Evaluation
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Gamut, brightness and deviation
We measured the image properties of the display using the Datacolor Spyder5Elite probe. It is a 15.6″ IPS display with a 4K resolution in a 16:9 aspect ratio (3840 × 2160 px) and 60 Hz. It can also boast of 100% AdobeRGB coverage or Pantone Validated certification. It does not even lack G-Sync. This panel is the highest in offer and is focused mainly on graphic artists, designers, etc. For players, a 300 Hz Full HD panel will be more suitable.
The display pleases with thin frames on three sides, although the lower bezel is relatively large, due to the square shape of the notebook. 4K resolution is extremely sharp at 15 inches and even impractical for normal use. However, designers and graphic artists will certainly appreciate the sharpness of the image. High definition will also be a big tax on fps if you want to play in native resolution.
Although the 4K display is not entirely suitable for gamers, it cannot be denied that it is really great. 100% AdobeRGB coverage has been confirmed thus more than 100% sRGB is expected. Thanks to the probe, we also know about 93% DCI-P3 and 99% NTSC. Gamma is at level 2.3 with a small deviation and the maximum brightness attacks the limit of 400 nits. The uniformity of the display, whether of colors or backlighting, is also very good, with only small deviations in the right part of the tested piece. We measured great values in color deviation or accuracy. Delta-E has an average value of 0.92 and a maximum of only 1.78. These are really great parameters, because Delta-E under 2 is rated as an ideal value for design work.
The ROG GameVisual application is used to control the display, where you can switch between several modes or adjust the color parameters accordingly.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Encrypting, encoding
In encryption, the Zephyrus with the new Ci9 is 45% faster than the HP Omen X 2S and 31% faster than the G14 with Renoir. The differences in decryption are a bit lower at 33 and 21%, but it’s still a big lead for the new Zephyrus.
Working with videos shows a big 23% difference in favor of the new Ci9 in Zephyrus compared to HP. However, a sibling with AMD passed this test well with only a 6% loss. In H.265, the differences have deepened further and there is a 25% difference between the i9 and AMD is 10% behind.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Memory and disk tests
The memory speed does not differ significantly from other models, only the low latency was surprising, which is 13% lower than with the HP dual-display notebook and up to 44% lower compared to the G14.
SSD speed is one of the best we have been able to measure so far.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Heating and battery life
The maximum CPU and GPU temperatures are not among the lowest, but it should be noted that in this case it was more or less fluctuations in the maximum boost time and then the temperature dropped to lower values, which we will show in a moment when we compare modes and extended Blender tests.
The battery life, which is over 3 hours, was a pleasant surprise which is not really a habit with ultra-powerful gaming machines. After all, the Omen X 2S didn’t even manage 2 hours… With the second display turned off, less brightness and office work, you could get to 5 hours, but it’s definitely not an ultrabook with 10 hours of endurance.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Blender – CPU and GPU comparison
We are introducing a new type of test in which we want to show you the differences between CPU and GPU rendering and at the same time take a closer look at thermal management, clock speed and consumption in practice and not just maximum or average values as in the previous sections.
So, we compare the run of the BMW test in the latest version of Blender, where in addition to the classic CPU and GPU render using CUDA, we also have the opportunity to use the new Nvidia OptiX, which uses new hardware resources of RTX graphics cards. While CUDA works with shaders, OptiX also uses RT cores and tensor cores for acceleration. Such a more complex involvement of computing units brings higher performance and efficiency is at a better level. At the same time, the application support is already quite decent and advanced. For an overview of the editors supported by the Optix API, see the Nvidia website. Nvidia is serious about this interface and has been developing “studio” drivers for some time, in addition to game drivers which are better and faster optimized for changes in supported applications.
In the first graph, you’re looking at the progress of the CPU clock speed during rendering. The classic CPU mode starts somewhere around 4500 MHz and decreases towards 3700 MHz which is expected due to temperatures and power limitations. With CUDA, you can see a large drop to 2200 MHz, but then a return to 4.5 GHz+. But the most interesting is Optix, where there is practically no drop in power and the clock speed is kept between 4.5 – 4.7 GHz.
The CPU Package consumption more or less corresponds to what you saw in this clock speed. CPU render starts with a high value and then decreases as we are limited by power/temperature and power reduction protects the processor from damage. In CUDA mode, the decrease is repeated, which also meant a reduction in clock speed. In the process, however, there is a difference of 30 W. However, OptiX is somewhere completely different, with 40 W consumption is many times lower than the other two modes.
Processor temperatures will be based on the previous two graphs and thus clock and consumption. The CPU thus stays above 90 degrees with slight drops. Using CUDA, the CPU still works, but not so much and lower temperatures below 90 degrees could be expected. However, not really an extra large difference can be seen. Conversely, in OptiX mode, temperatures are again significantly lower than in the other two. Here, however, I think that the values are slightly distorted, as the cooling system will be overheated by the graphics, which will be reflected in the higher temperature of the processor, as their cooling is interconnected.
The load on the graphics in CPU mode is practically minimal, on the contrary, in CUDA and OptiX you can see the full load.
The load also corresponds to the clock speed, where it is interesting that with the OptiX they climbed up to almost 2 GHz, which is really unprecedented in notebooks, especially in the Max-Q versions. In CUDA we are some 200 MHz lower and the CPU mode is, of course, at a minimum as the GPU is not used.
The consumption of the graphics card copies the load and clock graphs, so the CUDA and OptiX modes take around 90 W and in the CPU mode it takes practically nothing.
Finally, a look at GPU temperatures. With the CPU mode, the effect of influencing the second component by uniform cooling is again present. A large part of the chip works in CUDA and therefore the temperature rises to 75 degrees. On the contrary, with OptiX it does not reach even 65 °C and the temperature curve itself is less steep. This is logical, as a smaller part of the die is used, which does not create such a load.
Most important, however, is the final time, where OptiX clearly won, which is almost 20 seconds faster than CUDA, which is a 43% increase in speed. The CPU mode is an order of magnitude slower, compared to OptiX up to 5× and compared to CUDA 3.5×.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Power modes
The notebook offers the option to choose from Silent, Performance and Turbo power modes via ROG Armoury Crate.
All the tests were done in Turbo, but it’s worth looking at what differences the individual modes offer. You will definitely not expect some results. Again, we compare the same parameters, but this time in 3DMark in the Fire Strike benchmark.
The clock speed of the processor immediately shows an interesting development. In Turbo mode, there is a large drop from 4.5 to about 3.1 GHz. Other modes hold between 4.3 – 4.5 GHz and also note that Performance has a more stable curve and smaller drops than Silent mode.
Consumption more or less corresponds to the clock, and therefore Performance has it slightly higher than the Silent mode and Turbo again shows a drop as in clock speed.
Interestingly, despite the higher clock and consumption, the temperatures are lower in Performance mode, which is caused by a more aggressive fan curve. Due to the lower clock and consumption, the Turbo also has logically lower temperatures by about 20 degrees Celsius.
How’s the graphics card? No differences in the load as with Blender, as it is always working at full speed.
When looking at the clock speeds, however, there is a real difference between the modes. The Turbo literally demolishes the Performance mode and that again demolishes the Silent mode. The differences in clock speed are obvious, roughly around 200-300 MHz, which is certainly not negligible. I’m especially shocked by the high clock speed in Turbo mode, as it’s still a GPU in the Max-Q version.
Consumption corresponds to the clock speed and is therefore the highest in Turbo mode, lower in the Performance setting and lowest in the Silent setting. The differences are about 20 – 30W.
A surprise is heating, where one would expect the Turbo mode to be the worst, but due to the high fan speeds and the sound of a jet engine, the temperatures are lower than the Silent and Performance modes, which are very similar.
In the graphs we saw an interesting transfer of power from CPU to GPU in Turbo mode and practically identical Silent and Performance modes, where Silent is considerably limited for the purpose of quiet operation. But how do these modes really affect performance? In Fire Strike, there are always about 2000 – 2500 points between modes, which corresponds to a 15% difference. This is really interesting when you consider that you can get a third of the extra power from the Silent to the Turbo just by changing the mode. The tax is, of course, higher noise, but the flexibility of Zephyrus is very interesting.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
ROG Armoury Crate
The already known ROG Armoury Crate application is used to control the settings.
Here you can switch between performance modes, monitor the status of the processor and graphics, activate quick functions or create profiles. There is no lack of backlight or display controls, performance monitoring or game library control.
You will also find recommended applications, game sales or the opportunity to get games for free, in this case a bundle of Dying Light titles.
The application is also used to update drivers and there is also the option to link the application with a smartphone.
The G-Sync settings, which can be turned off, as well as the ability to customize the dashboard need to be highlighted.
We owe you the second part of the tests for Zephyrus Duo. In addition to encryption, encoding, tests of memory and SSDs, this article provides detailed performance evaluation under Nvidia OptiX interface, display measurements, and most importantly, an in-depth analysis of operational characteristics. Heating, power and clock management are captured for the first time in detailed flowcharts across all modes (Turbo, Performance and Silent).
Evaluation
Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo 15 GX550LXS is the best thing you can get in a laptop right now. Sure, there are special models with desktop components, but they are often not as tuned and sleek as a notebook designed from the beginning as a notebook and not a kind of hybrid. Zephyrus Duo 15 is definitely the best and most interesting gaming notebook that has ever come into my hands and it will probably stay that way for a while. The revolutionary solution of two displays is still a rarity so far and the unique cooling is also uncommon. When you add maximum notebook performance, apart from Ryzen processors, it’s hard to find a more capable machine for work and play. This was confirmed by performance tests and in-depth analyses of performance curves.
The great display deserves praise, although, as already mentioned, the 300 Hz FHD model will be more suitable for gamers. The connectivity is not left behind, nor is the external, but a better quality webcam. Negatives are hard to find, leaving only one aspect. As you can probably guess, all these premium functions and manufacturing cost something and in this case it is 4539 euros or 122 990 CZK, which are the official prices for the tested version. It is definitely not a bagatelle, nor is it a common price tag for an ordinary customer. However, the Zephyrus Duo 15 is definitely not a regular laptop, nor does it target the mainstream. Those for whom it is intended can afford it…
You can buy this laptop from our partner czc.cz for 122 990 CZK/4539 euros
| Asus ROG Zephyrus Duo GX550 |
| + extreme performance of CPU and GPU |
| + surprisingly bearable weight |
| + high build quality |
| + very good display for graphic work |
| + good port selection |
| + charging also via USB-C with a compact charger |
| + unique secondary display with many functions |
| + sophisticated cooling and power modes |
| + rich packaging |
| - high price |
| - uneven keyboard backlighting |
English translation and edit by Lukáš Terényi