With this late-2021 generation of their laptops, Asus brought back to life a subfamily that has been neglected for the last years: the Vivobook Pro. As of right now, these Vivobook Pro laptops are aimed to be jacks-of-all-trades, a mix of portability, performance, excellent screen options, and fair build quality, all in an aggressively priced package.
Unlike regular VivoBooks of recent generations, these Pros are a little chunkier and heavier, but they also get much faster hardware specs, superior thermal designs, larger batteries, and OLED screens with excellent image quality, contrast, and colors. This way, Asus targets these VivoBook Pros at creators and professionals looking for a versatile multi-purpose laptop on a mid-range budget.
We’ll be covering the entire VivoBook Pro lineup throughout different articles in the weeks to go, but this one is all about the compact 14-inch VivoBook Pro 14X OLED in the mid-range M7400QE configuration, which pairs 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 local price of around 1300 EUR at launch.
Specs as reviewed- Asus VivoBook Pro 14X
Asus VivoBook Pro 14X OLED M7400QE
Screen 14.0 inch, 2.8K+ 2880 x 1800 px, 16:10, OLED, glossy, touch, ~400 nits with 100% DCI-P3 color
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
Video Radeon Vega and Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050Ti (35-50W with Dynamic Boost 2.0)
Memory 16 GB LPDDR4x 4266 MHz (soldered)
Storage 1 TB SSD (single PCIe x4 M.2 SSD slot)
Connectivity Wireless 6 (Intel AX200), Bluetooth 5.0, Ethernet with adapter
Ports 1x USB-A 3.2 gen1, 2x USB-A 2.0, 1x USB-C 3.2 gen1, HDMI 1.4b, microSD card reader, 3.5 mm jack
Battery 63 Wh, 120W charger with quick-charging
Size 317 mm or 12.50” (w) x 228 mm or 9.00” (d) x 17.9 mm or 0.7” (h)
Weight 1.47 kg (3.25 lbs) + .45 kg (1 lbs) for the charger, EU version
Extras white backlit keyboard, glass touchpad, HD webcam with privacy shutter, stereo bottom speakers, finger-sensor in the power button
There will be a multitude of VivoBook Pro 14X variants, with Intel or AMD full-power hardware, with RTX 3050 or 3050Ti graphics (35W base TGP + Boost), and with 2.8K or 4K OLED screens.
Design and construction
The VivoBook Pro 14X is fairly sized for a 14-inch laptop with this kind of hardware. For comparison, the
Blade 14 is a bit wider, a bit shorter, and minimally thinner, but also a significantly heavier laptop, while the Zephyrus G14 is both larger, thicker, and heavier. Of course, those are more powerful laptops, but this Pro 14X is nonetheless a balanced middle-grounder.
Metal is used for the entire construction, and the laptop feels sturdily made, doesn’t flex or bulge or creak in any noticeable way. The aesthetics and overall feeling are perhaps not as nice and polished as on the more premium laptops, but the only design choice I don’t really like is the textured pattern on the bezel; everything else is just fine, even that rough plastic bezel around the screen.
I especially like the redesigned lid, with that VivoBook Pro embossed plaque, even if I could have lived without those hashtags and the inspirational quote. Regardless, the exterior looks even better to me than the interior.
And BTW, Asus will offer the VivoBook Pro 14X series in either this white/silver color variant that we have here, or a dark-gray variant. Normally, I’d be more interested in the darker model, but this white one is not as impractical as other white Asus laptops, because they chose to implement a gray keyboard instead of the white keycaps they’ve been using in the past, with the poor contrast once you switched on the illumination. As a result, poor key readability is not as much of an issue here.
Asus also ditched the pesky power button that had an always-on light in with this series, and replaced it with a new design that incorporates a finger-sensor in it. Plus, they put all the status LEDs on the side.
As far as the practicality goes, the laptop sits well-anchored on the desk thanks to its grippy rubber feet, the edges and corners are blunted and friendly on the wrists, and the screen can be comfortably picked up and adjusted with a single hand. The hinge is also stiff enough to keep it in place as set up, and allows it to lean back to about 150 degrees, which is OK, but not ideal for a portable design.
There are, however, two other aspects that I find rather controversial. First of, the IO, which is mostly crammed on the right edge, so connecting peripherals will clutter your mouse area. On top of that, there’s a single USB-A 3.2 gen1 slot here and a USB-C gen1 that only supports data, no charging or video. In comparison, the Intel-based variants of the VivoBook Pro 14X both get a Thunderbolt 4 port with video and charging, but this AMD variant does not.
