Notebookcheck

Asus ZenBook UX430UN (i7-8550U, GeForce MX150) Laptop Review

Portable multimedia machine. The UX430UN offers a bigger screen and faster GPU than the XPS 13 for hundreds less than the XPS 15. Its chassis and keyboard are unfortunately weaker than expected and feel cheaper to the touch.

The 14-inch Asus Zenbook UX430 series can be seen as the more affordable version of the flagship 14-inch Zenbook UX490 series. Whereas the latter is thinner, lighter, and with just USB Type-C ports, the former includes more connectivity ports and the much faster GeForce MX150 option for superior gaming performance. Users can choose between the UX430UA with HD Graphics 620, UX430UN with GeForce MX150, or the UX430UQ with the aging GeForce 940MX. All SKUs are otherwise identical in appearance with matte FHD displays, Kaby Lake or Kaby Lake-R CPUs, and up to 16 GB of LPDDR3 RAM and 512 GB of M.2 SATA III storage. Our test model today is the highest-end UX430UN SKU retailing for $1200 USD.

The UX430 competes directly against the 13.3-inch XPS 13 9370, 15-inch Samsung NP900X5T, 15.4-inch MacBook Pro 15, 13.9-inch Lenovo Yoga 920, 13.3-inch HP Spectre 13, and the 14-inch Acer Swift 3 in the ultra thin-and-light notebook category.

Working For Notebookcheck

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

Currently wanted: 
News and Editorial Editor - Details here

Asus Zenbook UX430UN (ZenBook UX430 Series)
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce MX150 - 2048 MB, Core: 1468 MHz, Memory: 6008 MHz, GDDR5, 382.84, Optimus
Memory
16384 MB 
, 1200 MHz, 10-10-10-28, Dual-Channel
Display
14 inch 16:9, 1920 x 1080 pixel 157 PPI, NV140FHM-N62, BOE0718, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Kaby Lake-U iHDCP 2.2 Premium PCH
Storage
SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002, 512 GB 
Soundcard
Intel Kaby Lake-U/Y PCH - High Definition Audio
Connections
1 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0 / 3.1 Gen1, 1 USB 3.1 Gen2, 1 HDMI, Audio Connections: 3.5 mm combo, Card Reader: SD, 1 Fingerprint Reader, Sensors: Ambient light sensor
Networking
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265 (a/b/g/n = Wi-Fi 4/ac = Wi-Fi 5), Bluetooth 4.1
Size
height x width x depth (in mm): 15.9 x 324 x 225 ( = 0.63 x 12.76 x 8.86 in)
Battery
50 Wh Lithium-Polymer, 3-cell, Battery runtime (according to manufacturer): 9 h
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64 Bit
Camera
Webcam: HD
Additional features
Speakers: Stereo, Keyboard: Chiclet, Keyboard Light: yes, User's guide, Warranty card, McAfee Anti-Virus, Asus Live Update, 12 Months Warranty
Weight
1.32 kg ( = 46.56 oz / 2.91 pounds), Power Supply: 230 g ( = 8.11 oz / 0.51 pounds)
Price
1200 USD
Note: The manufacturer may use components from different suppliers including display panels, drives or memory sticks with similar specifications.

 

Case

The chassis draws obvious inspirations from the costlier Zenbook 3 UX490UA. The signature concentric brushed aluminum outer lid, tapered design, smooth surfaces, and "NanoEdge" narrow bezels all return for a very familiar visual style that is shared across the ZenBook family. Omitted are the superficial gold chrome-cut edges and corners for a more unicolor and subtle look.

Chassis rigidity is similar to the Samsung NP900X5T but weaker than the XPS 13 9360 and 9370. Attempting to twist the base from its front corners, for example, will result in slight bending and a small amount of creaking. Applying moderate force on the palm rests or center of the keyboard will also slightly but visibly warp the surface. Meanwhile, the lid is more flexible than we would like due to its narrow bezels and lack of Gorilla Glass reinforcement. Though the distortions are minimal and far from severe when applying pressure, competing notebooks in this size category like the Spectre x360 13, Razer Blade 14, XPS 13, or MacBook Pro 13 all offer sturdier designs.

Build quality is excellent from top to bottom on our test unit save for some minor unevenness on the rear corner of the bottom lid. Fortunately, this is barely noticeable and only cosmetic.

In terms of size and weight, the UX430 is about 200 grams heavier and 3 mm thicker than the UX490 that costs hundreds more. Note that the Lenovo Yoga 920 is very similar in dimensions and weight to the UX430 while offering both 360-degree hinges and touchscreen features that the Asus is missing. The 14-inch notebook weighs about the same as many 13-inch convertibles while being a lot lighter than popular 15-inch models like the XPS 15 or MacBook Pro 15.

Maximum display angle of only ~140 degrees
Maximum display angle of only ~140 degrees
The lid tends to wobble when adjusting the angle, but it is otherwise sufficiently firm whilst typing
The lid tends to wobble when adjusting the angle, but it is otherwise sufficiently firm whilst typing
348 mm / 13.7 inch 229.4 mm / 9.03 inch 15.5 mm / 0.61 inch 1.3 kg2.82 lbs329 mm / 13 inch 210 mm / 8.27 inch 12.9 mm / 0.508 inch 1.1 kg2.43 lbs324 mm / 12.8 inch 225 mm / 8.86 inch 15.9 mm / 0.626 inch 1.3 kg2.91 lbs323 mm / 12.7 inch 223.5 mm / 8.8 inch 13.95 mm / 0.549 inch 1.4 kg3.02 lbs308 mm / 12.1 inch 223 mm / 8.78 inch 14.5 mm / 0.571 inch 1.3 kg2.76 lbs307 mm / 12.1 inch 218 mm / 8.58 inch 13.8 mm / 0.543 inch 1.3 kg2.76 lbs302 mm / 11.9 inch 199 mm / 7.83 inch 11.6 mm / 0.4567 inch 1.2 kg2.69 lbs286 mm / 11.3 inch 211 mm / 8.31 inch 12.5 mm / 0.4921 inch 1.1 kg2.31 lbs

Connectivity

Available ports are plentiful considering the size class with some glaring omissions. Instead of a full-size HDMI port, for example, there is an uncommon micro HDMI port. The lack of both a Kensington Lock and support for Thunderbolt 3 will likely irk users down the line as well. We would like to see multiple USB Type-C ports in the future for both charging and data in lieu of the dedicated AC adapter port.

