The Vivobook Pro 14X is the latest in Asus’s line of ultra-thin, powerful laptops. It features a 14″ IPS display with an impressive resolution of 3200 x 1800 and comes equipped with AMD Ryzen processors and Nvidia GTX 1060 graphics cards.
The 3050 ti is a powerful graphics card that is great for playing games.
Asus brought back to life a subfamily of their laptops that had been ignored for years with this late-2024 generation: the Vivobook Pro. These Vivobook Pro laptops are now intended to be jacks-of-all-trades, offering a combination of mobility, performance, great screen choices, and decent build quality in a competitively priced package.
These Pros are a bit chunkier and heavier than ordinary VivoBooks from previous generations, but they come with considerably quicker hardware specifications, better thermal designs, bigger batteries, and OLED displays with outstanding picture clarity, contrast, and colors. As a result, Asus is targeting these VivoBook Pros towards artists and professionals on a mid-range budget seeking for a flexible multi-purpose laptop.
In the coming weeks, we’ll be covering the entire VivoBook Pro lineup in various articles, but this one is all about the compact 14-inch VivoBook Pro 14X OLED in the mid-range M7400QE configuration, which combines a full-power Ryzen 7 5800H processor with a Max-Q Nvidia RTX 3050Ti graphics chip and a 14-inch 2.8K OLED display, all in a sub 1.5-kilo package and with a
Asus VivoBook Pro 14X specs as reviewed
| M7400QE Asus VivoBook Pro 14X OLED | |
| Screen | 14.0 inch, 2.8K+ 2880 x 1800 px, 16:10, IPS, glossy, touch, 400 nits, 100 percent DCI-P3 color, 14.0 inch, 2.8K+ 2880 x 1800 px, 16:10, IPS, glossy, touch, 14.0 inch, 2.8K+ 2880 x 1800 px, 16:10, IPS |
| Processor | AMD Ryzen 7 5800H processor |
| Video | Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050Ti and Radeon Vega (35-50W with Dynamic Boost 2.0) |
| Memory | LPDDR4x 4266 MHz 16 GB (soldered) |
| Storage | 1 TB Solid State Drive (single PCIe x4 M.2 SSD slot) |
| Connectivity | Ethernet with adaptor, Wireless 6 (Intel AX200), Bluetooth 5.0 |
| Ports | 1x USB-A 3.2 gen1, 2x USB-A 2.0, 1x USB-C 3.2 gen1, HDMI 1.4b, microSD card reader, and 3.5 mm audio jack |
| Battery | Quick-charging 63 Wh, 120W charger |
| Size | 317 mm or 12.50” (w) x 228 mm or 9.00” (d) x 17.9 mm or 0.7” (h) 317 mm or 12.50” (w) x 228 mm or 9.00” (d) x 17.9 mm or 0.7” (h) (h) |
| Weight | EU version: 1.47 kg (3.25 lbs) +.45 kg (1 pound) charger |
| Extras | Finger-sensor in the power button, white backlit keyboard, glass touchpad, HD webcam with privacy shutter, stereo bottom speakers |
VivoBook Pro 14X models will be available with Intel or AMD full-power processors, RTX 3050 or 3050Ti graphics (35W basic TGP + Boost), and 2.8K or 4K OLED displays.
Construction and design
For a 14-inch laptop with this sort of power, the VivoBook Pro 14X is a good size. The Blade 14 is a little broader, a little shorter, and a little thinner, but it’s also a lot heavier, while the Zephyrus G14 is bigger, thicker, and heavier. Of course, they are more powerful laptops, but the Pro 14X is a good middle-of-the-road option.
The laptop’s whole structure is composed of metal, and it feels solid and doesn’t bend, bulge, or creak in any manner. The looks and general feel aren’t quite as beautiful and polished as on more expensive laptops, but the one design decision I don’t like for is the textured pattern on the bezel; everything else, even the rough plastic bezel surrounding the screen, is acceptable.
Even though I could have done without the hashtags and the inspiring phrase, I appreciate the new lid with the VivoBook Pro engraved plate. Regardless, I think the outside is more appealing than the inside.