The other is the whole thermal design. We’ll discuss the internal cooling module further down, but on the outside, I’m not happy seeing a traditional design with the exhausts placed under the screen, a design that still blows some of the hot air into the panel, with the rest being diverted by the plastic hinge down and to the back of the laptop, away from the user. Our tests will show you that this is not a dealbreaker even when having to deal with the more powerful specs available in this laptop, as the panel doesn’t get as hot as on other Asus products, but it’s not an ideal design either.
All in all, this VivoBook Pro 14X is a mid-range laptop meant to bring together a fairly portable format, fast specs for this size class, and an excellent display, but all at a more affordable price tag. As a result, there should be no surprise that Asus had to cut some corners designing this series.
Keyboard and trackpad
The inputs on this VivoBook Pro series have been slightly updated from the ones on the previous VivoBooks.
The keyboard’s layout is pretty much standard for an Asus 14-inch laptop, with the addition of this updated power button that now incorporates a finger-sensor and no longer has an always-on light in it.
However, the extra column of Function keys previously available on VivoBook 14 models has been cut off, and now PgUp/PgDn/Home/End are only available as secondaries for the arrows keys. Not the approach I would have gone with on a laptop targeted at professionals/creators.
The feedback is firmer than on previous VivoBooks, and overall the typing experience is more reliable here. I even prefer it
over the ZenBook 14X I’ve been using alongside in these past days, whose keyboard felt mushier to me.
The illumination is white, with 3 brightness levels to choose from, and a dedicated Caps Lock indicator. A fair bit of light still bleeds out from under the keycaps, but I’m glad to see Asus implementing gray keycaps (in two shades of gray) on this color variant of the VivoBook Pro 14X, which offer much-improved contrast over the white keycaps used on past generations. Contrast is going to be even better on the darker-gray color variants of this series, with the gray/black keycaps.
For mouse, Asus offers a large glass clickpad on this VivoBook Pro lineup, centered on the arm-rest. It performs well and feels nice to the touch, but it’s a little bit flimsier than the clickpads implemented in ZenBooks. This also doesn’t act as a NumberPad.
Instead, the novelty is the addition of the Asus DialPad, a virtual dial that you activate on the clickpad by swiping from the right corner. By default, this gives you control over the screen’s brightness and audio volumes, but can be customized in the ProArt Creator software for other functionalities. Furthermore, this also integrates with Adobe software such as Photoshop, After Effects, and Premiere, and the clip down below better explains what it can do.
I haven’t used this long enough to have a proper opinion of its worth and utility, so look for updates in our future reviews of the VivoBook Pro 16X and the StudioBook Pro 16 lineups.
Finally, for biometrics, there’s a finger-sensor in the power button that works just fine, but no IR camera.
Screens – OLED
Asus offers two screen options for the VivoBook Pro 14X models, and both are OLED, 16:10 aspect ratio, glossy and non-touch. The difference is that one of the panels is 2.8K resolution and 90Hz refresh, while the other is 4K resolution and 60 Hz.
We have the 2.8K option on our sample, which is arguably better suited for this chassis and hardware. It’s an excellent panel with rich colors and punchy images, and it turned out to be a little brighter and better calibrated out of the box than the same panel we experienced on the touch-enabled ZenBook 14X. Plus, without the touch layer, there’s no longer that graininess effect noticeable over white content, such as when browsing and reading texts.
Here’s what we got in our tests,
with an X-Rite i1 Display Pro sensor:
Panel HardwareID: Samsung SDC4154 (ATNA40YK04-0);
Coverage: 100% sRGB, 95.7% Adobe RGB, 100% DCI-P3;
Measured gamma: 2.19;
Max brightness in the middle of the screen: 379.07.50 cd/m2 on power;
Min brightness in the middle of the screen: 5.35 cd/m2 on power;
Contrast at max brightness: 1:1;
White point: 6400 K;
Black on max brightness: 0 cd/m2;
Response time: <1 ms;
PWM: to be discussed.
The panel comes with a Pantone validation, and it is very well calibrated out of the box. We also haven’t noticed any significant color or luminosity variations between quadrants, so overall this is a very good screen for everyday use and even professional work.
Of course, there’s a lot to discuss on the pros and cons of OLED panels on laptops, and that’s a topic for a more specific article. All I’ll say is that you should do some research and understand the advantages (black, contrast, colors, low blue light emissions, etc) and the potential culprits (such as flickering, black crush, gray banding, or even burn-in to some extent) of OLED laptops before deciding whether they’re the way to go for your or not.
