The ProArt StudioBook Pro X W730 is Asus’s first attempt in the professional workstation notebook segment, one dominated by the Lenovo ThinkPads, ZP Zbooks and the Dell Precision series.
We’ve spent the last few weeks with an early sample of the Pro X and gathered all our impressions in the article down below, which touches on all its important aspects, like the build, typing experience, screen and especially on the performance and thermals.
As you’ll see throughout the post, the StudioBook Pro X has some interesting, even unique, particularities. Among them there’s the compact and light form-factor for a 17-inch workstation laptop, the 16:10 matte display with wide-gamut coverage, the big battery, the uncompromised IO and the solid performance once tweaked. On the other hand, this is not as configurable as the other notebooks in this segment and the components run hotter than I’d want under load, at least on this early sample.
For now, I feel there’s a lot of potential in the StudioBook Pro X based on this test unit, especially with some later software/driver updates that should improve the thermals and the performance of the final retail units.
The big question, however, is whether Asus improved on the QC, warranty conditions and post-sale support of their products. These are crucial for business environments and for professional end-users as well, as there’s no room for reliability compromises and downtimes in this class. Of course, there’s no way to answer this question right now, so I’d look for impressions from real-customers on the forums, Youtube, and Reddit before taking the plunge. And in case you plan to be an early-adopter, make sure to buy from a reputable source and get the extended warranty.
Specs as reviewed – ASUS ProArt StudioBook W730
|ASUS ProArt StudioBook Pro X W730G5T|
|Display||17-inch, 1920 x 1200 px IPS 60 Hz, 16:10, non-touch, matte, Hannstar 170PUW1-B00 panel|
|Processor||Intel Coffee Lake Xeon E-2276M, six-core with HyperThreading|
|Video||Intel HD 630 + Nivida Quadro RTX 5000 16 GB GDDR6 (Nvidia 425.54), with Optimus|
|Memory||64 GB DDR4 2666 MHz (4x DIMMs, optional ECC on Xeon versions)|
|Storage||2x M.2 PCI x4 slots, with CPU-attached RAID 0/1 support (1x 512 GB Intel 760P SSDPEKKW512G8)|
+ optional 2.5″ bay (empty) on versions with the 63Wh battery
|Connectivity||Gigabit LAN (Intel I219-LM), Wireless 6 (Intel AX200) 2×2, Bluetooth 5.0|
|Ports||3 x USB-A 3.1 gen2, 2x USB-C with Thunderbolt 3, HDMI 2.0, LAN, SD 4.0/UHS-II card reader, mic/headphone, Kensington Lock|
|Battery||63/95 Wh, 280 W charger|
|Size||382 mm or 15.03” (w) x 265 mm or 10.43” (d) x 28.2 – 32.1 mm or 1.11” -1.26″ (h)|
|Weight||6.4 lbs (2.9 kg), 2.2 lbs (1 kg ) for charger and cables, EU version|
|Extras||white backlit keyboard, 720p webcam, stereo speakers, ScreenPad 2.0, finger sensor|
This is a highly-specced configuration of the ProArt StudioBook W730, but Asus offers the series in a few different configurations. Aside from the various amounts of storage and RAM, potential users can choose between the Xeon E-2276M or the Core i7-9750H processor, optional ECC RAM, Nvidia Quadro RTX 4000 or 5000 graphics, and either a 63 or a 95 Wh battery. All variants get the same 1920 x 1200 px 16:10 display, chassis and keyboard.
Design and construction
Design-wise the ProArt StudioBook series is nothing like the other Asus lineups. The aesthetic lines are much simpler and cleaner, but the build quality hasn’t been sacrificed.
As one of the most powerful ProArt notebooks, the StudioBook Pro X is a full-size computer with high-end hardware, so it’s not as slim as some of the ultraportables out there. It is, however, still fairly compact and light, with narrow bezels around the entire screen, including the forehead and chin. It’s important to note that this notebook gets a 16:10 display, thus slightly taller than the 16:9 you’d normally get on most laptops.
At the same time, this is more compact than all the other 17-inch workstations out there. Down below we’d put it next to the ThinkPad P73, for comparison.
Metal alloys and plastic are used for the construction, with a textured pattern on the lid and the palm-rest. This pattern might gather dirt over time, but it should also do an excellent job of hiding smudges and scratches. The dark-gray color scheme is friendly as well, and in my opinion, even better suited for a work computer than the smudgy black finishing available on ThinkPads.
