How does that make sense :Asus ZenBook Pro UX501 is $1000 cheaper but has better specs than mbp2015

[koyoot]

So, you are saying that GM107 in mobile with lower voltages, and lower clocks, has higher power consumption than desktop part with higher voltages and clocks?

Edit, yeah, Ive checked the GTX960M. It looks like the TDP is shown of max potential power draw from PCIe bus, which is apparently 75W.

However, the desktop part has 60W TDP and mobile parts are more often better binned parts, so they have to have smaller power consumption.

 

[SHEEPOS]

I would not go that far with power consumption. should be within 35-45W power draw envelope. And by looking at notebookcheck review of MBP, looks like the power consumption is pretty high, because it can exceed even the 85W limit of power supply, by 6W. So I would not say that its more power hungry than M370X.

Also, I would not say its 60% faster than M370X, because performance in will be much higher on AMD chip than any Maxwell GPU available for 45W power budget.

In games, possibly Nvidia GPU will be even 60% faster. But games are not everything.

Isn't because GTX960m is not optimised for Final Cut Pro ?

 

[Dark Void]

That's the thing, while I agree mostly about Apple's build quality, many people here who tout its quality typically buy new laptops every three years. To me, I'd rather spend < 1,000 every 3 years then > 2,000 every 3 years.

As for Apple quality, my faith in them has been shaken, with the issues with the dGPU, I still think Macs are great computers and I its hard for me to imagine getting anything else, yet if I'm spending over 2,000 for a computer I'd like the peace of mind that the dPGU won't blow out in 3 years or the anti-reflective coating won't start flaking off.

Good points. I personally think that the build quality of my 2010 13'' MacBook Pro is untouchable, but that doesn't necessarily mean it establishes a threshold for what is acceptable and what isn't. I've had many Windows laptops, some of which I paid only a few hundred dollars for, last many years with consistent usage.

I'm the kind of person that doesn't fix or replace what isn't broken. I plan to get much more than 3 years out of a $1200+ purchase, but I agree with you and understand what you mean.


I have not experienced any issues with GPUs/etc on Macs, but I can understand where you are coming from. I wouldn't feel comfortable either - and of course I've read about many issues here.

I have an Asus notebook, with already outdated core i5 2410 m processor, 8 GB of ram, gt 540m gpu. I use it from the very first day until the day I leave from my home to here for a higher degree.

When I add ram from 2 GB default to 8 GB, I encounter intolerable BSOD issue. Asus finally replace me a new mother board, and then, there is no significant issue at all. Very solid, and still can do decent job, including heavy gaming (you may know supreme commander, which is a gpu hunger). On the contrary, many of my school mate computer is suffering from overheat issue or hard disk error.

I agree with your point. If you use it carefully, then it just can last long enough time before it dies. If not, even ultra expensive rMB could become unusable in a few days.

Glad to hear you have got it fixed with no persistent issues. I am definitely a fan of mid-range laptops ... it's great that you can get something for ~$500-600 with a decent dedicated GPU, solid dual-core processor and adequate RAM. I have found the overall quality of "mid-range; everyday computing" laptops to be nice - some even exceptional for their price. Asus and Lenovo use more durable materials than plastic for the top case usually, I've noticed, and internally they're well put together for what you pay.

 

[Quu]

So, you are saying that GM107 in mobile with lower voltages, and lower clocks, has higher power consumption than desktop part with higher voltages and clocks?

Edit, yeah, Ive checked the GTX960M. It looks like the TDP is shown of max potential power draw from PCIe bus, which is apparently 75W.

However, the desktop part has 60W TDP and mobile parts are more often better binned parts, so they have to have smaller power consumption.

Desktop GTX 960 has a TDP of 120 Watts. I don't know where you're getting 60 Watts from.

Source 1: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2015/01/22/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-review-feat-asus/1
Source 2: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2872...view-maxwell-meets-pc-gamings-sweet-spot.html
Source 3: http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/inde...ompare=geforce-gtx-960-2gb-vs-geforce-gtx-680

And there's many more on Google but you get the point, GTX 960 = 120 Watts, GTX 960m = 75 Watts.

