Notebookcheck

Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (i9-8950HK, GTX 1050 Ti, 4K UHD) Laptop Review

Seeing double. Asus wants to one-up Apple's Touch Bar with an even crazier idea of turning the traditional touchpad into a full-fledged 1080p secondary display. Surprisingly enough, it's actually quite useful and more than just a novelty. We can see the unique feature becoming a mainstay in Asus' flagship series in another generation or so when all the wrinkles and drawbacks can be ironed out.

Watch 1080p videos on your trackpad because why not
Watch 1080p videos on your trackpad because why not

(July 20, 2018 update: Our test on the Core i9 configuration is complete and the performance results have been updated below.)

Asus had a commanding presence at Computex 2018 with its flurry of announcements and product reveals. The poster child leading the pack this year was the UX580 and its much-vaunted trackpad display that the manufacturer has dubbed the ScreenPad. It's an attempt at innovating the traditional laptop form factor by incorporating a secondary touchscreen a la the Apple Touch Bar, Razer Project Linda, or the dated Razer Blade Pro 2015. The Asus approach, however, replaces the trackpad entirely with an integrated 5.5-inch 1080p IPS screen.

Other than the headline-catching touchscreen, the chassis is essentially identical to the last generation Zenbook Pro 15 UX550 down to its keyboard, main display, connectivity, and final dimensions. As such, we recommend checking out our existing reviews on the UX550VD and UX550VE for more information on chassis quality and its features.

The UX580 series will be available in multiple SKUs ranging from the Core i5-8300H up to the Core i9-8950HK with FHD or 4K UHD options, 8 GB or 16 GB of DDR4 2400 MHz RAM, and SATA III or NVMe M.2 SSDs from 256 GB up to 1 TB. The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti GPU is fixed for all SKUs and the Screenpad is only available on the high-end 4K UHD SKU for now. Asus' UX580 series competes directly with other flagship 15-inch multimedia systems like the Dell XPS 15 9570, HP Spectre x360 15, and MacBook Pro 15.

Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (Zenbook Pro 15 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop) - 4096 MB, Core: 1493 MHz, Memory: 7008 MHz, GDDR5, 397.31, Optimus
Memory
16384 MB 
, Dual-Channel, 1333.3 MHz, 17-17-17-39
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 3840 x 2160 pixel 282 PPI, 10-point capacitive, AU Optronics B156ZAN03.1, IPS, AUO31EB, glossy: yes
Mainboard
Intel HM370
Storage
Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), 1024 GB 
Soundcard
Intel Cannon Lake-H/S - cAVS (Audio, Voice, Speech)
Connections
4 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 4 USB 3.1 Gen2, 2 Thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 2 DisplayPort, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: MicroSD, Brightness Sensor
Networking
Intel Wireless-AC 9560 (a/b/g/n/ac), Bluetooth 5.0
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 18.9 x 365 x 251 ( = 0.74 x 14.37 x 9.88 in)
Battery
71 Wh Lithium-Polymer, 8-cell
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: VGA
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, Asus Sync, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
1.88 kg ( = 66.32 oz / 4.14 pounds), Power Supply: 529 g ( = 18.66 oz / 1.17 pounds)
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

We refer to our existing reviews of the UX550VD and UX550VE for more details on the spun-metal unibody chassis. Asus has essentially taken the UX550 skeleton, incorporated a touchpad screen, and then unveiled it as the new generation UX580. There are a few other minor but notable changes such as the relocation of both the fingerprint sensor and stereo speakers. The edges are now trimmed in Rose Gold instead of silver and the all-aluminum surfaces are now brushed instead of matte, but this is still the same chassis that we are already familiar with.

Competitors with even narrower bezels like the Aero 15X v8, XPS 15 9570, and Spectre x360 15 are slightly smaller than the UX580 although not necessarily any lighter.

Connectivity

Available ports are identical to the UX550 series including the dual 4x Thunderbolt 3 ports. We would have preferred a full-size SD reader and at least one USB Type-A port on the left edge for convenience.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, HDMI, 2x Thunderbolt 3
Left: AC adapter, HDMI, 2x Thunderbolt 3
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, MicroSD reader, 2x USB 3.1
Right: 3.5 mm combo audio, MicroSD reader, 2x USB 3.1

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!

SD Card Reader

Transfer rates from the spring-loaded MicroSD reader have not improved over the previous generation. Moving 1 GB worth of images from card to desktop takes just under 16 seconds compared to 7 seconds on the XPS 13 9370.

Interestingly, the AS SSD benchmark still crashes when a MicroSD card is inserted much like on the UX550VD.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed - average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
191 MB/s ∼100% +198%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i7 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro UHS-II)
156.4 MB/s ∼82% +144%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II)
64.2 MB/s ∼34%

Communication

Removable M.2 WLAN module
Removable M.2 WLAN module

WLAN has been upgraded from the Intel 8265 to the Intel 9560 to offer double the theoretical maximum transfer rate (867 Mbps vs. 1.73 Gbps) and a newer version of Bluetooth (v4.2 vs v5.0). Our current Linksys EA8500 setup is unable to test the maximum 1.73 Gbps claim, but we are able to record real-world transfer rates of 662 Mbps without any intermittent issues.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
682 MBit/s ∼100% +3%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
662 MBit/s ∼97%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
542 MBit/s ∼79% -18%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Intel Wireless-AC 9560
584 MBit/s ∼100%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1535 Wireless Network Adapter
539 MBit/s ∼92% -8%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
379 MBit/s ∼65% -35%

Maintenance

The bottom panel is secured by 10 screws and can be easily removed with a T5 Hex wrench. Internally, the UX580 has changed little from the UX550 with the relocated speakers being the most noticeable. The secondary display panel is hidden underneath the long stretch of battery cells.