By the way, Asus will sell the VivoBook Pro 14X series in either this white/silver color scheme or a dark gray color scheme. Normally, I’d prefer the darker model, but this white one isn’t as impractical as previous white Asus laptops, thanks to the gray keyboard instead of the white keycaps they’ve used in the past, which provides more contrast once the lighting is turned on. As a consequence, poor key readability is less of a problem in this case.
With this series, Asus also got rid of the annoying power button that featured an always-on light and replaced it with a new design that includes a finger-sensor. They also placed all of the status LEDs on the side.
In terms of practicality, the laptop is well-anchored on the desk due to its sticky rubber feet, the edges and corners are rounded and pleasant on the wrists, and the screen can be lifted up and adjusted easily with a single hand. The hinge is strong enough to hold it in place once it’s set up, and it can lean back to approximately 150 degrees, which is acceptable but not ideal for a portable design.
However, there are two additional points that I believe to be contentious. First, there’s the IO, which is mainly packed along the right side, which means that attaching peripherals will clog up your mouse area.
There’s also a single USB-A 3.2 gen1 connection here, as well as a USB-C gen1 port that only allows data, neither charging or video. The Intel-based VivoBook Pro 14X versions both include a Thunderbolt 4 port with video and charging, while the AMD variant does not.
The other point to consider is the overall thermal design. We’ll get into the internal cooling module later, but on the outside, I’m not happy with the traditional design with the exhausts under the screen, a design that still blows some of the hot air into the panel, with the rest being diverted down and to the back of the laptop, away from the user, by the plastic hinge.
Our testing indicate that this isn’t a deal breaker, even when dealing with the laptop’s more powerful hardware, since the panel doesn’t become as hot as previous Asus devices, but it’s still not an ideal design.
Overall, the VivoBook Pro 14X is a mid-range laptop that combines a somewhat compact design, quick specifications for this size class, and a great display, all at a more reasonable price. As a consequence, it’s no surprise that Asus had to scrimp on the design of this series.
Trackpad and keyboard
The inputs on this VivoBook Pro series are somewhat improved over those on earlier VivoBooks.
The layout of the keyboard is fairly typical for an Asus 14-inch laptop, with the exception of the redesigned power button, which now includes a finger-sensor and no longer has an always-on light.
However, the additional column of Function keys that was formerly accessible on VivoBook 14 models has been removed, leaving just PgUp/PgDn/Home/End as secondary arrow keys. On a laptop aimed towards professionals and artists, this is not the route I would take.
The feedback is more consistent than on prior VivoBooks, and the typing experience is more consistent overall. I even prefer it to the ZenBook 14X I’ve been using beside it for the last several days, which has a mushier keyboard.
There are three brightness settings to select from, as well as a separate Caps Lock indication. Although some light leaks through the keycaps, I’m pleased to see Asus using gray keycaps (in two shades of gray) on this color version of the VivoBook Pro 14X, which provide much better contrast than the white keycaps used on previous models. With the gray/black keycaps, contrast will be even greater on the deeper gray color variations of this series.
On this VivoBook Pro series, Asus includes a big glass clickpad centered on the armrest for the mouse. It works well and is pleasant to the touch, although it is a little flimsier than the clickpads found in ZenBooks. It also does not function as a NumberPad.
Instead, the Asus DialPad, a virtual dial that you activate on the clickpad by swiping from the right corner, is the novelty. This offers you control over the screen’s brightness and audio level by default, but additional features may be added via the ProArt Creator program. Additionally, it works with Adobe applications like Photoshop, After Effects, and Premiere, and the video below demonstrates what it can accomplish.
I haven’t had enough time with it to get an accurate assessment of its value and usefulness, so stay tuned for updates in our upcoming assessments of the VivoBook Pro 16X and StudioBook Pro 16 lines.
Finally, there’s a finger-sensor in the power button that works well, but no IR camera for biometrics.
Screens
For the VivoBook Pro 14X variants, Asus provides two screen choices, both of which are OLED, 16:10 aspect ratio, glossy, and non-touch. One screen has a 2.8K resolution and a 90Hz refresh rate, while the other has a 4K resolution and a 60Hz refresh rate.
On our sample, we have the 2.8K option, which is probably more suited to this chassis and hardware. It’s a great screen with vibrant colors and sharp pictures, and it’s a bit brighter and better calibrated out of the box than the touch-enabled ZenBook 14X’s panel. Furthermore, without the touch layer, the graininess effect seen over white material, such as while surfing and reading words, is gone.
