solution is never silent, but there is at least no unnecessary pulsating while idling.

Noise Level

Idle
32 / 33 / 34 dB(A)
Load
39 / 46 dB(A)
 
 
 
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: 31 dB(A)
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Alienware 15 R3
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Noise
-8%
-11%
-1%
-2%
-0%
off / environment *
31
30
3%
31
-0%
28.7
7%
31
-0%
28.8
7%
Idle Minimum *
32
31
3%
33
-3%
30.6
4%
32
-0%
33.1
-3%
Idle Average *
33
32
3%
34
-3%
30.6
7%
33
-0%
33.1
-0%
Idle Maximum *
34
42
-24%
44
-29%
31
9%
34
-0%
34
-0%
Load Average *
39
49
-26%
46
-18%
46.2
-18%
39
-0%
37.2
5%
Witcher 3 ultra *
42
43
-2%
46.1
-10%
Load Maximum *
46
50
-9%
52
-13%
52.3
-14%
50
-9%
47.1
-2%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

The major disadvantage of the slim construction and the limited noise level is the high temperature development of the case and the hardware. We can measure temperatures exceeding 50 °C (~122 °F) at some spots, both during the stress test as well as “The Witcher 3”. This is - as long as you do not use the GX501 on your lap – not a serious problem, but the keyboard also warms up to more than 40 °C (~104 °F) in practice, which can be uncomfortable for some users. The new Max-Q design is not a "saviour" for notebooks after all.

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

However, the main issue here should be the CPU. Intel has hardly worked on the thermal management or the efficiency, respectively, due to the lack of real competition, so the processor gets very warm in almost all gaming laptops. After a maximum load for one hour (again FurMark & Prime95), the CPU temperature climbed to more than 90 °C (~194 °F). The GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q stayed a bit cooler at around 82 °C (~179 °F), but throttled to less than 1000 MHz. The GPU did not throttle in “The Witcher 3” at around 79 °C (~174 °F).

However, we performed the measurements on a very hot summer day, so the values should be lower in cooler environments, especially during the winter. There is no criticism for the idle results. A chassis temperature of around 30 °C (~86 °F) is not a great result, but the laptop is pretty cool while idling.

Max. Load
 57 °C56 °C56 °C 
 52 °C54 °C49 °C 
 42 °C41 °C40 °C 
Maximum: 57 °C
Average: 49.7 °C
47 °C46 °C54 °C
42 °C43 °C48 °C
41 °C42 °C42 °C
Maximum: 54 °C
Average: 45 °C
Power Supply (max.)  48 °C | Room Temperature 24 °C | Voltcraft IR-900

These are the results with the second test model at lower ambient temperatures (maximum load scenario). Especially the palm rests stay cooler.

Max. Load
 53 °C54 °C50 °C 
 47 °C51 °C45 °C 
 36 °C36 °C32 °C 
Maximum: 54 °C
Average: 44.9 °C
45 °C44 °C48 °C
41 °C42 °C40 °C
38 °C40 °C39 °C
Maximum: 48 °C
Average: 41.9 °C
Room Temperature 22 °C | Fluke 62 Mini
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Alienware 15 R3
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Heat
-4%
-2%
3%
9%
8%
Maximum Upper Side *
57
46
19%
49.2
14%
53.2
7%
56
2%
Maximum Bottom *
54
51.8
4%
62
-15%
56.8
-5%
61
-13%
Idle Upper Side *
32
36.5
-14%
32.4
-1%
28.8
10%
25
22%
28.4
11%
Idle Bottom *
31
38.2
-23%
33
-6%
31.4
-1%
24
23%
29.6
5%

* ... smaller is better

Speakers

Asus has positioned the speakers on the left and right next to the keyboard, so none of the components can affect the cooling performance. The area should usually not be covered by the hands, so we do not expect any limitations for the sound in practice.

Speaking of sound: Our audio analysis shows an average performance among gaming laptops. The sound quality is similar to the Gigabyte Aero 15, which represents mids and highs quite accurately, but it has the same struggles with deep tones and bass. The maximum volume of 83 dB(A) is sufficient for small and medium-sized rooms. The performance is certainly okay for portable multimedia purposes, and Asus deserves some respect, considering the slim case.

You should still use external solutions if possible when you use the laptop stationary. We used the sound profile Music for our test. The software Sonic Studio II provides several modes and sound enhancements.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.143253338313134.64031.433.75027.529.16327.529.88026.129.710025.828.81252328.316022.541.920022.252.325022.457.931521.464.240019.967.250019.870.763019.774.38001975.110002071125019.268.3160019.168.620001969.5250019.269.2315019.268.8400019.169.4500019.270.663001972.3800019.173.9100001972.71250018.8681600018.659.1SPL31.483N1.659.4median 19.2Asus Zephyrus GX501median 68.8Delta16.640.245.238.242.533.735.740.640.8314232.939.729.931.826.935.825.332.423.935.423.544.525.149.925.354.821.558.820.361.620.165.918.865.518.865.418.667.518.566.318.56618.467.918.570.418.465.818.264.418.36418.268.618.769.718.671.417.964.331.379.11.644.5median 18.7Gigabyte Aero 15median 65.41.66.3hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Asus Zephyrus GX501 audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 43% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 52% worse
» The best had a delta of 10%, average was 18%, worst was 34%
Compared to all devices tested
» 22% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Gigabyte Aero 15 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 23.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 44% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 49% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 35%
Compared to all devices tested
» 24% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 22%, worst was 53%

Frequency Comparison (Checkboxes select/deselectable!)