Hardware and performance
Our test model is a higher-specced variation of the VivoBook Pro 14X M7400 built on an AMD Ryzen 7 5800H 8C processor with Vega 8 graphics, paired with an Nvidia RTX 3050Ti 35-50W dGPU, 16 GB of LPDDR4x 4266 MHz of memory, and 1 TB of fast SSD storage.
What we have here is a Media Review sample provided by Asus, identical to the retail units you can find in stores, and was tested with the early software available as of mid-September 2021 (BIOS 305, MyAsus 18.104.22.168 app, Nvidia Studio Driver 471.68). Thus, some aspects might change with future software tweaks.
Specs-wise, this is built on a full-power AMD Ryzen platform, with the mainstream Ryzen 7 5800H processor on our configuration. Asus implements various power profiles on this laptop, allowing the CPU to run at up to 55W sustained here. That’s not as powerful as on thicker implementations, but still very capable for a 14-inch portable chassis.
For the GPU, this M7400QE configuration comes with an Nvidia RTX 3050Ti chip, with a TGP of 35W and the ability to run at up to 50W with Dynamic Boost, when possible. This is the highest-end dGPU option available for this series, and RTX 3050 configurations are also an alternative if you’re shopping at a lower budget.
The memory is soldered on the motherboard, so non-upgradeable. Asus offers 8, 16, and 32 GB configurations, all with LPDDR4x memory, so make sure you get the one that fits your needs from the get-go, as there’s no way to add more afterward.
Storage might also be a slight limitation with this series, as there’s only a single M.2 2280 slot inside, so you can’t add a secondary drive when you’ll run out of space, you’ll have to replace the one that comes preinstalled.
Nonetheless, the SSD and WiFi chip are the only upgradeable components, and accessing them is a simple task, requiring you to remove the back panel that’s held in place by a couple of Torx screws. None of them are hidden behind rubber feet.
As far as the software goes, at this point, both the standard MyAsus app and a new ProArt Creator Dashboard allow control over the power profiles. The two are tied together, so operating a change in one app automatically applies it in the other, but I’d expect Asus to update the software and only give power control to the ProArt app, like on their TUF and ROG laptops.
For the purpose of this review, we’ve used the laptop on Standard (in My Asus) – Normal (in ProArt Creator) with daily use, and on Performance (in My Asus) – Rendering (in ProArt) for the performance tests.
There’s also an option in ProArt to increase the fans’ speed (Enable Full Fan), which at this point seems to automatically force the fans to spin fast regardless of the load. Ticking it off allows the fans to spin slowly with lighter loads, and then ramp up to high speeds when needed, and that’s what I’ve used for all our tests here.
The Standard + Normal profiles keep the fans idle with light use on battery, and very quiet with multitasking while plugged in. The laptop feels snappy with daily multitasking, video streaming, text-editing, and the likes. There’s also a Whisper mode that you can opt for (in MyAsus) when streaming video, but the multitasking experience feels a bit sluggish in this case, so I didn’t use this profile often.
On to more demanding tasks, we start by testing the CPU’s performance by running the Cinebench R15 benchmark for 15+ times in a loop, with 2-3 seconds delay between each run.
On the Rendering/Performance mode, the Ryzen 7 processor runs at 60+ W for a little bit and quickly stabilizes at ~55W of sustained power in this mode, with clock speeds of ~3.6 GHz, and temperatures of ~95 degrees Celsius. Thermals are the limiting factor here, despite the fans ramping up loudly to 46-47 dB, but even so, this Ryzen 7 5800H implementation runs at 85-90% of the CPU’s maximum potential, which is not bad at all for a compact mid-range design.
Switching over to the Standard/Normal mode limits the fans to around 39-40 dB. In this case, the CPU still runs at high power for a minute or two, but eventually settles at around 35W of sustained power, with temperatures in the high-70s. At this point, the performance also drops by about 20% from the previous profile, but overall this Normal profile is very well balanced and something I would personally consider over the Rendering profile for the much quieter fans and lower temperatures.
Whisper mode limits the noise even more, but also limits the CPU at 15W, causing a significant decrease in performance, and I don’t see why you’d ever want to use this profile for demanding loads.
Finally, the laptop runs at ~30 W of power when unplugged, on the Performance mode. All these findings are detailed in the chart and logs down below.
To put these in perspective, here’s how this Ryzen 7 5800H implementation fares against other 14-inch performance ultraportables in this test.