With an X-Rite i1 Display Pro sensor, here’s what we got in our tests:
- Samsung SDC4154 (ATNA40YK04-0) is the panel hardware ID.
- 100 percent sRGB, 95.7 percent Adobe RGB, and 100 percent DCI-P3 coverage;
- Gamma (measured): 2.19;
- On power, the maximum brightness in the center of the screen is 379.07.50 cd/m2;
- On power, the minimum brightness in the center of the screen is 5.35 cd/m2;
- At maximum brightness, the contrast is 1:1;
- 6400 K is the white point.
- 0 cd/m2 at maximum brightness;
- 1 millisecond response time;
- PWM is a topic that will be covered.
The panel has a Pantone certification and is properly calibrated right out of the box. We haven’t observed any major color or brightness differences across quadrants, thus this is an excellent screen for daily usage and even professional work.
Of course, there’s a lot to talk about when it comes to the benefits and drawbacks of OLED screens on laptops, but that’s a subject for another post. All I’ll say is that before deciding whether OLED laptops are the way to go for you or not, you should do some research and understand the benefits (black, contrast, colors, low blue light emissions, etc) as well as the potential drawbacks (flickering, black crush, gray banding, or even burn-in to some extent).
Performance and hardware
Our test model is a more powerful version of the VivoBook Pro 14X M7400, with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800H 8C CPU with Vega 8 graphics, an Nvidia RTX 3050Ti 35-50W discrete graphics processor, 16 GB of LPDDR4x 4266 MHz memory, and 1 TB of fast SSD storage.
What we have here is an Asus Media Review sample that is similar to the retail units available in shops and was tested with early software as of mid-September 2024. (BIOS 305, MyAsus 3.0.19.0 app, Nvidia Studio Driver 471.68). As a result, future software updates may alter certain features.
This system is based on a full-power AMD Ryzen platform, with our setup using the standard Ryzen 7 5800H CPU. On this laptop, Asus uses a variety of power profiles, enabling the CPU to operate at up to 55W for extended periods of time. This isn’t quite as powerful as bulkier versions, but it’s still enough for a 14-inch portable chassis.
The GPU in this M7400QE setup is an Nvidia RTX 3050Ti, which has a TGP of 35W and can operate at up to 50W with Dynamic Boost when feasible. This is the highest-end dGPU option for this series, but RTX 3050 combinations are still available if you’re on a tighter budget.
Because the memory is soldered to the motherboard, it cannot be upgraded. Asus provides 8, 16, and 32 GB variants, all with LPDDR4x memory, so be sure you buy the right one from the start.
Because there’s just one M.2 2280 slot inside, you won’t be able to add a secondary drive if you run out of space; instead, you’ll have to replace the one that came preinstalled.
Nonetheless, the SSD and WiFi chip are the only components that may be upgraded, and getting to them is a straightforward process that only removing the back panel, which is secured in place by two Torx screws. They aren’t concealed by rubber feet in any way.
In terms of software, the power profiles may now be controlled using both the regular MyAsus app and a new ProArt Creator Dashboard. Because the two apps are linked, making a change in one immediately affects the other, but I anticipate Asus to upgrade the software and just offer the ProArt app power control, like they do on their TUF and ROG laptops.
We utilized the laptop on Standard (in My Asus) – Normal (in ProArt Creator) for everyday usage and Performance (in My Asus) – Rendering (in ProArt) for the performance testing for this evaluation.
In ProArt, there’s also an option to boost the fan’s speed (Enable Full Fan), which appears to compel the fans to spin rapidly regardless of the load at the moment. Turning it off causes the fans to spin slowly with lower loads and then ramp up to high speeds as required, which is what I’ve done in all of our testing.
With light usage on batteries, the Standard + Normal settings keep the fans dormant, and multitasking when plugged in keeps them extremely quiet. With everyday multitasking, video streaming, text editing, and other tasks, the laptop seems fast. When streaming video, there’s also a Whisper mode to choose from (in MyAsus), however the multitasking experience is a little slow in this instance, so I didn’t use it too much.
Moving on to more difficult activities, we begin by evaluating the CPU’s performance by running the Cinebench R15 benchmark in a loop for 15+ times with a 2-3 second delay between each run.