Zenbook Pro 15 UX580VE
Zenbook Pro 15 UX580VE
Zenbook Pro 15 UX550VE
Zenbook Pro 15 UX550VE

Input Devices

Keyboard

The backlit chiclet keyboard returns from the UX550 series with no changes in size (~33.3 cm x 10.4 cm) or layout. Tactile feedback is still average with an acceptable 1.5 mm key travel. The UX580 would have been the perfect opportunity for Asus to incorporate full-size Arrow keys or a fingerprint-enabled Power button. Competing 15-inch notebooks like the new Spectre x360 15 may offer an integrated NumPad.

Fingerprint sensor has been moved from the corner of the trackpad to the edge of the keyboard
Fingerprint sensor has been moved from the corner of the trackpad to the edge of the keyboard
Feedback is softer than on a Lenovo Precision keyboard or HP Spectre
Feedback is softer than on a Lenovo Precision keyboard or HP Spectre

Touchpad

The unique 5.5-inch 1080p IPS touchpad is obviously the main draw of the system. Two main modes are available with the push of the F6 key: ScreenPad mode and Extension Display mode. In Screenpad mode, the display operates independently from the main notebook display with its own settings, launchers, shortcuts, and range of special applications as shown below. Default applications include Calculator, Calendar, NumPad, Office, YouTube Player, and Music Player. Keep in mind that the mouse cursor cannot be controlled when an app is opened since the trackpad surface will be tied to the app instead. As a result, alternating between the trackpad display and main display can feel a bit cumbersome without an external mouse.

Furthermore, the Screenpad frame rate is sometimes below the smooth 60 FPS that modern smartphones now deliver and this only becomes worse when running on battery power. Strangely, this sluggish frame rate is most noticeable when in the Settings menu as it is otherwise smooth during video playback and when on Extension Display mode. Asus says this was done to reduce power consumption, but a 60 FPS option when connected to mains would have went a long way to making Screenpad mode and its apps feel more responsive.

Additional apps tied to Spotify and Adobe can be downloaded and custom wallpapers can be applied. While third-party apps are limited at the moment, Asus is promising to make public a SDK at some point in the future to boost the flexibility of Screenpad mode. The potential is certainly there for more advanced applications such as real-time system monitoring statistics, game-specific mini-maps, weather reports, stock prices, and more to appeal to both gamers and business users.

There is no auditory or tactile feedback when operating the Screenpad much like on the virtual NumPad for the Zephyrus GX501. A vibration feature would have made the Screenpad more natural to use.

When Screenpad is disabled, the multi-touch trackpad is visually no different from any other trackpad
When Screenpad is disabled, the multi-touch trackpad is visually no different from any other trackpad
Pre-built apps are available, albeit very simple for now
Pre-built apps are available, albeit very simple for now
Calendar app conveniently syncs with the Microsoft Calendar
Calendar app conveniently syncs with the Microsoft Calendar
Brightness can only be controlled in the Settings menu and it is not affected by Windows automatic brightness control
Brightness can only be controlled in the Settings menu and it is not affected by Windows automatic brightness control
The main Screenpad Toolbar. Its surface can be operated as a regular laptop trackpad when apps are closed and in this state
The main Screenpad Toolbar. Its surface can be operated as a regular laptop trackpad when apps are closed and in this state
Music Player app will sync with files in your Music Folder
Music Player app will sync with files in your Music Folder

Extension Display mode is where the touchpad really shines. This turns the touchpad screen into an external secondary display with Windows recognizing it as such. Users are free to drag windows, play videos, or even run entire games on the 5.5-inch 1080p screen if they so choose just like on a standard display. It is extremely convenient from both productivity and multimedia standpoints because an external secondary display is always available with the touch of a button.

While the benefits are distinct, there are a handful of important drawbacks to keep in mind about Extension Display mode. When active, the touchpad screen ceases to become a touchscreen. Tapping or gliding across the touchpad will simply move the mouse cursor and not interact directly with onscreen content. This feels odd at first because users are accustomed to tapping files and folders on Windows tablets and touchscreen laptops. Secondly, there is a slightly longer input-output delay for the touchpad screen. For example, moving the cursor on the main screen feels instant while the same cursor movements on the touchpad screen are a bit slower to respond. 

Finally, perhaps the biggest drawback of the touchpad screen is its thick matte overlay. One would expect a 5.5-inch 1080p IPS screen to be crystal clear like on smartphones, but Asus has elected to not use Gorilla Glass because of its poorer gliding properties. Razer's Project Linda, for example, uses a smartphone screen as a trackpad and glide is subsequently very uneven and sticky. The matte surface on the Asus touchpad screen is comparatively smoother for cursor control and it actually feels more or less like a standard Ultrabook trackpad, but this comes at the cost of a very grainy screen. A microscope snapshot of the RGB array in the next section illustrates this perfectly.

We recommend a high DPI scale as texts and icons will appear very small on the 5.5-inch 1080p screen. Constantly looking up and down between the two screens will take some getting used to since the physical distance between them is wider than a typical dual-monitor setup.

If desired, the Screenpad feature can be completely disabled to save on batteries. The Microsoft Precision Touchpad (PTP) software is supported for up to four finger gestures not unlike a traditional trackpad.

