Notebookcheck

Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD (i7-8550U, GTX 1050) Laptop Review

Power on a budget. The 17-inch counterpart to the VivoBook Pro we reviewed last year is now in our labs. Now equipped with an 8th-gen Intel CPU, IPS display, and NVMe SSD, can it resolve the quibbles which plagued the previous unit? Our full review awaits.

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

Back in October, we evaluated Asus’ new VivoBook Pro 15, which was established as a compromise between low-end models and the high-end ZenBook Pro series. While we praised the strong performance, attractive case design, and effective thermal management, we were disappointed by the weak port selection, lackluster display, strange fan behavior, and a handful of other relatively minor items. Figuratively speaking, this “death by a thousand papercuts” precluded our recommendation of the machine over its myriad rivals, even in spite of its (somewhat) lower cost. Fortunately, many of these items hypothetically should be resolvable via software/firmware updates, so that’s one of the topics we’ll be addressing in today’s review of the 17-inch counterpart.

Our VivoBook Pro 17 test unit also features a newer CPU: the 8th-generation Intel Core i7-8550U, which—in contrast to the 45 W TDP of the Core i7-7700HQ contained within its predecessor—carries a mere 15 W TDP. But can it muster the same performance with such drastically reduced provisions? Elsewhere, the machine maintains an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU and 512 GB NVMe SSD, 16 GB of DDR4 memory, and a much nicer IPS display. Some competitors include the Dell XPS 15 9560, HP Pavilion 17z, and Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VYAt $1,205, how does it stack up to its peers?

Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76 (VivoBook Pro 17 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) - 4096 MB, Core: 1354 MHz, Memory: 1493 MHz, GDDR5, 4.5.0 NVIDIA 382.53, yes
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2400
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 127 PPI, no, LP173WF4-SPF5, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Sunrise Point-LP
Storage
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, 512 GB 
Soundcard
Realtek ALC256 @ Intel Sunrise Point-LP PCH - High Definition Audio Controller
Connections
2 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: SD
Networking
Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Realtek 8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 4.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 21 x 411 x 273 ( = 0.83 x 16.18 x 10.75 in)
Battery
42 Wh Lithium-Ion, 3-cell
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: VGA
Primary Camera: 0.3 MPix
Additional features
Speakers: 2.0, bottom-mounted, down-firing, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
2.346 kg ( = 82.75 oz / 5.17 pounds), Power Supply: 538 g ( = 18.98 oz / 1.19 pounds)

 

Case

The VivoBook Pro 17 features a plastic frame with sheets of brushed aluminum covering the palm rest and display lid. The metal lends a palpable degree of sturdiness to what otherwise would likely be a rather flimsy, large, and thin case—and as a result, there is very little flex across the breadth of the base unit (something which cannot be said for many other plastic notebooks of this size). It’s also easy on the eyes and looks more sophisticated. The rigidity of the display lid isn’t quite as reassuring, as twisting can flex it rather uncomfortably—but pressure from the back is well suppressed. Hinges are tightly-wound, leaving little to no bounce during everyday operation; consequently, however, two hands are required to open the machine to prevent the base from lifting off a surface.

The underside is still plastic, however, and the overall look—despite the clean metal aesthetic—is still rather plain. Fortunately, the weight is correspondingly low: at just 2.346 kg, it’s notably lighter than the typical 17-inch machine. It’s also a bit thinner (at 21 mm) and features a slightly smaller footprint than the competition (see our diagram for the full comparison).

Connectivity

The port selection on the VivoBook Pro is actually quite thin for a 17-inch machine. We get four total USB ports (three USB Type-A conventional ports and one USB Type-C 3.1 Gen 1 port capable of up to 5 Gbps)—but two of the four ports are merely USB 2.0. There is a full-sized card reader and Ethernet port as well, but the only option for video output is HDMI 1.4. By 2018 standards, this is pretty weak—but for the average user it may nevertheless prove sufficient.

The ports are at least conveniently arranged along the left and right sides of the machine, well-spaced and easy to access.

Front: no connections
Front: no connections
Rear: no connections
Rear: no connections
Right: USB Type-C 3.1 Gen 1, USB 3.0, HDMI, Ethernet, Charging port
Right: USB Type-C 3.1 Gen 1, USB 3.0, HDMI, Ethernet, Charging port
Left: Kensington Lock, USB 2.0 x 2, SD card reader, combo audio jack
Left: Kensington Lock, USB 2.0 x 2, SD card reader, combo audio jack

SD Card Reader

The SD card reader is much slower than category leaders, managing just 35.92 MB/s in our AS SSD sequential read test (which is well below the category average of 67.6 MB/s). The SD card slot is only large enough to accommodate around half the length of the card.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
120.5 MB/s ∼100% +277%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
76 MB/s ∼63% +138%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
64 MB/s ∼53% +100%
Average of class Multimedia
  (11.2 - 178, n=137)
53.6 MB/s ∼44% +68%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
32 MB/s ∼27%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26.94 MB/s ∼22% -16%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
24.1 MB/s ∼20% -25%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
252.6 MB/s ∼100% +603%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
87 MB/s ∼34% +142%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
86 MB/s ∼34% +139%
Average of class Multimedia
  (10.2 - 253, n=134)
71.2 MB/s ∼28% +98%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
36.92 MB/s ∼15% +3%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
35.92 MB/s ∼14%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
16.9 MB/s ∼7% -53%