The Ryzen 7 CPU operates at 60+ W for a short time in Rendering/Performance mode before rapidly stabilizing at 55W of continuous power, with clock speeds of 3.6 GHz and temperatures of 95 degrees Celsius. Despite the fans ramping up to 46-47 dB, thermals are the limiting factor here, but this Ryzen 7 5800H implementation operates at 85-90 percent of the CPU’s full capability, which isn’t bad for a small mid-range architecture.
Switching to Standard/Normal setting reduces the fan noise to approximately 39-40 decibels. In this scenario, the CPU continues to operate at high power for a minute or two before settling at a sustained power of about 35W and temperatures in the upper-70s. The performance decreases by approximately 20% from the previous profile at this point, but generally, this Normal profile is extremely well balanced, and I would choose it over the Rendering profile because of the much quieter fans and lower temps.
Whisper mode reduces noise even more, however it also restricts the CPU to 15W, resulting in a substantial drop in performance, and I don’t understand why you’d use this profile for intensive tasks.
Finally, while disconnected, the laptop uses 30 W of electricity in Performance mode. The graphic and logs that follow describe all of these results.
This Ryzen 7 5800H implementation compares to comparable 14-inch performance ultraportables in this test.
We again performed the 3DMark CPU profile test, and the Ryzen 7 5800H in this chassis came within 10-15% of beefier implementations for the second time.
We then double-checked our results using the more demanding Cinebench R23 loop test and the grueling Prime 95.
On this laptop, we also performed our combined CPU+GPU stress tests. This unit passed the 3DMark stress test, which repeats the same test 20 times in a loop and checks for performance fluctuation and deterioration over time, indicating that there are no major performance losses due by thermal throttling on this laptop.
Here are some benchmark results to follow. For consistency with our previous evaluations, we performed the full set of tests and benchmarks on the Rendering profile at FHD resolution. Here’s what we came up with.
- 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 11565 (Graphics: 12774, Physics: 23205, Combined: 4805); 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 11565 (Graphics: 12774, Physics: 23205, Combined: 4805); 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 11565
- 551 in 3DMark 13 – Port Royal;
- 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 5332 (Graphics: 4992, CPU: 8690); 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 5332 (Graphics: 4992, CPU: 8690); 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 53
- 1080p Uniengine Superposition Medium: 8875;
- Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 2913; Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Standard: 2913; Uniengine Superposition – 1080
- Handbrake 1.3.3 (4K to 1080p encode): average frame rate of 21.75 frames per second;
- 4888 on PassMark10 (CPU mark: 20914, 3D Graphics mark: 9314, Disk mark: 24506);
- PCMark 10: 6034 (Essentials: 9717, Productivity: 8519, Digital Content Creation: 7205); PCMark 10: 6034 (Essentials: 9717, Productivity: 8519, Digital Content Creation: 7205); PCMark 10: 6034 (Essentials: 9717,
- 64-bit GeekBench 5.0.1: 1426 single-core, 7136 multi-core
- CPU 1917 cb, CPU Single Core 226 cb in CineBench R15 (best run);
- CPU 4109 cb, CPU Single Core 540 cb in CineBench R20 (best run);
- CPU 11005 cb, CPU Single Core 1382 cb in CineBench R23 (best run);
- 64-bit x265 HD Benchmark: 41.84 s
On this Ryzen 7 + RTX 3050Ti combination, we also tested various Workstation-related demands on the Rendering profile:
- Blender 2.90 – BMW Car Scene- CPU Compute: 3m 52s (Performance); Blender 2.90 – BMW Car Scene- CPU Compute: 3m 52s (Performance); Blender 2.90 – BMW
- Blender 2.90 – BMW Car Scene- GPU Compute: 1m 23s (CUDA), 40s (Optix); Blender 2.90 – BMW Car Scene- GPU Compute: 1m 23s (CUDA), 40s (Optix); Blender 2.90 – BMW
- Blender 2.90 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 9m 40s (Performance); Blender 2.90 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 9m 40s (Performance); Blender 2.90 – Classroom
- Blender 2.90 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 5m 33s (CUDA), 2m 19s (Optix); GPU Compute: 5m 33s (CUDA), 2m 19s (Optix);
- SPECviewerf 2024 – 3DSMax: 52.98 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2024 – 3DSMax: 52.98 (Turbo);
- SPECviewerf 2024 – Catia: 32.79 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2024 – Catia: 32.79 (Turbo);
- SPECviewerf 2024 – Creo: 62.19 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2024 – Creo: 62.19 (Turbo);
- SPECviewerf 2024 – Energy: 11.49 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2030 – Energy: 11.49 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2030
- SPECviewerf 2024 – Maya: 164.29 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2024 – Maya: 164.29 (Turbo);
- SPECviewerf 2024 – Medical (Turbo): 16.99
- SPECviewerf 2024 – SNX: 11.51 (Turbo); SPECviewerf 2024 – SNX: 11.51 (Turbo);
- SW: 101.06 SPECviewerf 2024 (Turbo).
