Notebookcheck

Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN (i7, FHD, MX150) Laptop Review

Benjamin Herzig, 👁 Andreas Osthoff (translated by Mark Riege), 12/08/2018

Greenhorn. The most important feature of the Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN is its green case color. However, this does not necessarily mean that it is a bad laptop. We tested this Asus laptop to uncover its strength and weaknesses.

The high-end devices from the Asus PC manufacturer are the ZenBooks, and VivoBook is the brand name for the more affordable consumer laptops. At Computex 2018, Asus introduced several new models, among them was our current test unit the VivoBook S15 S530UN, which is the successor of the VivoBook S15 S510UQ.

Our specific test model contains the Intel Core i7-8550U, the Nvidia GeForce MX150, a 15.6-inch Full HD display (1920x1080), a 256-GB SSD plus 1-TB HDD, and 16 GB of RAM. With this equipment and a price of about 1150 Euros (~$1308; $929 in the US with i5 processor and Intel graphics instead), Asus positions the VivoBook S15 S530UN in the classic mid-range multimedia category. This segment of the laptop market has numerous competitors, and as direct comparison devices to the Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN, we select the Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G, the Lenovo IdeaPad 530s-15IKB, and the Medion Akoya S6625.

Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T (VivoBook S15 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce MX150 - 2048 MB, Core: 1532 MHz, Memory: 1469 MHz, 1D10 non-Max-Q, 388.73, Optimus
Memory
16384 MB 
, DDR4-2400 dual-channel, 2 of 2 slots occupied, 64 GB max.
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 141 PPI, LP156WFC-SPD1, IPS LED, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Kaby Lake-U + iHDCP 2.2 Premium PCH
Storage
SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027, 256 GB 
, M.2 2280 PCIe NVMe, in addition: Toshiba MQ04ABF100, 2.5-in HDD, 1 TB storage space, 1133 GB free
Soundcard
Intel Kaby Lake-U/Y PCH - High Definition Audio
Connections
2 USB 2.0, 2 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 HDMI, Audio Connections: audio combo port, Card Reader: microSD, 1 Fingerprint Reader
Networking
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.2
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 18 x 361 x 243 ( = 0.71 x 14.21 x 9.57 in)
Battery
42 Wh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: 720p
Additional features
Speakers: stereo, Keyboard: 6-row chiclet with number block, Keyboard Light: yes, McAfee LiveSafe, Microsoft Office trial, Asus Hello, Asus GiftBox service, Asus ZenAnywhere, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
1.8 kg ( = 63.49 oz / 3.97 pounds), Power Supply: 201 g ( = 7.09 oz / 0.44 pounds)
Price
1149 Euro
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Working For Notebookcheck

Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team! Especially English native speakers welcome!

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Case and Equipment

Compared to its VivoBook S15 S510UQ predecessor model, Asus has changed the design significantly. Apparently the slightly boring design of the predecessor was supposed to get pepped up a bit, which was the reason for the introduction of various new color options, for example. Our test unit is completely kept in green color tones, with the sides being bright green and the rest of the case surfaces being dark green. Asus introduced another big change with the hinge design, since in the VivoBook S15 S530UN the display props up the device slightly, similar to for example the Asuspro B9440UA.

The case consists to a large extent of plastic, and only the outside of the display lid is made from brushed aluminum. Asus has cut some costs in the case, and there are many devices in the 1000-Euro price range (~$1138) that turn out better in terms of their haptics. In addition, the stability is not good, particularly in the keyboard area, and the case has some noticeable give here. The display lid can also be pressed down in the center and then transfers the pressure quickly to the LCD panel. At least the hinges are adjusted well, and fortunately Asus kept the dimensions from the predecessor model, including the small display bezels. In this regard, there is not much difference between the competitors.

In order to perform maintenance on the VivoBook, you have to remove the whole bottom of the case. To do this, you must remove 10 screws and numerous clips, with the screws not remaining in the cover. Inside, you can clean the fan or replace the battery. You can also upgrade the VivoBook S15, since it has two RAM slots as well as two slots for storage (1x 2.5-in HDD, 1x M.2-2280 SSD). All the expansion slots are occupied in the state of delivery.