This StudioBook Pro X W730 also meets most of my expectations in terms of ergonomics. The screen is held in place by sturdy hinges and can lean-back flat to 180 degrees, something you’ll hardly find on other Asus laptops. The interior is roomy and accommodating, yet the laptop has a fairly tall front lip that can uncomfortably dig into your wrists in certain conditions, even though it’s not very sharp.
The status LEDs are dim and placed out of sight, beneath the clickpad, and there are very few other lights and visible branding elements around the entire chassis. I’m still not a fan of the fact that the Power button integrates an always-on light, but at least even that one isn’t very bright either.
A lot of attention was given to the thermal design, as this laptop needs to tame powerful hardware while keeping the fan-noise in check. There are massive intakes on the bottom, spread over the entire thermal module, an extra intake at the top of the keyboard, and big exhausts on the back. Down there on the underbelly you’ll also notice that a perimeter rubber foot was chosen to keep the laptop anchored on flat surfaces, which is a smart design, but the material could have been a little grippier. You’ll also notice the side-firing speakers grills.
The IO is entirely lined on the sides and includes pretty much everything you’d need as both a regular user or a professional. You’ll get 3x USB-A slots, 2x USB-C with Thunderbolt 3 support, HDMI, LAN, Kensington Lock, and a fast UHS-II card reader.
All in all, the Asus StudioBook Pro X is a nice looking and sturdily crafted laptop, and Asus gave proper attention to most design and ergonomics aspects as well. It is nonetheless a full-size notebook, so those of you looking for something lighter and easier to lug around every day might find a better value in the ultraportable ProArt StudioBook Pro alternatives.
Keyboard and trackpad
A workstation notebook needs a good and reliable keyboard, and from my time with this StudioBook, I can tell that Asus did well here.
There’s a complete keyboard on this Pro X model, with a standard layout, full-size arrow keys, and a full-sized Numpad section. The Power button is not a key, as on other Asus implementations, there are no weirdly shaped or positioned keys, and there are no extra macro-keys like on the gaming units, which makes this implementation simple and functional at the same time.
As far as the overall typing experience goes, I found it pretty good, and that’s surprising as I’m normally not a fan of deep-stroke keyboards such as this one. I needed some time to get used to its harder and deeper press, of course, but a few thousands of words later I was able to type fairly quickly and accurately. There’s no doubt shorter keys are going to be faster and quieter, but if you’re coming from a desktop-keyboard or an older laptop, you’ll probably get along great with this one.
The keys are backlit, with white LEDs beneath each keycap and three intensity levels. The illumination is fairly even and the LEDs get bright at the highest setting, but due to the taller stroke, a lot of light creeps out from beneath some of them, especially from those on the top row.
As side notes, Asus also thought of the little details here, so the illumination is activated by swiping fingers over the clickpad, and there are physical indicators for CapsLock and Microphone On/Off.
For mouse, the StudioBook Pro X gets the ScreenPad 2.0 we’ve seen on many 2019 Asus products. I’m not going to get in-depth here, the ScreenPad is a spacious glass-covered clickpad with a secondary screen underneath, which can be switched on or off. When off, the surface acts just like a good glass clickpad, while when on, you can use it as a secondary Windows screen or as a companion screen tied with certain apps and displaying tools and shortcuts. The app integration is still limited to the Office suite, Spotify and a few other basic apps, plus the secondary Screen takes a toll on battery life, so I mostly prefer keeping it off.
Nonetheless, this is one of the better clickpads out there right now. The surface is smooth and glidy, excellently handles swipes, taps, and gestures, and even the physical clicks are soft and quiet.
The Pro X gets a finger-sensor as well, as the only biometric option. It’s placed to the right-side of the palm-rest and works fine for quickly logging into Windows with Hello.
The screen is one of this laptop’s main selling points.
It’s not a 4K UHD panel like you get on other 17-inch workstations, but is a 16:10 1920 x 1200 px screen with 97% coverage of the DCI-P3 color gamut, Delta E of less than 2, and pre-calibration with a Pantone certification.
The taller 16:10 aspect ratio allows for a larger work-space and reminds me of older times when these kinds of screens were not such a rarity. Paired with good brightness, contrast, and excellent color coverage, this panel is a solid choice for a work-computer and for everyday use. More details below, taken with a Sypder4 sensor.