 

[koyoot]

Mobile GTX960M is 640 GCN core GPU. The same as GTX750Ti, GTX850M, GTX860M. In all of those GPUs there is GM107 chip. GTX960 has 1024 GCN cores and 120W TDP. GTX960 is GM206 part. They are completely different.

GM107 does not need additional pin cables to power up. It can be powered just from the power of PCIe bus.

And GTX960M should not have more than 60W of TDP. I would say, even with higher clocks its has more like 50W of TDP, and power draw around that value.

 

[gngan]

Just get the Zenbook OP. If you have to ask such questions then you are pretty clueless why people use Mac. I wouldn't even bother explaining why some people rather use Mac. Clueless is not an excuse to not reading the forum or website why people use Mac.

 

[yjchua95]

Just get the Zenbook OP. If you have to ask such questions then you are pretty clueless why people use Mac. I wouldn't even bother explaining why some people rather use Mac. Clueless is not an excuse to not reading the forum or website why people use Mac.

Based on the OP's username, it sounds quite like a trolling username, so I wouldn't be surprised by some of the crap that he posts here.

 

[BoneDaddy]

Buy it and find out.

 

[mizerab1e]

Why does apple only care about money ???
Asus ZenBook Pro UX501 is $1000 cheaper but has better specs than macbook pro 2015

I was in the market for a new laptop 3 weeks ago and came across UX501. It looked beautiful, 4k display, 960m, 512 SSD all for $1499, so I picked it up without any hesitation. When the laptop arrived, first thing I did was to open internet explorer then visited youtube for a 4k video. The 4k was amazing, showed my friends how great it is, then started to install all my normal programs on it.

I unplugged the power once the battery was full, then it hit me. The performance on chrome or firefox was atrocious for regular browsing. Extremely choppy, and playing 4k video on it was impossible except on IE. General performance on battery power was disgusting to say the least. I downloaded few videos and played it on VLC and it gave noticeable choppiness during playback. The graphical performance simply could not handle 4k with 960m on battery power due to what I suspect is throttling.

I truly wanted to like this laptop, it was the closest thing I could find to my old 2014 15 Macbook Pro but I could not justify the performance on battery power. Everything runs beautifully once it is plugged in, but Asus really dropped the ball with this beautiful laptop.

And the yellow, THE YELLOW.

Needless to say, I've returned it and ordered a 2015 15 MBP. Yes, it is $1000 more expensive, but trust me, UX501 is flawed machine that I wish I could've kept.

 

[cbautis2]

I was in the market for a new laptop 3 weeks ago and came across UX501. It looked beautiful, 4k display, 960m, 512 SSD all for $1499, so I picked it up without any hesitation. When the laptop arrived, first thing I did was to open internet explorer then visited youtube for a 4k video. The 4k was amazing, showed my friends how great it is, then started to install all my normal programs on it.

I unplugged the power once the battery was full, then it hit me. The performance on chrome or firefox was atrocious for regular browsing. Extremely choppy, and playing 4k video on it was impossible except on IE. General performance on battery power was disgusting to say the least. I downloaded few videos and played it on VLC and it gave noticeable choppiness during playback. The graphical performance simply could not handle 4k with 960m on battery power due to what I suspect is throttling.

I truly wanted to like this laptop, it was the closest thing I could find to my old 2014 15 Macbook Pro but I could not justify the performance on battery power. Everything runs beautifully once it is plugged in, but Asus really dropped the ball with this beautiful laptop.

And the yellow, THE YELLOW.

Needless to say, I've returned it and ordered a 2015 15 MBP. Yes, it is $1000 more expensive, but trust me, UX501 is flawed machine that I wish I could've kept.

What do you expect from a crappy Windoze OS with atrocious power management? Plus Crappy battery that can't pump out high amperage to supply CPU/GPU decently. Mac OS / Apple hardware is designed with efficiency on battery power while Windoze is only good for desktops. I learned the hard way so I now never buy a crappy mobile Windoze device no matter what specs it says. One will realize how much money they wasted on a laptop since it can't even function properly when use as a mobile platform. Hell my 2011 MBA will outperform that crap ASUS in UI performance and multitasking when both are running on batteries.

 

[koyoot]

Specs - thats what you can expect from Windows laptops, or hardware. Not user experience.

 

[cbautis2]

Plus specs don't mean **** if it doesn't perform as it should or it has atrocious experience/slow/laggy experience ...