Communication

A Realtek 8822BE 802.11ac adapter handles wireless connections in the VivoBook Pro 17, and its performance was very good during our testing, comfortably beating the class average and nearing the top of the charts in both transmit and receive measurements.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
687 MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
648 MBit/s ∼94% +3%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Realtek 8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
627 MBit/s ∼91%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
522 MBit/s ∼76% -17%
Average of class Multimedia
  (44 - 949, n=94)
497 MBit/s ∼72% -21%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
338 MBit/s ∼49% -46%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
Realtek RTL8188E Wireless LAN 802.11n PCI-E NIC
44.7 MBit/s ∼7% -93%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Realtek 8822BE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
552 MBit/s ∼100%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7265
542 MBit/s ∼98% -2%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
529 MBit/s ∼96% -4%
Average of class Multimedia
  (46.1 - 949, n=94)
464 MBit/s ∼84% -16%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174
424 MBit/s ∼77% -23%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Qualcomm Atheros QCA9377 Wireless Network Adapter
308 MBit/s ∼56% -44%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
Realtek RTL8188E Wireless LAN 802.11n PCI-E NIC
47 MBit/s ∼9% -91%

Accessories

Apart from a 538 g, 120 W AC Adapter, no accessories are included with the VivoBook Pro 17.

Maintenance

The VivoBook Pro 17’s case design renders maintenance and upgrades unfortunately challenging. Following the removal of ten screws from the underside of the machine, the aluminum top cover must be (extremely) carefully pried around the edges to disengage the clips holding it to the bottom cover/base unit below. The keyboard is part of the top cover, as is the power button (which is located on the keyboard), so three separate ZIF connector cables connect these critical components to the motherboard, running from the top cover rather inconveniently into the center of the motherboard. There is no easy way to disconnect these cables during the disassembly procedure (much less to reconnect them), so users might find it simpler to just lift the top cover off, hold it above the bottom, and replace the desired component without bothering to disconnect the cables.

Even once inside, however, there isn’t a whole lot to do. The mechanical hard drive is secured by a few more screws to the board and case within a metal caddy, the wireless adapter is readily accessible from the side, and one of two cooling fans can be accessed. The remaining components—including RAM and the NVMe SSD, as well as the other fan—require a complete teardown of the rest of the machine, motherboard and all.

Quality journalism is made possible by advertising. We show the least amount of ads whenever possible. We intentionally show more ads when an adblocker is used. Please, switch off ad blockers.

Warranty

The VivoBook Pro 17 ships with a standard 12 month depot warranty.

Input Devices

Keyboard

The keyboard on the VivoBook Pro 17 is likely identical to that of the VivoBook Pro 15, and our same impressions apply. It’s decent, with comfortable travel and actuation force, but it can’t compete with category leaders such as the Dell XPS 15. We do appreciate the inclusion of a numeric keypad, but this one is patently inferior to most thanks to its horizontally-compressed form factor and narrower keys. The same affliction applies to the arrow keys, which makes them quite a bit harder to operate by feel. Finally, the relegation of the Home/End/Page-Up/Page-Down/Insert/Delete keys to secondary functions of seemingly random keys on the numeric keypad is not likely to prove an easy adjustment for the average user.

The keyboard is backlit with three adjustable brightness levels while activated.

Touchpad

Although the relatively touchpad is different from the one in the 15-inch VivoBook Pro (for starters, it lacks the integrated fingerprint reader for Windows Hello functionality), it nevertheless retains the Precision Touchpad designation. Elan manufactures the pad, which features a smooth, comfortable, spacious (104 mm x 72 mm) surface and integrated buttons along the bottom. The buttons feature very short travel distance but offer a great sense of feedback. Our only significant complaint here is (once again) with the slightly-louder-than-normal clicks, but it’s a minor complaint overall (especially since the user can always opt for tap-to-click functionality until the use of a physical button is warranted).

The keyboard is decent, but the awkward layout is a persistent obstacle.
The keyboard is decent, but the awkward layout is a persistent obstacle.
The touchpad works well.
The touchpad works well.

Display

Asus fortunately did not opt for the same grade of display as that of the cheap TN panel we found in our VivoBook Pro 15. Instead, our VivoBook Pro 17 review unit includes an LG LP173WF4-SPF5 IPS display panel, which carries a 1920x1080 resolution and subjectively appears far superior to that of the VivoBook Pro 15.