Port positioning is otherwise excellent with USB Type-A on both sides and none that are too close to the front edge.

Front: No connectivity
Front: No connectivity
Right: SD reader, USB 2.0
Right: SD reader, USB 2.0
Rear: No connectivity
Rear: No connectivity
Left: AC adapter, Micro HDMI, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB 3.1 Type-C Gen. 1 (w/ DisplayPort support)
Left: AC adapter, Micro HDMI, 3.5 mm combo audio, USB 3.1 Type-C Gen. 1 (w/ DisplayPort support)

SD Card Reader

Remember to remove the card if not in use to avoid bending and snapping
Remember to remove the card if not in use to avoid bending and snapping

Average transfer rates from the integrated card reader are disappointing at just 36 MB/s when using our Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II test card. Moving 1 GB worth of photos from the card to desktop will take about 29 seconds compared to only 5 to 6 seconds on the XPS 13 9370. We can, however, appreciate the fact that Asus has included a full-size SD reader instead of a MicroSD solution like on the latest XPS 13 or Samsung NP900X5T.

An fully inserted SD card will still protrude by about two-thirds of its length. A spring-loaded reader would have been ideal for transporting purposes.

SDCardreader Transfer Speed
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs)
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
182 MB/s ∼100% +411%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II)
76.9 MB/s ∼42% +116%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
35.61 MB/s ∼20%
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB)
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 64 GB UHS-II)
210.3 MB/s ∼100% +471%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro M501 UHS-II)
90.19 MB/s ∼43% +145%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
  (Toshiba Exceria Pro SDXC 64 GB UHS-II)
36.8 MB/s ∼17%

Communication

The M.2 WLAN module is removable
The M.2 WLAN module is removable

The Intel 8265 WLAN module connects without any issues to our Linksys EA8500 test router. Real-world transfer rates are comparable to both the XPS 13 and Samsung NP900X5T but without the gaming-centric software features found on the Killer 1435/1535 series.

There are no 4G LTE or GPS options.

Networking
iperf3 Client (receive) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
668 MBit/s ∼100% +3%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
648 MBit/s ∼97%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
639 MBit/s ∼96% -1%
iperf3 Client (transmit) TCP 1 m 4M x10
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
Killer Wireless-n/a/ac 1435 Wireless Network Adapter
505 MBit/s ∼100% +6%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
497 MBit/s ∼98% +4%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 8265
478 MBit/s ∼95%

Accessories

There are no included extras outside of the warranty card and User's guide whereas the higher-end Zenbook 3 may throw in a carrying case and USB Type-C adapter for free.

Maintenance

The bottom panel requires a Philips screwdriver and the same T5 hex wrench as on the Razer Blade or XPS 13 to remove. Note that there are additional screws hidden underneath the rear rubber footing for a total of 10 screws. Once removed, users are granted direct access to the internal battery, M.2 2230 WLAN module, M.2 2280 SSD, and cooling solution. System RAM is soldered.

Accessible internals
Accessible internals

Warranty

The standard one-year limited warranty applies. Asus recommends registering new purchases online to take advantage of benefits. The full text on the warranty card can be found here.

Please see our Guarantees, Return Policies and Warranties FAQ for country-specific information.

Input Devices

Keyboard

The chiclet keyboard (~27.8 x 10.2 cm) integrates a three-level white backlight with a nearly identical layout to the UX490. This unfortunately means that the Power button is still inconveniently close to both the Delete and Space keys and that the Directional keys are uncomfortably small. Tactile feedback from the individual plastic keys is lighter and spongier than what we're used to on the XPS 13, Spectre 13, or Lenovo ThinkPad series. Travel is shallow (1.4 mm) even for a thin Ultrabook and the overall typing experience is notably inferior to a cheap desktop keyboard. It will take some time for typists to become fully accustomed to the weak feel of the keyboard. On the bright side, clatter is relatively quiet and muffled.

Touchpad

The trackpad (10.5 x 7.5 cm) suffers a similar fate to the keyboard. While its surface area is only slightly narrower than the trackpad on the XPS 15 (10.5 x 8.5 cm), the integrated click keys are horrible to use. Travel is very shallow, clatter is loud, and feedback is weak. The surface appears to stick after each click and so inputting clicks in rapid succession is very difficult on the clickpad. We highly recommend tapping on the clickpad surface instead or an external mouse if possible. Fortunately, glide is uniformly smooth for reliable cursor control and two-finger scrolling.

Keyboard keys are shallow and feathery light including the all-important Space key
Keyboard keys are shallow and feathery light including the all-important Space key
Be careful not to hit the Power button accidentally as it is adjacent to the Delete and Backspace keys
Be careful not to hit the Power button accidentally as it is adjacent to the Delete and Backspace keys

Display

The UX430 series includes no display options other than matte 1080p whereas most Ultrabooks in this price range can have FHD or 4K UHD touchscreens. Despite the lack of choices, the display is comparable  to those on competing Ultrabooks if not a bit worse. While contrast is excellent at about 1000:1, ghosting is somewhat more prevalent and color space is slightly narrower on the Asus. The most notable drawback is the relatively dim backlight of just 300 nits maximum that negatively impacts visibility when outdoors.

Subjectively, the matte display is nearly as sharp as a glossy display since it suffers from no major graininess issues commonly found on most other matte panels. On the other hand, there is irrefutable pulse-width modulation on all brightness levels up to 99 percent and so users who may be sensitive to onscreen flickering may want to avoid this notebook altogether.

Note that the UX430 uses a similar NV140FHM IPS panel from BOE Display as do the Lenovo Yoga 520 and ThinkPad Yoga 460. Consequently, these three notebooks share somewhat similar display characteristics.

