Notebookcheck

Asus VivoBook X751BP (AMD A9-9420, HD+) Laptop Review

Sebastian Bade, 👁 Sebastian Jentsch, Sven Kloevekorn (translated by Martin Jungowski), 10/31/2017

Room for improvement! The Asus VivoBook X751BP is an affordable entry-level office notebook with subpar performance. Our review will reveal whether or not it might be worth the purchase.

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News Editor - Details here

For the original German article, see here.

Asus’s latest VivoBook X751BP is a pure and straight office and business device with a 17-inch HD+ resolution display. It is based on AMD’s Stoney Ridge APU featuring an AMD A9-9420 microprocessor and an integrated AMD Radeon R5 graphics processor without dedicated video RAM but a shared memory architecture instead. Our review unit was equipped with 8 GB of DDR4 RAM and a 1 TB hard drive, and sells for 489 Euros (~$569) in Europe. As such, the X751BP would be considered a truly affordable business notebook. Options include a different processor as well as some storage options; however the AMD A9-9420 reviewed by us is already the top of the range model for this particular notebook. Overall, the device turned out to be rather sluggish and we would advise everyone not to expect too much. Further details on how badly it really performed can be found in the respective sections below. See the following table for the devices we have decided to compare the VivoBook to, all of which are affordable 17-inch business notebooks.

Lenovo IdeaPad 320 Lenovo V320 HP 17-y044ng HP 17-x066ng
CPU AMD E2-9000 Intel Core i5-7200U AMD A10-9600P Intel Core i3-6006U
GPU AMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) Intel HD Graphics 620 AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) Intel HD Graphics 520
Display 17.3-inch, 1600x900 17.3-inch, 1920x1080 17.3-inch, 1600x900 17.3-inch, 1920x1080
RAM 8 GB DDR4 8 GB DDR4 8 GB DDR4 8 GB DDR4
Storage 1 TB HDD 256 GB SSD 1 TB HDD 1 TB HDD
Score 75% 82% 77% 79%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T (VivoBook Series)
Processor
Graphics adapter
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), Core: 847 MHz, Memory: 933 MHz, shared memory, 21.19.384.4 (Crimson 17.1.1) WHQL
Memory
8192 MB 
, DDR4
Display
17.3 inch 16:9, 1600 x 900 pixel 106 PPI, AU Optronics AUO B173RTN01.1, TN LED, glossy: yes
Mainboard
K15.6 IMC
Storage
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035, 1024 GB 
, 900 GB free
Soundcard
Conexant SmartAudio HD
Connections
3 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 VGA, 1 HDMI, 1 Kensington Lock, Audio Connections: Microphone-in/Headphone-out jack, Card Reader: SD/SDHC/SDXC
Networking
Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller (10/100/1000MBit), Qualcomm Atheros AR956x (b/g/n), Bluetooth 4.0
Optical drive
HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GUE1N
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 31.5 x 415 x 270 ( = 1.24 x 16.34 x 10.63 in)
Battery
37 Wh, 2600 mAh Lithium-Ion
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: VGA
Additional features
Speakers: Asus SonicMaster Technology, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: no, power supply, 24 Months Warranty
Weight
2.593 kg ( = 91.47 oz / 5.72 pounds), Power Supply: 246 g ( = 8.68 oz / 0.54 pounds)
Price
489 EUR
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case and Connectivity

The VivoBook’s case is made primarily out of plastic with slightly roughened surfaces for improved grip. Unfortunately, it also acts as a superb fingerprint magnet. Its black design is inconspicuous and there are no color accents whatsoever.

For a 17-inch device the base’s rigidity is fairly decent, however the lid is pretty flexible. It responds very willingly to torsional forces, and applying pressure to the back results in minor yet visible ripples at the front. All things considered, the case is very sturdy despite its size. Due to the lack of dedicated maintenance flaps upgradability is somewhat restricted, and the entire bottom cover has to be removed in order to replace or upgrade the hard disk drive or the RAM.