Subpixel array, VivoBook Pro 17
Subpixel array, VivoBook Pro 17
Minor clouding on black screens
Minor clouding on black screens
357.7
cd/m²
358.3
cd/m²
339.3
cd/m²
369.3
cd/m²
376.2
cd/m²
358
cd/m²
341
cd/m²
358.6
cd/m²
334.1
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro Basic 2
Maximum: 376.2 cd/m² Average: 354.7 cd/m² Minimum: 19.69 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 376.2 cd/m²
Contrast: 896:1 (Black: 0.42 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.21 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3, calibrated: 3.95
ΔE Greyscale 5.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
87% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 57% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.335
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
LP173WF4-SPF5, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
INNOLUX N156HGA-EAB, TN, 15.6, 1920x1080
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
AUO109D (AU Optronics), IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Chi Mei CMN1738, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
ID: AUO109D, Name: AU Optronics B173HW01 V0, IPS, 17.3, 1920x1080
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
IGZO IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Response Times
6970%
-16%
11%
-23%
184%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
30.8 (15.6, 15.2)
44 (25, 19)
-43%
38 (20, 18)
-23%
38 (20, 18)
-23%
40.8 (22, 18.8)
-32%
57.2 (27.2, 30)
-86%
Response Time Black / White *
23.2 (13.2, 10)
13 (10, 3)
44%
25 (14, 11)
-8%
26 (15.6, 10.4)
-12%
26.4 (14, 12.4)
-14%
39.2 (23.6, 15.6)
-69%
PWM Frequency
119 (99)
25000 (30)
20908%
200 (95)
68%
961.5
708%
Screen
-22%
17%
4%
6%
6%
Brightness middle
376.2
247
-34%
279
-26%
318
-15%
333.5
-11%
370.1
-2%
Brightness
355
224
-37%
262
-26%
295
-17%
323
-9%
356
0%
Brightness Distribution
89
85
-4%
85
-4%
79
-11%
91
2%
87
-2%
Black Level *
0.42
0.48
-14%
0.18
57%
0.25
40%
0.32
24%
0.37
12%
Contrast
896
515
-43%
1550
73%
1272
42%
1042
16%
1000
12%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.21
5.39
-28%
3.58
15%
4.7
-12%
4
5%
5.3
-26%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.31
7.98
4%
5.98
28%
8.8
-6%
6.9
17%
9.9
-19%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
3.95
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.5
5.25
5%
2.75
50%
5
9%
4.5
18%
4.6
16%
Gamma
2.335 103%
2.48 97%
2.57 93%
2.28 105%
2.19 110%
2.31 104%
CCT
7056 92%
7609 85%
6836 95%
7374 88%
6386 102%
6284 103%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
57
38
-33%
58
2%
61
7%
57.5
1%
88.3
55%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
87
60
-31%
88
1%
93
7%
88.1
1%
100
15%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
3474% / 1592%
1% / 12%
8% / 6%
-9% / 2%
95% / 47%

* ... smaller is better

Our measurements further support our impressions of the display’s superiority over its 15 inch counterpart: a very good 354.7 cd/m² brightness and 896:1 contrast ratio, made possible by a low black level of 0.42 cd/m².

Colors also appear comfortably vivid, and we measured 87 percent coverage of the sRGB spectrum (57 percent of AdobeRGB). These values—along with the brightness and contrast measurements—bring the display in line with the rest of the competition, and far ahead of October’s VivoBook Pro 15 review unit.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB

CalMAN 2017 measurements aren’t bad, either. With out of the box ColorChecker and Greyscale DeltaE2000 values of 4.21 and 5.5, respectively, as well as a Gamma of 2.335 and Average CCT of 7056, not much calibration is really needed for general use. The panel performs slightly better post-calibration, but it isn’t a huge difference.

Color analysis (pre-calibration)
Color analysis (pre-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (pre-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (pre-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (pre-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (pre-calibration)
Color analysis (post-calibration)
Color analysis (post-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (post-calibration)
Saturation sweeps (post-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (post-calibration)
Grayscale analysis (post-calibration)

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
23.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 13.2 ms rise
↘ 10 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. » 30 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
30.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 15.6 ms rise
↘ 15.2 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. » 15 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41.4 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 detected 119 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 119 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 119 Hz is very low, so the flickering may cause eyestrain and headaches after extended use.

In comparison: 54 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8822 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

We detected PWM in our measurements at all brightness settings up to 99 percent, and the frequency of 119 Hz is quite low, so it's likely to bother sensitive users.

Outdoors, the machine is perfectly usable in most environments (all but absolute direct sunlight) thanks to the anti-glare display and high brightness/contrast. Viewing angles are vastly superior to those of our VivoBook Pro 15 review unit, as expected, thanks to the upgrade from TN to IPS panel technology.

In the shade
In the shade
In the sun
In the sun
Wide IPS viewing angles
Wide IPS viewing angles

Performance

Again, the primary focus of the VivoBook Pro is on performance: and to that end, our review unit features an eighth-generation Intel Core i7-8550U, 16 GB DDR4-2400 RAM, an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU, and a 512 GB NVMe SSD. From these components, we should expect to see strong performance across a variety of applications. To reiterate our comments in the maintenance section, upgrades to the VivoBook Pro 17 do not come easily—so it would be wise to order a machine preconfigured with the components you’re after.

A secondary run of 3DMark 11 confirmed that performance while unplugged is (unsurprisingly) far below that while on AC power; we received a score of 3709. Unlike our VivoBook Pro 15 unit, no issues with latencies were detected by LatencyMon.

CPU-Z CPU
CPU-Z CPU
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Memory
CPU-Z Memory
CPU-Z RAM SPD
CPU-Z RAM SPD
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
Octane v2
Octane v2
LatencyMon
LatencyMon

Processor

The venerable Intel Core i7-8550U is a quad-core CPU featuring clock rates ranging between 1.8 GHz and 4.0 GHz. It carries a TDP (15 W) which is just one-third of that of the VivoBook Pro 15’s Core i7-7700HQ (45 W). Naturally, performance can’t quite keep up with the i7-7700HQ—but whether it even approaches the ballpark is heavily dependent upon the laptop’s cooling system providing ample thermal headroom within which the CPU can operate at higher frequencies uninhibited (a challenge which many recent machines have failed to meet). How does the VivoBook Pro 17 fare?