We also ran the 3DMark CPU profile test, where the Ryzen 7 5800H in this chassis came once more within 10-15% of beefier implementations.
We then went ahead and further verified our findings with the more taxing Cinebench R23 loop test and the gruesome Prime 95.
We also ran our combined CPU+GPU stress tests on this notebook. 3DMark stress runs the same test for 20 times in a loop and looks for performance variation and degradation over time, and this unit passed it, which suggests there are no significant performance losses that might be caused by thermal throttling on this laptop.
Next, here are some benchmark results. We ran the entire suite of tests and benchmarks on the Rendering profile at FHD resolution, for consistency with our past reviews. Here’s what we got.
3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 11565 (Graphics – 12774, Physics – 23205, Combined – 4805);
3DMark 13 – Port Royal: 551;
3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 5332 (Graphics – 4992, CPU – 8690);
Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Medium: 8875;
Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 2913;
Handbrake 1.3.3 (4K to 1080p encode): 21.75 average fps;
PassMark10: Rating: 4888 (CPU mark: 20914, 3D Graphics Mark: 9314, Disk Mark: 24506);
PCMark 10: 6034 (Essentials – 9717 , Productivity – 8519 , Digital Content Creation – 7205);
GeekBench 5.0.1 64-bit: Single-Core: 1426, Multi-core: 7136;
CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 1917 cb, CPU Single Core 226 cb;
CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 4109 cb, CPU Single Core 540 cb;
CineBench R23 (best run): CPU 11005 cb, CPU Single Core 1382 cb;
x265 HD Benchmark 64-bit: 41.84 s.
We also ran some Workstation related loads on this Ryzen 7 + RTX 3050Ti configuration, on the Rendering profile:
Blender 2.90 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 3m 52s (Performance);
Blender 2.90 – BMW Car scene- GPU Compute: 1m 23s (CUDA), 40s (Optix);
Blender 2.90 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 9m 40s (Performance);
Blender 2.90 – Classroom scene – GPU Compute: 5m 33s (CUDA), 2m 19s (Optix);
SPECviewerf 2020 – 3DSMax: 52.98 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – Catia: 32.79 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – Creo: 62.19 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – Energy: 11.49 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – Maya: 164.29 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – Medical: 16.99 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – SNX: 11.51 (Turbo);
SPECviewerf 2020 – SW: 101.06 (Turbo).
Once more, the CPU scores are solid for this class, with the Ryzen 7 5800H in this VivoBook Pro 14X scoring within 5-15% to the Ryzen 7 5800HS in the ROG Zephyrus G14 and 5-25% of the Ryzen 7 5800H in the full-size TUF Gaming A15 series. The gap gets wider in the longer duration loads, such as Handbrake, X265, or Blender, where the lower sustained TDP kicks in.
The GPU, on the other hand, runs 10-15% slower than the higher power 3050Ti 60+W in the Zephyrus G14, and 25+% slower than an RTX 3060 60+W in the same G14. No surprise, given this is merely a power-limited 3050Ti.
The laptop does run rather noisy on the Performance mode, at 46-47 dB, that’s what switching over to the Normal profile might be of interest to you. This way, the fans only average around 39-40 dB, with a roughly 10-20% drop in performance in our tests, more noticeable in the longer CPU loads where the TDP drops to only 35W sustained. Dynamic Boost also doesn’t kick on on this Normal profile, which means the GPU only runs at 35W, and that also translates in a ~10% potential decrease in performance.
Here are some benchmarks results on this Normal/Standard power profile.
3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 10636 (Graphics – 11611, Physics – 222715, Combined – 4382);
3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 4688 (Graphics – 4489, CPU – 6270);
CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 1768 cb, CPU Single Core 221 cb;
CineBench R23 (best run): CPU 9885 cb, CPU Single Core 1356 cb;
Overall, though, the VivoBook Pro 14x is a competent performer in its segment. Once more, not as fast as a Zephyrus G14 or a Blade 14, but also a fair bit more portable and more affordable, in most markets.
With these out of the way, let’s look at how this R7 + 16 GB RAM + 3050 Ti configuration does in games.
For starters, we ran tests on Ultra settings on FHD and 2.8 K resolution, with the laptop set-up on the Rendering/Performance profile. We also threw in the 3050Ti configuration of the Zephyrus G14, for comparison.