Size Comparison

379 mm / 14.9 inch 250 mm / 9.84 inch 20.8 mm / 0.819 inch 2 kg4.45 lbs363.4 mm / 14.3 inch 243.5 mm / 9.59 inch 17.95 mm / 0.707 inch 1.8 kg3.97 lbs361 mm / 14.2 inch 243 mm / 9.57 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 1.8 kg3.97 lbs361 mm / 14.2 inch 244 mm / 9.61 inch 18 mm / 0.709 inch 1.7 kg3.75 lbs359 mm / 14.1 inch 245 mm / 9.65 inch 17 mm / 0.669 inch 1.7 kg3.69 lbs

Connections

In the connections, Asus has replaced the slow SD-card slot of the predecessor with a similarly slow microSD-card slot, while the competitors still maintain their SD-card slot at full size. You should also consider that while Asus has built in USB-C, the available connection supports neither Thunderbolt nor DisplayPort, and unfortunately you apparently cannot charge the Asus notebook via USB-C either. It is also not a positive that the USB-A connections can only handle the USB-2.0 standard.

Right: audio combo, USB 3.1 Gen1 Type-C, HDMI, USB 3.0 Type-A, power
Right: audio combo, USB 3.1 Gen1 Type-C, HDMI, USB 3.0 Type-A, power
Left: 2x USB 2.0 Type-A, microSD-card slot
Left: 2x USB 2.0 Type-A, microSD-card slot
SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
70.4 MB/s ∼100% +116%
Average of class Multimedia
  (11.2 - 190, n=177)
57.9 MB/s ∼82% +78%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
33.9 MB/s ∼48% +4%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
32.6 MB/s ∼46%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
27.35 MB/s ∼39% -16%
Medion Akoya S6625
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
18.1 MB/s ∼26% -44%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
83 MB/s ∼100% +140%
Average of class Multimedia
  (10.2 - 253, n=174)
74 MB/s ∼89% +114%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
37.4 MB/s ∼45% +8%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
34.6 MB/s ∼42%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
28.95 MB/s ∼35% -16%
Medion Akoya S6625
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
22.8 MB/s ∼27% -34%
Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
652 MBit/s ∼100% +122%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
618 (min: 446, max: 680) MBit/s ∼95% +110%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
510 MBit/s ∼78% +73%
Average of class Multimedia
  (44 - 949, n=140)
501 MBit/s ∼77% +70%
Medion Akoya S6625
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
302 (min: 245, max: 313) MBit/s ∼46% +3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
294 (min: 161, max: 330) MBit/s ∼45%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
668 MBit/s ∼100% +10%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
647 (min: 534, max: 664) MBit/s ∼97% +7%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
606 (min: 306, max: 655) MBit/s ∼91%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
530 MBit/s ∼79% -13%
Average of class Multimedia
  (46.1 - 949, n=139)
483 MBit/s ∼72% -20%
Medion Akoya S6625
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 3165
327 (min: 266, max: 337) MBit/s ∼49% -46%

Input Devices

In contrast to the VivoBook S15 S510UQ predecessor, the VivoBook S15 S530UN has a keyboard with a number block. In order to fit this into a case that kept a similar width, Asus had to reduce the width of the primary key block. In particular the Shift key is now less wide, and the navigation keys such as End and Pos1 are not separate anymore but are doubly occupied with the function keys. Whether you consider this a positive or negative change is a matter of taste: Not everyone needs a number block, but not everyone uses the navigation keys either. However, the small Shift key can be annoying.

We also feel annoyed that Asus cut some costs using an unusual QWERTZ keyboard in the ANSI layout that is customary in the US, for example. In most European countries, ISO keyboards with a larger Enter key are customary, but instead German users are forced to get along with the single-row Enter key. The reason is that the keys stick out of the case directly, and with another layout, Asus would have also needed to manufacture an additional version of the palm rest. In our opinion, this was an unnecessary cost-cutting measure.

In terms of its quality, the typing experience on the keyboard with six chiclet key rows mainly suffers from the case that yields under pressure. While we basically like the typing experience on the slightly concave keys, due to the lack of stability, the experience becomes too soft.

The quality of the plastic ClickPad with the integrated fingerprint reader is decent to a large extent, the sliding characteristics are good, and the driver works reliably. However, the mechanics clatter a bit and the touchpad does not appear to be fixed 100% tight.

Display

Subpixel grid of the LP156WFC-SPD1
Subpixel grid of the LP156WFC-SPD1

The Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN laptop has a matte IPS display with a resolution of 1920x1080 (Full HD). Asus specifies a brightness value of 250 cd/m² for this LCD display, and we can confirm this value with our measurements, where the display achieved a brightness of 256 cd/m² on average. While the competitors all turn out fairly similar, the brightness values are only slightly higher in models such as the Acer Aspire 5 A515 and the Lenovo IdeaPad 530S-15IKB.

We did not measure any PWM in this display, and the brightness distribution was also very good at 90%. We did not notice any backlight bleeding.