- Panel HardwareID: Hannstar HSD1702 (170PUW1-B00);
- Coverage: 100% sRGB, 83% NTSC, 84% AdobeRGB, 98% DCI P3;
- Measured gamma: 2.2;
- Max brightness in the middle of the screen: 328 cd/m2 on power;
- Contrast at max brightness: 690:1;
- White point: 6500 K;
- Black on max brightness: 0.47 cd/m2;
- PWM: No.
Keep in mind our tool measures brightness and contrast by quickly switching between a black and white background, that’s why our results are a little different than others measured with X-Rite sensors.
We also took some measurements with DisplayCal and edded up with these results:
The panel came very well calibrated out of the box, and we didn’t notice any obvious color imbalances. Light bleeding, on the other hand, was somewhat visible on dark backgrounds in lower bottom corners, which also proved dimmer than the top side in the luminance-uniformity test. The imbalance fades-in at mid-level brightness levels, but it’s still something I wouldn’t want on a computer that’s supposed to offer superior display quality.
In all fairness, don’t forget our sample is pre-production, which means final retail products could go through a better QC process before shipping out to customers. Just to be sure, though, I’d make sure to properly test the display for bleeding or other issues as soon as you get your order, as this is a crucial component on a workstation notebook.
Hardware, performance and upgrades
Our test model is a highly specced configuration of the Asus ProArt StudioBook Pro X W730G5T, with the Intel Xeon E-2276 processor, 64 GB of DRR4 2666 MHz RAM (4x DIMMs), a single NVMe SSD and an extra spare M.2 slot, as well as the Nvidia Quadro RTX 5000 graphics chip.
Nvidia offers different variants of the RTX Quadro 5000 GPU, and the StudioBook Pro X gets the base-level full-power variant, with a TDP of 110W. Other options get higher TDP limits and higher clocks, but all share the same amount of 16 GB GDDR6 memory. At the same time, Nvidia also offers the so-called Max-Q variants of the Quadro 5000 mobile chip on ultraportable variants, with 80-90W TDPs and even lower clocks.
All these are based on the T104 Turing chip, with 3000+ Cuda Cores, as well as Tensor and Ray-Tracing Cores, support for HDMI 2.0b, HDR and H.265 video decoding/encoding.
Compared to the GeForce RTX 2080 options, the RTX Quadro 5000 comes with a few more CUDA Cores, twice the amount of memory (16 vs 8 GB) and optimized drivers as part of the Nvidia Studio Drivers set. These are meant to improve the performance and stability in professional applications that require constant high-loads for long periods. That’s also backed-up by the inclusion of the Intel Xeon processors and optional ECC RAM on the higher-end configurations.
The Xeon E-2276M is a six-core processor with HyperThreading and 12 MB of cache, so very close to the six-core Intel Core i7-9750H in terms of performance. Asus does not offer any eight-core CPU Pro X models at this time, which could be a reason to go with a different option if CPU performance is one of your top selection criteria.
That aside, the StudioBook Pro X gets four RAM slots (for a total of up to 128 GB of memory) and 2x M.2 PCIe storage slots with support for CPU-attached RAID 0/1 on our configuration, which also comes with a big 95Wh battery. Asus offers an alternative option for a smaller 63 Wh battery and a 2.5″ bay on other variants, in case you need extra storage space and can compromise on battery life.
The memory and storage are all easily accessible by removing the back panel, which is held in place by a handful of Philips screws, all clearly visible around the sides. Two of the RAM slots are placed behind the motherboard, though. Inside you’ll also notice the thermal module, the battery, and the speakers.
Knowing all these, the next part of this section touches on the system’s performance in taxing chores. However, it’s important to take our findings with a grain of salt, because our test-unit is pre-production and running early drivers and BIOS, thus the final retail models might perform a little differently. I’d also expect some sort of control software to be added to the retail models, similar to the Armoury Crate suite on the ROG gaming notebooks.
Without it, we didn’t get much room for tweaking on our sample, aside from undervolting the CPU with either XTU or Throttlestop. Nonetheless, here’s what we found out from our tests.
First, we test the CPU’s performance in demanding loads by running Cinebench R15 for 10+ times in a loop, with 2-3 sec delay between each run, which simulates a 100% load on all the cores. Without any control software, we used the High-Performance mode in Windows.