The Ryzen 7 5800H in this VivoBook Pro 14X scores between 5-15 percent of the Ryzen 7 5800HS in the ROG Zephyrus G14 and 5-25 percent of the Ryzen 7 5800H in the full-size TUF Gaming A15 series, which is excellent for this class. Longer duration loads, such as Handbrake, X265, or Blender, widen the disparity when the lower sustained TDP kicks in.
The GPU, on the other hand, is 10-15% slower than the Zephyrus G14’s higher-power 3050Ti 60+W and 25+% slower than an RTX 3060 60+W in the same G14. Given that this is just a power-limited 3050Ti, this comes as no surprise.
Switching to the Normal profile may be of interest to you since the laptop runs quite loudly in Performance mode, at 46-47 dB. In our testing, the fans only average about 39-40 dB, resulting in a 10-20% decrease in performance, which is particularly apparent under prolonged CPU loads, when the TDP lowers to just 35W continuous. On this Normal profile, Dynamic Boost is off, thus the GPU only draws 35 watts, resulting in a 10% drop in performance.
On this Normal/Standard power profile, here are some benchmark results.
- 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 10636 (Graphics: 11611, Physics: 222715, Combined: 4382); 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 10636 (Graphics: 11611, Physics: 222715, Combined: 4382); 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 10636
- 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 4688 (Graphics: 4489, CPU: 6270); 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 4688 (Graphics: 4489, CPU: 6270); 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 46
- CPU 1768 cb, CPU Single Core 221 cb in CineBench R15 (best run);
- CPU 9885 cb, CPU Single Core 1356 cb in CineBench R23 (best run);
The VivoBook Pro 14x, on the other hand, is a capable performer in its class. In most markets, it’s not as quick as a Zephyrus G14 or a Blade 14, but it’s also more portable and less expensive.
Performance in video games
Now that we’ve cleared everything up, let’s see how this R7 + 16 GB RAM + 3050 Ti setup performs in games.
For begin, we conducted tests with the laptop configured to the Rendering/Performance profile and Ultra settings on FHD and 2.8 K resolution. For comparison, we included the Zephyrus G14’s 3050Ti setup.
| Performance profile, ultra settings | Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W FHD resolution VivoBook Pro 14X | Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 60+W FHD resolution Zephyrus G14 | Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W 2.8K resolution VivoBook Pro 14X |
| Far Cry 5 is the fifth installment in the Far Cry series (DX 11, Ultra Preset, SMAA) | 68 frames per second (42 frames per second – 1% low) | 84 frames per second (72 frames per second – 1% low) | 37 frames per second (32 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Shadow of Mordor is a film set in Middle Earth (DX 11, Ultra Preset) | 88 frames per second (63 frames per second – 1% low) | 113 frames per second (82 frames per second – 1% low) | 54 frames per second (44 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 is a sequel to Red Dead Redemption (DX 12, Ultra Optimized, TAA) | 40 frames per second (29 frames per second – 1% low) | 44 frames per second (32 frames per second – 1% low) | – |
| Tomb Raider: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA) | 56 frames per second (45 frames per second – 1% low) | 69 frames per second (52 frames per second – 1% low) | 28 frames per second (22 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Tomb Raider: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA, RTX Ultra) | 24 frames per second (11 frames per second – 1% low) | 26 frames per second (14 frames per second – 1% low) | – |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is the third installment in The Witcher franchise (DX 11, Ultra Preset, Hairworks On 4) | 63 frames per second (47 frames per second – 1% low) | 70 frames per second (54 frames per second – 1% low) | 36 frames per second (31 frames per second – 1% low) |
- In campaign mode, The Witcher 3 was captured using Fraps/in-game FPS counter.