All devices in our test group weigh between 2.6 and 2.8 kg (~5.7 to ~6.2 lb), and the VivoBook can be found at the lower end of this spectrum. The charger adds another 246 g (~8.7 oz). Due to the comparatively low weight it is not possible to open the lid one-handed. While the hinges are too firm for one-handed operation, they are not firm enough to prevent display teetering entirely.

In terms of ports the VivoBook offers what we would have expected from an office notebook. Unfortunately, port distribution is somewhat one-sided with almost all ports on the left-hand side. Spacing between the three USB 3.0 ports is minimal and thus troublesome, and the SD card reader is located at the front. Tested with our usual reference card, a 64 GB Toshiba Exceria Pro SDCX UHS-II, the VivoBook managed a meager 19 MB/s worthy of no more than last place. That said, the other devices in our test group were not exactly Speedy Gonzales in this test either - the Lenovo IdeaPad 320’s disappointing 28 MB/s were sufficient for the first place.

Wi-Fi performance was similarly poor, with 92 MBit/s receiving and 62 MBit/s transmitting data. The only device even slower was the HP 17-y044ng. In addition, the Wi-Fi modem made by Qualcomm also supports Bluetooth 4.0. Higher speeds of up to 1 Gbit/s are available via the notebook’s Gigabit Ethernet port.

Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP
Asus VivoBook X751BP

Size Comparison

Connectivity

left: Kensington lock, fan vents, RJ45, VGA, HDMI, 3x USB 3.0, audio combo jack
left: Kensington lock, fan vents, RJ45, VGA, HDMI, 3x USB 3.0, audio combo jack
right: DVD burner, power
right: DVD burner, power
front: SD card reader
front: SD card reader
rear: no connectivity
rear: no connectivity
SDCardreader Transfer Speed - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
28 MB/s ∼100% +47%
HP 17-y044ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26.6 MB/s ∼95% +40%
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
26.5 MB/s ∼95% +39%
HP 17-x066ng
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
22.2 MB/s ∼79% +17%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
19 MB/s ∼68%

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

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
288 MBit/s ∼100% +213%
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
285 MBit/s ∼99% +210%
HP 17-x066ng
Realtek RTL8723BE Wireless LAN 802.11n PCI-E NIC
96 MBit/s ∼33% +4%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Qualcomm Atheros AR956x
92 MBit/s ∼32%
HP 17-y044ng
Realtek RTL8723BE Wireless LAN 802.11n PCI-E NIC (jseb)
47 MBit/s ∼16% -49%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
353 MBit/s ∼100% +469%
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
Realtek 8821AE Wireless LAN 802.11ac PCI-E NIC
327 MBit/s ∼93% +427%
HP 17-x066ng
Realtek RTL8723BE Wireless LAN 802.11n PCI-E NIC
93 MBit/s ∼26% +50%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Qualcomm Atheros AR956x
62 MBit/s ∼18%
HP 17-y044ng
Realtek RTL8723BE Wireless LAN 802.11n PCI-E NIC (jseb)
51 MBit/s ∼14% -18%

Input Devices

Asus VivoBook X751BP keyboard
Asus VivoBook X751BP keyboard
Asus VivoBook X751BP touchpad
Asus VivoBook X751BP touchpad

The 6-row chiclet keyboard sits flush with the VivoBook’s top case. At 16 x 16 mm (~0.63 x 0.63 in) the roughened keys are sufficiently sized and their white labels are easy to read. Unfortunately, typing is somewhat uncomfortable due to the spongy key travel and feedback as well as annoying clatter (despite the fact that the keys seem to sit very tight and do not wobble at all). The same must be said about the touchpad: at 10.5 x 7.5 cm (~4.1 x 3 in) it is decently large, offers sufficient slippage, and unlike the keyboard it is slightly recessed into the top case. So far so good, if only it was not for the lack of precision along the edges and corners. On the plus side, we did not experience any problems with multi-touch input, and the ClickPad’s acoustic feedback when clicked is pleasantly quiet.