Want to open a folder? Simply tapping on the icon will not work; the mouse cursor must be placed over the icon just like on any other non-touchscreen display
Want to open a folder? Simply tapping on the icon will not work; the mouse cursor must be placed over the icon just like on any other non-touchscreen display
Windows will recognize the trackpad as a regular external display when it is set to Extension Display mode. The second screen can be dragged to different edges of the main screen
Windows will recognize the trackpad as a regular external display when it is set to Extension Display mode. The second screen can be dragged to different edges of the main screen
Seamlessly toggle between Screenpad and Extension Display modes with the F6 key. The default dual-screen setup will look like the above
Seamlessly toggle between Screenpad and Extension Display modes with the F6 key. The default dual-screen setup will look like the above

We also measured the brightness, contrast, colors, and black-white response times of the trackpad display. Surprisingly, the trackpad display is actually brighter than the main display when set to maximum (448 nits vs 358 nits). Contrast is very good at nearly 1000:1, but this is again difficult to appreciate because of the grainy matte overlay. The slight increase in ghosting from the slower black-white and gray-gray response times isn't a huge issue during video playback or word processing.

Black-White response times
Black-White response times
Gray-to-Gray response times
Gray-to-Gray response times
No pulse-width modulation
No pulse-width modulation
Maximum Brightess Minimum Brightness Center on Battery Black Value Contrast Black-to-White Gray-to-Gray
448.3 nits 23.43 nits 448.3 nits 0.47 nits 954:1 16.4 ms 20.0 ms

Display

Our UX580 configuration is equipped with the same B156ZAN03.1 IPS touchscreen from AU Optronics as on the ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD. Brightness, contrast, color temperature, and color space are subsequently nearly identical between them. Onscreen content is very sharp due to the glossy Gorilla Glass overlay. While far from being too dim, we were hoping for a more powerful backlight to better compete against the brighter displays of the XPS 15 and MacBook Pro 15.

Black-white and gray-gray response times are good and certainly faster than the 4K UHD IGZO panel of the XPS 13. Users who want higher refresh rates and less ghosting will have to resort to dedicated gaming notebooks like the ROG GL504 Hero II where 120 Hz and 144 Hz panels are more common.

Backlight bleeding is minimal and not noticeable during regular use on both the main and trackpad displays.

Main display subpixel array
Main display subpixel array
Touchpad display subpixel array. The thick overlying matte surface makes content grainier compared to the main display
Touchpad display subpixel array. The thick overlying matte surface makes content grainier compared to the main display
Slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges of main display
Slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges of main display
Slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges of trackpad display
Slight uneven backlight bleeding along the edges of trackpad display
348.4
cd/m²
378.6
cd/m²
371.5
cd/m²
328.1
cd/m²
357.6
cd/m²
348.3
cd/m²
323.3
cd/m²
351.8
cd/m²
341.9
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 378.6 cd/m² Average: 349.9 cd/m² Minimum: 19.1 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 85 %
Center on Battery: 357.6 cd/m²
Contrast: 1022:1 (Black: 0.35 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.12 | 0.4-29.43 Ø6.2, calibrated: 4.23
ΔE Greyscale 1.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.5
100% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 87.5% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.17
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
AU Optronics B156ZAN03.1, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
Sharp SHP149A LQ156M1, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 15.6, 1920x1080
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
B156ZAN03.1, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
BOE06C3, IPS, 15.6, 3840x2160
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
LGD05C0, IPS, 15.6, 1920x1080
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
15.4, 2880x1800
Response Times
-22%
-23%
-12%
57%
-10%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
44 (22, 22)
49 (25, 40)
-11%
52 (25, 27)
-18%
41.2 (23.2, 18)
6%
16.8 (8.4, 8.4)
62%
42.4 (20.4, 22)
4%
Response Time Black / White *
22.8 (12, 10.8)
30 (16, 14)
-32%
29 (15, 14)
-27%
29.6 (16.4, 13.2)
-30%
11.2 (6, 5.2)
51%
28 (14.8, 13.2)
-23%
PWM Frequency
961 (10)
1000
Screen
13%
-2%
-22%
14%
25%
Brightness middle
357.6
413
15%
380
6%
338.7
-5%
313
-12%
534
49%
Brightness
350
378
8%
371
6%
325
-7%
300
-14%
502
43%
Brightness Distribution
85
86
1%
87
2%
91
7%
78
-8%
86
1%
Black Level *
0.35
0.29
17%
0.28
20%
0.28
20%
0.33
6%
0.31
11%
Contrast
1022
1424
39%
1357
33%
1210
18%
948
-7%
1723
69%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.12
2.44
41%
4.38
-6%
4.9
-19%
1.29
69%
1.8
56%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
9.91
4.46
55%
7.59
23%
8.7
12%
2.04
79%
3.8
62%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.23
2.48
41%
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
1.8
2.48
-38%
3.6
-100%
5.5
-206%
0.69
62%
2.4
-33%
Gamma
2.17 101%
2.43 91%
2.32 95%
2.08 106%
2.43 91%
2.27 97%
CCT
6613 98%
7006 93%
6860 95%
7498 87%
6550 99%
6563 99%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
87.5
62
-29%
88
1%
63.5
-27%
60
-31%
77.92
-11%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
100
96
-4%
100
0%
86.92
-13%
94
-6%
99.94
0%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
-5% / 8%
-13% / -5%
-17% / -20%
36% / 21%
8% / 19%

* ... smaller is better

Asus advertises full AdobeRGB coverage while our own independent measurements show a coverage of about 88 percent. When given the highly variable methods of calculating gamut, however, we can't argue with the small differences. Color space is nearly the same as on the ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD and even wider than the 1080p Sharp IGZO panel on the latest XPS 15.

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

Further analyses with a X-Rite spectrophotometer reveal a very accurate grayscale and color temperature out of the box without the need for any calibration. In fact, our calibration attempts do almost nothing to improve upon the grayscale or colors of the system since Asus is claiming that each UX580 unit is factory-calibrated and Pantone validated. Strangely, colors like Green and Teal becoming increasingly more inaccurate the higher the saturation level while others like Blue and Yellow remain very accurate against the sRGB standard. Further calibration will likely be required to get the most accurate colors.

