Asus Q502LAB performing "way below expectations"

tabliya

Prominent
May 2, 2017
2
0
510
My Asus laptop came highly recommended, but it has become very slow. Just opening the Windows menu and typing in a search, the letters I type appear very slowly, one at a time. Even videos played locally get laggy. Overall performance seems much slower than it should be with this equipment.

I tested it on UserBenchmark.com and got these results: http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/3533526 - Both the processor and memory are performing "way below expectations."

With my low CPU score, their main suggestion is to check Task Manager and get rid of anything eating up a lot of juice. But when I go there, I only see about 7% of CPU being used.

I have AVG and iOlO System Mechanic and use both all the time, as well as running Spybot and Malwarebytes about once a month. Based on a suggestion on the UBM website, I also got a Ccleaner free trial and ran it. I'm not seeing much improvement.

Any ideas for speeding up this laptop?
 
Solution
Those results and the temperatures are within the acceptable range for that computer. It doesn't have the best cooling system, and it's not designed for taxing workloads. It's designed to be portable, and it sacrifices performance to that end.

Editing videos, as a rule, should be left to desktop machines. There are a handful of exceptions for smaller projects, but those are fairly pricey.

What was your last computer, and what are you trying to use that machine for?

tabliya

Prominent
May 2, 2017
2
0
510


Task Manager shows CPU at about 1.2 GHz during everyday use. I tried exporting video from a video editor, and it jumped up to 2.48 GHz. (It's rated at 2.19)

I couldn't find temperature in my BIOS, so I got CoreTemp and it shows around 35-60 C, with a high temp at 69 C.

I also noticed that for several minutes after startup (maybe 5 minutes or so), Disk is at 100%. Is that typical?
 
Those results and the temperatures are within the acceptable range for that computer. It doesn't have the best cooling system, and it's not designed for taxing workloads. It's designed to be portable, and it sacrifices performance to that end.

Editing videos, as a rule, should be left to desktop machines. There are a handful of exceptions for smaller projects, but those are fairly pricey.

What was your last computer, and what are you trying to use that machine for?
 
Solution