At least initially, it’s pretty solid. We recorded single-core performance that leads the field with a score of 172 in Cinebench R15 single CPU. In multi-core, the score of 642 is only around 14% below the leader (Dell XPS 15 9560), which—like all four of the competitors above the VivoBook on our chart—is equipped with an i7-7700HQ. Both of these results are well above the class averages of 119 and 564, respectively.

But unfortunately, this doesn’t tell the full story. Sustained performance is absolutely the biggest challenge as it applies to cooling these quad-core processors in thin and light machines, and here, the VivoBook Pro struggles heavily. During our separate Cinebench R15 loop test, we initially recorded a score of 625 in the first run. The second run’s result plummeted all the way to 543, however, after which the device permanently remained in the 535 – 540 range barring a bizarre 515/518 score incident near the middle of our test. While we expect to see some degree of performance loss following the first couple of runs from machines powered by these newer quad-core 15 W TDP CPUs, a drop of 14% is pretty severe. By contrast, our Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon 2018 test unit, which featured the same CPU and is even thinner and more comparably compact than the VivoBook, witnessed a drop in performance of just around 5% between the first and subsequent runs of this test.

Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
ComputeMark
ComputeMark
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Intel Core i7-8550U
172 Points ∼83%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (108 - 172, n=51)
161 Points ∼78% -6%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
159 Points ∼77% -8%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
158 Points ∼76% -8%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
157 Points ∼76% -9%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
148 Points ∼71% -14%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel Core i5-8250U
143 Points ∼69% -17%
Average of class Multimedia
  (36 - 191, n=318)
122 Points ∼59% -29%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD A12-9720P
69 Points ∼33% -60%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
735 Points ∼24% +14%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
729 Points ∼23% +14%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
726 Points ∼23% +13%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
724 Points ∼23% +13%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Intel Core i7-8550U
642 Points ∼21%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel Core i5-8250U
636 Points ∼20% -1%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (301 - 761, n=53)
575 Points ∼18% -10%
Average of class Multimedia
  (73 - 1550, n=327)
438 Points ∼14% -32%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD A12-9720P
229 Points ∼7% -64%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Intel Core i7-8550U
1.87 Points ∼80%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (1.43 - 1.95, n=29)
1.829 Points ∼78% -2%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.81 Points ∼77% -3%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.78 Points ∼76% -5%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.71 Points ∼73% -9%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel Core i5-8250U
1.64 Points ∼70% -12%
Average of class Multimedia
  (0.39 - 2.16, n=404)
1.279 Points ∼55% -32%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD A12-9720P
0.94 Points ∼40% -50%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.14 Points ∼30% +7%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.1 Points ∼30% +7%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
8.09 Points ∼30% +7%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Intel Core i7-8550U
7.58 Points ∼28%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel Core i5-8250U
6.96 Points ∼26% -8%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (4.38 - 8.56, n=29)
6.28 Points ∼23% -17%
Average of class Multimedia
  (0.59 - 17.6, n=670)
3.65 Points ∼13% -52%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD A12-9720P
2.7 Points ∼10% -64%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Average of class Multimedia
  (198 - 2326, n=374)
634 s * ∼7% -146%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD A12-9720P
415.484 s * ∼5% -61%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (258 - 435, n=11)
351 s * ∼4% -36%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Intel Core i7-8550U
257.514 s * ∼3%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
214.927 s * ∼3% +17%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average of class Multimedia
  (-1 - 135140, n=6803)
1805 Seconds * ∼8% -253%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (1.4 - 7795, n=74)
1244 Seconds * ∼6% -143%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD A12-9720P
863.551 Seconds * ∼4% -69%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
522.024 Seconds * ∼2% -2%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Intel Core i7-8550U
512 Seconds * ∼2%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.87 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
7.58 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
75.95 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
172 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
642 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
114.95 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Help
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit

System Performance

Regardless of sustained processing limitations, in terms of everyday application performance, the VivoBook lives up the challenge. It unequivocally tops the charts across all of our PCMark benchmarks, delivering scores even slightly above the average for its particular CPU + GPU combination. Part of this is a consequence of its lower screen resolution than some competitors (a factor which does affect overall scoring in these tests), but nevertheless, these results do indicate a system which feels universally fast—and the VivoBook Pro 17 unmistakably does.

PCMark 10
PCMark 10
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
5343 Points ∼82%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4934 Points ∼76% -8%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (4382 - 5343, n=5)
4922 Points ∼76% -8%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
4804 Points ∼74% -10%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
4636 Points ∼71% -13%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
4422 Points ∼68% -17%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2213 - 5343, n=237)
4201 Points ∼64% -21%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-60JC3T1
3518 Points ∼54% -34%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
5474 Points ∼57%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (4961 - 5474, n=4)
5208 Points ∼55% -5%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
5114 Points ∼54% -7%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
4760 Points ∼50% -13%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1765 - 6408, n=182)
3975 Points ∼42% -27%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-60JC3T1
3219 Points ∼34% -41%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
4245 Points ∼70%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4216 Points ∼69% -1%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (3505 - 4245, n=6)
3938 Points ∼65% -7%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3833 Points ∼63% -10%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
3722 Points ∼61% -12%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
3687 Points ∼61% -13%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
3588 Points ∼59% -15%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1740 - 4693, n=256)
3326 Points ∼55% -22%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-60JC3T1
2783 Points ∼46% -34%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
4245 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5474 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5343 points
Help

Storage Devices

The Asus VivoBook Pro 17 is capable of dual-storage solutions, which are ideal for pairing up a solid-state drive for operating system and application storage with a mechanical hard drive for large, disposable files (such as videos, music, or downloaded games). At the risk of sounding redundant, we should point out once again that it would be wise to select the desired configuration from the outset, as disassembling and customizing the situation post-purchase is not very convenient—especially if adding an M.2/NVMe SSD is in the plans (since that port is located on the opposite side of the motherboard than is accessible under the top cover).