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Nvidia deserves praise for the optimization of the efficiency. While regular GTX 1080 laptops require extremely bulky and heavy 330-watt power adapters, the Zephyrus requires only a 230-watt model similar to most GTX 1070 systems. The PSU measures just 16.5 x 7.5 x 3 cm (~6.5 x 3 x 1.2 in) and is even smaller compared to many rivals.

The positive impression is confirmed by our benchmarks. The 15-inch laptop consumes only 79 watts in 3DMark 06. This value could also be from a GTX 1060 notebook or it even beats these systems. The consumption moves towards the GTX 1070 only under maximum load. Asus uses G-Sync in favor of Optimus, so the idle results are just mediocre (18 to 31 watts). Gigabyte does a better job with the Aero 15 (12 to 20 watts).

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.7 / 0.9 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 18 / 23 / 31 Watt
Load midlight 79 / 196 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ
Alienware 15 R3
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
Power Consumption
-1%
11%
18%
24%
17%
Idle Minimum *
18
19
-6%
14
22%
14.9
17%
12
33%
14.5
19%
Idle Average *
23
23
-0%
18
22%
15.1
34%
15
35%
17.3
25%
Idle Maximum *
31
29
6%
24
23%
15.2
51%
20
35%
17.4
44%
Load Average *
79
85
-8%
87
-10%
105.8
-34%
82
-4%
93
-18%
Load Maximum *
196
192
2%
201
-3%
148.8
24%
161
18%
Witcher 3 ultra *
148
111
25%
128.8
13%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Runtime

One of the biggest issues for many potential buyers is probably the battery runtime. Asus has equipped the GX501 with a 4-cell battery to realize the "ultra-slim and ultra-fast" concept. 50 Wh is not a lot and counteracts the mobility aspect. Why get a very slim and light chassis, when the battery is drained after a short while?

However, this is unfortunately the case with the Zephyrus. The longest runtime, even at the lowest luminance, is 3 hours. Around 2 hours web browsing and 2 hours video playback (display at 150 nits in both cases) is no highlight either. Stress the notebook harder and the battery will run out of juice after less than one hour. For comparison: The 99-Wh battery of the Alienware 15 R3 manages twice as much in all scenarios. The battery performance is at least not significantly reduced. Our test with “The Witcher 3” (Full HD/Ultra) shows a moderate frame rate drop of only 18%, which is pretty good for a high-end notebook.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
3h 08min
WiFi Surfing v1.3
2h 10min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
2h 12min
Load (maximum brightness)
0h 44min
Asus Zephyrus GX501
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q, 7700HQ, 50 Wh
Alienware 15 R3
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 99 Wh
Schenker XMG P507 PRO
GeForce GTX 1070 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 60 Wh
Asus FX502VM-AS73
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 64 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 94.24 Wh
MSI GS63VR 7RF-228US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, 65 Wh
Battery Runtime
110%
56%
84%
218%
84%
Reader / Idle
188
382
103%
363
93%
638
239%
386
105%
H.264
132
266
102%
213
61%
464
252%
WiFi v1.3
130
264
103%
195
50%
277
113%
422
225%
232
78%
Load
44
102
132%
64
45%
112
155%
75
70%

Verdict

Pros

+ high-contrast 120 Hz panel with wide viewing angles
+ nice case with sophisticated materials
+ powerful gaming center
+ slim chassis
+ high-capacity PCIe-SSD
+ Thunderbolt 3
+ comparatively light
+ G-Sync

Cons

- display response times could be better
- hard to maintain and upgrade
- test model with some build quality issues
- high temperatures under load
- no switchable graphics
- short battery runtime
- keyboard flexing
- very expensive
In review: ROG Zephyrus GX501. Test model courtesy of Asus Germany.
In review: ROG Zephyrus GX501. Test model courtesy of Asus Germany.

The verdict about the 3000-Euro (~$3405) ROG Zephyrus GX501 mainly depends on two things: 1) Does price matter? And: 2) How important is the mobility aspect? Users willing to pay a lot for an extremely slim and powerful notebook get a very stylish and comparatively light case. It features great materials, a 120 Hz panel with G-Sync support and a level of performance that – in this class – is unrivaled so far.

However, if you are more price-conscious and do not care about every last millimeter, the GX501 suddenly appears a lot less attractive. The ultra-slim concept does not only affect the temperatures (the chassis gets very hot under load), but also the maintenance, input devices, port selection (no card reader, no RJ45-LAN) and especially the battery runtime, which is disappointingly short for a supposedly mobile laptop at up to 3 hours. 

Thicker GTX 1070 laptops like the Asus Strix GL502VS do not make as many compromises and are more affordable.

All in all, the Zephyrus GX501 still gets a "good" rating and will enter the Top 10 ranking for slim and light gaming laptops in the next update.

Asus Zephyrus GX501 - 07/13/2017 v6
Florian Glaser, Klaus Hinum, J. Simon Leitner

Chassis
84 / 98 → 86%
Keyboard
75%
Pointing Device
75%
Connectivity
59 / 81 → 73%
Weight
61 / 66 → 92%
Battery
64%
Display
85%
Games Performance
97%
Application Performance
96%
Temperature
76 / 95 → 80%
Noise
80 / 90 → 89%
Audio
70%
Average
77%
85%
Gaming - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 15 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Asus ROG Zephyrus GX501 Laptop Review
Florian Glaser, Klaus Hinum, J. Simon Leitner, 2017-07- 1 (Update: 2017-07-25)
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.