Out of the box, the CPU settles for around 3.2 GHz after several Cinebench runs, scores of around 1100 points, a TDP of 45 W and temperatures of around 84-85 degrees Celsius. These are average results for a stock six-core Coffee Lake processor, and Power Limit Throttling is the limiting factor here. Further software tweaks could allow the CPU to run at a higher TDP on a max-performance setting, similar to the ROG laptops on Turbo, which stably run at 65W and constant max-boost speeds.
We proceeded to improve this behavior by undervolting the CPU. Our Xeon E-2276M ran stably at -125 mV, and that translated in speeds of around 3.7 GHz, scores of around 1230 points, a TDP of 45 W and temperatures of around 84-85 degrees. That’s a significant gain over the stock settings, but still within 10% of what the 2276M can theoretically sustain, which is 4.2 GHz on all-core loads.
Our sample performed well on battery too (details below), running at 45W and returning scores of above 1200 points in Cinebench for the first loops, but eventually settling for a TDP of 25W towards the end of the test.
Next, we’ve run the entire suite of tests and benchmarks on the StudioBook Pro X and it performed well. We’re going to share them with you down below, but keep in mind the pre-production status of our sample, with the lack of any Control Software and the early BIOS and CPU/GPU drivers. Hopefully, we’ll get to retest a final version once available and update the results.
- 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 18478 (Graphics – 21746, Physics – 17214);
- 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 8351 (Graphics – 8710, CPU – 6773);
- 3DMark 13 – Port Royal: 4910;
- Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Medium: 5432;
- GeekBench 5.0.1 64-bit: Single-Core: 1243, Multi-core: 6417;
- CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 1273 cb, CPU Single Core 192 cb;
- CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 2574 cb;
- x264 HD Benchmark 4.0 32-bit: Pass 1 – 220.32 fps, Pass 2 – 76.84 fps.
- x265 HD Benchmark 64-bit: 50.22 s.
Then we reran some of them on the -125 mV undervolted profile:
- 3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 18553 (Graphics – 21414, Physics – 18396);
- 3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 8431 (Graphics – 8725, CPU – 7082);
- 3DMark 13 – Port Royal: 4947;
- Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Medium: 5464;
- PCMark 10: 5941 (Essentials – 10009 , Productivity – 7658 , Digital Content Creation – 7425);
- PassMark: Rating: 6815, CPU mark: 16300, 3D Graphics Mark: 14330;
- GeekBench 5.0.1 64-bit: Single-Core: 1243, Multi-core: 6575;
- CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 1374 cb, CPU Single Core 192 cb;
- CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 3008 cb, CPU Single Core 458 cb;
- x264 HD Benchmark 4.0 32-bit: Pass 1 – 222.68 fps, Pass 2 – 79.08 fps;
- x265 HD Benchmark 64-bit: 47.58 s.
As suggested by the Cinebench loop test, undervolting the CPU helps boost the CPU scores by 5-10%, but without a significant impact on the GPU scores. The RTX 5000 Quadro chip performs very well even with these early-drivers, though, maintaining high speeds and a constant TDP of around 110 W in every situation.
Let’s touch on the workstation-related matters as well, which are the main reason you’d want to get one of these laptops in the first place.
First, there’s the stability aspect, which we test by running the 3DMark stress test. Our sample did well with both out-of-the-box and undervolted settings. At stock, the CPU and GPU average roughly 80 degrees Celsius in this test, but the system remains fairly quiet. Undervolting the CPU allows it to run at higher speeds and slightly higher temperatures of 84-85 degrees Celsius for the CPU and 82 C for the GPU. However, don’t forget that this test does not simulate a 100% simultaneous load on the CPU and GPU, which we’ll touch in a bit.
As for the performance in demanding work loads, we also ran a couple or benchmarks that simulate workstation-grade tasks, and gathered the results below:
- Blender – BMW Car scene- GPU Compute (CUDA): Time – 0:53.57;
- Blender – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: Time – 15:51.87;
- Luxmark 3.1 – Luxball HDR – OpenCL GPUs score: 31770;
- Luxmark 3.1 – Luxball HDR – OpenCL CPUs + GPUs score: 34088;
- SPECviewerf 13 – 3DSMax: 175.23;
- SPECviewerf 13 – Catia: 212.19;
- SPECviewerf 13 – Creo: 206.09;
- SPECviewerf 13 – Energy: 46.26;
- SPECviewerf 13 – Maya: 203.73;
- SPECviewerf 13 – Medical: 82.27;
- SPECviewerf 13 – Showcase: 104.66;
- SPECviewerf 13 – SNX: 253.62;
- SPECviewerf 13 – SW: 125.33.
