ASUS Vivobook 16 vs ASUS Vivobook Go 14

The ASUS Vivobook 16, with more RAM and a stronger CPU, handles tasks more efficiently and has a larger, higher quality screen that's better for extended viewing, but it’s heavier, affecting its portability and has shorter battery life. Meanwhile, the ASUS Vivobook Go 14 offers better portability due to its lighter weight and slightly longer battery life, but has less RAM and a less powerful CPU, which may slow down demanding tasks, and a smaller screen with lower quality.

The ASUS Vivobook 16 is fair for gaming and 3D because it has a more powerful integrated GPU in the Ryzen 7 processor and a 16-inch screen with a higher resolution compared to the ASUS Vivobook Go 14, which is poor for gaming due to its less capable Radeon 610M GPU and a smaller 14-inch screen. Although both laptops have the same screen refresh rate, the Vivobook 16's better GPU and larger, higher-quality display make it more suitable for gaming and 3D applications.

The ASUS Vivobook 16, with a more powerful main processor, better GPU for graphics tasks, higher RAM for multitasking, and a larger, higher quality screen, is suited for demanding engineering and design applications, whereas the ASUS Vivobook Go 14, which is lighter and more portable but has a less powerful CPU, lower RAM, and a lower-tier GPU, is not equipped for such intensive tasks.

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.

When considering screen quality for general use like browsing and watching videos, both the ASUS Vivobook 16 and the Vivobook Go 14 offer sufficient resolution and brightness, but they may not have the most vibrant panel types, like IPS, leading to less vivid colors and narrower viewing angles. For engineering and design, where precise color representation is key, their fair screen quality suggests that while they can handle basic tasks, they might not cover the extensive color gamuts required for professional-level color work. As for gaming and 3D applications, the lower refresh rates on both laptops mean they won't provide the smooth visuals preferred for fast-paced action or detailed animations, although resolution and panel types are adequate for casual play or entry-level 3D work.

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.