Asus GX700 Notebook Review
Working For Notebookcheck
Are you a loyal reader of notebookcheck? Are you a techie who knows how to write? Then join our Team!
Especially wanted:
News Editor, Review Editor (Smartphones)- Details here
News Editor, Review Editor (Smartphones)- Details here
Case
See our Top 10 Notebooks:
» Multimedia, » Gaming, » Lightweight Gaming
» Budget Office, » Business, » Workstations
» Subnotebooks, » Utrabooks, » Convertibles
» Budget Office, » Business, » Workstations
» Subnotebooks, » Utrabooks, » Convertibles
» Top 10 under 300 Euros, » under 500 Euros
» Best Notebooks for University Students
» Top Windows alternatives to Apple's MacBook series
» Best Notebook Displays
» Best Notebooks for University Students
» Top Windows alternatives to Apple's MacBook series
» Best Notebook Displays
Top 10 Tablets / Smartphones:
The gaming machine is anything but a lightweight. The 17-inch device already tips the scale at 3.9 kilograms without the water-cooling. This is roughly on par with the MSI GT72S 6QF at 3.8 kilograms, but the latter is considerably thicker (4.8 vs. 3.8 centimeters). The 4.2 kg P775DM1 barebone and the 5.0 kg P870M barebone are even worse when you have to carry them around. However, you will definitely be limited to the desk with the water-cooling. Asus does ship the GX700 in a black travel suitcase – yes, you read it correctly – but the transport is no joy with the 330-Watt PSU (1.2 kg) and the Overclocking System (4.6 kg), especially since some desktop PCs are actually lighter.
The design of the GX700 is closely related to the 17-inch sibling G752, which got 89% (very good) in our review with the Core i7-6700HQ and GeForce GTX 970M. Thanks to the bright color scheme, which we would describe as a mixture between silver and champagne, the chassis subjectively does not attract as much dirt as many competitors. The only exception is the rubberized palm rest, which is susceptible to fingerprints. The quality of the materials is above-average as well, because Asus uses metal for the lid and the most part of the top of the base-unit. We were not quite that satisfied with the bottom of the chassis. The latter is only made of plastic and pretty prone to scratches, which affects the overall impression.
Whether you like the design of the GX700 or not is a matter of taste. Except for the line pattern at the bottom and the area between the macro keys and the power buttons, we think that Asus did a nice job. The verdict on the stability is similar: Base-unit and lid cannot really be twisted or pushed in even with a lot of pressure, but it was annoying that the keyboard was very soft and therefore imprecise at some points.
Asus could also improve the build quality. Some elements of the test model did not sit flush, and the display frame did not sit correctly on the panel everywhere. Those issues are perhaps a result of the pre-production status, but the sharp port covers are a result of the construction and should also be an issue for the final product. A maximum opening angle of 130 degrees on the other hand is acceptable in our opinion.
A few more words about the water-cooling, whose mechanism is extremely simple. Just put the notebook on the corresponding area, push a lever and you are good to go. Water damage would be more complicated. Will Asus simply replace the device or will they try to put it on the customer (improper handling)?
Connectivity
Ports
There is not much criticism for the ports. The space for the mouse can be slightly affected by the location at the side, but the GX700 does leave a good impression otherwise. Asus not only integrates three USB 3.0 ports to be future-proof but also a USB 3.1 Type-C port as well as a Thunderbolt 3 port. External monitors can either be attached via HDMI or the Mini-DisplayPort. An RJ45-Ethernet port and the slot for a Kensington lock are obviously available as well.
Card Reader
Maintenance
One of the biggest drawbacks is the limited maintainability. Yes, you could access all the internals in theory, but it will take time. First, you have to loosen 12 screws at the bottom, which are also covered by rubberized covers (sharp tool necessary). But be advised: You will probably damage the chassis if you just remove the bottom cover next, because there are two more screws in the area of the connectors for the water-cooling. We are not sure why, but Asus located them underneath the cover for the hinge.