Display

subpixel geometry
subpixel geometry
no clouding
no clouding

Our review unit was equipped with an HD+ panel, the only option for the VivoBook X751BP. The panel’s resolution of 1600x900 results in a pixel density of no more than 106 PPI, and its average brightness was only 259 nits. Still, it was brighter than the Lenovo IdeaPad 320 and the HP 17-y044ng, and managed to secure a decent third place in this category. Given its high black level of 0.45 nits and the low overall brightness, the resulting contrast ratio is a meager 591:1, and at just 83% the brightness distribution was mediocre at best. That said, the VivoBook was in good company since none of its competitors was significantly better. On a positive note, there was no annoying screen bleeding. On a more negative note we found PWM flickering at a very low frequency of 200 Hz.

232
cd/m²
248
cd/m²
255
cd/m²
260
cd/m²
266
cd/m²
261
cd/m²
266
cd/m²
279
cd/m²
261
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 279 cd/m² Average: 258.7 cd/m² Minimum: 13.7 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 83 %
Center on Battery: 266 cd/m²
Contrast: 591:1 (Black: 0.45 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.53 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.3
ΔE Greyscale 5.48 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
82% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 53% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.23
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
AU Optronics AUO B173RTN01.1, 1600x900, 17.3
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
AU Optronics B173RTN02.1, 1600x900, 17.3
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
LG Philips LP173WF4-SPF5, 1920x1080, 17.3
HP 17-y044ng
AU Optronics, 1600x900, 17.3
HP 17-x066ng
AU Optronics B173HW01 V0, 1920x1080, 17.3
Response Times
-9%
19789%
-22%
-27%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
47 (26, 21)
40 (22, 18)
15%
35 (18, 17)
26%
43 (21, 22, Plateau)
9%
38 (21, 17)
19%
Response Time Black / White *
15 (9, 6)
20 (16, 4)
-33%
24 (14, 10)
-60%
23 (7, 16, Plateau)
-53%
26 (15, 11)
-73%
PWM Frequency
200 (40)
119000 (80)
59400%
Screen
-60%
17%
-53%
13%
Brightness middle
266
205
-23%
412
55%
264
-1%
331
24%
Brightness
259
209
-19%
377
46%
232
-10%
310
20%
Brightness Distribution
83
81
-2%
83
0%
80
-4%
87
5%
Black Level *
0.45
0.55
-22%
0.39
13%
0.59
-31%
0.33
27%
Contrast
591
373
-37%
1056
79%
447
-24%
1003
70%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.53
11.26
-149%
5.04
-11%
10.58
-134%
4.58
-1%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
7.2
19.86
-176%
8.84
-23%
18.96
-163%
7.83
-9%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
5.48
13.85
-153%
5.28
4%
13.13
-140%
6.18
-13%
Gamma
2.23 99%
2.48 89%
2.44 90%
2.49 88%
2.34 94%
CCT
7726 84%
15307 42%
6900 94%
14044 46%
6076 107%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
53
47
-11%
55
4%
48
-9%
56
6%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
82
73
-11%
84
2%
74
-10%
86
5%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-35% / -52%
9903% / 4580%
-38% / -48%
-7% / 7%

* ... 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
15 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 9 ms rise
↘ 6 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. » 12 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
47 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 26 ms rise
↘ 21 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. » 76 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (41 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 200 Hz ≤ 40 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 200 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 40 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

The frequency of 200 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below.

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8773 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

grayscales
grayscales
colors
colors
saturation
saturation
sRGB coverage: 82%
sRGB coverage: 82%
AdobeRGB coverage: 53%
AdobeRGB coverage: 53%

Due to the display’s high black level, blacks turn out visibly grey instead, and thanks to the poor contrast ratio, colors are pretty pale. With DeltaE deviations of 4.53 (colors) and 5.48 (grayscales) color accuracy was somewhat decent and much better than we would have expected. Color space coverage was 82% sRGB and 53% AdobeRGB, and once again we were pleasantly surprised considering that some notebooks priced over 1000 Euros (~$1164) are equipped with displays with similar specifications. The display is accurate enough for non-professional photo editing purposes. Outdoors the device performed decently in the shade as overall brightness was not high enough for direct or indirect sunlight.

As expected, viewing angles were rather poor due to the display’s TN panel. Looking at the display from the sides results in significantly distorted colors.