We also performed our usual color measurements on the touchpad display just to see how it compares. As shown by our CalMan results below, grayscale and RGB balance are both very poor. Color temperature (8854K) is far too cool and so most colors are more inaccurate at the lower saturation levels. While we certainly didn't expect the touchpad display to look anywhere near as good as the main 4K UHD display, it's disappointing to record such middling numbers here.

Grayscale before calibration (main display)
Grayscale before calibration (main display)
Saturation Sweeps before calibration (main display)
Saturation Sweeps before calibration (main display)
ColorChecker before calibration (main display)
ColorChecker before calibration (main display)
Grayscale after calibration (main display)
Grayscale after calibration (main display)
Saturation Sweeps after calibration (main display)
Saturation Sweeps after calibration (main display)
ColorChecker after calibration (main display)
ColorChecker after calibration (main display)
Grayscale before calibration (touchpad display)
Grayscale before calibration (touchpad display)
Saturation Sweeps (touchpad display)
Saturation Sweeps (touchpad display)
ColorChecker before calibration (touchpad display)
ColorChecker before calibration (touchpad display)
Display measurements were performed with the Asus Splendid color profile app set to Normal
Display measurements were performed with the Asus Splendid color profile app set to Normal

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
22.8 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 12 ms rise
↘ 10.8 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. » 27 % 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
44 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22 ms rise
↘ 22 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. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to 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 not detected

In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8929 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

The main screen is far too glossy to be used comfortably outdoors on a bright or overcast day even with the backlight turned to maximum. Working under shade is still the ideal condition if outdoor use is unavoidable. Viewing angles from the IPS panel are thankfully very wide to aid in reducing the inevitable glare as much as possible.

The touchpad display also becomes difficult to see especially when in Extension Display mode where text and icons are usually very small. Glare is actually quite heavy as well because of the unique matte surface while direct sunlight will accentuate fingerprints that cover up of the screen. There are definitely more appropriate 15-inch notebooks with brighter displays if outdoor use is priority such as the Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5N or MacBook Pro 15.

Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Main display, wide IPS viewing angles
Main display, wide IPS viewing angles
Trackpad IPS display. Note the cooler color temperature compared to the main display
Trackpad IPS display. Note the cooler color temperature compared to the main display

Performance

As stated in the intro, the UX580 series comes with 8th gen Core i5/i7/i9 CPU options and a GeForce GTX 1050 Ti GPU to be powerful enough for video streaming, editing, and even gaming. However, Asus has confirmed that the screenpad does not have its own dedicated processor and instead sips resources from the CPU and GPU. Unless otherwise stated, we elected to run all our benchmarks below with the screenpad enabled to best represent the UX580. After all, this secondary screen is a defining feature of the notebook.

Choose wisely between the 8 GB and 16 GB SKUs since RAM is again soldered and thus not upgradeable.

 

Processor

The Core i9-8950HK performs well in the Asus Zenbook, but it is far from perfect. This same CPU in the Asus Chimera G703GI is able to sustain faster Turbo Boost clock rates for longer and the result is a 22 percent increase in multi-thread performance over the UX580 (1312 points vs. 1074 points). Running CineBench R15 Multi-Thread in a loop results in an initial high score of 1112 points before dropping 6 to 7 percent to 1040 points. While still significantly faster than the older Core i7-7700HQ, the i7-8750H is the better bang for the buck when compared to the Core i9.

See our dedicated CPU page on the Core i9-8950HK for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R15
CineBench R15
01020304050607080901001101201301401501601701801902002102202302402502602702802903003103203303403503603703803904004104204304404504604704804905005105205305405505605705805906006106206306406506606706806907007107207307407507607707807908008108208308408508608708808909009109209309409509609709809901000101010201030104010501060107010801090110011101120Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Asus Chimera G703GI
Intel Core i9-8950HK
206 Points ∼94% +8%
Average Intel Core i9-8950HK
  (185 - 206, n=10)
196 Points ∼90% +3%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
192 Points ∼88% +1%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Intel Core i9-8950HK
191 Points ∼88%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
170 Points ∼78% -11%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
Intel Core i7-8750H
168 Points ∼77% -12%
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
Intel Core i7-8550U
168 Points ∼77% -12%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
156 Points ∼72% -18%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBA-80WY001VGE
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
147 Points ∼67% -23%
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
144 Points ∼66% -25%
Acer Swift 3 SF315-41-R6J9
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
141 Points ∼65% -26%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Asus GL702ZC-GC104T
AMD Ryzen 7 1700
1408 Points ∼32% +31%
Eurocom Sky X4C
Intel Core i7-8700K
1359 Points ∼31% +27%
Asus Chimera G703GI
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1312 Points ∼30% +22%
Average Intel Core i9-8950HK
  (1074 - 1391, n=10)
1220 Points ∼28% +14%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
Intel Core i7-8750H
1113 Points ∼25% +4%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Intel Core i9-8950HK
1074 Points ∼25%
Asus FX503VM-EH73
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
733 Points ∼17% -32%
Asus VivoBook 15 F510UF-ES71
Intel Core i7-8550U
655 Points ∼15% -39%
Asus FX504GD
Intel Core i5-8300H
604 Points ∼14% -44%
Acer Swift 3 SF315-41-R6J9
AMD Ryzen 7 2700U
530 Points ∼12% -51%
Lenovo Legion Y520-15IKBA-80WY001VGE
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
501 Points ∼11% -53%
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
2.16 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
11.95 Points
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
82.37 fps
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
191 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
1074 Points
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
131.47 fps
Help

System Performance

PCMark scores are in line with where we expect the system to be when considering the CPU and GPU. PCMark 10 scores in particular are only higher than the Aero 15X v8 while PCMark 8 scores appear to be more normalized.