Our particular review unit came outfitted with a conventional 1 TB 5400 RPM mechanical hard drive paired with a 512 GB NVMe Samsung solid-state drive.

The Samsung NVMe drive is a PM961, a drive which is shared by many competitors and which always performs admirably. Our benchmarks were no disappointment, with scores mostly exceeding the average (and beating all competitors in the comparison field). See our full results in the charts below.

AS SSD
AS SSD
CrystalDiskMark
CrystalDiskMark
HD Tune
HD Tune
PCMark 8 Storage
PCMark 8 Storage
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
SK hynix SC311 M.2
HP Omen 17-w206ng
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
AS SSD
-77%
-82%
-598%
-5%
Copy Game MB/s
405.46
130.92
-68%
539.5
33%
Copy Program MB/s
305.83
107.82
-65%
411.54
35%
Copy ISO MB/s
1732.6
162.82
-91%
1272.4
-27%
Score Total
3488
830
-76%
509
-85%
2172
-38%
2810
-19%
Score Write
1091
360
-67%
160
-85%
165
-85%
1022
-6%
Score Read
1612
308
-81%
234
-85%
1390
-14%
1206
-25%
Access Time Write *
0.03
0.057
-90%
0.061
-103%
1.881
-6170%
0.034
-13%
Access Time Read *
0.056
0.132
-136%
0.128
-129%
0.056
-0%
0.034
39%
4K-64 Write
827.6
246.84
-70%
73.41
-91%
129.48
-84%
788.85
-5%
4K-64 Read
1328.81
236.67
-82%
159.11
-88%
1100.75
-17%
961.61
-28%
4K Write
122.14
70.42
-42%
68.76
-44%
1.31
-99%
112.15
-8%
4K Read
49.78
22.9
-54%
25.6
-49%
48.92
-2%
41.34
-17%
Seq Write
1408.9
426.73
-70%
182.06
-87%
346.23
-75%
1206.58
-14%
Seq Read
2338.65
482.94
-79%
492.1
-79%
2399.21
3%
2026.09
-13%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 3220 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1614 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 558.7 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 452.3 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 935.1 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1020 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 46.62 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 151.3 MB/s

GPU Performance

The VivoBook Pro 17 is powered by an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050, a card which we have thoroughly evaluated at this point. In all benchmarks, we found results right in line with expectations, nearly identical to the average numbers we’ve recorded across all GTX 1050-equipped machines, and roughly equivalent in most cases with the Dell XPS 15 9560. This suggests that thermal throttling and other constraints are not in play.

To further clarify these results, we turn to our Witcher 3 one hour stress test, in which the machine idles at a particular spot in the game for a full hour while we monitor clock rates and temperatures. The graph shows some minor fluctuation in frame rates, but mostly those which would be expected as a result of day/night cycles and other in-game variances. The average frame rate over the course of the full hour remained around 25 fps overall, which is above the average for all GTX 1050 notebooks we’ve recorded (21.8 fps). CPU/GPU core temperatures hover between 69 and 73 degrees C.

3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
HP Omen 17-w206ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
8495 Points ∼48% +23%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U
6889 Points ∼39%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (4446 - 7607, n=36)
6812 Points ∼39% -1%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6713 Points ∼38% -3%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
6389 Points ∼36% -7%
Average of class Multimedia
  (375 - 8966, n=583)
2232 Points ∼13% -68%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P
1337 Points ∼8% -81%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1260 Points ∼7% -82%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
14846 Points ∼29% +94%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ
9482 Points ∼19% +24%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
7712 Points ∼15% +1%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (6744 - 8223, n=36)
7643 Points ∼15% 0%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U
7640 Points ∼15%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P
3597 Points ∼7% -53%
Average of class Multimedia
  (352 - 15256, n=586)
2675 Points ∼5% -65%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1622 Points ∼3% -79%
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
11502 Points ∼28% +90%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
6074 Points ∼15% +1%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U
6042 Points ∼15%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (5329 - 6393, n=37)
6024 Points ∼15% 0%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
5982 Points ∼15% -1%
Average of class Multimedia
  (337 - 11850, n=364)
2565 Points ∼6% -58%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P
1926 Points ∼5% -68%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
930 Points ∼2% -85%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ
68143 Points ∼37% +87%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
38266 Points ∼21% +5%
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U
36413 Points ∼20%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (14979 - 39896, n=36)
35910 Points ∼19% -1%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
31274 Points ∼17% -14%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2468 - 77755, n=367)
15322 Points ∼8% -58%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P
10116 Points ∼5% -72%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
7983 Points ∼4% -78%
1920x1080 Ice Storm Extreme Graphics
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (7482 - 200390, n=21)
106273 Points ∼15%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ
84368 Points ∼12%
Average of class Multimedia
  (3538 - 171011, n=73)
65989 Points ∼9%
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
42118 Points ∼6%
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
AMD Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P
41700 Points ∼6%
3DMark 06 Standard
24942 points
3DMark 11 Performance
7474 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
15440 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
5411 points
Help
012345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728Tooltip
The Witcher 3 ultra
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) (sort by value)
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
25 fps ∼22%
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
20 fps ∼17% -20%
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
38.5 fps ∼33% +54%
HP Omen 17-w206ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
26 fps ∼23% +4%
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
19.8 fps ∼17% -21%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
  (19 - 25, n=27)
21.8 fps ∼19% -13%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2.9 - 40.2, n=65)
17.6 fps ∼15% -30%
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 27716915762fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 25fps