Some slight uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom edge
Some slight uneven backlight bleeding along the bottom edge
RGB subpixel array (157 PPI)
RGB subpixel array (157 PPI)
319.3
cd/m²
306
cd/m²
317.4
cd/m²
297
cd/m²
310.4
cd/m²
301.8
cd/m²
285.5
cd/m²
298.4
cd/m²
287.4
cd/m²
Distribution of brightness
NV140FHM-N62, BOE0718
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 319.3 cd/m² Average: 302.6 cd/m² Minimum: 16.91 cd/m²
Brightness Distribution: 89 %
Center on Battery: 310.4 cd/m²
Contrast: 1001:1 (Black: 0.31 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.07 | 0.6-29.43 Ø6, calibrated: 4.07
ΔE Greyscale 2.8 | 0.64-98 Ø6.2
84.6% sRGB (Argyll 3D) 55.3% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 3D)
Gamma: 2.217
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
NV140FHM-N62, BOE0718, IPS, 14, 1920x1080
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
ID: Sharp SHP148B, Name: LQ133D1, Dell P/N: 8XDHY, IPS, 13.3, 3840x2160
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
ID: BOE06E8, Name: BOE HF NV150FHB-N31, IPS, 15, 1920x1080
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
AU Optronics AUO383D / B140HAN03.8, IPS, 14, 1920x1080
Huawei MateBook X
Chi Mei CMN8201 / P130ZDZ-EF1, , 13.3, 2160x1440
Microsoft Surface Laptop i5
ID: MEI96A2, Name: Panasonic VVX14T092N00, IPS, 13.5, 2256x1504
Response Times
363%
469%
37%
32%
-6%
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% *
43.6 (24.4, 19.2)
67.2 (31.6, 35.6)
-54%
46 (25.2, 20.8)
-6%
24 (12, 12)
45%
33 (15, 18)
24%
50.8 (25.6, 25.2)
-17%
Response Time Black / White *
39.2 (22.8, 16.4)
41.6 (22.8, 18.8)
-6%
29.6 (16.4, 13.2)
24%
28 (18, 10)
29%
24 (12, 12)
39%
37.2 (20, 17.2)
5%
PWM Frequency
200 (99)
2500 (20)
1150%
2976 (91)
1388%
Screen
11%
-2%
2%
20%
23%
Brightness middle
310.4
496.4
60%
558.2
80%
337
9%
408
31%
384.2
24%
Brightness
303
469
55%
528
74%
295
-3%
395
30%
378
25%
Brightness Distribution
89
84
-6%
92
3%
81
-9%
88
-1%
90
1%
Black Level *
0.31
0.5
-61%
0.46
-48%
0.21
32%
0.45
-45%
0.36
-16%
Contrast
1001
993
-1%
1213
21%
1605
60%
907
-9%
1067
7%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 *
4.07
2.9
29%
4.41
-8%
4.89
-20%
1.55
62%
1.8
56%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 max. *
8.33
5.26
37%
10.91
-31%
8.43
-1%
2.19
74%
4.2
50%
Colorchecker DeltaE2000 calibrated *
4.07
Greyscale DeltaE2000 *
2.8
3.9
-39%
6.6
-136%
4.28
-53%
1.91
32%
1.2
57%
Gamma
2.217 99%
2.066 106%
2.19 100%
2.25 98%
2.34 94%
2.21 100%
CCT
7033 92%
7169 91%
7615 85%
7352 88%
6491 100%
6708 97%
Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998)
55.3
63.9
16%
61.3
11%
56
1%
61
10%
63.7
15%
Color Space (Percent of sRGB)
84.6
98.2
16%
97.2
15%
87
3%
96
13%
94.2
11%
Total Average (Program / Settings)
187% / 92%
234% / 107%
20% / 8%
26% / 22%
9% / 18%

* ... smaller is better

Color space is approximately 85 percent and 55 percent of the sRGB and AdobeRGB standards, respectively, which is very similar to the pricier Zenbook 3 UX490UA. Note that we are unable to record the promised 100 percent sRGB coverage that Asus is advertising. While more than sufficient for video playback and web browsing, digital artists may want a wider color gamut that many competing Ultrabooks offer such as the ones above.

vs. sRGB
vs. sRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. AdobeRGB
vs. Samsung NP900X5N
vs. Samsung NP900X5N

Further analyses with a spectrophotometer reveal a generally accurate display even before calibration. RGB balance and grayscale improve slightly after our calibration attempts, but the changes are difficult to notice in practice. Color accuracy still decreases with increasing saturation level due to imperfect sRGB coverage.

Grayscale before calibration
Grayscale before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
Saturation Sweeps before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
ColorChecker before calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Grayscale after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
Saturation Sweeps after calibration
ColorChecker after calibration
ColorChecker after calibration

Display Response Times

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.
       Response Time Black to White
39.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 22.8 ms rise
↘ 16.4 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 96 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (24.9 ms).
       Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey
43.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined↗ 24.4 ms rise
↘ 19.2 ms fall
The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.
In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 64 % of all devices are better.
This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (39.7 ms).

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.
Screen flickering / PWM detected 200 Hz ≤ 99 % brightness setting

The display backlight flickers at 200 Hz (Likely utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 99 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting.

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

In comparison: 51 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 9370 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Outdoor visibility is average at best even when under shade. The display backlight is relatively dim compared to 500 nits or brighter on the MacBook Pro 15, XPS 13, or Samsung NP900X5T. To Asus' credit, the matte panel helps in reducing glare compared to the glossy panels on the aforementioned examples, but this advantage is diminished by the dimmer backlight. We recommend avoiding direct sunlight if working outdoors as much as possible. Fortunately, the backlight is more than sufficient for indoor ambient conditions.

Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under shade
Outdoors under sunlight
Outdoors under sunlight
Wide IPS viewing angles
Wide IPS viewing angles

Performance

The UX430 series is currently shipping with i3-7100U, i5-7200U, i7-7500U, i5-8250U, and i7-8550U CPU options with either integrated (U)HD Graphics 620 only or discrete GeForce MX150 with Optimus. Our test model is the higher-end option that should cater well to casual gamers because of the Nvidia Pascal GPU. System RAM is fixed and so we recommend avoiding the lower-end configurations that are equipped with just 4 GB of DDR4 2133 MHz RAM.

 

Processor

CPU performance is where we expect it to be for an i7-8550U. CineBench scores are about 10 to 20 percent faster than the competing Ryzen 5 2500U depending on the workload and even faster than the more power-demanding i5-7300HQ found on many budget gaming notebooks like the Inspiron 15 7577. Users who may be considering the lower-end SKUs of the UX430 with the 7th gen Kaby Lake i3-7100U or i5-7200U will be losing out on almost half the multi-thread performance and about 15 to 20 percent of single-threaded performance when compared to the i7-8550U.

As with most Ultrabooks, Turbo Boost potential is limited on the Asus. Running CineBench R15 Multi-Thread in a loop results in a very high initial score of 623 points before steadily falling to an average of 550 points as shown by our graph below. The rough 12 percent decrease in performance is about in line with the average CineBench score of dozens of other notebooks sporting the same CPU. Still, it's a bit unfortunate that maximum Turbo Boost is unsustainable.