Ultra settings, Performance profile
VivoBook Pro 14X –
Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W
Zephyrus G14 –
Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 60+W
VivoBook Pro 14X –
Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W
Far Cry 5
(DX 11, Ultra Preset, SMAA) 68 fps (42 fps – 1% low)
84 fps (72 fps – 1% low)
37 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor
(DX 11, Ultra Preset) 88 fps (63 fps – 1% low)
113 fps (82 fps – 1% low)
54 fps (44 fps – 1% low)
Red Dead Redemption 2
(DX 12, Ultra Optimized, TAA) 40 fps (29 fps – 1% low)
44 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
Shadow of Tomb Raider
(DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA) 56 fps (45 fps – 1% low)
69 fps (52 fps – 1% low)
28 fps (22 fps – 1% low)
Shadow of Tomb Raider
(DX 12, Highest Preset, TAA, RTX Ultra) 24 fps (11 fps – 1% low)
26 fps (14 fps – 1% low)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
(DX 11, Ultra Preset, Hairworks On 4) 63 fps (47 fps – 1% low)
70 fps (54 fps – 1% low)
36 fps (31 fps – 1% low)
The Witcher 3 – recorded with Fraps/in-game FPS counter in campaign mode;
Far Cry 5, Middle Earth, Tomb Raider – recorded with the included Benchmark utilities;
Red Dead Redemption 2 Optimized profile based on
Much like in the GPU benchmarks, the VivoBook Pro 14X ends up 10-20% slower than the higher power 3050Ti G14, but it’s still capable of good framerates with these settings.
Nonetheless, I’d recommend you trim down on those details and set-up the resolution at FHD+ to properly benefit from the 16:10 aspect ratio. Here’s what we got on Medium settings at FHD+ and the screen’s native 2.8K resolution.
VivoBook Pro 14X –
Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W
VivoBook Pro 14X –
Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 35+W
Far Cry 5
(DX 11, Normal Preset, TAA) 76 fps (44 fps – 1% low)
42 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor
(DX 11, Medium Preset) 111 fps (82 fps – 1% low)
71 fps (56 fps – 1% low)
Red Dead Redemption 2
(DX 12, Balanced – first option) 51 fps (39 fps – 1% low)
35 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
Shadow of Tomb Raider
(DX 12, Medium Preset) 66 fps (52 fps – 1% low)
39 fps (33 fps – 1% low)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
(DX 11, Medium Preset, Hairworks Low) 98 fps (73 fps – 1% low)
56 fps (44 fps – 1% low)
Even the more demanding titles such as Red Dead 2 return consistent framerates at FHD+ and Medium settings, while the older titles might even run well at 2.8K.
All these results are on the Performance/Rendering profile, which is rather noisy for an ultraportable, spinning the fans at 46-47 dB at head-level, so you’ll probably want to use headphones to cover that up.
The performance is consistent though and does not degrade over time, as the CPU averages temperatures of around 80 degrees C and the GPU runs at around 70 degrees Celsius between the tested titles. Here are the logs at FHD resolution.
And here are the logs at 2.8K resolution, which puts a higher toll on the GPU and allows it to run at higher power in most games, through Dynamic Boost.
Lifting up the laptop from the desk can help shed off a few degrees, allowing for better airflow into the fans, but it’s not required, as the performance and temperatures are fine with the laptop sitting on the desk.
I would also definitely consider gaming on the Normal/Standard power profile at FHD+ resolution.
In this case, the CPU is a little more power limited in this case and the GPU only runs at 35W, which translates to a 5-15% drops in framerates between the tested titles, but with still very good internal temperatures (around 75C for the CPU and 70C for the GPU), but much quieter fans that only spin at around 39-40 dB in this case.
Noise, Heat, Connectivity, speakers, and others
Asus went with a dual-fan dual-heatpipe thermal module here. This is more complex than on regular VivoBooks powered by low-voltage hardware, but not as complex as on something like the Zephyrus G14.
In addition, fresh air comes in from the bottom, through the open intakes over the grill, and the hot air is pushed out through vents hidden under the hinge. The plastic hinge is designed to split this hot air, sending part of it to the back and away from the user, but some of it also blows up into the screen, as you can see from our thermal readings down below.
Asus also ramps up the fans to 46-47 dB on the Rendering/Performance profile, which is fairly loud for a laptop of this kind. The Normal profile is much quieter, at 39-40 dB, with a toll on performance, but this 5-20% toll might be worth considering for the much quieter use experience.
With daily use, on the other hand, this VivoBook Pro 14X runs flawlessly. The fans rest idle with light use on battery, and barely kick on with daily multitasking while plugged in. I also haven’t noticed any coil whine or electronic noises on our sample, but make sure to test for them on yours.