Stress Test

Our synthetic stress tests, as always, were very useful in helping to interpret the machine’s performance under sustained loads. We are always quick to remind our readers that thin-and-light machines frequently struggle to maintain high Turbo clock rates over longer periods of synthetic stress. In many situations, these constraints do not translate over to practical usage scenarios, but in the case of the VivoBook Pro 17, we’ve already seen previously that the CPU performance limitations absolutely do apply to normal use (review our Cinebench R15 multi-CPU loop test results above).

But what conditions lead to this behavior? Our full-load CPU stress test data reveals the answer. Although initially, the Intel Core i7-8550U maintains full Turbo frequencies of 4.0 GHz, it soon after drops precipitously until after around 5 minutes of operation it remains at 1.8 GHz. What appears to prompt this behavior is an escalation of core temperatures to 80 °C, after which point all bets are off and the temperatures permanently drop to the mid-50s C. Although we occasionally still encounter spikes to around 3.7 GHz subsequent to this point of no return, the machine never recovers to anything closely resembling full performance. Since this CPU can sustain temperatures close to 100 °C, it seems this behavior is a strict limitation at the firmware level from Asus. Perhaps a future BIOS update or some sort of supplemental software might offer options to adjust this temperature limit, but for the time being it appears to be set in stone.

Of course, no such constraints apply to the GPU side of the equation, where an average clock rate of 1633 MHz is maintained permanently and average GPU temperatures never exceed a stable 76 °C. Combined stress sees similar performance and identical core temperatures from the GPU, with an average CPU temperature of 82 °C (oddly enough, when both chips are stressed, the CPU appears to break the 80 °C limit and ascend into the 90s C for a short period of time) and the CPU clock rate throttling to 1.4 GHz.

Full CPU stress
Full CPU stress
Full GPU stress
Full GPU stress
Combined CPU + GPU stress
Combined CPU + GPU stress
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 1.8 - 67 -
FurMark Stress - 1633 - 76
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 1.4 1683 82 76

Emissions

System Noise

One of two internal cooling fans
One of two internal cooling fans

The VivoBook Pro 17 is a relatively quiet machine in many cases, with noise levels only becoming truly noticeable from the dual fans under average load conditions at 36.7 dB(A). After environmental noise levels are taken into account and adjusted for, this is roughly in line with the previous VivoBook Pro as well as all competitors in our comparison field today.

Noise Level

Idle
28.3 / 29 / 29 dB(A)
HDD
29.9 dB(A)
Load
36.7 / 42.8 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   BK Precision 732A (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 28.3 dB(A)
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix SC311 M.2
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 7700HQ, Toshiba MQ01ABD100
HP Omen 17-w206ng
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
Radeon R7 M340, A12-9720P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-60JC3T1
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 7700HQ, Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD
Noise
-7%
-8%
-3%
-18%
-5%
-10%
off / environment *
28.3
30.5
-8%
30.1
-6%
30.1
-6%
30
-6%
28
1%
28.4
-0%
Idle Minimum *
28.3
30.6
-8%
31.1
-10%
31.4
-11%
34
-20%
30.4
-7%
29
-2%
Idle Average *
29
30.9
-7%
31.1
-7%
31.4
-8%
35
-21%
30.5
-5%
29
-0%
Idle Maximum *
29
31.9
-10%
31.1
-7%
31.7
-9%
36
-24%
30.5
-5%
32.2
-11%
Load Average *
36.7
38.6
-5%
44.4
-21%
35.2
4%
47
-28%
41.5
-13%
47.1
-28%
Witcher 3 ultra *
44.7
47.3
-6%
39.9
11%
48
-7%
41.8
6%
52
-16%
Load Maximum *
42.8
45.7
-7%
41.7
3%
43.5
-2%
52
-21%
48.2
-13%
47.1
-10%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

Surface temperatures while idle are one area in which the VivoBook Pro 17 has regressed significantly since the previous model we reviewed back in October. Although idle conditions are perfectly comfortable with averages of 26.1 °C / 30 °C on top and bottom respectively, load temperatures quickly become inconvenient with averages of 34.3 °C and 41.3 °C in those same areas. We measured hotspots of 46 °C at the top center of the top cover and 43.6 °C in the center of the keyboard (somewhat bothersome during actual use), but the biggest issues were on the bottom of the machine, where we recorded multiple hotspots above 50 °C, including one at the center top of 56.2 °C. More or less this invalidates the use of the machine on the lap while processing heavy loads—so be sure to have it resting on a surface and this won’t present much of a problem.