Once you have completed the whole process, you get access to almost every component. Starting with the wireless module, the battery (screwed), the processor, the graphics card (both soldered) up to the cooling system including fans. You will also find two DDR4-RAM modules and one M.2 slot. The other memory slots and the secondary SSD slot are located underneath the keyboard.
Software
Accessories
Our review unit was not shipped with all the accessories. We not only missed the 180-Watt power adapter but also a driver DVD and a manual or a quick-start guide, respectively. The previously mentioned 330-Watt PSU is very bulky at 20 x 10 x 4 centimeters. Asus will ship the GX700 with an optical mouse in return.
Warranty
The warranty period is 24 months (Pickup-&-Return service).
Input Devices
Display
Discussion
Despite or perhaps because of the lacking 4K support, we were pretty convinced by the display. It starts with the luminance at around 320 cd/m², which surpasses the notebook average of 250-300 cd/m². The contrast deserves respect as well: Almost 980:1 is an excellent result that is only beaten by a couple of laptops. Not quite as good is the brightness illumination of the GX700. The 17-inch device manages 93% on paper, but we noticed backlight bleeding at the edges with a dark picture, which should not be a problem when you pay around 4,000 Euros (~$4363).
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
X-Rite i1Pro 2
Maximum: 332 cd/m² Average: 318.6 cd/m²Brightness Distribution: 93 %
Center on Battery: 332 cd/m²
Contrast: 976:1 (Black: 0.34 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 5.35 | - Ø
ΔE Greyscale 6.45 | - Ø
85% sRGB (Argyll) 56% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll)
Gamma: 2.34
| Asus GX700 LP173WF4-SPF3 (LGD04E8) | MSI GT72S 6QF Name: LG Philips LP173WF4-SPF1, ID: LGD0469 | Schenker XMG U726 AU B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B) | Schenker XMG U716 AU B173ZAN01.0 (AUO109B) | Schenker XMG U706 LG LP173WF4-SPD1 | Schenker XMG P706 LG LP173WF4-SPD1 | Asus G752VT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response Times |
-24%
|
-25%
|
-3%
| ||||
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * |
37
|
43
-16%
|
45
-22%
|
30.4
18%
| |||
| Response Time Black / White * |
22
|
29
-32%
|
28
-27%
|
27.2
-24%
| |||
| PWM Frequency | |||||||
| Screen |
16%
|
17%
|
12%
|
9%
|
2%
|
9%
| |
| Brightness |
319
|
326
2%
|
327
3%
|
356
12%
|
287
-10%
|
302
-5%
|
339
6%
|
| Brightness Distribution |
93
|
85
-9%
|
86
-8%
|
88
-5%
|
91
-2%
|
90
-3%
|
89
-4%
|
| Black Level * |
0.34
|
0.282
17%
|
0.38
-12%
|
0.4
-18%
|
0.305
10%
|
0.34
-0%
|
0.366
-8%
|
| Contrast |
976
|
1265
30%
|
868
-11%
|
935
-4%
|
977
0%
|
900
-8%
|
976
0%
|
| Colorchecker DeltaE2000 * |
5.35
|
4.16
22%
|
3
44%
|
4.23
21%
|
4.16
22%
|
5.49
-3%
|
3.69
31%
|
| Greyscale DeltaE2000 * |
6.45
|
2.47
62%
|
3.81
41%
|
5.48
15%
|
3.13
51%
|
3.97
38%
|
3.05
53%
|
| Gamma |
2.34 103%
|
2.29 105%
|
2.52 95%
|
2.35 102%
|
2.26 106%
|
2.15 112%
|
2.21109%
|
| CCT |
7048 92%
|
6860 95%
|
6306 103%
|
6686 97%
|
6213 105%
|
6163 105%
|
6164105%
|
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) |
56
|
56
0%
|
88
57%
|
88
57%
|
55.5
-1%
|
55.5
-1%
|
55
-2%
|
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) |
85
|
85
0%
|
100
18%
|
100
18%
|
84.5
-1%
|
84.5
-1%
|
84
-1%
|
| Total Average (Program / Settings) |
-4% / 8%
|
17% / 17%
|
-7% / 5%
|
9% / 9%
|
2% / 2%
|
3% / 7%
|
* ... smaller is better
All things considered, the manufacturer selected a good display. If you want even better results, you should have a look at the MSI GT72S 6QF. The biggest color-space coverage is currently provided by the 4K panel of the Clevo P870DM and P775DM1, respectively (88% AdobeRGB).