See our dedicated page on the Core i7-8550U for more technical information and benchmark comparisons.

CineBench R10 32-bit
CineBench R10 32-bit
CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R11.5 64-bit
CineBench R15
CineBench R15
0102030405060708090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310320330340350360370380390400410420430440450460470480490500510520530540550560570580590600610620630Tooltip
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64 Bit
Cinebench R15
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
168 Points ∼77% +2%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
165 Points ∼76%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (108 - 172, n=74)
160 Points ∼73% -3%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
155 Points ∼71% -6%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00
Intel Core i5-8250U
143 Points ∼66% -13%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
142 Points ∼65% -14%
Asus ZenBook UX530UX-FY070T
Intel Core i7-7500U
141 Points ∼65% -15%
Alienware 13 R3 (i5-7300HQ, GTX 1050 Ti)
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
136 Points ∼62% -18%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-13ARR
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
135 Points ∼62% -18%
Asus Zenbook UX310UQ-GL011T
Intel Core i7-6500U
130 Points ∼60% -21%
Lenovo IdeaPad 320s-14IKB
Intel Core i5-7200U
128 Points ∼59% -22%
Asus ASUSPRO Essential P2520LA-XO0167H
Intel Core i5-5200U
97 Points ∼44% -41%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00
Intel Core i5-8250U
724 Points ∼17% +23%
Lenovo ThinkPad T480s-20L8S02D00
Intel Core i5-8250U
716 Points ∼16% +22%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
710 Points ∼16% +21%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
660 Points ∼15% +12%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
589 Points ∼13%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (301 - 761, n=76)
570 Points ∼13% -3%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-13ARR
AMD Ryzen 5 2500U
556 Points ∼13% -6%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
544 Points ∼12% -8%
Alienware 13 R3 (i5-7300HQ, GTX 1050 Ti)
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
512 Points ∼12% -13%
Lenovo IdeaPad 320s-14IKB
Intel Core i5-7200U
331 Points ∼8% -44%
Asus Zenbook UX310UQ-GL011T
Intel Core i7-6500U
327 Points ∼7% -44%
Asus ZenBook UX530UX-FY070T
Intel Core i7-7500U
307 Points ∼7% -48%
Asus ASUSPRO Essential P2520LA-XO0167H
Intel Core i5-5200U
253 Points ∼6% -57%
Cinebench R11.5
CPU Single 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
1.98 Points ∼81% +16%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
1.95 Points ∼80% +15%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (1.43 - 1.95, n=32)
1.834 Points ∼75% +8%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
1.7 Points ∼70%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
1.61 Points ∼66% -5%
Asus Zenbook UX310UQ-GL011T
Intel Core i7-6500U
1.48 Points ∼61% -13%
Asus ASUSPRO Essential P2520LA-XO0167H
Intel Core i5-5200U
1.2 Points ∼49% -29%
CPU Multi 64Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
7.67 Points ∼17% +17%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
7.13 Points ∼16% +8%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
6.58 Points ∼15%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (4.38 - 8.56, n=32)
6.28 Points ∼14% -5%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
6.03 Points ∼14% -8%
Asus Zenbook UX310UQ-GL011T
Intel Core i7-6500U
3.15 Points ∼7% -52%
Asus ASUSPRO Essential P2520LA-XO0167H
Intel Core i5-5200U
2.8 Points ∼6% -57%
Cinebench R10
Rendering Single 32Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
6730 Points ∼62% +4%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
6478 Points ∼60%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
6478 Points ∼60% 0%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (4202 - 8211, n=30)
6332 Points ∼58% -2%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
5426 Points ∼50% -16%
Lenovo IdeaPad 320s-14IKB
Intel Core i5-7200U
5013 Points ∼46% -23%
Asus Zenbook UX310UQ-GL011T
Intel Core i7-6500U
4904 Points ∼45% -24%
Asus ASUSPRO Essential P2520LA-XO0167H
Intel Core i5-5200U
4073 Points ∼38% -37%
Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
23585 Points ∼36% +21%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
19801 Points ∼30% +1%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
19550 Points ∼30%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (11694 - 24180, n=30)
17908 Points ∼27% -8%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
17215 Points ∼26% -12%
Lenovo IdeaPad 320s-14IKB
Intel Core i5-7200U
11123 Points ∼17% -43%
Asus Zenbook UX310UQ-GL011T
Intel Core i7-6500U
10897 Points ∼17% -44%
Asus ASUSPRO Essential P2520LA-XO0167H
Intel Core i5-5200U
6239 Points ∼10% -68%
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (258 - 435, n=11)
351 s * ∼4% -30%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
292.499 s * ∼3% -9%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
269.12 s * ∼3%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
253.57 s * ∼3% +6%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
247 s * ∼3% +8%
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - ---
Average Intel Core i7-8550U
  (1.4 - 7795, n=90)
1105 Seconds * ∼5% -108%
Asus Strix GL703VM-DB74
Intel Core i7-7700HQ
638.9 Seconds * ∼3% -21%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
Intel Core i7-8550U
529.977 Seconds * ∼2%
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Intel Core i7-8550U
513.599 Seconds * ∼2% +3%
Eurocom Tornado F5 Killer Edition
Intel Core i5-7600K
467.526 Seconds * ∼2% +12%

* ... smaller is better

Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit
6828
Cinebench R10 Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
19550
Cinebench R10 Rendering Single 32Bit
6478
Cinebench R11.5 OpenGL 64Bit
71.15 fps
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64Bit
6.58 Points
Cinebench R11.5 CPU Single 64Bit
1.7 Points
Cinebench R15 Ref. Match 64Bit
99.6 %
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64Bit
94.44 fps
Cinebench R15 CPU Multi 64Bit
589 Points
Cinebench R15 CPU Single 64Bit
165 Points
Help

System Performance

PCMark benchmarks rank the Asus within single-digit percentage points of many of its closest Ultrabook competitors. Subjectively, we can notice no performance hitches or software problems during our time with the test unit.

PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Home Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8 Creative Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 8 Work Accelerated
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 10 Standard
PCMark 8
Work Score Accelerated v2
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5228 Points ∼80% +10%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (4063 - 5228, n=20)
4771 Points ∼73% +1%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
4732 Points ∼73%
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
4695 Points ∼72% -1%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G
4140 Points ∼64% -13%
Creative Score Accelerated v2
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
5325 Points ∼50% +3%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
5153 Points ∼49%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (4643 - 5550, n=9)
5072 Points ∼48% -2%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G
4933 Points ∼47% -4%
Home Score Accelerated v2
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4130 Points ∼68% +9%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
3792 Points ∼62%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (3145 - 4130, n=21)
3656 Points ∼60% -4%
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3632 Points ∼60% -4%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G
3471 Points ∼57% -8%
PCMark 10 - Score
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
4106 Points ∼53% +6%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
3858 Points ∼50%
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G
3678 Points ∼47% -5%
Average Intel Core i7-8550U, NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (3056 - 4106, n=19)
3631 Points ∼47% -6%
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
3425 Points ∼44% -11%
PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2
3792 points
PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2
5153 points
PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2
4732 points
Help

Storage Devices

Luckily, it's relatively easy to access and upgrade the M.2 SSD
Luckily, it's relatively easy to access and upgrade the M.2 SSD

Internal storage is limited to a single M.2 2280 slot with no secondary options. Asus is shipping SKUs with storage capacities in the 128 GB to 512 GB range sans NVMe options. Thus, sequential transfer rates will be limited to SATA III speeds at about 500 MB/s read and write. Competing Ultrabooks in this price range tend to offer NVMe as standard for almost 4x the transfer rates.

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

CDM 5
CDM 5
AS SSD
AS SSD
PCMark 8 Storage
PCMark 8 Storage
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
Asus ZenBook 13 UX331UN
SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A
Microsoft Surface Laptop i5
Toshiba THNSN0128GTYA
AS SSD
131%
184%
15%
-16%
-73%
Copy Game MB/s
225.15
291.41
29%
1057.86
370%
154.1
-32%
80.52
-64%
Copy Program MB/s
270.45
206.97
-23%
479.55
77%
129.74
-52%
62.69
-77%
Copy ISO MB/s
467.56
357.42
-24%
1750.73
274%
192.43
-59%
87.09
-81%
Score Total
926
2437
163%
2646
186%
855
-8%
991
7%
309
-67%
Score Write
261
1135
335%
628
141%
382
46%
323
24%
86
-67%
Score Read
441
894
103%
1367
210%
308
-30%
445
1%
157
-64%
Access Time Write *
0.088
0.038
57%
0.032
64%
0.056
36%
0.23
-161%
0.369
-319%
Access Time Read *
0.089
0.063
29%
0.054
39%
0.09
-1%
0.09
-1%
0.128
-44%
4K-64 Write
183.49
937.11
411%
392.6
114%
257.48
40%
233.14
27%
35.48
-81%
4K-64 Read
366.01
656.76
79%
1084.59
196%
234.46
-36%
368.36
1%
80.38
-78%
4K Write
47.88
107.22
124%
115.02
140%
77.23
61%
68.94
44%
39.07
-18%
4K Read
25.39
33.81
33%
48.71
92%
24.89
-2%
27.98
10%
20.15
-21%
Seq Write
300.26
907.16
202%
1205.64
302%
469.96
57%
213.71
-29%
117.15
-61%
Seq Read
494.43
2037.42
312%
2336.79
373%
487.22
-1%
483.68
-2%
561.28
14%

* ... smaller is better

SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
CDM 5/6 Read Seq Q32T1: 522.6 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write Seq Q32T1: 489.9 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K Q32T1: 280.2 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K Q32T1: 260.4 MB/s
CDM 5 Read Seq: 457.2 MB/s
CDM 5 Write Seq: 477.3 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Read 4K: 27.48 MB/s
CDM 5/6 Write 4K: 55.19 MB/s

GPU Performance

The Asus integrates a GeForce MX150 of the '1D10' variant with base and memory clock rates of 1469 MHz and 1502 MHz, respectively. 3DMark scores, however, are slightly below the average MX150 since core clock rates are throttled over time to as slow as 1126 MHz. The MSI PL62 with the same GPU, for example, consistently outscores our Asus in both synthetic benchmarks and games due in part to its ability to maintain higher GPU clock rates. Nonetheless, the raw performance boost over the GeForce 940MX and especially the (U)HD Graphics 620 is still massive despite the pitfalls in clock rate. Most demanding titles are playable at native 1080p so long as owners are satisfied with 30 FPS and Low graphical settings.

See our dedicated page on the GeForce MX150 for more information.