Max. Load
 34.8 °C
95 F
46 °C
115 F
39 °C
102 F
 
 37 °C
99 F
43.6 °C
110 F
29.4 °C
85 F
 
 27.4 °C
81 F
25.2 °C
77 F
26.6 °C
80 F
 
Maximum: 46 °C = 115 F
Average: 34.3 °C = 94 F
53 °C
127 F
56.2 °C
133 F
46 °C
115 F
35.2 °C
95 F
44.4 °C
112 F
50 °C
122 F
30 °C
86 F
28 °C
82 F
29 °C
84 F
Maximum: 56.2 °C = 133 F
Average: 41.3 °C = 106 F
Power Supply (max.)  47 °C = 117 F | Room Temperature 22 °C = 72 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
Thermal profile, top of base unit (Witcher 3)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (Witcher 3)
Thermal profile, underside (Witcher 3)
Thermal profile, underside (Witcher 3)
Thermal profile, side (Witcher 3)
Thermal profile, side (Witcher 3)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (max load)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (max load)
Thermal profile, underside (max load)
Thermal profile, underside (max load)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (idle)
Thermal profile, top of base unit (idle)
Thermal profile, underside (idle)
Thermal profile, underside (idle)

Speakers

The VivoBook Pro’s speakers produce healthy volume with a fairly linear overall sound, especially in terms of mid- and high-range frequencies. As is usually the case, it’s the low frequencies which present the challenge here, where bass is a bit lower than the class median and linearity is decent. Overall, however, the audio sounds quite good and is among the best we’ve recently seen from comparable machines. There was no noticeable vibration or distortion even at higher volumes in the tests we performed.

Bottom-mounted speakers...
Bottom-mounted speakers...
...and the view from the inside
...and the view from the inside
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2041.838.841.82536.234.436.23134.533.634.54033.632.933.65034.932.634.96332.633.132.68033.132.633.110037.429.337.412550.629.250.616060.228.360.220064.427.964.425065.827.565.831563.126.863.140062.826.262.850064.925.364.963069.42569.480067.42567.4100065.524.465.5125064.623.964.6160063.323.863.32000642464250067.623.967.6315068.723.768.7400068.123.668.1500068.223.568.2630066.623.566.6800065.723.465.71000066.523.566.51250073.623.573.61600070.323.570.3SPL79.236.379.2N48.42.748.4median 65.7Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76median 24median 65.7Delta2.61.52.642.841.242.839.739.939.734.231.834.23731.73737.12937.137.631.137.63928.73939303940.425.540.442.325.442.347.324.447.349.723.249.753.122.453.153.121.553.156.720.256.762.419.962.466.31966.364.818.564.860.417.960.463.717.263.762.81762.864.216.864.262.316.862.363.616.763.661.316.661.355.716.755.761.416.861.463.516.763.562.216.762.257.616.857.674.630.174.6351.435median 61.3Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357median 17.9median 61.35.83.25.8hearing rangehide median Pink Noise
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76 audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.15 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 8.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.1% 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 1.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 91% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 2% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357 audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (66.29 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.9% lower than median
(+) | bass is linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 24% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 71% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 14% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 83% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency Comparison (Checkbox selectable!)
Graph 1: Pink Noise 100% Vol.; Graph 2: Audio off

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Although power consumption while idling is hobbled by the power-hungry 17.3-inch IPS display (average: 10.3 W), the load average we recorded of 83 W is perfectly reasonable and almost identical to that of the 15.6-inch VivoBook Pro we reviewed back in October. The XPS 15 9560, with its ultra-high-resolution display panel, is quite a bit hungrier on average even in spite of its smaller screen. This would normally lead us to expect better than average battery life, except…

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.406 / 0.63 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 5.06 / 10.3 / 10.7 Watt
Load midlight 83 / 99.9 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
8550U, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN, TN, 1920x1080, 15.6
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix SC311 M.2, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), Toshiba MQ01ABD100, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
HP Omen 17-w206ng
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
A12-9720P, Radeon R7 M340, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-60JC3T1, IPS, 1920x1080, 17.3
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), Lite-on CX2-8B512-Q11 NVMe SSD, IGZO IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Power Consumption
-1%
32%
-28%
-62%
-1%
-52%
Idle Minimum *
5.06
4.7
7%
4.08
19%
7
-38%
11
-117%
7.8
-54%
11.9
-135%
Idle Average *
10.3
7.7
25%
8.45
18%
12.3
-19%
18
-75%
11.7
-14%
17.1
-66%
Idle Maximum *
10.7
10.9
-2%
9.6
10%
14.2
-33%
24
-124%
15.7
-47%
17.3
-62%
Load Average *
83
82
1%
40.2
52%
72.6
13%
84
-1%
57.4
31%
94.7
-14%
Load Maximum *
99.9
120
-20%
41.4
59%
153
-53%
146
-46%
62.3
38%
122
-22%
Witcher 3 ultra *
92.4
109
-18%
125
-35%
101
-9%
53.3
42%
104.8
-13%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

…the battery in the VivoBook Pro 17 is absolutely tiny, especially for a 17.3-inch machine, at just 42 Wh. The Dell Inspiron 17 and HP Pavilion 17z share this battery size (the latter of which also posts poor battery runtime results), but the Inspiron also does not include dedicated graphics or an NVMe SSD, and the display features a comparatively poor brightness level. This results in battery runtimes for the VivoBook Pro 17 of just 53 minutes under load (Battery Eater Classic Test) and 4:25 during web surfing. The bottom line here is that the VivoBook Pro, while perhaps a reasonable choice for everyday desk-based use with the occasional GPU-heavy activity (such as moderate gaming) tossed in for good measure, will not function acceptably as a truly mobile machine unless power provisions are constantly available.