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 22 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 18 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. » 13 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (27.9 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 37 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 14 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 23 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 250 (maximum) ms. » 29 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (43.3 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 58 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 495 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 10420) Hz was measured.
| |||
Performance
Megalomania or wise investment? Asus does not make any compromises in respect of the components. 64 GB DDR4 RAM (4x 16 GB @2400 MHz) is just as huge as the two M.2 SSDs with a total capacity of 1,000 GB. An overclocked Skylake processor and Nvidia's most powerful laptop GPU complete the high-quality package.
Processor
The key feature of the GX700, however, is the overclocking of the Core i7-6820HK to 4.0 GHz. It does not matter if we look at Cinebench or Unigine Heaven 4.0: Our tools always indicated 4.0 GHz. The additional overclocking of the 17-inch device is always active as long as you don't stress it with torture tools like Prime95.
The results in the CPU tests are accordingly very high: Cinebench R15 determines 875 and 173 points, which means the Core i7-6820HK is on par with the desktop sibling Core i7-6700K. The scores will be around 20% lower without the additional overclocking (MSI GT72S 6QF, Schenker XMG P706) and fall behind the Core i7-6700 (XMG U726, XMG U716). For comparison: The Core i7-6700HQ inside the Asus G752VT only managed 680 and 136 points.
| Cinebench R15 | |
| CPU Single 64Bit (sort by value) | |
| Asus GX700 | |
| MSI GT72S 6QF | |
| Schenker XMG U726 | |
| Schenker XMG U716 | |
| Schenker XMG U706 | |
| Schenker XMG P706 | |
| Asus G752VT | |
| CPU Multi 64Bit (sort by value) | |
| Asus GX700 | |
| MSI GT72S 6QF | |
| Schenker XMG U726 | |
| Schenker XMG U716 | |
| Schenker XMG U706 | |
| Schenker XMG P706 | |
| Asus G752VT | |
System Performance
While the MSI GT72S 6QF and the Schenker XMG U716 were the previous record holders in the system tests, this position is now filled by the Asus GX700. 7933 points in PCMark results in a difference of around 10%. The great result benefits from the extremely fast Solid State Drives in particular.
| PCMark 7 Score |
| 7933 points |
| PCMark 8 Home Score Accelerated v2 |
| 5669 points |
| PCMark 8 Creative Score Accelerated v2 |
| 8162 points |
| PCMark 8 Work Score Accelerated v2 |
| 6122 points |
Help
Storage Devices
Asus equips the review unit with two M.2 SSDs in a RAID-0 array. The Samsung SM951 is known for its excellent performance and therefore a popular choice for gaming notebooks. The table below shows that Schenker also uses the modern PCIe- or NVMe-technology besides Asus.
While smaller files can hardly benefit from a RAID configuration, the transfer speeds of larger files are much higher compared to a single-SSD solution. 2963 MB/S for sequential reads and 2524 MB/s for sequential writes (AS SSD benchmark) would have been unimaginable during the HDD-era. Conventional Solid State Drives with the SATA-III interface cannot keep up in a direct comparison either (up to 500-550 MB/s).