 

[gngan]

What do you expect from a crappy Windoze OS with atrocious power management? Plus Crappy battery that can't pump out high amperage to supply CPU/GPU decently. Mac OS / Apple hardware is designed with efficiency on battery power while Windoze is only good for desktops. I learned the hard way so I now never buy a crappy mobile Windoze device no matter what specs it says. One will realize how much money they wasted on a laptop since it can't even function properly when use as a mobile platform. Hell my 2011 MBA will outperform that crap ASUS in UI performance and multitasking when both are running on batteries.

But but but the spec is so much better....

 

[Quu]

I was in the market for a new laptop 3 weeks ago and came across UX501. It looked beautiful, 4k display, 960m, 512 SSD all for $1499, so I picked it up without any hesitation. When the laptop arrived, first thing I did was to open internet explorer then visited youtube for a 4k video. The 4k was amazing, showed my friends how great it is, then started to install all my normal programs on it.

I unplugged the power once the battery was full, then it hit me. The performance on chrome or firefox was atrocious for regular browsing. Extremely choppy, and playing 4k video on it was impossible except on IE. General performance on battery power was disgusting to say the least. I downloaded few videos and played it on VLC and it gave noticeable choppiness during playback. The graphical performance simply could not handle 4k with 960m on battery power due to what I suspect is throttling.

I truly wanted to like this laptop, it was the closest thing I could find to my old 2014 15 Macbook Pro but I could not justify the performance on battery power. Everything runs beautifully once it is plugged in, but Asus really dropped the ball with this beautiful laptop.

And the yellow, THE YELLOW.

Needless to say, I've returned it and ordered a 2015 15 MBP. Yes, it is $1000 more expensive, but trust me, UX501 is flawed machine that I wish I could've kept.

This is actually very disappointing. I have been recommending the UX501 to friends of mine who wanted a good Windows notebook. None of them have purchased it yet, thank god.

 

[SHEEPOS]

Just get the Zenbook OP. If you have to ask such questions then you are pretty clueless why people use Mac. I wouldn't even bother explaining why some people rather use Mac. Clueless is not an excuse to not reading the forum or website why people use Mac.

I already have a macbook pro retina 15, my question was how does that make sense
I know that Mac OS is better than windows but why didn't apple update their MacBooks with better specs and charge the same as the current prise ?

 

[Quu]

I already have a macbook pro retina 15, my question was how does that make sense
I know that Mac OS is better than windows but why didn't apple update their MacBooks with better specs and charge the same as the current prise ?

Everything about the MacBook Pro 15" is better than the Asus except for the GTX 960 graphics. But as we've just seen in the thread, when on battery power the GTX 960 has to throttle because it consumes too much power and then its performance gains are removed.

 

[SHEEPOS]

Everything about the MacBook Pro 15" is better than the Asus except for the GTX 960 graphics. But as we've just seen in the thread, when on battery power the GTX 960 has to throttle because it consumes too much power and then its performance gains are removed.

you are right, thanks man

 

[zhenya]

I already have a macbook pro retina 15, my question was how does that make sense
I know that Mac OS is better than windows but why didn't apple update their MacBooks with better specs and charge the same as the current prise ?

Apple chooses to design their laptops with a mix between raw performance and battery life, with a large emphasis on the details of the physical hardware. At every price point Apple laptops are competitive and usually class-leading when you take all of those factors into account. Try shopping for a real workstation laptop from the other major manufacturers and from every one you will generally find devices that are significantly larger and heavier (some have power bricks that weigh over a pound by themselves), have almost non-existent battery life, and are every bit as expensive. Yes, some of them can be outfitted with more powerful processors, more RAM, second hard disks, etc. but for the overall package, it's difficult to find something that has so few compromises as what Apple makes.

 

[gngan]

I already have a macbook pro retina 15, my question was how does that make sense
I know that Mac OS is better than windows but why didn't apple update their MacBooks with better specs and charge the same as the current prise ?

If you already own a rMBP then you should know why. Unless you don't like OSX.