We did not experience any repeatable software issues during our time with the review unit. 

PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10 - Score
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
5358 Points ∼69%
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5059 Points ∼65% -6%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
4479 Points ∼58% -16%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4249 Points ∼55% -21%
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
3673 Points ∼47% -31%
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
5676 Points ∼87% +27%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
5271 Points ∼81% +18%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
4456 Points ∼68%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4401 Points ∼68% -1%
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
4217 Points ∼65% -5%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
4504 Points ∼74% +23%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
4030 Points ∼66% +10%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
3661 Points ∼60%
Asus ZenBook Flip 15 UX561UD
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8550U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3614 Points ∼59% -1%
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
3457 Points ∼57% -6%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3661 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4456 points
Help

Storage Devices

No 2.5-inch SATA III options
No 2.5-inch SATA III options

A single M.2 2280 slot is available with no secondary internal options. The 1 TB Samsung SSD PM961 NVMe SSD in our review unit can also be found on a few high-end Lenovo ThinkPad SKUs like the T470s and P51s mobile workstation. Sequential write rates and 4K performance in particular are much faster than the Lite-On and Toshiba solutions found on the latest XPS 15 and Aero 15X v8, respectively. It's possible that the 512 GB SKU of the UX580 will utilize a SSD from a different manufacturer, but we're glad to see a Samsung SSD nonetheless as they tend to perform more consistently in benchmarks.

See our table of SSDs and HDDs for more benchmark comparisons.

AS SSD
AS SSD
CDM 5
CDM 5
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
Lenovo ThinkPad T580-20LAS01H00
Samsung SSD PM981 MZVLB512HAJQ
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
AS SSD
-234%
-4%
17%
-46%
Copy Game MB/s
728.25
465.85
-36%
877.75
21%
1134.11
56%
Copy Program MB/s
430.94
117.21
-73%
393.38
-9%
534.36
24%
Copy ISO MB/s
1045.16
632.4
-39%
1533.01
47%
1936.38
85%
Score Total
4065
750
-82%
3548
-13%
3781
-7%
2536
-38%
Score Write
1547
58
-96%
1515
-2%
1556
1%
939
-39%
Score Read
1679
492
-71%
1342
-20%
1493
-11%
1092
-35%
Access Time Write *
0.036
0.889
-2369%
0.033
8%
0.026
28%
0.046
-28%
Access Time Read *
0.04
0.086
-115%
0.059
-48%
0.04
-0%
0.119
-198%
4K-64 Write
1272.75
19.19
-98%
1277.8
0%
1262.39
-1%
742.09
-42%
4K-64 Read
1431.02
301.79
-79%
1153.13
-19%
1206.47
-16%
847.34
-41%
4K Write
100.89
5.12
-95%
110.86
10%
141.05
40%
80.44
-20%
4K Read
37.78
32.5
-14%
51.47
36%
51.93
37%
23.36
-38%
Seq Write
1728.67
340.31
-80%
1261.74
-27%
1530.14
-11%
1163.11
-33%
Seq Read
2098.63
1573.62
-25%
1373.14
-35%
2342.26
12%
2212.97
5%

* ... smaller is better

Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 2171 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 1763 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 614 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 506.6 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 771.7 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 1059 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 44.68 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 125 MB/s

GPU Performance

Unlike traditional laptops, GPU resources on the UX580 must be split between the main display and screenpad and so performance will be slightly slower than most other notebooks with the same GPU. 3DMark benchmarks confirm this as final scores are consistently below the UX550VE by single-digit percentage points. The UX580GE clocks in up to 10 percent slower than the average GTX 1050 Ti in our database in most 3DMark benchmarks.

We also ran Fire Strike with the screenpad disabled to see if performance would improve. Sadly, we can record no higher scores.

Graphics performance is still handily better than a GTX 1050 and about 75 percent faster than the old GTX 960M. The immense performance gain for users upgrading from a last generation Maxwell GPU will more than offset the small performance deficit caused by the Screenpad.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Fire Strike (touchpad disabled)
Fire Strike (touchpad disabled)
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Extreme
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
10391 Points ∼57% +19%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
9333 Points ∼51% +7%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
8788 Points ∼48% +1%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK
8709 Points ∼48%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
8503 Points ∼47% -2%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7952 Points ∼44% -9%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
7838 Points ∼43% -10%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (6104 - 9042, n=31)
7738 Points ∼43% -11%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H
7025 Points ∼39% -19%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4466 Points ∼25% -49%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
15182 Points ∼30% +71%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
14975 Points ∼29% +69%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
14302 Points ∼28% +62%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
13871 Points ∼27% +57%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
9824 Points ∼19% +11%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (8304 - 10402, n=32)
9580 Points ∼19% +8%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
9240 Points ∼18% +4%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK
8854 Points ∼17%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H
7133 Points ∼14% -19%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4826 Points ∼9% -45%
3DMark
Fire Strike Extreme Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
5106 Points ∼26% +48%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
4405 Points ∼22% +28%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (3452 - 3945, n=14)
3690 Points ∼19% +7%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
3649 Points ∼18% +6%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
3517 Points ∼18% +2%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK
3452 Points ∼17%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H
2733 Points ∼14% -21%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
1988 Points ∼10% -42%
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
11733 Points ∼29% +61%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
11512 Points ∼28% +58%
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
10970 Points ∼27% +50%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
10248 Points ∼25% +41%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (6792 - 8376, n=34)
7723 Points ∼19% +6%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
7457 Points ∼18% +2%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
7321 Points ∼18% 0%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK
7291 Points ∼18%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H
6356 Points ∼16% -13%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4133 Points ∼10% -43%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Dell G5 15 5587
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q, 8300H
79420 Points ∼43% +82%
Asus ROG GU501GM-BI7N8
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8750H
71431 Points ∼39% +63%
Asus ROG Strix GL702ZC-GC204T
AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop), 1600
70020 Points ∼38% +60%
Intel Hades Canyon NUC8i7HVK
AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, 8809G
59162 Points ∼32% +35%
Asus Strix GL502VT-DS74
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ
50205 Points ∼27% +15%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (43721 - 53978, n=33)
49907 Points ∼27% +14%
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ
48597 Points ∼26% +11%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK
43721 Points ∼24%
Asus FX504GD
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H
38881 Points ∼21% -11%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
25986 Points ∼14% -41%
3DMark 11 Performance
8990 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
24182 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
6504 points
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
3372 points
3DMark Time Spy Score
2281 points
Help