3DMark 11
3DMark 11
Cloud Gate
Cloud Gate
Ice Storm Extreme
Ice Storm Extreme
Fire Strike
Fire Strike
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Extreme
Fire Strike Ultra
Fire Strike Ultra
3DMark
1920x1080 Fire Strike Graphics
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7300HQ
6375 Points ∼16% +104%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4133 Points ∼10% +32%
MSI PL62 MX150 7700HQ
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 7700HQ
3673 Points ∼9% +18%
Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
3574 Points ∼9% +14%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (2323 - 3739, n=44)
3310 Points ∼8% +6%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
3122 Points ∼8%
Average of class Multimedia
  (337 - 16100, n=408)
2855 Points ∼7% -9%
Asus VivoBook S410UQ-NH74
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 8550U
2069 Points ∼5% -34%
Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7360U
1541 (min: 1484, max: 1547) Points ∼4% -51%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7660U
1418 Points ∼3% -55%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-13ARR
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, 2500U
1095 Points ∼3% -65%
Dell Latitude 5590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
954 Points ∼2% -69%
1280x720 Cloud Gate Standard Graphics
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7300HQ
39511 Points ∼21% +126%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
25986 Points ∼14% +49%
Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
22439 Points ∼12% +28%
MSI PL62 MX150 7700HQ
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 7700HQ
21594 Points ∼12% +24%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (16227 - 22183, n=43)
19512 Points ∼11% +12%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
17469 Points ∼9%
Average of class Multimedia
  (2468 - 77755, n=413)
16879 Points ∼9% -3%
Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7360U
11495 (min: 10969, max: 11750) Points ∼6% -34%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7660U
11264 Points ∼6% -36%
Asus VivoBook S410UQ-NH74
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 8550U
10816 Points ∼6% -38%
Dell Latitude 5590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
8065 Points ∼4% -54%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-13ARR
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, 2500U
7309 Points ∼4% -58%
3DMark 11
1280x720 Performance Combined
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7300HQ
6265 Points ∼28% +81%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4466 Points ∼20% +29%
MSI PL62 MX150 7700HQ
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 7700HQ
4277 Points ∼19% +23%
Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
4113 Points ∼18% +19%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (2820 - 4421, n=46)
3957 Points ∼18% +14%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
3467 Points ∼15%
Average of class Multimedia
  (375 - 15962, n=630)
2470 Points ∼11% -29%
Asus VivoBook S410UQ-NH74
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 8550U
2395 Points ∼11% -31%
Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7360U
2193 (min: 2057, max: 2200) Points ∼10% -37%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7660U
2184 Points ∼10% -37%
Dell Latitude 5590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1299 Points ∼6% -63%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-13ARR
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, 2500U
1246 Points ∼6% -64%
1280x720 Performance GPU
Dell Inspiron 15 7000 7577
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Laptop), 7300HQ
8047 Points ∼16% +108%
Asus Zenbook UX510UW-CN044T
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, 6500U
4826 Points ∼9% +25%
MSI PL62 MX150 7700HQ
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 7700HQ
4685 Points ∼9% +21%
Acer Aspire E5-575G-549D
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M, 7200U
4251 Points ∼8% +10%
Average NVIDIA GeForce MX150
  (2796 - 4905, n=47)
4191 Points ∼8% +8%
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
NVIDIA GeForce MX150, 8550U
3867 Points ∼8%
Average of class Multimedia
  (352 - 20837, n=634)
2963 Points ∼6% -23%
Asus VivoBook S410UQ-NH74
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, 8550U
2613 Points ∼5% -32%
Microsoft Surface Pro (2017) i7
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7660U
2493 Points ∼5% -36%
Apple MacBook Pro 13 2017
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640, 7360U
2379 (min: 2355, max: 2425) Points ∼5% -38%
Lenovo Ideapad 720S-13ARR
AMD Radeon RX Vega 8, 2500U
1668 Points ∼3% -57%
Dell Latitude 5590
Intel UHD Graphics 620, 8250U
1619 Points ∼3% -58%
3DMark 11 Performance
4160 points
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score
44383 points
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score
12367 points
3DMark Fire Strike Score
2874 points
3DMark Fire Strike Extreme Score
1437 points
Help
low med. high ultra
BioShock Infinite (2013) 141.477.266.928.9fps
Metro: Last Light (2013) 85.761.436.421.6fps
Thief (2014) 6135.830.216.7fps
The Witcher 3 (2015) 32fps
Batman: Arkham Knight (2015) 413616fps
Metal Gear Solid V (2015) 60603424fps
Fallout 4 (2015) 5135.719.214.9fps
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016) 44.931.716.414.8fps
Ashes of the Singularity (2016) 25.71512.8fps
Overwatch (2016) 121.275.438.232.4fps
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) 25.412.67fps

Stress Test

We stress the notebook to identify for any potential throttling or stability issues. When subjected to Prime95 load to stress the CPU, clock rates can be observed operating at up to 3.1 GHz for the first 30 seconds or so before dropping down to a steady 2.1 GHz. The results are in line with our CineBench loop test above where the highest score was on the first run only to decline steadily thereafter. While the drop to 2.1 GHz is steep, this is still above the base clock rate of the i7-8550U by 300 MHz and so the system is at least able to maintain a tiny amount of Turbo Boost.

Running both Prime95 and FurMark simultaneously will throttle the processors accordingly. Note that CPU clock rate, GPU clock rate, and CPU temperature may cycle when under such demanding loads. Core temperatures for both the CPU and GPU are steady in the mid 60 C to 70 C range even if one processor is not under high load since they share the same heat pipe.

Running Witcher 3 is more representative of real-world gaming loads. Unfortunately, the GPU is unable to maintain its rated GPU Boost of 1532 MHz for very long as the clock rate eventually throttles to just 1126 MHz over time or 343 MHz slower than its rated base clock rate. Our graph below shows that the initial 33 FPS is only achievable for the first few minutes or so before dropping down to the 28 to 30 FPS range. Note that there are periodic dips to the low 20 FPS range likely due to background activity from pre-installed applications. The lower-than-expected FPS count is disappointing for anyone hoping to get the full performance of the MX150 without any performance dips after long gaming sessions. It is, however, steady compared to the heavy throttling we recorded on the Samsung NP900X5T.

CPU performance is throttled when on battery power. A 3DMark 11 run on batteries returns Physics and Graphics scores of 6001 and 3694 points, respectively, compared to 8551 and 3867 points when on mains.

Prime95 stress
Prime95 stress
FurMark stress
FurMark stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
Prime95+FurMark stress
Witcher 3 stress
Witcher 3 stress
0123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233Tooltip
The Witcher 3 medium
CPU Clock (GHz) GPU Clock (MHz) Average CPU Temperature (°C) Average GPU Temperature (°C)
Prime95 Stress 2.1 - 2.2 -- 66 63
FurMark Stress -- 899 60 73
Prime95 + FurMark Stress 1.4 - 2.1 140 - 885 66 - 73 73
Witcher 3 Stress 2.7 - 4.0 1126 66 73

Emissions

System Noise

The cooling solution consists of a single fan and heat pipe located towards the rear of the unit. The fan is generally always active and only inactive upon the first few minutes of boot up. It's barely audible if simply web browsing or word processing for a near-silent experience.

Running higher loads like 3DMark 06 will slowly but surely bump fan noise up to 41.8 dB(A) by the end of the first benchmark scene. This behavior is expected since the benchmark is quite demanding on Ultrabooks and low-power GPUs. Competing Ultrabooks with weaker integrated GPUs like the Zenbook UX490 or Yoga 920 run quieter by several decibels when subjected to similar loads. Users can expect a steady fan noise of 42 dB(A) when gaming to be comparable to many Max-Q gaming notebooks.

High-pitched electronic noise or coil whine is present on our test unit even when the system is simply idling on desktop. The noise is only audible when in a quiet room or with an ear placed closely on the keyboard keys, but the fact that it is present in the first place can be irritating to some users.