263
cd/m²
268
cd/m²
259
cd/m²
260
cd/m²
262
cd/m²
253
cd/m²
250
cd/m²
248
cd/m²
240
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
LP156WFC-SPD1
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 268 cd/m² Average: 255.9 cd/m² Minimum: 13.6 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 265 cd/m²
Contrast: 1248:1 (Black: 0.21 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.8 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 4.6
ΔE Greyscale 2.5 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
57.6% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 36.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 1.99
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
LP156WFC-SPD1, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
BOE CQ NV156FHM-N48, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
N156HCA-EAB, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Medion Akoya S6625
LG Philips LP156WF6-SPK3, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
AU Optronics B156W02 / AUO B156HAN02.1, , 1920x1080, 15.6
Response Times
-24%
-9%
-3%
-13%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
38.8 (20.8, 18)
45 (24, 21)
-16%
37.2 (19.6, 17.6)
4%
39 (19, 20)
-1%
47 (21, 26)
-21%
Response Time Black / White *
26.8 (16, 10.8)
35 (19, 16)
-31%
32.4 (18.4, 14)
-21%
28 (17, 11)
-4%
28 (16, 12)
-4%
PWM Frequency
20000 (90)
25770 (67)
21000
Screen
8%
-7%
-20%
7%
Brightness middle
262
296
13%
285.1
9%
247
-6%
293
12%
Brightness
256
268
5%
271
6%
227
-11%
275
7%
Brightness Distribution
90
81
-10%
88
-2%
87
-3%
86
-4%
Black Level *
0.21
0.3
-43%
0.28
-33%
0.23
-10%
0.25
-19%
Contrast
1248
987
-21%
1018
-18%
1074
-14%
1172
-6%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
5.8
4.01
31%
4.38
24%
7.26
-25%
3.81
34%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
14.3
8.7
39%
24.07
-68%
15.53
-9%
6.64
54%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.6
4
13%
3.95
14%
4.09
11%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.5
0.98
61%
3.1
-24%
6.39
-156%
2.66
-6%
Gamma
1.99 111%
2.35 94%
2.24 98%
2.37 93%
2.54 87%
CCT
6528 100%
6408 101%
6705 97%
7616 85%
6541 99%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
36.6
38
4%
40
9%
37
1%
37
1%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
57.6
58
1%
62
8%
57
-1%
58
1%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-8% / 4%
-8% / -7%
-12% / -18%
-3% / 4%

* ... smaller is better

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
26.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 16 ms rise
↘ 10.8 ms fall
The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 53 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
38.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 20.8 ms rise
↘ 18 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. » 41 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9378 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Color values
Color values
Saturation
Saturation
Grayscales
Grayscales
Color values (calibrated)
Color values (calibrated)
Saturation (calibrated)
Saturation (calibrated)
Grayscales (calibrated)
Grayscales (calibrated)
sRGB: 57.6%
sRGB: 57.6%
AdobeRGB: 36.6%
AdobeRGB: 36.6%
Outdoors (cloudy)
Outdoors (cloudy)

At first glance, the quality of the display is not bad, subjectively. This probably can be attributed mainly to the high contrast of 1248:1 and the low black value (0.21 cd/m²). The competitors are unable to achieve these values. However, if you compare the display with other monitors, you can quickly notice that it is unable to reproduce many colors accurately, since the color-space coverage is very bad at only 57.6% of the sRGB color space. After all, it is an affordable display.

Performance

There are many different model variants of the VivoBook S15 S530, which can mainly be attributed to the different color options. In terms of the internal hardware, you have the choice between the Intel Core i5-8250U or the Core i7-8550U, which are accompanied by 8 GB or 16 GB of DDR4-2400 working memory respectively (two SO-DIMM slots, both occupied in our test unit) as well as a 256-GB SSD that can optionally be supplemented by a 1-TB HDD. You have even more choices in terms of the graphics chip, since you can order the Asus VivoBook with the Intel UHD Graphics 620, the Nvidia GeForce MX130, or the Nvidia GeForce MX150.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Caches
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Mainboard
CPU-Z Memory
CPU-Z Memory
HWiNFO
HWiNFO
LatencyMon
LatencyMon
 
 

Processor

The Intel Core i7-8550U is a quad-core processor of the 8th generation of the Core-i CPUs. The four CPU cores of the power-saving Kaby Lake Refresh processor have a clock speed of 1.8 to 4 GHz. Our CPU benchmark list allows you to compare it with other processors. 

The performance of Ultra Low Voltage processors such as the i7-8550U is primarily dependent on the cooling. In the VivoBook S15 S530UN, the processor is allowed to consume 35 watts, achieving a clock speed of 3.3 GHz with this. However, this is only the case for a short time period. Already in the second iteration of the Cinebench-R15 test loop, the clock speed drops to about 2.9 GHz, with the consumption then being 25 watts. Continuing the half-hour test, the clock speed drops a little further with each run, until it finally reaches 2.4 GHz, consuming only about 15 watts. The reason for this is Asus' adjustment of the firmware, so that the temperatures are kept on a level of almost 75 °C (167 °F).