It doesn't have to make sense. Apple can do whatever they want. If their subpar spec can match or even win better spec. window then why increase the spec? Increasing the spec means more cost therefore; less earning for them. Apple is famous for their supply chain and stock management. They can order older/less powerful hardware to cut-cost (i.e. more earning). Another way of looking it is that Apple spend more money on R&D. If they raise the spec. then they will charge more what they are charging now. Though they may pull in more spec geek into OSX but they may also push average user away. I believe Apple is targeting average user because most of their users are average users.

I wouldn't say OSX is better than Windows because they have their pros and cons. Watch out your wording or else fanboy will be pissed. To me, when I made the switch... Mountain Lion was better than XP. The hardware was also better and lasted much longer (1-2 years of Window PC before it dies vs 3-4 years of MacBook before it became 'sluggish' <-- it didn't die).

 

[dusk007]

I unplugged the power once the battery was full, then it hit me. The performance on chrome or firefox was atrocious for regular browsing. Extremely choppy, and playing 4k video on it was impossible except on IE. General performance on battery power was disgusting to say the least. I downloaded few videos and played it on VLC and it gave noticeable choppiness during playback. The graphical performance simply could not handle 4k with 960m on battery power due to what I suspect is throttling.

The main problem here is that current hardware has no 4k video acceleration support. So it basically runs in software. That would be the same on Apple hardware. It is the same chips with the same lack of video acceleration.
You'd run the CPU with very high load even on MBP and the battery would be dry in less than 2h while watching 4k video on a Mac. It is not really a practical use case for mobile use on todays hardware.

But have you tried looking into the Windows powerplans. Usually one can decide how much general throtteling one wants under certain power plans.

 

[improwise]

Good points. I personally think that the build quality of my 2010 13'' MacBook Pro is untouchable, but that doesn't necessarily mean it establishes a threshold for what is acceptable and what isn't. I've had many Windows laptops, some of which I paid only a few hundred dollars for, last many years with consistent usage.

The quality of the MacBook Pro is miles above the UX501, I know this as I have owned both (and still own the MBP). Now, the MBP is also much more expensive even before UX501 prices where slashed so anyone shopping with a budget might be better of with the UX501 as "tech specs" are not that different (and the UX501 in many ways are better). But when it comes to build quality, keyboard, sound quality etc. the UX501 doesn't stand a chance in an absolute comparison.

Sorry for disturbing your TDP discussion about GPUs not being in the MacBook Pro

 

[improwise]

This is actually very disappointed. I have been recommending the UX501 to friends of mine who wanted a good Windows notebook. None of them have purchased it yet, thank god.

Having bashed the UX501 here I still have to say that I don't really find this "not running 4K fine on battery" is a major issue, I don't think the MBP 15 2015 can do that either (maybe not plugged in either). It could however be yet another reason why 4K on laptops isn't such a great idea.

 

[improwise]

I already have a macbook pro retina 15, my question was how does that make sense
I know that Mac OS is better than windows but why didn't apple update their MacBooks with better specs and charge the same as the current prise ?

You have to realize that "better" doesn't always mean "more gaming power". For many users, the lack of gaming power (and thus less power consumption and heat) might be better than the alternative.

 

[Quu]

Having bashed the UX501 here I still have to say that I don't really find this "not running 4K fine on battery" is a major issue, I don't think the MBP 15 2015 can do that either (maybe not plugged in either). It could however be yet another reason why 4K on laptops isn't such a great idea.

My 2015 rMBP plays 4K h.264 encoded video perfectly fine on both the Iris Pro and the M370X when plugged in or disconnected from power.

No dropped frames, instant scrubbing, no lag, CPU not pegged, fans not taking off like a rocket.

Also I run my rMBP at 4K virtual resolution. As it's running the 1920x1200 desktop size in HiDPI which means it's actually running at a pixel doubled resolution of 4K then down-scaled to 2.8K. My laptop is working overdrive to deliver me the same desktop size as the UX501 and still plays 4K video flawlessly.

 

[yjchua95]

Having bashed the UX501 here I still have to say that I don't really find this "not running 4K fine on battery" is a major issue, I don't think the MBP 15 2015 can do that either (maybe not plugged in either). It could however be yet another reason why 4K on laptops isn't such a great idea.

On battery, 4K video is perfectly smooth on my 13" rMBP (that said, it's a 4K segment from YouTube, which is of a lower quality compared to a less compressed 4K, like a 4K segment from my EOS-1Dc).