As for the external temperatures, no complaints with daily use, even with the mostly passive cooling. With games, a fair bit of the heat is pushed into the screen, but most of it is soaked up by the plastic hinge and bezel, so the panel only reaches temperatures in the high 30s, which should not lead to any unpleasant surprises down the road.
*Daily Use – streaming Netflix in EDGE for 30 minutes, Normal Mode, fans at 0-35 dB
*Gaming – Rendering mode – playing Far Cry 5 for 30 minutes, fans at 46-47 dB
For connectivity, there’s the latest-gen WiFi 6 and Bluetooth 5 through an Intel AX200 module on this laptop. It performed well with our setup.
Audio is handled by a set of stereo speakers that fire through grills on the underside, much like on the previous VivoBook lineups. The angled shape of the D-Panel allows the sound to bounce off the table without distortions and prevents you from easily muffling them while using the computer on the lap. The sound coming out of these speakers is only alright, though, the kind you should expect from this class, with middling volumes and still lacking in the lows.
The HD camera placed at the top of the screen, though, this seems a little better quality than the norm, at least in fair lighting.
There’s a 63 Wh battery inside the VivoBook Pro 14x, so Asus didn’t skimp on this end. With the efficient AMD hardware implementation and even with the 2.8K OLED screen, this notebook will last for a fair while on a charge.
Here’s what we got, with the screen’s brightness set at around 120 nits (~60 brightness).
10 W (~6+ h of use) – text editing in Google Drive, Normal + Better Battery Mode, screen at 60%, Wi-Fi ON;
7 W (~9 h of use) – 1080p fullscreen video on Youtube in Edge, Normal + Better Battery Mode, screen at 60%, Wi-Fi ON;
6.5 W (~10 h of use) – Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Normal + Better Battery Mode, screen at 60%, Wi-Fi ON;
12 W (~5-6 h of use) – browsing in Edge, Normal + Better Performance Mode, screen at 60%, Wi-Fi ON.
I was expecting perhaps a higher toll taken by the 2.8K OLED screen, especially with mostly white backgrounds in browsing and text-editing, but I was wrong.
The laptop ships with a mid-sized 120W charger (for a 14-inch portable chassis, that is), which plugs in via a standard barrel plug. USB-C charging is not possible here.
Price and availability-
Asus VivoBook Pro 14X
The VivoBook Pro 14X is hardly available in stores at the time of this article, but should be soon.
Over here, the tested VivoBook Pro M7400QE configuration with the Ryzen 7 5800H + 3050Ti + 2.8K OLED screen + 16 GB of RAM + 512 GB of storage is expected at around 1300 EUR MSRP, at launch. The Vivobook Pro 14X M7400QP model, with the 3050 graphics chip, should sell for less.
Stay put for updates, and in the meantime,
follow this link for updated prices and configurations in your region. Final thoughts-
Asus VivoBook Pro 14X
Having spent the last week or so with this Ryzen 7 + 3050Ti 14-inch VivoBook Pro 14X, I feel that it is definitely a competitive
performance ultraportable in the mid-priced segment.
It’s not the most powerful 14-incher out there, 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 offers that 2.8K 16:10 OLED display that most of the alternatives do not.
In fact, this OLED screen is the prominent selling point for this series and what sets it apart from the other 14-inch performance laptops out there. Otherwise, if you’d be OK with a 70% DCI-P3 144Hz IPS FHD screen instead, the
Asus Zephyrus G14 or the Acer Predator Triton 300 SE are both faster performers at around 1300 EUR or less. In fact, you’ll get a 3060 60+W configuration of both at 1250-1300 EUR over here, with AMD Ryzen HS specs on the G14 and Intel Tiger Lake specs on the Triton, both 25+% faster than this Vivobook Pro M7400QE configuration in games and GPU-dependant activities.
So at the end of the day, if you decide that a punchy and awesome looking OLED screen is the way to go for you on a compact multi-purpose laptop that can efficiently handle daily chores, demanding workloads and some gaming, the VivoBook Pro 14X is for sure an option to consider at this point. Just make sure you also understand the potential drawbacks of OLED laptop screens first, as well as the small corners that Asus cut on this product, mostly in the IO department.
This wraps up our review of the Vivobook Pro 14X M7400 here, and I’d love to hear your thoughts, questions, and feedback down below. Would you get this over everything else in this class?
Our content is reader-supported. If you buy through some of the links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission.