ASUS R410MA vs ASUS Vivobook Go 14

The ASUS R410MA is considered poor for general use because it has a lower-end processor, less RAM, and a lower resolution TN screen which typically has narrower viewing angles and less vibrant colors compared to IPS screens, as found on the ASUS Vivobook Go 14, which is rated fair for general use due to its better performance CPU, double the RAM, and higher quality IPS display.

The ASUS R410MA and ASUS Vivobook Go 14 both fall short for engineering and design tasks mainly due to their processors and graphical capabilities, with the R410MA featuring a basic Intel Celeron and integrated Intel graphics, and the Vivobook Go having a modest AMD Ryzen 3 and Radeon graphics, neither of which are powerful enough for demanding engineering software. Additionally, both have limited RAM, which is crucial for multitasking and running complex applications, and their screen quality, important for detailed design work, is average, as indicated by their moderate color coverage and lower brightness levels.

PerfectRec’s Content Creation Score takes into account the many different features of the laptop that make it more or less suitable for photo editing, video editing and other content creation tasks.

PerfectRec’s Software Development Score takes into account the many different features of the laptop that make it more or less suitable for software developers.

For general use, a laptop with a clear and bright display makes for a comfortable viewing experience, which the ASUS R410MA lacks, while the ASUS Vivobook Go 14 offers a slightly better experience due to its fair screen clarity and brightness. In engineering and design, accurate color representation is crucial for precision work; the ASUS R410MA falls short here, whereas the Vivobook Go 14 provides acceptable color coverage but might not satisfy professionals looking for high fidelity color accuracy. When it comes to Gaming and 3D, the high refresh rate is essential for smooth motion and the ASUS R410MA disappoints due to its low refresh rate, and despite the Vivobook Go 14's fair resolution and panel type, its poor refresh rate makes it less ideal for such demanding visual content.

Battery life estimate is based on a mix of common use patterns. More portable and higher performing laptops tend to have less battery life.

PerfectRec’s Build Quality Score incorporates case materials, display and keyboard flex, hinge quality, and overall reliability.

The ASUS R410MA and ASUS Vivobook Go 14 are both poor choices for gaming and 3D applications because they lack powerful GPUs, with the former using an Intel UHD Graphics 600 and the latter equipped with an AMD Radeon 610M, which are both inadequate for such intensive tasks. Additionally, they both have screen refresh rates of only 60Hz, which are not ideal for the fast-paced visuals required in gaming and 3D rendering.