Overall, the CPU performance of the VivoBook is quite good for a device from this price range. The direct competitors are clearly outperformed, in the short-term performance as well as under continuous load. Unfortunately, the CPU performance is limited in battery operation, and instead of slightly above 700 points, the VivoBook only achieved about 540 points in the Cinebench-R15 multi-core test without a charger.

0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630640650660670680690700710720730Tooltip
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T Intel Core i7-8550U, Intel Core i7-8550U: Ø570 (535-723)
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB Intel Core i5-8250U, Intel Core i5-8250U: Ø492 (486.99-523.37)
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU Intel Core i5-8265U, Intel Core i5-8265U: Ø487 (482.49-523.51)
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U
172 Points ∼100%
Medion Akoya S6625
Intel Core i7-8550U
170 Points ∼99% -1%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (108 - 172, n=74)
160 Points ∼93% -7%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
Intel Core i5-8265U
159 Points ∼92% -8%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel Core i5-8250U
144 Points ∼84% -16%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Intel Core i5-7200U
130 Points ∼76% -24%
Average of class Multimedia
  (36 - 201, n=366)
128 Points ∼74% -26%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U
729 Points ∼100%
Medion Akoya S6625
Intel Core i7-8550U
627 Points ∼86% -14%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (301 - 761, n=76)
570 Points ∼78% -22%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
Intel Core i5-8265U
524 Points ∼72% -28%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel Core i5-8250U
490 Points ∼67% -33%
Average of class Multimedia
  (73 - 1550, n=382)
486 Points ∼67% -33%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Intel Core i5-7200U
331 Points ∼45% -55%
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
97.37 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
729 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
172 Points
Help

System Performance

There is nothing to complain about in the system performance. The VivoBook S15 S530UN always ran smoothly and without any noticeable delays. It also achieved good results in the PCMark system performance benchmarks.

PCMark 10
Digital Content Creation
Average of class Multimedia
  (1001 - 7161, n=97)
3727 Points ∼100% +12%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
GeForce MX150, 8265U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3548 Points ∼95% +7%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
3315 Points ∼89%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (2036 - 3518, n=19)
2984 Points ∼80% -10%
Medion Akoya S6625
GeForce 940MX, 8550U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
2875 Points ∼77% -13%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
2786 Points ∼75% -16%
Productivity
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
GeForce MX150, 8265U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
6469 Points ∼100% +4%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
6236 Points ∼96%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1407 - 8020, n=98)
6167 Points ∼95% -1%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (4779 - 7244, n=19)
6104 Points ∼94% -2%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
6069 Points ∼94% -3%
Medion Akoya S6625
GeForce 940MX, 8550U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
5686 Points ∼88% -9%
Essentials
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
7767 Points ∼100% +16%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2891 - 9829, n=98)
7508 Points ∼97% +12%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
GeForce MX150, 8265U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
7348 Points ∼95% +10%
Medion Akoya S6625
GeForce 940MX, 8550U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
7306 Points ∼94% +9%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (5448 - 8412, n=19)
7198 Points ∼93% +7%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
6710 Points ∼86%
Score
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
GeForce MX150, 8265U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3960 Points ∼100% +7%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1144 - 5469, n=98)
3953 Points ∼100% +7%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
3711 Points ∼94%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
3643 Points ∼92% -2%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (3056 - 4106, n=19)
3631 Points ∼92% -2%
Medion Akoya S6625
GeForce 940MX, 8550U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
3530 Points ∼89% -5%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
5025 Points ∼100%
Medion Akoya S6625
GeForce 940MX, 8550U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
4994 Points ∼99% -1%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
GeForce MX150, 8265U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4924 Points ∼98% -2%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (4063 - 5228, n=20)
4771 Points ∼95% -5%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
4762 Points ∼95% -5%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
GeForce 940MX, 7200U, Toshiba SG5 THNSNK128GVN8
4483 Points ∼89% -11%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2213 - 5651, n=280)
4300 Points ∼86% -14%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Medion Akoya S6625
GeForce 940MX, 8550U, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
3906 Points ∼100% +8%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
GeForce MX150, 8265U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3725 Points ∼95% +3%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (3145 - 4130, n=21)
3656 Points ∼94% +1%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
3620 Points ∼93%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
3585 Points ∼92% -1%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
GeForce 940MX, 7200U, Toshiba SG5 THNSNK128GVN8
3468 Points ∼89% -4%
Average of class Multimedia
  (1371 - 4693, n=301)
3383 Points ∼87% -7%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3620 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
5025 points
Help

Storage Solution

Asus uses a 1-TB HDD (Toshiba MQ04ABF100) in combination with a 256-GB SSD. The HDD is the primary storage medium, since the operating system is installed on the SSD. The flash storage with a capacity of 256 GB comes from SanDisk and is a comparatively slow SSD, since it is connected via the old SATA-III standard. While this does not pose any larger limitations in everyday operation, it would have been nice if Asus had been a little more generous in a device costing more than 1000 Euros (~$1138). Other manufacturers are not as stingy here, for example the Lenovo IdeaPad 530s-15IKB has a faster PCIe-NVMe SSD.

Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG
Medion Akoya S6625
SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Toshiba SG5 THNSNK128GVN8
Average SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
 
CrystalDiskMark 5.2 / 6
3%
109%
-1%
-19%
-2%
Write 4K
51.55
78.39
52%
93.78
82%
84
63%
91.6
78%
55.3 (51.6 - 60.5, n=3)
7%
Read 4K
28.53
25.99
-9%
40.46
42%
29.41
3%
11.8
-59%
26.4 (21.6 - 29.1, n=3)
-7%
Write Seq
444.2
390.9
-12%
804.2
81%
267.1
-40%
136.5
-69%
443 (435 - 451, n=3)
0%
Read Seq
477.7
482.6
1%
1677
251%
491.7
3%
440.3
-8%
480 (478 - 482, n=3)
0%
Write 4K Q32T1
208.7
205.5
-2%
201.8
-3%
218.8
5%
123.7
-41%
192 (119 - 249, n=3)
-8%
Read 4K Q32T1
224.3
227.9
2%
267
19%
239
7%
277.1
24%
207 (129 - 268, n=3)
-8%
Write Seq Q32T1
514.9
502.2
-2%
669.3
30%
267.8
-48%
139.1
-73%
515 (496 - 534, n=3)
0%
Read Seq Q32T1
558.6
526.2
-6%
2606
367%
551.3
-1%
542.1
-3%
557 (550 - 563, n=3)
0%
SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027
Sequential Read: 527.2 MB/s
Sequential Write: 452.7 MB/s
512K Read: 310.1 MB/s
512K Write: 408.3 MB/s
4K Read: 29.92 MB/s
4K Write: 56.59 MB/s
4K QD32 Read: 350.7 MB/s
4K QD32 Write: 304.7 MB/s

Graphics Card

GPU-Z Nvidia GeForce MX150
GPU-Z Nvidia GeForce MX150

The Nvidia GeForce MX150 is a low-end GPU based on the Pascal architecture, which is aging at this point. It is typically used in smaller and more affordable laptops and offers a considerable performance increase compared to Intel iGPUs. However, compared to GeForce-GTX chips such as the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050, it is much slower, with the speeds being worlds apart. You can see a detailed comparison using our GPU benchmark table.

An interesting aspect of the MX150 is that it is available on the market in two variants. There is the unofficial "Max-Q" version with a maximum consumption of 10 watts, and then there is the regular version with a TDP of 25 watts. Which version is used is not clear before buying a laptop. In the case of the VivoBooks, it is the 25-watt version of the GeForce MX150, which is about 27% faster than the 10-watt MX150. The Intel UHD Graphics 620 is even 66% slower.

In battery mode, the GPU performance is throttled and a score of only 3993 points is achieved in 3DMark11.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i5-8265U
4558 Points ∼100% +1%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
4506 Points ∼99%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (2796 - 4905, n=47)
4191 Points ∼92% -7%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
3551 Points ∼78% -21%
Average of class Multimedia
  (352 - 20837, n=634)
2963 Points ∼65% -34%
Medion Akoya S6625
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i7-8550U
2938 Points ∼64% -35%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i5-7200U
2689 Points ∼59% -40%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
1547 Points ∼34% -66%
3DMark
2560x1440 Time Spy Graphics
Average of class Multimedia
  (142 - 4734, n=60)
1564 Points ∼100% +49%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i5-8265U
1057 Points ∼68% +1%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
1050 Points ∼67%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (830 - 1085, n=15)
985 Points ∼63% -6%
Medion Akoya S6625
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i7-8550U
644 Points ∼41% -39%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i5-8265U
3613 Points ∼100% +3%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
3517 Points ∼97%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (2323 - 3739, n=44)
3310 Points ∼92% -6%
Average of class Multimedia
  (337 - 16100, n=408)
2855 Points ∼79% -19%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
2807 Points ∼78% -20%
Medion Akoya S6625
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i7-8550U
2357 Points ∼65% -33%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i5-7200U
2158 Points ∼60% -39%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
1004 Points ∼28% -71%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i5-8265U
21120 Points ∼100% +13%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (16227 - 22183, n=43)
19512 Points ∼92% +4%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
18770 Points ∼89%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, Intel Core i7-8550U
17743 Points ∼84% -5%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2468 - 77755, n=413)
16879 Points ∼80% -10%
Medion Akoya S6625
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i7-8550U
13119 Points ∼62% -30%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, Intel Core i5-7200U
11986 Points ∼57% -36%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
Intel UHD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-8250U
7581 Points ∼36% -60%
3DMark 11 Performance
4605 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
13727 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
3175 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
1168 points
Help