Gaming Performance

The GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a common find on mainstream gaming notebooks hovering around $1000 USD and its performance has been well documented in our database. Thus, we refer to our dedicated page on the GTX 1050 Ti for more technical information and benchmark comparisons. The same GPU in our UX580GE is consistently a few frame rates slower than the average GTX 1050 Ti to be in line with the 3DMark results above.

Games can be played on the trackpad display at full speed since it can be set as a primary screen. Users can quite literally play demanding titles on a 5.5-inch 1080p screen while browsing the net on the main 15.6-inch 4K touchscreen. The keyboard will still focus on the primary window as usual.

It's possible to play modern titles at full speed on the trackpad display even though most titles are not optimized for such a high DPI and small screen
It's possible to play modern titles at full speed on the trackpad display even though most titles are not optimized for such a high DPI and small screen
BioShock Infinite - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset, DX11 (DDOF)
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8300H, Samsung PM871b MZNLN128HAHQ
112 fps ∼100% +68%
Gigabyte Aero 14-K7
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung SM961 MZVPW256HEGL
74.4 fps ∼66% +12%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (61 - 97, n=20)
73 fps ∼65% +10%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
67.5 fps ∼60% +2%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
66.5 fps ∼59%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U, SanDisk SD8SNAT256G1002
39.4 fps ∼35% -41%
Rise of the Tomb Raider - 1920x1080 Very High Preset AA:FX AF:16x
MSI GV62 8RE-016US
GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop), 8300H, Samsung PM871b MZNLN128HAHQ
59 fps ∼100% +70%
Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop)
  (27.8 - 40.7, n=15)
36.1 fps ∼61% +4%
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
34.8 fps ∼59%
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
33.2 fps ∼56% -5%
low med. high ultra4K
BioShock Infinite (2013) 270.5157.4149.966.5fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 88.344.624.215.8fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 95502915fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 75.539.634.814.1fps
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) 51.436.228.5fps
Overwatch (2016) 108.358.731.4fps

Stress Test

We stress the notebook to identify for any potential throttling or stability issues. When subjected to Prime95 load, the CPU can be observed running at 3.3 - 3.5 GHz for the first few seconds with core temperatures reaching 96 C. Clock rates eventually fall to 3.0 GHz in order to maintain a slightly cooler core temperature of 87 C as shown by our screenshots below. Since the base clock rate of the i9-8950HK is 2.9 GHz, Turbo Boost is almost completely unsustainable when the UX580 is subjected to 100 percent CPU load. Running both Prime95 and FurMark simultaneously will throttle the CPU even further.

Witcher 3 stress is more representative of real-world gaming load than the above synthetic benchmarks. The CPU can be observed operating at a steady 3.3 GHz with core temperatures in the mid 80 C range. The very small drops in GPU clock rates have no affect on frame rate stability when gaming.

Prime95 stress
Prime95 stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
Witcher 3 stress
Witcher 3 stress
System idle
System idle
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 3.0 -- 87 --
FurMark Stress -- 1240 -- 80
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 1.3 1316 80 80
Witcher 3 Stress 3.3 1544 84 80

Emissions

System Noise

The internal cooling solution consists of two identical fans with two heat pipes between them. Mainstream gaming notebooks like the Dell G7 or MSI GL series have very similar CPU and GPU options to our Asus but with larger cooling solutions.

Fan noise is inaudible when idling and during word processing. Unfortunately, our test unit also suffers from audible electronic noise and so its idling noise is higher than background. We will revisit this in the near future with a second unit in hopes that the characteristic is not representative of retail SKUs.

Otherwise, fan noise and behavior is nearly identical to the UX550VE. Average load (as represented by the first benchmark scene of 3DMark 06) is louder than on both the XPS 15 and MacBook Pro 15 and gaming load will be slightly louder. The fans are sensitive to onscreen activity and so we recommend the Power Saver profile for a nearly silent browsing experience.

Twin 50 mm fans
Twin 50 mm fans
Symmetrical cooling for CPU and GPU
Symmetrical cooling for CPU and GPU

Noise Level

Idle
28.6 / 29.9 / 30.5 dB(A)
Load
42.5 / 44.8 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: 28 dB(A)
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 8950HK, Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0)
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 8300H, Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 8750H, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
Radeon Pro 560, 7820HQ
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 7700HQ, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP
Noise
1%
6%
-11%
2%
-3%
off / environment *
28
30.3
-8%
28.4
-1%
29
-4%
30.8
-10%
28.3
-1%
Idle Minimum *
28.6
30.3
-6%
28.4
1%
30
-5%
31
-8%
30.4
-6%
Idle Average *
29.9
30.3
-1%
28.4
5%
31
-4%
31
-4%
31
-4%
Idle Maximum *
30.5
30.3
1%
28.4
7%
35
-15%
31
-2%
31.2
-2%
Load Average *
42.5
37.1
13%
41.6
2%
49
-15%
31.3
26%
43.3
-2%
Witcher 3 ultra *
44.8
43.3
3%
36.1
19%
51
-14%
46.2
-3%
Load Maximum *
44.8
43
4%
41.6
7%
54
-21%
41.8
7%
46.2
-3%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

Rear ventilation when gaming
Rear ventilation when gaming

Surface temperatures when idling are generally flat on both sides with the rear quadrants being slightly warmer than the front by a few degrees. Higher loads like gaming will accentuate the delta even further with the keyboard center and rear quadrants reaching as high as 40 C and 50 C, respectively. We wouldn't recommend gaming without a flat desk, for example. Thankfully, the palm rests, Screenpad, and WASD keys remain much cooler and never become uncomfortable no matter the onscreen load. The roughly symmetrical temperature gradient is perhaps unsurprisingly very similar to the Zenbook UX550.

Note that the chassis has no ventilation grilles along the bottom panel or edges. Both intake and exhaust occur through grilles hidden underneath the hinge and so it is important to leave space behind the notebook for airflow.

System idle (top)
System idle (top)
System idle (bottom)
System idle (bottom)
Witcher 3 stress (top)
Witcher 3 stress (top)
Witcher 3 stress (bottom)
Witcher 3 stress (bottom)
Prime95+FurMark stress (top)
Prime95+FurMark stress (top)
Prime95+FurMark stress (bottom)
Prime95+FurMark stress (bottom)
Max. Load
 35.8 °C
96 F
40 °C
104 F
41.2 °C
106 F
 
 32.6 °C
91 F
42.4 °C
108 F
31 °C
88 F
 
 29.2 °C
85 F
28 °C
82 F
30.8 °C
87 F
 
Maximum: 42.4 °C = 108 F
Average: 34.6 °C = 94 F
45 °C
113 F
50.8 °C
123 F
44.6 °C
112 F
39.4 °C
103 F
45.6 °C
114 F
39.2 °C
103 F
35.4 °C
96 F
37.4 °C
99 F
35.6 °C
96 F
Maximum: 50.8 °C = 123 F
Average: 41.4 °C = 107 F
Power Supply (max.)  41.4 °C = 107 F | Room Temperature 21.4 °C = 71 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.6 °C / 94 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 42.4 °C / 108 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 50.8 °C / 123 F, compared to the average of 38.8 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.8 °C / 86 F, compared to the device average of 30.9 °C / 88 F.
(±) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 34.6 °C / 94 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 31.8 °C / 89.2 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 (-2.7 °C / -4.8 F).

Speakers

Sound quality from the internal Harman Kardon speakers are above average with decent bass as Asus is promising louder output and with wider frequencies than the UX550. Since the speakers are now closer to the palm rests, however, the chassis will reverberate during music playback even when at 50 percent volume. This can be potentially distracting when gaming or word processing depending on the user.

Speakers are now bottom-facing
Speakers are now bottom-facing
Pink noise
Pink noise
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2040.437.92536.135.93134.633.54033.732.35032.632.76331.834.88030.930.91003031.512529.533.116028.644.420027.952.425027.359.331526.662.64002667.950025.667.26302569.780024.47510002472125023.769.5160023.674.8200023.671.7250023.370.2315023.169.1400023.372.1500023.170.7630023.175.4800022.979.91000022.876.41250022.768.41600022.768.9SPL35.985.4N2.666median 23.7median 69.5Delta1.96.740.638.132.233.332.633.833.739.534.339.629.448.828.652.227.35927.968.126.458.925.46723.967.922.666.123.374.922.875.721.573.42069.620.174.719.476.618.779.81873.318.173.217.874.717.871.817.874.318.17718.37018.272.318.268.318.572.131.5871.676.6median 19.4median 72.32.83.3hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GEApple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.8 GHz, 555)
Frequency diagram (checkboxes can be checked and unchecked to compare devices)
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE audio analysis

(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (79.88 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 22.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (17.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 39% of all tested devices in this class were better, 11% similar, 50% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 6% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.8 GHz, 555) audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (87 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 7.8% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.1% away from median
(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (7.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 3% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 96% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 18%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 99% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Energy Management

Power Consumption

The system consumes anywhere between 11 W and 23 W when idling on desktop depending on the Windows power profile and the screen brightness setting. This range is noticeably higher than most other 15-inch notebooks of similar category and it has more in common with powerful gaming notebooks like the Aero 15X v8 instead. In comparison, the XPS 15 and ZenBook Pro UX550 range between 3 W and 8 W when under similar idling loads. Disabling the screenpad does little to bring down consumption as we can only record a power savings of about 0.8 W.

When gaming or under extreme loads, the UX580GE becomes very similar to the UX550VE with the same GTX 1050 Ti GPU. The system will draw about 103 W or 112 W at most from the medium-sized (~16 x 7.5 x 2.7 cm) 150 W AC adapter.

Prime95 activated at the 20s mark. Steady decline in power consumption begins immediately after the start of the test
Prime95 activated at the 20s mark. Steady decline in power consumption begins immediately after the start of the test
System running FurMark and Prime95 simultaneously
System running FurMark and Prime95 simultaneously
Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.11 / 0.56 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 11.7 / 18.5 / 22.8 Watt
Load midlight 97.5 / 111.1 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Samsung SSD PM961 1TB M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe (MZVLW1T0), IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), Lite-On CA3-8D256-Q11, LED IGZO IPS InfinityEdge, 1920x1080, 15.6
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 3840x2160, 15.6
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, Toshiba NVMe THNSN5512GPU7, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
7820HQ, Radeon Pro 560, , , 2880x1800, 15.4
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), Samsung PM961 NVMe MZVLW512HMJP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15.6
Power Consumption
42%
28%
-17%
32%
32%
Idle Minimum *
11.7
2.9
75%
11.6
1%
14
-20%
3.7
68%
6.3
46%
Idle Average *
18.5
5.8
69%
13.8
25%
18
3%
16.2
12%
7.9
57%
Idle Maximum *
22.8
7.5
67%
14.2
38%
22
4%
18
21%
8.1
64%
Load Average *
97.5
77.5
21%
67.9
30%
91
7%
58.4
40%
84.9
13%
Load Maximum *
111.1
107
4%
76.9
31%
173
-56%
89.6
19%
102.4
8%
Witcher 3 ultra *
102.9
84
18%
59.04
43%
142
-38%
96.3
6%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Asus battery health manager
Asus battery health manager