Asus VivoBook X751BP outside in sunlight
Asus VivoBook X751BP outside in sunlight
Asus VivoBook X751BP outside in the shade
Asus VivoBook X751BP outside in the shade
Asus VivoBook X751BP viewing angles
Asus VivoBook X751BP viewing angles

Performance

Based around an AMD APU the VivoBook X751BP is equipped with an A9-9420 processor, 8 GB of DDR4 RAM, and a 1 TB 2.5-inch hard disk drive. Accordingly, it is only suitable for simple office tasks and browsing the web.

CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
CPU-Z
GPU-Z
GPU-Z
HWiNFO
DPC latencies

Processor

Based on the Stoney Ridge APU series, AMD’s A9-9420 is an entry-level CPU and the successor to the A9-9410. Its two processing units run at 3.0 GHz and can boost up to 3.6 GHz based on demand. Our benchmarks showed that compared to the A10-9600P (HP 17-y044ng) the A9-9420 was slightly faster in single-core tasks. However, in multi-core tasks, it did not stand a chance against the competition and fell behind. In our review group, Intel's Core i5-7200U was the fastest contender.

Additional benchmarks for AMD’s A9-9420 can be found here.

Sustained load caused by our Cinebench R15 Multithread loop was no challenge for the VivoBook X751BP, and its scores remained consistently high with only minimal variation.

0102030405060708090100110120130140Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
127 Points ∼60% +57%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
AMD A9-9420
81 Points ∼38%
HP 17-y044ng
AMD A10-9600P
70 Points ∼33% -14%
HP 17-x066ng
Intel Core i3-6006U
70 Points ∼33% -14%
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
AMD E2-9000
47 Points ∼22% -42%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
329 Points ∼11% +146%
HP 17-x066ng
Intel Core i3-6006U
208 Points ∼7% +55%
HP 17-y044ng
AMD A10-9600P
195 Points ∼6% +46%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
AMD A9-9420
134 Points ∼4%
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
AMD E2-9000
84 Points ∼3% -37%
JetStream 1.1 - 1.1 Total Score
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
Intel Core i5-7200U
214.35 Points ∼64% +60%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
AMD A9-9420
134.09 Points ∼40%
HP 17-y044ng
AMD A10-9600P
123.3 Points ∼37% -8%
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
AMD E2-9000
82.762 Points ∼25% -38%
Cinebench R10
Cinebench R10
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R11.5
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15
Jetstream 1.1
Jetstream 1.1
Octane V2
Octane V2
Mozilla Kraken 1.1
Mozilla Kraken 1.1
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
5088
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
5022
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
2875
Cinebench R10 Shading 64Bit
3828 Points
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
6757 Points
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
3410 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
1.64 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
20.39 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
0.99 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
134 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
81 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
98 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
23.23 fps
Help

System Performance

We use PCMark 8’s Home benchmark to assess overall system performance, and the VivoBook’s 2745 points are only good enough for second to last place. However, the difference between the VivoBook’s fourth place and the second place is negligible, and it is safe to say that our review unit is at eye level with both HP notebooks.

Subjectively speaking, we were disappointed by the Asus VivoBook X751BP. The system was sluggish and frequently stalled for several seconds. Replacing the hard disk drive with an SSD would undoubtedly improve application launch times and thereby perceived system performance significantly.

PCMark 8 Home
PCMark 8 Home
PCMark 8 Creative
PCMark 8 Creative
PCMark 8 Work
PCMark 8 Work
PCMark 8 Storage
PCMark 8 Storage
PCMark 8 - Home Score Accelerated v2
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, SK Hynix HFS256G3BTND
3820 Points ∼63% +39%
HP 17-x066ng
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, WDC WD10JPVX-08JC3T5
2801 Points ∼46% +2%
HP 17-y044ng
Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge), A10-9600P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-75JC3T0
2754 Points ∼45% 0%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), A9-9420, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
2745 Points ∼45%
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), E2-9000, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
1844 Points ∼30% -33%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
2745 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
2879 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
3046 points
Help

Storage Devices

As mentioned before, our review unit came equipped with a regular 2.5-inch hard disk drive from Seagate, and while it offered sufficient storage space (1 TB) at only 5400 RPM, it was also fairly slow. HD Tune reported an average transfer rate of 100 MB/s, which would have been decent if it were not for its very poor 4K read and write performance. Unfortunately, Asus does not offer any SSD options for the VivoBook X751BP, and you will have to take matters into your own hands (and tools) if you want to equip the VivoBook accordingly.