Gaming Performance

While the GeForce MX150 makes the VivoBook S15 basically suitable for gaming, limitations are to be expected even with the more powerful 25-watt version. Current games are fairly playable at low details and in parts reduced resolutions, but you have to live with these limitations, since the GeForce MX150 is not a real gaming chip. However, at least the GPU was able to maintain its performance in our The Witcher 3 loop.

The Witcher 3 - 1366x768 Medium Graphics & Postprocessing
Average of class Multimedia
  (5.2 - 206, n=104)
44.3 fps ∼100% +25%
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
35.3 fps ∼80%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
Intel Core i5-8265U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
35.2 fps ∼79% 0%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (24.4 - 43.2, n=26)
34.3 fps ∼77% -3%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02E00
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
31.47 fps ∼71% -11%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Intel Core i5-7200U, NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
25.4 fps ∼57% -28%
Medion Akoya S6625
Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
24.5 fps ∼55% -31%
05101520Tooltip
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027: Ø10.4 (6-13)
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 139.392.680.932fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 59.735.319.811fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 63.637.420.1fps

Emissions and Power Management

Noise Emissions

During idle, the fan is mostly silent. However if it finally does turn on, it quickly becomes annoying. The reason is not necessarily the volume itself, but the kind of the fan noise. Unfortunately the fan of our test unit was roaring a bit. Under load, this naturally became even more pronounced. This might possibly be a defect, but since we do not have a second test unit, we cannot confirm this.

Besides the fan, the mechanical hard drive can also be a possible source of noise. However, since this remained completely empty in our test unit, it hardly ever ran during our test. But if you do use the hard drive, you should expect a low constant whirring noise. In addition to these noise sources, we were also able to notice an electronic noise. However, this is only audible if you put your ear directly next to the keyboard.

Noise Level

Idle
29 / 29 / 30.2 dB(A)
HDD
29.4 dB(A)
Load
36.2 / 36.2 dB(A)
  red to green bar
 
 
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud
 
min: dark, med: mid, max: light   Audix TM1, Arta (15 cm distance)   environment noise: 29 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.726.228.328.730.52526.226.125.524.425.93125.525.726.826.524.84023.723.925.526.724.65029.92827.928.128.46326.624.624.823.322.28023.421.922.622.221.610024.123.925.624.523.812521.322.921.122.621.516020.122.920.522.220.720020.92321.323.220.225021.422.220.521.520.531520.62220.120.820.640019.520.820.220.120.150020.322.219.119.619.863019.621.119.419.419.280018.921.419.418.618.5100019.323.319.617.818.9125019.723.517.917.518.5160021.325.618.316.619.4200022.427.216.716.519.2250020.425.915.915.818.2315020.125.415.615.416.4400017.427.215.315.215.5500016.522.715.11515.3630015.519.615.114.81580001517.615.114.814.81000014.715.814.914.714.71250014.415.114.814.514.51600014.115.115.114.214.2SPL31.436.229.42929.9N1.52.31.21.21.3median 19.7median 22.7median 18.3median 17.5median 18.9Delta1.91.52.52.82.5hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseAsus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T

Temperature

Stress test (Prime95 + FurMark)
Stress test (Prime95 + FurMark)

The exterior temperatures reach a maximum of 50 °C (122 °F) at the bottom, which is still within the acceptable range for a relatively slim notebook with dedicated graphics. In the stress test with Prime95 and FurMark, the processor can initially run at 2.7 GHz and 25 watts for a brief time period, but after about 30 seconds, the clock speed is limited to 1.2 GHz with the CPU power consumption only being 7 watts. The GPU is also affected by temperature-dependent throttling, and its clock speed is only about 1000 instead of 1500 MHz.

Right after the stress test, we always run a 3DMark11 test. In this test, the Asus VivoBook only achieved 4313 points overall, which is slightly less than normal. In everyday operation, the limitation of the cooling system can have some effects, but those should be comparatively small.

Max. Load
 38.8 °C
102 F
46.1 °C
115 F
43.4 °C
110 F
 
 37.3 °C
99 F
45.7 °C
114 F
40.8 °C
105 F
 
 25.3 °C
78 F
29.2 °C
85 F
29.9 °C
86 F
 
Maximum: 46.1 °C = 115 F
Average: 37.4 °C = 99 F
46.2 °C
115 F
48.1 °C
119 F
41.7 °C
107 F
44.6 °C
112 F
50 °C
122 F
41.6 °C
107 F
30.2 °C
86 F
30.5 °C
87 F
27.1 °C
81 F
Maximum: 50 °C = 122 F
Average: 40 °C = 104 F
Power Supply (max.)  42.8 °C = 109 F | Room Temperature 20.6 °C = 69 F | Voltcraft IR-900
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 37.4 °C / 99 F, compared to the average of 30.9 °C / 88 F for the devices in the class Multimedia.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 46.1 °C / 115 F, compared to the average of 36.5 °C / 98 F, ranging from 21.1 to 71 °C for the class Multimedia.
(-) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 50 °C / 122 F, compared to the average of 38.8 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 23 °C / 73 F, compared to the device average of 30.9 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 35.4 °C / 96 F, compared to the device average of 30.9 °C / 88 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 29.9 °C / 85.8 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 29.1 °C / 84.4 F (-0.8 °C / -1.4 F).
Load (top)
Load (top)
Load (bottom)
Load (bottom)

Speakers

Asus has built in stereo speakers that are positioned at the bottom of the VivoBook. Their volume is rather too low and they also completely lack bass, which is typical for many laptop speakers. However, otherwise the quality of the speakers is okay, even if they of course are unable to keep up with external speakers, which you can connect via the flawlessly operating headphone connection.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2028.731.22524.427.43126.525.14026.724.95028.129.26323.331.88022.227.410024.526.512522.626.416022.232.920023.238.125021.543.531520.84840020.151.450019.651.963019.454.580018.660100017.858125017.557160016.653.8200016.557.4250015.851.9315015.451.5400015.247.150001549.8630014.855.9800014.853.91000014.7481250014.545.81600014.248.1SPL2966.8N1.221.2median 17.5median 51.4Delta2.85.832.635.532.63538.63536.848.236.83435.63438.83438.828.832.228.830.728.230.734.72734.740.924.340.941.923.241.946.122.846.157.422.357.46121.56163.420.263.46619.26666.618.966.665.418.465.463.617.963.667.21867.269.417.669.471.217.571.273.417.973.469.41869.469.318.269.368.318.568.369.818.669.869.518.869.56818.76861.918.961.954.719.154.781.230.781.250.91.550.9median 66median 18.8median 667.31.87.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097TAsus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (66.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.5% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (11.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (19.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 51% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 38% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 39% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 54% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (73.4 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 19% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (15.8% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 25% of all tested devices in this class were better, 5% similar, 70% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 19% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 78% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Power Management

Power Consumption

The power consumption of the Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN is relatively low, particularly during idle. Under load, some of the competitors are less wasteful with power, but those devices also have less-powerful equipment. The 65-watt power supply has exactly the right size for the maximum power consumption of the VivoBook, which is 62.7 watts under load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.34 / 0.52 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3.1 / 6.3 / 8.6 Watt
Load midlight 56.4 / 62.7 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
8550U, GeForce MX150, SanDisk SD9SN8W256G1027, IPS LED, 1920x1080, 15.6
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
8265U, GeForce MX150, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, SK hynix PC401 HFS256GD9TNG, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Medion Akoya S6625
8550U, GeForce 940MX, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
7200U, GeForce 940MX, Toshiba SG5 THNSNK128GVN8, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
 
Average of class Multimedia
 
Power Consumption
-9%
14%
1%
-3%
-16%
-117%
Idle Minimum *
3.1
3.8
-23%
3.5
-13%
3.9
-26%
3.6
-16%
4.48 (2.2 - 11.6, n=45)
-45%
11.5 (2.1 - 101, n=934)
-271%
Idle Average *
6.3
6.3
-0%
5.6
11%
6.6
-5%
6.8
-8%
7.88 (5 - 13.8, n=45)
-25%
16.1 (4.2 - 122, n=934)
-156%
Idle Maximum *
8.6
9.6
-12%
10.3
-20%
7.5
13%
9.5
-10%
9.76 (6.2 - 14.7, n=45)
-13%
19.6 (4.7 - 181, n=934)
-128%
Load Average *
56.4
59.5
-5%
30.5
46%
51
10%
51.6
9%
54.7 (33 - 75, n=44)
3%
59.8 (18.5 - 164, n=913)
-6%
Load Maximum *
62.7
64.4
-3%
33.8
46%
55
12%
56
11%
63.5 (40.4 - 89.2, n=45)
-1%
77.9 (20.1 - 329, n=918)
-24%
Witcher 3 ultra *
45

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Time to recharge: 120 minutes
Time to recharge: 120 minutes

Together with its predecessor, the VivoBook S15 S530UN has the smallest battery in our test field. The capacity of the internal battery is merely 42 Wh. While this is quite small for a 15.6-inch laptop, the achieved battery life of 6.5 hours is not sub-standard. This is primarily due to the good consumption values, since the Asus VivoBook S15 S510UQ predecessor runs out of breath significantly earlier.