Single heat pipe shared between the CPU and GPU
Single heat pipe shared between the CPU and GPU
Single ~50 mm fan
Single ~50 mm fan
Zenbook UX430UN
Zenbook UX430UN
Samsung NP900X5T
Samsung NP900X5T
Dell XPS 15 9560
Dell XPS 15 9560
 

Noise Level

Idle
28.9 / 30 / 30.2 dB(A)
Load
41.8 / 42 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: 28.3 dB(A)
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
GeForce MX150, 8550U, SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
UHD Graphics 620, 8250U, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
GeForce MX150, 8550U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
HD Graphics 620, 7200U, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN
Lenovo Yoga 920-13IKB-80Y7
UHD Graphics 620, 8550U, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP
Apple MacBook Pro 15 2017 (2.9 GHz, 560)
Radeon Pro 560, 7820HQ
Noise
6%
1%
3%
7%
1%
off / environment *
28.3
29
-2%
29.6
-5%
30.2
-7%
28
1%
30.8
-9%
Idle Minimum *
28.9
29
-0%
29.6
-2%
30.2
-4%
28
3%
31
-7%
Idle Average *
30
29
3%
29.6
1%
30.2
-1%
28.8
4%
31
-3%
Idle Maximum *
30.2
29
4%
30.3
-0%
31.2
-3%
30.3
-0%
31
-3%
Load Average *
41.8
32
23%
40
4%
35.7
15%
34.5
17%
31.3
25%
Witcher 3 ultra *
42
40
5%
Load Maximum *
42
40.1
5%
40
5%
34.2
19%
34.3
18%
41.8
-0%

* ... smaller is better

Temperature

Rear exhaust when under high load
Rear exhaust when under high load

Surface temperatures are generally flat on both sides of the notebook when idling with the rear being only a few degrees warmer than the front. When subjected to heavier loads, the hot spots can be as warm as 44 C. One of these hot spots is very close to the WASD keys since the CPU is located directly underneath. As such, users will find the left side of the keyboard to be noticeably warmer than the right which is less than ideal when gaming. Alternative Ultrabooks like the Spectre 13 have more symmetrical temperature development compared to the Asus.

For word processing or streaming purposes, the Asus never becomes uncomfortable to use even if a table is unavailable.

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
 39.6 °C
103 F
37.8 °C
100 F
35 °C
95 F
 
 43.6 °C
110 F
37.6 °C
100 F
29.4 °C
85 F
 
 30.6 °C
87 F
28.4 °C
83 F
28 °C
82 F
 
Maximum: 43.6 °C = 110 F
Average: 34.4 °C = 94 F
39 °C
102 F
44 °C
111 F
40.4 °C
105 F
33 °C
91 F
38.8 °C
102 F
38.8 °C
102 F
29.8 °C
86 F
32.6 °C
91 F
33.4 °C
92 F
Maximum: 44 °C = 111 F
Average: 36.6 °C = 98 F
Power Supply (max.)  38 °C = 100 F | Room Temperature 20.4 °C = 69 F | Fluke 62 Mini IR Thermometer
(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 34.4 °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 43.6 °C / 110 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 44 °C / 111 F, compared to the average of 38.8 °C / 102 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 21.5 °C / 71 F, compared to the device average of 30.9 °C / 88 F.
(+) Playing The Witcher 3, the average temperature for the upper side is 31.1 °C / 88 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 30.6 °C / 87.1 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 (-1.5 °C / -2.7 F).

Speakers

Speakers located towards front corners
Speakers located towards front corners

The 1.5 W stereo Harman Kardon speakers are above average for the size with deeper bass and a wider range than the speakers of the Samsung Notebook 9. Maximum volume is sufficiently loud to fill a small conference room and introduces no static or noticeable distortion. The main issue is that the palm rests will vibrate slightly even when on lower volume settings that some users may find distracting.

Asus UX430UN (Red: System idle, Pink: Pink noise)
Asus UX430UN (Red: System idle, Pink: Pink noise)
Dell XPS 13 9370
Dell XPS 13 9370
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T
dB(A) 0102030405060708090Deep BassMiddle BassHigh BassLower RangeMidsHigher MidsLower HighsMid HighsUpper HighsSuper Highs2036.834.62532.6353131.831.4403131.65031.7306330.429.98029.529.510028.329.312527.428.116028.326.820036.825.825046.825.831552.12540054.32450054.723.363056.723.180060.522.810006122.5125062.322.3160062.922.2200061.722250063.521.8315058.421.6400059.421.6500056.321.5630064.521.5800062.721.31000060.621.31250057.921.21600053.921.3SPL73.234.3N31.32.2median 57.9median 22.3Delta71.535.335.132.931.831.83236.535.132.428.93328.936.328.848.32761.52752.924.860.92462.822.763.32269.521.267.82174.82075.919.472.718.97117.770.117.86917.671.817.668.117.671.417.673.717.670.417.571.617.671.617.669.617.459.717.583.630.662.51.5median 69.6median 17.84.62.4hearing rangehide median Pink NoiseAsus Zenbook UX430UNApple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz
Asus Zenbook UX430UN audio analysis

(-) | not very loud speakers (64.52 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 21.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (12.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.3% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (9.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (22.2% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 75% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 18% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 19%, worst was 41%
Compared to all devices tested
» 57% of all tested devices were better, 8% similar, 36% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

Apple MacBook 12 (Early 2016) 1.1 GHz audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.6 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 11.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (14.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.3% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 1% of all tested devices in this class were better, 1% similar, 97% worse
» The best had a delta of 8%, average was 20%, worst was 50%
Compared to all devices tested
» 1% of all tested devices were better, 0% similar, 98% worse
» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

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

Energy Management

Power Consumption

Idling on desktop will draw anywhere between 3 W and 6 W depending on the Power profile and brightness setting. Medium load as represented by 3DMark 06 will demand about 54 W or around 10 W to 15 W more than many competing 13-inch Ultrabooks. Note that power consumption when running Witcher 3 is slightly lower since GPU Boost and CPU demands are different between Witcher 3 and 3DMark 06.

Power consumption is measurably higher during the first minute or so of stress testing because higher Turbo Boost clock rates are only achievable during this period.

Average power consumption when running both Prime95 and FurMark simultaneously over a 90-second period is 56 W from a small (7.5 x 7.5 x 3.0 cm) AC adapter rated for 65 W. It's worth noting that we recorded a maximum draw of 66 W as shown by our graph below, but this occurred very early in our stress test for a very short period.