HD Tune
HD Tune
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
CrystalDiskMark 5.2
CrystalDiskMark 5.2
CrystalDiskInfo
CrystalDiskInfo
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
SK Hynix HFS256G3BTND
HP 17-y044ng
WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-75JC3T0
HP 17-x066ng
WDC WD10JPVX-08JC3T5
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
444%
116304%
1433%
1368%
Write 4k QD32
0.305
0.154
-50%
242.5
79408%
1.03
238%
0.959
214%
Read 4k QD32
1.074
1.088
1%
298.3
27675%
0.891
-17%
1.039
-3%
Write 4k
0.009
0.316
3411%
73.29
814233%
1.013
11156%
0.96
10567%
Read 4k
0.461
0.448
-3%
29.41
6280%
0.328
-29%
0.395
-14%
Write 512
91.86
92.19
0%
263.3
187%
28.27
-69%
45.98
-50%
Read 512
22.3
30.3
36%
337
1411%
19.17
-14%
33.8
52%
Write Seq
55.8
87.01
56%
260.8
367%
102
83%
98.24
76%
Read Seq
48.63
98.62
103%
473.7
874%
105.5
117%
98.55
103%
Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Transfer Rate Minimum: 45.9 MB/s
Transfer Rate Maximum: 137.6 MB/s
Transfer Rate Average: 100 MB/s
Access Time: 19.7 ms
Burst Rate: 177.9 MB/s
CPU Usage: 11.4 %

GPU Performance

3DMark 11
3DMark 11

The A9-9420’s integrated GPU is named AMD Radeon R5, runs at 847 MHz, and does not have access to its own dedicated video RAM. Consequently, it uses the notebook’s DDR4 RAM as video memory (aka shared memory). Compared to Intel’s integrated GPUs the AMD Radeon R5’s performance was right in-between the HD Graphics 520 and HD Graphics 620. It supports AMD’s UVD 6 (Unified Video Decoder) with HVEC/H.265 and 4K decoding in hardware.

Further details and benchmarks for AMD’s Radeon R5 can be found here.

3DMark 11 - 1280x720 Performance GPU
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
Intel HD Graphics 620, Intel Core i5-7200U
1535 Points ∼3% +13%
HP 17-y044ng
AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge), AMD A10-9600P
1482 Points ∼3% +9%
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), AMD A9-9420
1356 Points ∼3%
HP 17-x066ng
Intel HD Graphics 520, Intel Core i3-6006U
1177 Points ∼2% -13%
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
AMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), AMD E2-9000
747 Points ∼1% -45%
3DMark 11 Performance
1387 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The VivoBook X751BP is definitely not suitable for demanding games. It was only able to run “BioShock Infinite” smoothly on the lowest preset and the lowest resolution possible. Due to resolution and display incompatibilities, we were unable to choose the medium or high presets. It should, however, be fast enough for simple browser games.

#ff7777;">0 game wont start (unsupported resolution)
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 43.40 game wont start (unsupported resolution)0 game wont start (unsupported resolution)fps
Mass Effect Andromeda (2017) 12.2fps
Prey (2017) 21.5fps
Rocket League (2017) 41.425.616.3fps
Dirt 4 (2017) 32.8fps
Playerunknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017) 12.1fps
F1 2017 (2017) 181310fps
Ark Survival Evolved (2017) 156.2fps
FIFA 18 (2017) 42.619.4fps
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017) 8fps
The Evil Within 2 (2017) 6fps
ELEX (2017) 6fps
Destiny 2 (2017) 10fps

Emissions & Energy

System Noise

noise levels
noise levels

A single fan is in charge of heat dissipation, but it remained off when idle and in low load scenarios and was only active under load. Accordingly, all we were able to make out when idle was the hard disk drive. At 35.1 dB(A), the VivoBook was noticeable, but far from annoying under load. The Lenovo IdeaPad 320 and HP 17-x066ng remained significantly quieter under load.

Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), A9-9420, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), E2-9000, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, SK Hynix HFS256G3BTND
HP 17-y044ng
Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge), A10-9600P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-75JC3T0
HP 17-x066ng
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, WDC WD10JPVX-08JC3T5
Noise
7%
0%
-3%
-1%
off / environment *
31.1
30.6
2%
30
4%
30.2
3%
30.6
2%
Idle Minimum *
31.1
31
-0%
30.5
2%
32
-3%
32.7
-5%
Idle Average *
31.1
31
-0%
30.5
2%
32
-3%
32.7
-5%
Idle Maximum *
31.1
31
-0%
30.5
2%
32
-3%
32.7
-5%
Load Average *
32.4
22.6
30%
35
-8%
35.6
-10%
33
-2%
Load Maximum *
35.1
32.2
8%
35.8
-2%
34.8
1%
32.7
7%

* ... smaller is better

Noise Level

Idle
31.1 / 31.1 / 31.1 dB(A)
HDD
31.4 dB(A)
DVD
33.7 / dB(A)
Load
32.4 / 35.1 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: 31.1 dB(A)
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2037.840.543.143.337.8253436.442.339.3343129.230.732.631.929.24029.831.229.528.529.85028.430.331.332.828.46330.235.237.336.330.2802628.528.729.72610025.928.529.330.325.912524.726.926.425.924.716023.72626.927.223.720022.925.326.626.222.925021.723.824.324.321.731521.223.52423.321.240021.522.122.622.121.550021.821.72221.221.863022.221.921.520.322.280024.522.120.619.424.5100025.722.320.318.525.7125025.222.619.517.825.216002622.418.917.626200026.320.817.916.926.3250024.819.617.316.324.8315020.517.717.215.920.5400018.216.616.615.618.250001716.416.315.617630016.116.116.315.516.1800015.615.81615.315.61000015.615.815.815.215.61250015.815.915.815.215.81600015.715.815.915.115.7SPL35.132.431.130.135.1N21.71.61.42median 21.8median 21.9median 19.5median 17.8median 21.8Delta3.83.33.74.33.8hearing rangehide median Fan NoiseAsus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T

Temperature

3DMark 11 immediately after the stress test
3DMark 11 immediately after the stress test

Thermals are a non-issue for the VivoBook X751BP, which became clear very early on during our Cinebench R15 Multithread loop. Surface temperature remained fairly low, and only a single quadrant at the bottom reached 34.6 °C (~94 °F) under load. While the Lenovo IdeaPad 320 once again outperformed the VivoBook X751BP and remained slightly cooler, the other three competitors got noticeably warmer under load.

During our stress test internal CPU temperature reached a maximum of 73.5 °C (~164 °F) at a clock speed of 3.1 GHz, while the GPU remained cooler at only 64 °C (~147 °F). We found no negative effects on graphics performance: running 3DMark 11 immediately after our stress test yielded the exact same result as before.

stress test: Prime95 solo
stress test: Prime95 solo
stress test: FurMark solo
stress test: FurMark solo
stress test: FurMark + Prime95
stress test: FurMark + Prime95
Max. Load
 30.5 °C
87 F
27.2 °C
81 F
24.2 °C
76 F
 