Battery Runtime
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (Edge)
6h 28min
Battery Runtime - WiFi v1.3
Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T
8550U, GeForce MX150, 42 Wh
388 min ∼108%
Acer Aspire 5 A515-52G-53PU
8265U, GeForce MX150, 48 Wh
450 min ∼125%
Lenovo Ideapad 530S-15IKB
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 45 Wh
391 min ∼109%
Average of class Multimedia
  (96 - 942, n=248)
360 min ∼100% -7%
Medion Akoya S6625
8550U, GeForce 940MX, 44 Wh
355 min ∼99%
Asus Vivobook S15 S510UQ-BQ189T
7200U, GeForce 940MX, 42 Wh
255 min ∼71%

Verdict

Pros

+ compact case
+ CPU potential fully used
+ improved battery life compared to the predecessor
+ equipped with the more powerful version of the MX150
+ upgradability (2x RAM, SSD + HDD)
+ FHD IPS display with good contrast

Cons

- bad color-space coverage
- no PCIe-NVMe SSD
- strange ANSI QWERTZ layout
- USB 2.0 Type-A & USB C without Thunderbolt or DisplayPort
- slow microSD-card slot
- unstable keyboard area
- uncomfortable fan noise
- throttling in battery operation and during stress test
In review: Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN. Test unit provided by Asus.
In review: Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN. Test unit provided by Asus.

In a mid-range multimedia laptop, it is always interesting to see where the manufacturer made some cuts for savings. You should not have any illusions that some cuts will definitely be there.

Of course, an affordable multimedia laptop can also have its advantages. For example, thanks to its slim bezels, the VivoBook S15 S530UN is quite compact for a 15.6-inch laptop. The CPU performance is higher than those of all the direct competitors, because the VivoBook makes better use of the potential of the processor. Compared to the predecessor, the battery life has improved significantly (despite the small battery), and it is also positive that Asus uses the more powerful version of the Nvidia GeForce MX150. Furthermore, you can easily upgrade the Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN. As a final positive point, we can list the quality of the display in general. Its contrast value is really not bad for its price class, and otherwise there are also no weaknesses that stand out, such as PWM or backlight bleeding.

On the other hand, we definitely need to hold the bad color-space coverage against the display. From a multimedia device that costs more than 1000 Euros (~$1138) in the configuration at hand, we expect more in this regard. The list of negative points can be continued with the various cost-cutting measures from Asus: Besides the lack of a PCIe-NVMe SSD, these also include the fact that Asus uses a slightly strange keyboard with a QWERTZ ANSI layout, which is very unusual for a laptop on the German market. The two USB-A connections on the left side only handle USB 2.0, and the USB-C port on the right size does not support Thunderbolt 3. The latter can be regarded as matter of luxury, but unfortunately it also lacks the DisplayPort functionality.

Furthermore, Asus has only built in a microSD-card slot, and even that is a very slow version. While the competitors also have slow card slots, at least those are real SD-card slots. The VivoBook had some quality problems, in particular with the stability of the keyboard that yielded too much under pressure and the fan that unfortunately produced some uncomfortable, roaring noise. It is also unfortunate that the performance is limited in battery operation and that the Asus laptop significantly throttles the performance in the stress test.

Many disadvantages stemming from cost-cutting measures, but basically not too bad: the Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN.

No laptop in this price class is perfect, so the Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN might be worth buying if it fits your needs – and if you are aware of its weaknesses.

Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN-BQ097T - 12/01/2018 v6(old)
Benjamin Herzig

Chassis
78 / 98 → 80%
Keyboard
79%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
46 / 81 → 57%
Weight
65 / 20-67 → 97%
Battery
89%
Display
86%
Games Performance
75 / 85 → 88%
Application Performance
85 / 92 → 92%
Temperature
87%
Noise
92 / 95 → 97%
Audio
50%
Camera
39 / 85 → 46%
Average
73%
83%
Multimedia - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 7 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading Comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > Asus VivoBook S15 S530UN (i7, FHD, MX150) Laptop Review
Benjamin Herzig, 2018-12- 8 (Update: 2018-12- 8)