Prime95 initiated at the 20s mark. Note that power consumption is highest only for the first 30 seconds or so before tapering down
Prime95 initiated at the 20s mark. Note that power consumption is highest only for the first 30 seconds or so before tapering down
Relatively steady consumption over time when running Witcher 3
Relatively steady consumption over time when running Witcher 3
Power consumption jumps by about 3 W from minimum brightness to maximum brightness
Power consumption jumps by about 3 W from minimum brightness to maximum brightness
Prime95+FurMark initiated at the 20s mark. Note that power consumption tapers off as maximum Turbo Boost is unsustainable
Prime95+FurMark initiated at the 20s mark. Note that power consumption tapers off as maximum Turbo Boost is unsustainable
Power Consumption
Off / Standbydarklight 0.54 / 0.7 Watt
Idledarkmidlight 3 / 5.8 / 6.2 Watt
Load midlight 54.1 / 56.4 Watt
 color bar
Key: min: dark, med: mid, max: light        Metrahit Energy
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
8550U, GeForce MX150, SanDisk SD8SN8U512G1002, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, Toshiba XG5 KXG50ZNV256G, IPS, 3840x2160, 13.3
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
8550U, GeForce MX150, Samsung PM961 MZVLW256HEHP, IPS, 1920x1080, 15
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Micron 1100 MTFDDAV256TBN, IPS, 1920x1080, 14
Huawei MateBook X
7200U, HD Graphics 620, LITEON CB1-SD256, , 2160x1440, 13.3
Microsoft Surface Laptop i5
7200U, HD Graphics 620, Toshiba THNSN0128GTYA, IPS, 2256x1504, 13.5
Asus ZenBook 13 UX331UN
8550U, GeForce MX150, SK Hynix HFS256G39TND-N210A, IPS, 1920x1080, 13.3
Power Consumption
-17%
-42%
8%
-34%
11%
13%
Idle Minimum *
3
4.3
-43%
3.5
-17%
3.3
-10%
4.6
-53%
3.2
-7%
2.2
27%
Idle Average *
5.8
8
-38%
11.3
-95%
6.1
-5%
11
-90%
6.5
-12%
5
14%
Idle Maximum *
6.2
8.1
-31%
14.2
-129%
10.1
-63%
12
-94%
6.8
-10%
8
-29%
Load Average *
54.1
46.6
14%
53.3
1%
24.6
55%
39.5
27%
28.2
48%
33
39%
Load Maximum *
56.4
49.8
12%
56.2
-0%
22
61%
34.6
39%
36
36%
49.4
12%
Witcher 3 ultra *
45.9
50.6
-10%

* ... smaller is better

Battery Life

Runtimes from the non-removable 50 Wh battery are respectable at about 9 hours of real-world WLAN use on the Balanced profile setting or even longer for simpler tasks. Results are unsurprisingly comparable to Asus' other 14-inch Ultrabook, the ZenBook UX490, while being a bit better than the XPS 13 and its higher resolution 4K UHD display.

Charging from near empty to full capacity is very slow on the UX430 at about 3 hours with the included AC adapter. In comparison, most notebooks take only 1.5 to 2 hours to charge.

Battery Runtime
Idle (without WLAN, min brightness)
17h 19min
NBC WiFi Websurfing Battery Test 1.3
9h 20min
Load (maximum brightness)
1h 38min
Asus Zenbook UX430UN
8550U, GeForce MX150, 50 Wh
Dell XPS 13 9370 i5 UHD
8250U, UHD Graphics 620, 52 Wh
Samsung Notebook 9 NP900X5T-X01US
8550U, GeForce MX150, 75 Wh
Asus Zenbook 3 Deluxe UX490UA
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 46 Wh
Huawei MateBook X
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 40 Wh
Microsoft Surface Laptop i5
7200U, HD Graphics 620, 45 Wh
Battery Runtime
-12%
39%
18%
-9%
22%
Reader / Idle
1039
869
-16%
1810
74%
1032
-1%
512
-51%
1351
30%
WiFi v1.3
560
408
-27%
635
13%
562
0%
337
-40%
602
8%
Load
98
106
8%
127
30%
153
56%
162
65%
124
27%

Pros

+ crisp IPS matte display; good contrast levels
+ accessible internals; upgradeable M.2 SSD
+ Great core specifications for the price
+ attractive and slim design
+ respectable battery life
+ full-size SD card reader
+ decent speakers

Cons

- display backlight could be brighter; poor outdoor visibility
- Discrete MX150 tends to throttle below base clock rate
- pulse-width modulation on nearly all brightness levels
- Inserted SD card protrudes by over half its length
- no touchscreen, glossy, or 4K UHD options
- soft keyboard keys with shallow travel
- no Thunderbolt 3 or full-size HDMI
- soft clickpad with poor feedback
- RAM is not upgradeable
- slow battery charging
- no NVMe SSD options
- lid can feel flimsy

Verdict

In review: Asus ZenBook UX430UN
In review: Asus ZenBook UX430UN

The positives don't outweigh the longer list of negatives on the UX430. The few standout features are the crisp matte display and thin design, but nearly everything else is average at best or unremarkable. Brightness is dimmer than competing Ultrabooks, the chassis is comparatively more flexible, the trackpad is soft, and the keyboard keys could have been firmer. When diving deeper into the hardware, it is disappointing to find coil whine and a throttling GPU that is unable to sustain even its base clock rate over time.

The main advantage of the UX430UN is its price of $1200. Its specifications are impressive with an 8th gen Core i7 CPU, 16 GB of RAM, 512 GB SSD, and even dedicated GeForce Pascal graphics. A system with comparable specifications like the Samsung NP900X5T or Spectre x360 15 retail for hundreds more each and even the XPS 13 begins at $1000 USD with just a fraction of the core specifications. From this perspective, the UX430UN can be considered excellent value for the performance so long as users are aware of its laundry list of drawbacks.

Great specs for a great price. The actual hardware, however, could use improvement on nearly all fronts to better compete in the 4-digit price range. We hope to see a more rigid design and a brighter display for improved outdoor usability in future iterations.

Asus Zenbook UX430UN - 03/23/2018 v6(old)
Allen Ngo

Chassis
70 / 98 → 71%
Keyboard
74%
Pointing Device
75%
Connectivity
46 / 81 → 57%
Weight
71 / 20-67 → 100%
Battery
92%
Display
88%
Games Performance
72 / 85 → 85%
Application Performance
88 / 92 → 95%
Temperature
90%
Noise
88 / 95 → 93%
Audio
70%
Camera
45 / 85 → 53%
Average
75%
83%
Multimedia - Weighted Average

Pricecompare

Read all 10 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 UX430UN (i7-8550U, GeForce MX150) Laptop Review
Allen Ngo, 2018-03-24 (Update: 2019-03-20)
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.