Now, back to those complex CPU+ GPU loads, we tested these in Luxmark and games. In Luxmark, the GPU works flawlessly, maintaining high Turbo Boost Speeds and a TDP of above 110W, but the CPU is Power limited to 3.1 – 3.2 GHz and 45 W. We dropped the CPU undervolting to -100 mV for these tests, to prevent any instability and crashes that might still occasionally occur at lower voltage levels.
Unplugging the laptop limits the CPU to 25 W and the GPU fluctuates between 25 and 50W, thus we can’t draw any conclusion on the performance on battery. I’d expect this to be tweaked on the final versions, though, so look into it in later reviews.
With that out of the way, let’s look at some gaming results.
We ran a couple of games representative for DX11 and DX12 architectures on the undervolted profile, with stock GPU settings, on the standard FHD+ resolution of the screen, as well as on an external 4K monitor hooked up via HDMI. This section of our reviews and is sponsored by Acer, who supplied us with their Nitro XV273K 4K 144 Hz gaming monitor for our tests (follow this link for more details).
|FHD+ UV||4K UV|
|Far Cry 5 (DX 11, Ultra Preset, SMAA)||106 fps||45 fps|
|Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor (DX 11, Ultra Preset)||– fps||58 fps|
|Rise of Tomb Raider (DX 12, Very High Preset, FXAA)||59 fps||46 fps|
|Shadow of Tomb Raider (DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA)||-fps||– fps|
|The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (DX 11, Ultra Preset, Hairworks On 4)||130–178 fps||48-62 fps|
- Battlefield V, The Witcher 3 – recorded with Fraps/in-game FPS counter in campaign mode;
- Far Cry 5, Middle Earth, Tomb Raider games – recorded with the included Benchmark utilities.
The HWinfo logs below show the CPU and GPU speeds and temperatures in Farcry 5 and Witcher 3 on the undervolted profile, both at FHD+ and at 4K. You’ll notice that the CPU ran very hot in these games, at 95+ degrees Celsius, but with minimal speed drops. The GPU ran at around 80 degrees Celsius and 108-110W, thus towards its maximum performance capabilities as well. The GPU runs a little slower at 4K than at FHD+, as it has to do more work to push the extra pixels.
Gaming on battery, on the other hand, proved challenging, with both the CPU and the GPU being limited to lower power, just like in the Luxmark test.
Bottom point, the Asus ProArt StudioBook Pro X W730 performs flawlessly in pretty much every task as long as it’s plugged in on this early pre-production variant with immature software and drivers. The CPU and GPU run hot in demanding loads, though, and there’s room for improved performance in continuous CPU chores. Hopefully, these will be further tweaked in the final retail models, once those will be available. The advanced users among you should also consider repasting the components, that should further help lower the temperatures.
Noise, Heat, Connectivity, speakers, and others
The StudioBook Pro X gets a complex thermal module, with two high-capacity fans and multiple heat-pipes and heat-plates spread over the CPU/GPU and VRMs/MOSFETs. The pasting seems a little sloppy on our unit, but that aside, the cooling implementation is mostly capable of squeezing excellent performance out of the components, even on this higher-specced variant and despite the laptop’s fairly compact footprint.
The CPU and GPU run hot on our unit, but little of that heat is spread onto the exterior chassis, mostly thanks to the plastic shells reduced thermal conductivity.
The fans don’t get as noisy as on the top-tier ROG laptops with similar specs. We measured noise levels of 46-47 dB at head-level in games and other demanding chores. With daily use, the GPU fan switches off and the CPU fan remains active, but barely audible at around 36-38 dB. We did notice some fain electronic noises on our sample, though.
*Daily Use – streaming Netflix on EDGE for 30 minutes (fans ~ 36-38 dB)
*Load – playing Far Cry 5 for 30 minutes (fans ~ 46-47 dB)
For connectivity, the StudioBook Pro X gets Intel’s latest Wifi 6 AX200 chip in a 2×2 implementation, as well as Gigabit Lan through a Intel I219-LM module. We’ve mostly used our sample on wireless, and it performed flawlessly both near the router and at 30+ feet away, with obstacles in between.