The GX700 is subjectively very responsive. Boot times, loading times and file transfers can fully meet the high expectations. You could only criticize the lack of a 2.5-inch tray, which is usually available in the majority of notebooks.
| Asus GX700 2x Samsung SM951 MZVPV512HDGL (RAID 0) | MSI GT72S 6QF 2x Micron M600 MTFDDAV128MBF NVMe (RAID 0) | Schenker XMG U726 Samsung SM951 MZHPV512HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Schenker XMG U716 Samsung SM951 MZHPV512HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Schenker XMG U706 Samsung SM951 MZVPV512HDGL m.2 PCI-e | Schenker XMG P706 Samsung SM951 MZHPV512HDGL m.2 PCI-e | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD |
-24%
|
-30%
|
-30%
|
-16%
|
-32%
| |
| Score Total |
3655
|
2568
-30%
|
1930
-47%
|
1910
-48%
|
2630
-28%
|
2278
-38%
|
| 4K Write |
119.63
|
97.82
-18%
|
103.57
-13%
|
102.76
-14%
|
141.74
18%
|
95.25
-20%
|
| 4K Read |
46.43
|
42.98
-7%
|
40.45
-13%
|
40.86
-12%
|
48.99
6%
|
39.93
-14%
|
| Seq Write |
2524.75
|
1279.19
-49%
|
1500.24
-41%
|
1515.63
-40%
|
1491.98
-41%
|
1272.66
-50%
|
| Seq Read |
2963.6
|
2543.81
-14%
|
1943.45
-34%
|
1941.51
-34%
|
1963.39
-34%
|
1862.83
-37%
|
GPU Performance
The GeForce GTX 980 from Nvidia finally closes the performance gap between desktop and notebook chips. The new top model is extremely expensive, but the performance is excellent and it is currently unrivaled in the mobile sector. 2048 shaders is 33% more compared to the previous notebook champion GTX 980M (1536 CUDA cores). The memory clock is also much higher at 3500 vs. 2500 MHz, but the amount of GDDR5 VRAM did not change. This is not surprising though, 8 GB and 256-bit are sufficient even for the most demanding games.
| 3DMark 11 Performance |
| 15462 points |
| 3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score |
| 179732 points |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score |
| 30430 points |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score |
| 11440 points |
Help
Thanks to the water-cooling, the core can always maintain its maximum clock: 1228 MHz is not always managed by the competition (GT72S 6QF, XMG U716/U726), which also explains the small lead in the GPU benchmarks in combination with the overclocked CPU. 11440 points in the Fire Strike test of the current 3DMark is a couple of percent ahead of the notebooks from Schenker and MSI. However, you will not notice a difference in practice, both benchmarks and games are subjectively similarly fast.
The GTX 980 is based on the Maxwell architecture, which is manufactured in a 28 nm process. The GX700 does not support switchable graphics due to the G-Sync technology. The notebook could switch to the Intel HD Graphics 530 and manage longer battery runtimes with theOptimus technology.
| 3DMark | |
| 3840x2160 Fire Strike Ultra Score (sort by value) | |
| Asus GX700 | |
| Schenker XMG U726 | |
| Schenker XMG U716 | |
| 1920x1080 Fire Strike Score (sort by value) | |
| Asus GX700 | |
| MSI GT72S 6QF | |
| Schenker XMG U726 | |
| Schenker XMG U716 | |
| Schenker XMG U706 | |
| Schenker XMG P706 | |
| Asus G752VT | |
Gaming Performance
Star Wars Battlefront refused to work with the preloaded GPU driver (ForceWare 354.43), so we used the brand-new version 361.43 for the gaming benchmarks. All the tested games worked without problems with this version. The GX700 does not really have problems with the native resolution of 1920x1080 pixels and maximum details. Only Assassin's Creed Syndicate and Anno 2205 did not surpass 35 fps at the highest setting. The other titles on the other hand ran very smoothly.
The situation is a bit more complicated in 4K with 3840x2160 pixels, because even a high-end chip like the GeForce GTX 980 will reach its limits. More than 50 fps is hardly possible at high details, but frame rates are usually between 30 and 40 fps.