Runtimes are expected to be shorter than on the UX550 since the UX580 has to drive two discrete displays and with a slightly smaller battery capacity. Battery life is about 2 hours shorter than the last model during real-world WLAN use even when the trackpad display is completely disabled. When enabled, WLAN runtime can be as low as 4 hours. Users can expect 4 to 6 hours of browsing use when both the trackpad display and iGPU are active compared to the advertised 9.5-hour battery life. In the world of Ultrabooks, the results are merely average at best as competing systems can often last 1 to 3 hours longer under similar loads.

Charging from near empty to full capacity takes about 1.5 hours. Asus is claiming a 60 percent battery charge in just 49 minutes which we can confirm in our own testing when the battery is drained.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
14h 02min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
6h 15min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 16min
Asus ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE
8950HK, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 71 Wh
Dell XPS 15 2018 i5 FHD 97Wh
8300H, GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 97 Wh
HP Spectre x360 15t-bl100
8550U, GeForce MX150, 79.2 Wh
Gigabyte Aero 15X v8
8750H, GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q, 94.24 Wh
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
7820HQ, Radeon Pro 560,  Wh
Asus Zenbook Pro UX550VE-DB71T
7700HQ, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Laptop), 73 Wh
Battery Runtime
101%
42%
44%
35%
18%
Reader / Idle
842
934
11%
762
-10%
1023
21%
WiFi v1.3
375
942
151%
511
36%
513
37%
677
81%
532
42%
Load
76
114
50%
136
79%
156
105%
67
-12%
70
-8%
Witcher 3 ultra
62
76

Pros

+ crisp 4K UHD touchscreen; full AdobeRGB coverage
+ Unique 5.5-inch 1080p Screenpad is practical
+ trackpad surface offers smooth gliding
+ no pulse-width modulation
+ dual Thunderbolt 3 ports
+ fast Intel 9560 WLAN
+ easy serviceability

Cons

- no full-size SD reader; transfer rates could be faster
- GTX 1050 Ti performance is slightly below average
- Screenpad can be cumbersome without a mouse
- noticeable coil whine from our test model
- higher power consumption when idling
- RAM is soldered and not upgradeable
- clickpad feedback is soft and shallow
- thicker bezels than the competition
- outdoor visibility could be better
- Screenpad is very grainy
- shorter battery life

Verdict

In review: Asus Zenbook Pro 15 UX580GE. Test model provided by Asus US
In review: Asus Zenbook Pro 15 UX580GE. Test model provided by Asus US

The Screenpad is an innovation that's arguably more practical than the Apple Touch Bar. The core concept of a 16:9 1080p secondary screen when compared to the unorthodox Apple approach has its inherent advantages for both multimedia and productivity workloads. No specialized applications are even required for the Screenpad to be useful; the simple ability to have a secondary screen always available when on the go makes us want a trackpad display on every notebook out there. Desktop users with two or more monitors will know exactly how beneficial mulit-monitor setups can be in terms of efficiency and how difficult it would be to go back to one display. In this regard, the UX580 is one of the freshest ideas we've seen yet on a Windows laptop. We can't wait until the SDK becomes public for developers to further exploit what a second screen can offer.

While the concept has untapped potential, there are ergonomic challenges to overcome. Looking up and down between the separate displays can become tiring whereas the Apple Touch Bar is physically closer to the main screen. Furthermore, the trackpad display can be cumbersome to use if no external mouse is available since its surface is constantly switching between mouse cursor control and onscreen app control. There is a learning curve involved before the Asus' Screenpad becomes second nature.

Lastly, a key drawback to the Screenpad is its grainy overlay. While text will appear small-but-sharp on the Apple Touch Bar or even on a budget 1080p smartphone, text on the Screenpad is grainier and nowhere near as crisp. We understand that the thick matte overlay was necessary to improve the gliding properties of the trackpad, but this comes at the noticeable expense of display quality. From this perspective, the UX580 Screenpad feels very much like a first generation product.

The UX580 feels the same as the UX550 in nearly all other aspects and so our existing comments still apply here. The speakers are even better, serviceability is easy, and the aluminum chassis is relatively strong with the same caveats as before. We're hoping to see improvements to battery life and a possible jump to a sharper AMOLED/OLED Screenpad in the future.

(July 20, 2018 update: The Core i9-8950HK in the UX580GE is about on par with the i7-8750H in the Asus GU501GM after confirming on a second UX580GE test unit. Users would be better off with the Core i7-8750H configuration since the performance benefits of a Core i9 are relatively minor.)

Pricecompare

Read all 9 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 ZenBook Pro 15 UX580GE (i9-8950HK, GTX 1050 Ti, 4K UHD) Laptop Review
Allen Ngo, 2018-06-22 (Update: 2018-08-17)
Allen Ngo
Allen Ngo - US Editor in Chief
After graduating with a B.S. in environmental hydrodynamics from the University of California, I studied reactor physics to become licensed by the U.S. NRC to operate nuclear reactors. There's a striking level of appreciation you gain for everyday consumer electronics after working with modern nuclear reactivity systems astonishingly powered by computers from the 80s. When I'm not managing day-to-day activities and US review articles on Notebookcheck, you can catch me following the eSports scene and the latest gaming news.