The flip side of having such a small battery is quick charging times: in just an hour, the VivoBook was able to charge all the way to 86%.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
4h 25min
Load (maximum brightness)
0h 53min
Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76
8550U, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 42 Wh
Asus VivoBook Pro 15 N580VD-DM028T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 47 Wh
Dell Inspiron 17-5770-0357
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 42 Wh
Acer Aspire 7 A717-71G-72VY
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 48 Wh
HP Omen 17-w206ng
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook), 62 Wh
HP Pavilion 17z 1EX13AV
A12-9720P, Radeon R7 M340, 41.6 Wh
Dell XPS 15 9560 (i7-7700HQ, UHD)
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook), 97 Wh
Battery Runtime
52%
55%
34%
62%
10%
79%
Reader / Idle
609
702
552
795
410
831
WiFi v1.3
265
392
48%
368
39%
336
27%
380
43%
233
-12%
434
64%
Load
53
82
55%
90
70%
74
40%
96
81%
70
32%
103
94%

Pros

+ thin and light design
+ relatively rigid case; sturdy on surfaces
+ attractive display with good brightness, color, contrast, and a matte finish
+ very fast NVMe SSD paired with mechanical storage drive
+ very good single-core CPU performance
+ no GPU throttling; capable of running most modern games
+ reasonable noise levels
+ good speakers

Cons

- disappointing CPU performance in multi-core applications; Core i5 seems a more practical choice
- weak port selection
- poor battery life
- high surface temperatures under load
- awkward keyboard layout
- difficult maintenance and upgrade procedures
- slow card reader

Verdict

In review: Asus VivoBook Pro 17. Test model provided by CUKUSA. Use code NBC10 to get $10 off
In review: Asus VivoBook Pro 17. Test model provided by CUKUSA. Use code NBC10 to get $10 off

Nothing about the VivoBook Pro 17 is particularly head-turning, but then again, this is not a machine which seeks to push the envelope in any particular category. Instead, it’s an overall value proposition, an appeal to those who would love to own a machine with competent, well-rounded everyday performance and a capability for occasional gaming, but who aren’t interested in paying the premium for top-notch aesthetics, design, and the affiliated bells and whistles.

Nothing about the VivoBook Pro 17 is particularly head-turning, but then again, this is not a machine which seeks to push the envelope in any particular category. Instead, it offers competent everyday performance and a capability for occasional gaming for a reasonable price—in exchange for a number of other drawbacks.

And for the most part (with strings attached), it does succeed at that task. The thin and light VivoBook Pro 17 posts very good general system performance scores, features fast solid-state storage, and can manage a typical gaming session without any problem. The display is also quite good overall, with high brightness, good viewing angles, respectable color reproduction, and a matte finish.

But we do have our reservations, and they’re not necessarily minor. While the VivoBook Pro 17 resolves some of the issues of its 15-inch counterpart, the Core i7-8550U (as is often the case) cannot maintain strong enough multi-core performance to justify its selection over, say, a Core i5-8250U (though single-core performance is clearly superior). The machine also features a substandard port selection, rather ho-hum plastic casing, difficult maintenance, a pedestrian keyboard with an awkward layout, high surface temperatures, and poor battery life. If none of these items is particularly offensive to the user, it might prove a worthwhile alternative to the pricier premium models in its class (such as the Dell XPS 15 9560). But similarly-priced alternatives with different sets of pros and cons are widely available (such as the Acer Aspire 7 A71-71G-72VY)—so, as is frequently the case, the real question with these value-oriented machines is which corner do you wish to cut?

Asus VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD-EH76 - 02/28/2018 v6
Steve Schardein

Chassis
72 / 98 → 73%
Keyboard
64%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
49 / 81 → 60%
Weight
61 / 20-67 → 87%
Battery
78%
Display
87%
Games Performance
88 / 85 → 100%
Application Performance
92 / 92 → 100%
Temperature
82%
Noise
92 / 95 → 97%
Audio
80%
Camera
46 / 85 → 54%
Average
75%
83%
Multimedia - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 4 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 VivoBook Pro 17 N705UD (i7-8550U, GTX 1050) Laptop Review
Steve Schardein, 2018-03- 8 (Update: 2018-03-16)
Steve Schardein
Steve Schardein - Review Editor - @othersteve
In grade school, my first computer—an Apple IIGS—started it all for me. Later, in the nineties, if I wasn’t repairing computers for family and friends, I was busy cooking up nifty Visual Basic projects and playing PC games like Command & Conquer and Heroes of Might and Magic. Soon, much of my free time was spent moderating popular gaming forums and covering the industry for various websites. All the while, I never stopped repairing computers, and in 2006, I started a technology consulting company in Louisville, KY—Triple-S Computers—which I have been fortunate to nurture to great success by specializing in not only repairs, but also new machine consultations and purchasing, data recovery, and malware/security. And since 2012, I have proudly contributed many dozens of reviews to Notebookcheck, a site which I have long considered to be the ultimate authority on laptops and related technology. Today, I am truly living my dream: still a child at heart, ever-curious, constantly learning, and thankful to you, our readers.