| low | med. | high | ultra | 4K | ||
| Anno 2205 (2015) | 168.2 | 156.2 | 103.1 | 34.2 | 41 | fps |
| Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 (2015) | 184.1 | 179.7 | 103.8 | 92.7 | 35.7 | fps |
| Fallout 4 (2015) | 195.2 | 173.4 | 99.8 | 80.8 | 34.4 | fps |
| Star Wars Battlefront (2015) | 200 | 199.2 | 123.6 | 103.9 | 40.7 | fps |
| Assassin's Creed Syndicate (2015) | 96.3 | 94.6 | 78.4 | 32.3 | 28.6 | fps |
| Rainbow Six Siege (2015) | 327.5 | 247.7 | 149.4 | 114.1 | 50.4 | fps |
| Just Cause 3 (2015) | 168.1 | 157.4 | 100.6 | 87 | 38.2 | fps |
Still, the GX700 can even beat our similarly equipped desktop PC (Core i7-6700K & GeForce GTX 980), which is the basis for our gaming articles, depending on the game. The main reason should be the bigger amount of video memory (8 vs. 4 GB). If you are wondering about the pretty good results in Anno 2205: The performance is much better since patch 1.2, so the older benchmarks fall behind noticeably. More information and performance comparisons of the GTX 980 are available in our GPU review.
Just Cause 3 | Rainbow Six Siege | Star Wars Battlefront | Assassin's Creed Syndicate | Fallout 4 | Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 | Anno 2205
| Just Cause 3 | |
| 3840x2160 High / On AA:FX AF:8x (sort by value) | |
| Asus GX700 | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 (Reference) | |
| Schenker W504 | |
| Schenker W504 | |
| 1920x1080 Very High / On AA:SM AF:16x (sort by value) | |
| Asus GX700 | |
| Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 (Reference) | |
| Schenker W504 | |
| Schenker W504 | |
Emissions
System Noise
Another issue is the system noise while idling. The water-cooling still creates 33-35 dB(A) even when you don't stress it. The rivals are on a similar level, but the noise of our review unit is a pretty annoying humming. The unnecessary pulsating with light workloads (sometimes more than 40 dB(A)) is annoying as well, especially since the products from MSI and Clevo are less affected. It would be nice if Asus would put more work into the fan control and the acoustics of the water-cooling and/or release an according BIOS update.
Noise Level
| Idle |
33 / 35 / 42 dB(A)
| ||||
| Load | 46 / 48 dB(A) | ||||
 | |||||
30 dB
silent
40 dB(A)
audible
50 dB(A)
loud | |||||
min:
 , med:  , max:  Audix TM1 (15 cm distance) | |||||
| Asus GX700 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | MSI GT72S 6QF GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | Schenker XMG U726 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U716 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6700K | Schenker XMG P706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK | Asus G752VT GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noise |
5%
|
7%
|
2%
|
14%
|
11%
|
11%
| |
| Idle Minimum * |
33
|
33.1
-0%
|
33
-0%
|
33
-0%
|
29
12%
|
30.9
6%
|
32.9
-0%
|
| Idle Average * |
35
|
33.3
5%
|
34
3%
|
35
-0%
|
30.8
12%
|
31.2
11%
|
33
6%
|
| Idle Maximum * |
42
|
37
12%
|
35
17%
|
38
10%
|
30.8
27%
|
31.2
26%
|
33.1
21%
|
| Load Average * |
46
|
39
15%
|
42
9%
|
45
2%
|
42.1
8%
|
40.5
12%
|
36.2
21%
|
| Load Maximum * |
48
|
52.2
-9%
|
46
4%
|
48
-0%
|
43.5
9%
|
47
2%
|
45.8
5%
|
* ... smaller is better
Temperature
| Asus GX700 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | MSI GT72S 6QF GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | Schenker XMG U726 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U716 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6700K | Schenker XMG P706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK | Asus G752VT GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heat |
16%
|
-5%
|
-8%
|
-2%
|
6%
|
12%
| |
| Maximum Upper Side * |
48.7
|
39.8
18%
|
46.9
4%
|
48.8
-0%
|
45.6
6%
|
44
10%
|
37.6
23%
|
| Idle Upper Side * |
32
|
27.8
13%
|
36.3
-13%
|
36.7
-15%
|
34.9
-9%
|
31.7
1%
|
31.6
1%
|
| Maximum Bottom * |
49
|
61
|
55.8
|
52.4
|
42.3
|
38
| |
| Idle Bottom * |
26
|
40.8
|
37.3
|
36.3
|
29.9
|
30.6
|
* ... smaller is better
Speakers
Asus integrates a total of four speakers; some of them are next to the keyboard and some at the front of the notebook. Even though the sound quality cannot keep up with the MSI GT72F and Clevo P870DM, the GX700 still sounds better than the majority of notebooks. We still have some wishes for the successor. For starters, the 4.0 system could be more powerful. Up to 73 dB(A) Pink and White noise is quite low in comparison and suggests an all-round laptop. The maximum volume of the GX700 is not sufficient for bigger rooms. We also miss a subwoofer, which would add more powerful bass.