Judging by their rather small size, I wasn’t expecting much from the speakers on this laptop. They proved to be alright, though, with clean and clear sound, but only average volumes of around 74-75 dB. Small amounts of vibrations are pushed into the chassis at higher volumes, and you should be careful not to cover the speaker cuts in any way, as this would greatly interfere with the sound quality.
Lastly, the StudioBook Pro X gets an HD webcam at the top of the screen, flanked by microphones. It’s just a standard laptop camera, OK for occasional use, but nothing to brag about.
Asus offers the Pro X with either a 63 or a 95 Wh battery, and we got the latter variant here. That’s on par with competitors like the Alienware Area 51m, ZP Zbook 17 or the Lenovo ThinkPad P73, and translates in solid battery-life with everyday use, especially with Optimus on board and with the FHD+ display, more efficient than the UHD variants on other Nvidia Studio laptops.
Here’s what we got on our review unit, with the screen’s brightness set at around 120 nits (~40 brightness).
- 12.5 W (~7+ h of use) – text editing in Google Drive, Better Battery Mode, screen at 40%, Wi-Fi ON;
- 13 W (~7+ h of use) – 1080p fullscreen video on Youtube in Edge, Better Battery Mode, screen at 40%, Wi-Fi ON;
- 11.5 W (~8+ h of use) – Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Better Battery Mode, screen at 40%, Wi-Fi ON;
- 15 W (~6+ h of use) – browsing in Edge, Better Performance Mode, screen at 40%, Wi-Fi ON;
- 75 W (~1 h 15 min of use) – Luxmark, Max Performance Mode, screen at 40%, Wi-Fi ON.
Asus bundles the laptop with a standard, fairly chunky and heavy, 280 W power-brick, which is adequately designed for the hardware inside. It will add roughly 1 kilo to your backpack, though.
Price and availability
Exact pricing details for the StudioBook Pro X W730 have not been confirmed at the time of this post, but we should find more in the near future, as the laptop is scheduled for Q4 2019 in most regions. I would expect the higher-end variants to go for between 3-4000 USD/EUR.
We’ll update this section once we know more.
I’m not going to draw final conclusions based on this early-sample of the Pro X W730, for two main reasons: it ran on immature software/drivers and we don’t know how much this will cost.
It did run very well, even with the early software, and I’d expect it to be competitive, perhaps even better priced than most other workstations, based on past experience with Asus products. Nonetheless, we’re still looking at 3-4 grand of the higher models, though.
I’m not going to hide that I’m quite impressed with this laptop. Asus nailed most important aspects and didn’t make any compromises, and on top of these, the StudioBook Pro X is both smaller/lighter than the competition and offers a unique advantage: the 16:10 matte display. Well, not all of the competition, if you consider devices like the MSI WS75 or the Razer Blade Pro Studio, or perhaps even the slimmer StudioBook Pro W700, even if those are all built on lower-performance hardware.
On the other hand, it’s not as customizable as the other workstations, doesn’t get an eight-core processor or a UHD display, and an HDD is only included on versions with a smaller screen, due to its smaller size. I’m also looking to further clarify on the thermals and software offered in the final units, as I feel there’s room for further tweaking in a few different profiles that would allow users to better juggle between performance, temperatures and noise levels, based on their requirements.
Even if the final StudioBook addresses these aspects, it will still need to prove itself at one final aspect where professionals workstations need to excel: reliability, quality control, and post-sale services when something will eventually break and would need to be replaced. Asus has struggled on these over the years and needs to catch up to Dell, Lenovo or HP in most regions, and I hope they’re taking this aspect very seriously. Time will tell, but in the meantime, get the extended warranty, only buy from reputable stores and test for any potential issues within your return window.
As far as the competition goes, we’re going to touch on this matter in another article that will pitch the StudioBook Pro X against the Lenovo ThinkPad P73, the Dell Precision 7740 and the HP Zbook 17.
That wraps-up our preview of the Asus ProArt StudioBook Pro X W730G5T. The comments section down below awaits your feedback and questions, so get in touch, we’re aroudn to reply and help out.
Our content is reader-supported. If you buy through some of the links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more.