 31.2 °C
88 F
30.1 °C
86 F
24.4 °C
76 F
 
 25.7 °C
78 F
28.5 °C
83 F
28.3 °C
83 F
 
Maximum: 31.2 °C = 88 F
Average: 27.8 °C = 82 F
24.1 °C
75 F
26 °C
79 F
33 °C
91 F
24.3 °C
76 F
30.8 °C
87 F
34.6 °C
94 F
29.7 °C
85 F
29.4 °C
85 F
25.1 °C
77 F
Maximum: 34.6 °C = 94 F
Average: 28.6 °C = 83 F
Power Supply (max.)  43 °C = 109 F | Room Temperature 21.9 °C = 71 F | FIRT 550-Pocket
(+) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 27.8 °C / 82 F, compared to the average of 29.4 °C / 85 F for the devices in the class Office.
(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 31.2 °C / 88 F, compared to the average of 33.9 °C / 93 F, ranging from 21.2 to 62.5 °C for the class Office.
(+) The maximum temperature on the bottom side is 34.6 °C / 94 F, compared to the average of 36.4 °C / 98 F, ranging from 22.3 to 71.6 °C for the class Office.
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 25.1 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 29.4 °C / 85 F.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 28.5 °C / 83.3 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (-0.2 °C / -0.4 F).
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), A9-9420, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), E2-9000, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, SK Hynix HFS256G3BTND
HP 17-y044ng
Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge), A10-9600P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-75JC3T0
HP 17-x066ng
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, WDC WD10JPVX-08JC3T5
Heat
1%
-10%
-8%
-4%
Maximum Upper Side *
31.2
29.6
5%
37.3
-20%
33.9
-9%
36.5
-17%
Maximum Bottom *
34.6
33.4
3%
37
-7%
40.1
-16%
37.2
-8%
Idle Upper Side *
28.2
27.1
4%
28.7
-2%
27.8
1%
26
8%
Idle Bottom *
27.6
29.7
-8%
30.1
-9%
30.2
-9%
27.1
2%

* ... smaller is better

heatmap top (load)
heatmap top (load)
heatmap bottom (load)
heatmap bottom (load)
heatmap top (idle)
heatmap top (idle)
heatmap bottom (idle)
heatmap bottom (idle)

Speakers

speakers
speakers

The speakers (Asus SonicMaster Technology) are located above the keyboard and utilize the display to reflect the sound towards the user, thereby avoiding the common problem of muffled sound on soft surfaces. A tool named Audio Wizard can be used for audio adjustments based on various presets. Overall, the sound quality was fairly decent - highs and mids were very clear and we even found traces of bass. At only 61 dB(A) the speakers were not very loud, but on the plus side they did not distort at maximum volume.

dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2042.343.342.3253739.337313531.9354036.828.536.85038.132.838.16340.536.340.58042.229.742.210042.630.342.612543.925.943.91604827.24820052.326.252.325048.224.348.231554.923.354.940057.322.157.350057.121.257.163061.120.361.180060.919.460.9100057.618.557.612505517.855160058.617.658.6200057.816.957.8250054.516.354.531505715.95740005515.655500060.315.660.3630059.815.559.8800058.815.358.8100005515.2551250053.915.253.91600044.715.144.7SPL7031.130.170N27.91.61.427.9median 55median 17.8median 55Delta2.84.32.838.335.538.339.438.639.444.648.244.638.135.638.133.73433.731.232.231.230.528.230.527.92727.927.424.327.430.923.230.937.122.837.152.922.352.961.221.561.262.620.262.659.319.259.363.918.963.96018.46057.317.957.362.71862.759.217.659.263.317.563.36717.96766.91866.964.918.264.968.918.568.962.418.662.458.918.858.955.118.755.160.918.960.962.219.162.276.230.776.237.11.537.1median 60.9median 18.8median 60.96.61.86.6hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus VivoBook X751BP-TY048TLenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (61.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 6.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (68.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.4% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (8.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.8% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (8% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (18.6% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 35% of all tested devices in this class were better, 9% similar, 56% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 21%, worst was 51%
Compared to all devices tested
» 34% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 60% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Frequency diagram (checkboxes selectable/deselectable!)

Power Consumption

When looking at power consumption, our review unit did not stand a chance against its competitors, every single one of which was more efficient. When idle, our review unit’s power consumption was between 4.9 and 10.5 W and quickly shot up to 51.1 W with singular peaks of up to 54.7 W under load. The 65 W charger is amply dimensioned, and our review unit’s battery did not discharge under maximum load.

Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.29 / 0.6 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 4.9 / 9.6 / 10.5 Watt
Load midlight 51.1 / 54.7 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), A9-9420, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), E2-9000, Seagate Mobile HDD 1TB ST1000LM035
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, SK Hynix HFS256G3BTND
HP 17-y044ng
Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge), A10-9600P, WDC Scorpio Blue WD10JPVX-75JC3T0
HP 17-x066ng
HD Graphics 520, 6006U, WDC WD10JPVX-08JC3T5
Power Consumption
34%
18%
20%
9%
Idle Minimum *
4.9
4.7
4%
3.8
22%
4.7
4%
5.5
-12%
Idle Average *
9.6
7.8
19%
9.6
-0%
7.7
20%
9.9
-3%
Idle Maximum *
10.5
8
24%
10.4
1%
9
14%
14.6
-39%
Load Average *
51.1
19.7
61%
35.4
31%
35.3
31%
28
45%
Load Maximum *
54.7
19.6
64%
34
38%
38.3
30%
24.6
55%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

3DMark 11 on battery
3DMark 11 on battery

The 37 Wh lithium-ion battery is not user replaceable. It lasted for 8:22 hours when idle and a very short 2:43 hours in our Wi-Fi test during which display brightness was reduced to 150 nits (65% on the VivoBook X751BP) for the sake of better comparability. 

maximum battery life
maximum battery life
minimum battery life
minimum battery life
Wi-Fi battery life
Wi-Fi battery life
H.264 battery life
H.264 battery life
Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T
A9-9420, Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), 37 Wh
Lenovo Ideapad 320-17AST-80XW0013GE
E2-9000, Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge), 30 Wh
Lenovo V320-17IKB 81AH0002GE
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 35 Wh
HP 17-y044ng
A10-9600P, Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge), 41 Wh
HP 17-x066ng
6006U, HD Graphics 520, 41.5 Wh
Battery Runtime
WiFi Websurfing 1.3
163
224
37%
302
85%
263
61%
375
130%
Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
8h 22min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3 (EDGE: 40.15063.674.0)
2h 43min
Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p
3h 11min
Load (maximum brightness)
2h 05min

Pros

+ functional design
+ low price
+ 8 GB DDR4 RAM
+ 1 TB HDD

Cons

- outdated
- low system performance
- no SSD
- only HD+ panel available
- power consumption too high
- battery life
- mediocre input devices
- poor connectivity distribution

Verdict

Asus VivoBook X751BP. Review unit courtesy of Cyberport.
Asus VivoBook X751BP. Review unit courtesy of Cyberport.

While the Asus VivoBook X751BP is marketed as a 17-inch business notebook, it had no trouble with multimedia content either. As we speak, the model equipped with AMD's A9-9420 dual-core processor, 8 GB of DDR4-RAM and a spacious yet slow 1 TB hard disk drive sells for 489 Euros (~$569) in Europe. Unfortunately, the 17-inch display only offers HD+ resolution. The case is well made with a sturdy and rigid base, and its looks are pretty inconspicuous thanks to its black surfaces.

The Asus VivoBook X751BP is an affordable 17-inch business notebook. It turned out to be an underachiever when it came to raw performance, and given its many handicaps it is rather uninteresting overall.

The impression the X751BP left was pretty mixed. While the performance was sufficient overall, it was simply not up to date anymore. The lack of fast SSD storage resulted in plenty of unnecessary idle time due to the hopelessly swamped hard disk drive. It is also a mystery to us why the notebook lacked an FHD panel. Taking into account the notebook’s poor performance, power consumption was too high, and as a result, the battery life was very poor. The input devices reflect the appearance of the device. They underperformed and with its mushy feedback and loud clatter when typing the keyboard felt really cheap. Prolific writers will certainly not enjoy using it.

Asus VivoBook X751BP-TY048T - 10/26/2017 v6
Sebastian Bade

Chassis
73 / 98 → 74%
Keyboard
78%
Pointing Device
81%
Connectivity
37 / 80 → 46%
Weight
59 / 20-67 → 83%
Battery
68%
Display
79%
Games Performance
55 / 68 → 80%
Application Performance
60 / 92 → 65%
Temperature
95%
Noise
92%
Audio
60%
Camera
42 / 85 → 50%
Average
68%
76%
Office - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 1 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 X751BP (AMD A9-9420, HD+) Laptop Review
Sebastian Bade, 2017-10-31 (Update: 2017-10-31)