- Far Cry 5, Middle Earth, and Tomb Raider – recorded using the Benchmark tools that included with the game;
- Based on these parameters, a Red Dead Redemption 2 optimized profile was created.
The VivoBook Pro 14X, like the GPU benchmarks, is 10-20% slower than the higher-power 3050Ti G14, but it can still provide excellent framerates with these settings.
Nonetheless, to get the most out of the 16:10 aspect ratio, I suggest trimming those elements and setting the resolution to FHD+. Here’s what we got using the screen’s natural 2.8K resolution and Settings in the middle at FHD+.
| Medium settings | Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W FHD+ resolution VivoBook Pro 14X | Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W 2.8K resolution VivoBook Pro 14X |
| Far Cry 5 is the fifth installment in the Far Cry series (DX 11, Normal Preset, TAA) | 76 frames per second (44 frames per second – 1% low) | 42 frames per second (34 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Shadow of Mordor is a film set in Middle Earth (DX 11, Medium Preset) | 111 frames per second (82 frames per second – 1% low) | 71 frames per second (56 frames per second – 1% low) |
| (DX 12, Balanced – first choice) Red Dead Redemption 2 | 51 frames per second (39 frames per second – 1% low) | 35 frames per second (28 frames per second – 1% low) |
| Tomb Raider: Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX 12, Medium Preset) | 66 frames per second (52 frames per second – 1% low) | 39 frames per second (33 frames per second – 1% low) |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is the third installment in The Witcher franchise (DX 11, Medium Preset, Hairworks Low) | 98 frames per second (73 frames per second – 1% low) | 56 frames per second (44 frames per second – 1% low) |
Even the most demanding games, like Red Dead 2, provide steady framerates at FHD+ and Medium settings, while older games may even run well at 2.8K.
All of these figures are based on the Performance/Rendering profile, which is very loud for an ultraportable, spinning the fans at 46-47 dB at head-level, so you’ll probably want to wear headphones to drown it out.
The performance is constant and does not deteriorate over time, with CPU temperatures averaging about 80 degrees Celsius and GPU temperatures averaging around 70 degrees Celsius amongst the games tested. The logs are shown below in full-HD quality.
Here are the logs at 2.8K resolution, which puts more strain on the GPU while allowing it to operate at greater power in most games thanks to Dynamic Boost.
Lifting the laptop off the desk may assist shed a few degrees, enabling more airflow into the fans, but it’s not necessary; performance and temps are acceptable with the laptop on the desk.
I’d also consider gaming at FHD+ resolution with the Normal/Standard power profile.
The CPU is a little more power limited in this case, and the GPU only runs at 35W, resulting in a 5-15 percent drop in framerates between the tested titles, but still very good internal temperatures (around 75C for the CPU and 70C for the GPU), as well as much quieter fans that only spin at around 39-40 dB.
Noise, heat, connectivity, speakers, and other factors are all factors to consider.
In this case, Asus used a dual-fan dual-heatpipe thermal module. This is more difficult than on ordinary VivoBooks with low-voltage hardware, but not as difficult as on the Zephyrus G14.
Furthermore, fresh air enters from the bottom through open intakes above the grill, while heated air is forced out by vents concealed under the hinge. As you can see from our thermal measurements below, the plastic hinge is intended to divide this hot air, sending some of it to the rear and away from the user, but some of it also blows up into the screen.
On the Rendering/Performance option, Asus also turns up the fans to 46-47 dB, which is very noisy for a laptop of this size. The Normal profile is considerably quieter, at 39-40 dB, but it comes with a performance cost of 5-20%, which may be worth it for the much quieter usage experience.
On the other hand, this VivoBook Pro 14X performs well in everyday usage. With light battery usage, the fans are hardly turned on, and with everyday multitasking when plugged in, they are barely turned on. I haven’t heard any coil whining or electrical sounds on our sample, but you should check for them.
In terms of exterior temperatures, even with the mainly passive cooling, there have been no problems with everyday usage. When playing games, a significant amount of heat is transferred to the screen, but the most of it is absorbed by the plastic hinge and bezel, resulting in temperatures in the upper 30s, which should not cause any problems down the road.