Energy Management
Power Consumption
The power consumption is very high, which is not least caused by the water-cooling. Despite the notebook CPU, the GX700 consumes more power in some scenarios than the Clevo barebones P755DM1 and P870M, even though they are equipped with desktop processors. Almost 149 Watts in the first scene of 3DMark06 and up to 313 Watts under maximum load remind us of a full-fledged PC. The Schenker XMG U716 and the XMG U726 consume a couple of percent less. The GX700 is not frugal while idling (40-51 Watts) either. Optimus notebooks like the Schenker XMG P706 hardly consume more than 20 Watts in this scenario.
Power Consumption
| Off / Standby | 0.6 / 2.4 Watt |
| Idle | 40 / 45 / 51 Watt |
| Load | 149 / 313 Watt |
    | |
| Key: min: , med: , max: Metrahit Energy | |
| Asus GX700 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | MSI GT72S 6QF GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | Schenker XMG U726 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U716 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6700K | Schenker XMG P706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK | Asus G752VT GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power Consumption |
3%
|
6%
|
31%
|
52%
| |||
| Idle Minimum * |
40
|
36
10%
|
35
12%
|
22
45%
|
12
70%
| ||
| Idle Average * |
45
|
45
-0%
|
44
2%
|
28.9
36%
|
17.9
60%
| ||
| Idle Maximum * |
51
|
53
-4%
|
51
-0%
|
29.8
42%
|
19.3
62%
| ||
| Load Average * |
149
|
139
7%
|
134
10%
|
126.8
15%
|
97.7
34%
| ||
| Load Maximum * |
313
|
306
2%
|
298
5%
|
261.6
16%
|
213
32%
|
* ... smaller is better
Battery Runtime
The lack of switchable graphics affects the battery runtimes in particular, which were obviously determined without the water-cooling. Almost 1.5 hours in the Battery Eater Classic Test (high load @100% brightness) and 3.5 hours in the Reader's Test (low load @0% brightness) are similar to the Clevo barebones P870DM and P775DM1. The most enduring GTX 980 notebook is the MSI GT72S 6QF, which can last up to 6.5 hours under perfect conditions. Users of the GX700 can expect around two hours during the playback of an HD video, which is not sufficient for a Hollywood blockbuster.
Battery Runtime
| Idle (without WLAN, min brightness) |
| 3h 21min |
| Big Buck Bunny H.264 1080p |
| 2h 16min |
| Load (maximum brightness) |
| 1h 28min |
| Asus GX700 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | MSI GT72S 6QF GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6820HK | Schenker XMG U726 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U716 GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop), 6700 | Schenker XMG U706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6700K | Schenker XMG P706 GeForce GTX 980M, 6820HK | Asus G752VT GeForce GTX 970M, 6700HQ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Battery Runtime |
47%
|
-4%
|
-11%
|
6%
|
40%
|
-2%
| |
| Reader / Idle |
201
|
387
93%
|
170
-15%
|
158
-21%
|
245
22%
|
297
48%
|
230
14%
|
| Load |
88
|
89
1%
|
94
7%
|
88
0%
|
69
-22%
|
97
10%
|
72
-18%
|
| H.264 |
136
|
161
18%
|
220
62%
|
Verdict
Asus GX700 - 02/24/2016 v5
Florian Glaser
Florian Glaser
Gaming - Weighted Average
لا يوجد تعليقات
أضف تعليق