*Daily Use – 30 minutes of Netflix in EDGE, Normal Mode, fans at 0-35 dB *Gaming – Rendering mode – 30 minutes of Far Cry 5, fans at 46-47 dB
This laptop has the latest-generation WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5 connection thanks to an Intel AX200 chipset. With our configuration, it worked great.
A pair of stereo speakers, similar to those seen on earlier VivoBook models, fire through grills on the bottom. The D-slanted Panel’s design enables sound to bounce off the table without distortion, making it difficult to muffle when operating the computer on your lap. However, the sound produced by these speakers is just adequate, as one would expect from speakers in this class, with moderate loudness and a lack of lows.
The HD camera at the top of the screen, on the other hand, seems to be of somewhat higher quality than the usual, at least in bright light.
Life of the battery
The VivoBook Pro 14x has a 63 Wh battery, so Asus didn’t compromise on this front. This laptop will survive a long time on a charge thanks to the efficient AMD chip implementation and even the 2.8K OLED screen.
Here’s what the screen looked like with the brightness adjusted to about 120 nits (60 brightness).
- 10 W (almost 6 hours of usage) — text writing in Google Drive, Normal + Better Battery Mode, 60% screen, Wi-Fi ON;
- 7 W (about 9 hours of usage) — 1080p fullscreen movie in Edge, Normal + Better Battery Mode, screen at 60%, Wi-Fi ON;
- 6.5 W (about 10 hours of usage) – Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Normal + Better Battery Mode, 60% screen, Wi-Fi ON;
- 12 W (about 5-6 hours of usage) – Edge, Normal + Better Performance Mode, screen at 60%, Wi-Fi ON.
I thought the 2.8K OLED screen would take a bigger toll, particularly with mainly white backdrops while surfing and text-editing, but I was incorrect.
The laptop comes with a conventional barrel plug and a mid-sized 120W charger (for a 14-inch portable chassis, that is). It is not feasible to charge through USB-C in this location.
the cost and the availability
At the time of writing, the VivoBook Pro 14X was not yet available in shops, but it should be shortly.
The tested VivoBook Pro M7400QE combination, which includes the Ryzen 7 5800H + 3050Ti + 2.8K OLED screen + 16 GB RAM + 512 GB storage, is anticipated to cost approximately 1300 EUR at launch. With the 3050 graphics chip, the Vivobook Pro 14X M7400QP variant should retail for less.
Stay tuned for further information, and in the meanwhile, check out this link for the most up-to-date pricing and configurations in your area.
Finally, some ideas
After spending the past week or so with the Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 14-inch VivoBook Pro 14X, I believe it is a competitive mid-priced performance ultraportable.
It isn’t the most powerful 14-inch display on the market, but it is still a capable implementation in terms of overall performance in both daily use and demanding loads, is more portable than the majority of the other options, and includes a 2.8K 16:10 OLED display that the majority of the alternatives lack.
In fact, the OLED display is the series’ main selling feature and what sets it apart from other 14-inch performance laptops on the market. If you prefer a 70 percent DCI-P3 144Hz IPS FHD screen, the Asus Zephyrus G14 or the Acer Predator Triton 300 SE, both priced at 1300 EUR or less, are both quicker performers. In fact, you can buy a 3060 60+W combination of both for 1250-1300 EUR over here, with AMD Ryzen HS specifications on the G14 and Intel Tiger Lake specs on the Triton, which are both 25+ percent quicker in games and GPU-dependent activities than this Vivobook Pro M7400QE setup.
So, if you decide that a punchy and awesome-looking OLED screen on a small multi-purpose laptop that can effectively handle everyday chores, demanding tasks, and some gaming is the way to go for you, the VivoBook Pro 14X is definitely an option to consider. Just make sure you’re aware of the possible disadvantages of OLED laptop displays, as well as the minor compromises made by Asus in this device, namely in the IO area.
This concludes our look at the Vivobook Pro 14X M7400, and I’d love to hear your views, questions, and criticism in the comments section below. Would you choose this assignment over the rest of the class?
Disclaimer: Our material is entirely funded by our readers. We may get an affiliate commission if you purchase anything after clicking on one of our links. Find out more.
Editor-in-Chief of Ultrabookreview.com, Andrei Girbea. I’ve been writing about mobile computers since the early 2000s, and you’ll mainly find my reviews and comprehensive instructions on this site.
