This is my detailed review of the 2024 Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UX3405 series.
The reviewed configuration is the new Zenbook 14 UX3405MA variant, with an Intel Core Ultra processor and Intel Arc graphics, the latest Meteor Lake hardware platform available from Intel.
For the most part, this series follows-up on the Zenbook 14 UX3402, Zenbook 14X UX3404 or Zenbook 14x OLED Q420 models from 2023, which we’ve tested over the last months, so I was able to properly compare the new Asus generation and figure out what has changed, what has improved, and where there’s still room for improvement.
This series is also the mainstream 14-inch Zenbook for this year and offers the design ques and the build quality that I’d expect from a modern Zenbook, alongside a 14-inch OLED touch display, good inputs and IO, a refined chassis, and now updated hardware that’s both more powerful and more efficient than the Intel and even the AMD options available in the past.
We’ll get in depth on all the aspects that you should know about this new Zenbook 14 UX3405 series further down in this laptop review.
Note: See the hardware and performance section for a summary of the various tests ran over time, on various software packages.
Specs as reviewed – Asus ZenBook 14 OLED UX3405 laptop
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED review, UX3405MA series, 2024 model
Screen 14 inch, OLED, 16:10 aspect ratio, touch, glossy,
Processor Intel Meteor Lake Core Ultra 7 155H, 6PC+8Ec+2LPEc/22T, up to 4.9 GHz
Video Intel Arc, up to 2.4 GHz
Memory 32 GB LPDDR5-7467 (soldered), up to 32 GB LPDDR5-7467
Storage 1TB M.2 NVMe SSD (Micro 2400) – single M.2 2280 slot
Connectivity Wireless 6E (Intel AX211) 2×2, Bluetooth 5.3
Ports left: 1x USB-A 3.2 gen1,
Battery 75 Wh, 65W USB-C charger
Size 312 mm or 12.28” (w) x 220 mm or 8.66” (d) x from 14.9 mm or 0.58” (h)
Weight 2.82 lbs (1.28 kg) + .36 (.8 lbs) for the USB-C charger and cables, EU version
Extras clamshell format with 180-degree hinge, single-fan dual-radiator cooling,
Asus offers this laptop in a bunch of different hardware configurations, with Intel Core Ultra 5 125H, Ultra 7 155H or Ultra 9 185H processors, 8 to 32 GB of RAM, and either a touch or a non-touch display, as well as either FHD or 2.8K OLED panels.
Update: In the meantime, Asus also offers and AMD-based variant of this same chassis, built on AMD Hawk Point Ryzen 7 8840HS hardware and available in Jade Black. This is called the Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406 series, and the link takes you to our detailed review .
Design, build quality – refined chassis and ergonomics This ZenBook is refinement of the previous 14 and 14x generations. Design wise, it inherits most lines from the previous 14x series, with the way the hinges are designed and the two-radiator cooling module. But it is smaller and lighter and slimmer than the 14x, and in fact even slimmer than the previous 14 model as well.
Asus advertises this notebook at 1.2 kilos and 14.9 mm thick. But, as there’s always a but, the non-touch FHD OLED screen version weighs 1.2 kilos, as this touch model that I have here tips the scales at 1.28 kg (or 2.82 pounds). As for the thickness, that’s without accounting for the rubber feet.
Regardless, this is a highly portable device for its size, especially considering that it doesn’t compromise on anything important such as ergonomics, ports, hardware or battery size, unlike some of the lighter 14-inch options .
It’s also built well, as I haven’t noticed any creaky noises or any unwanted flex during my time with it, either in the lid or in the main deck. This also meets a handful of MIL-SPEC criteria of durability and reliability, much like past Zenbooks did. Fairly new is the anti-microbial coating on the metal surfaces, but not a novelty for this generation.
Aesthetically, this looks and feels as the other recent Zenbooks, with clean lines, a monogram logo on the lid, and muted branding elements. Asus offers the series in either a dark-blue or a silver color, and our unit is the blue version. It’s beautiful, but does show smudges and finger oil easily, especially on the lid and on the keycaps. The silver model is more care-free in this regard.
Ergonomically, a few things have changed over the previous models, the most notable being the way the front lips and corners are designed, slightly tapered and friendlier on the wrists. The other is the hinge design, with a long-centered hinge instead of two smaller side hinges. This mechanism is still smooth and properly balanced for single-handed use, and still goes back flat to 180 degrees.
And then there’s the way the D-panel on the bottom of the laptop attaches to the main chassis, which is now much smoother and no-longer catches on your fingers with daily use, as on most Zenbooks available over the years. I’m glad Asus finally figured out the front lip and this bottom-panel part, even if it took them all these years.
Speaking of the bottom panel, you’ll notice plenty of air-grills down here, as well as the speaker grills and some larger rubber feet than on past Zenbooks, which allow for better ventilation and better grip on a desk.
Connectivity – Thunderbolt 4 ports, but no card reader As for the IO, that hasn’t changed and still includes an UBS-A, 2x USB-Cs (Thunderbolt 4 ports), 1x HDMI 2.1, and an audio jack.
On the other hand, there’s still no card-reader and no lock, and both USB-C ports are on the right edge, so you’re not getting the possibility of charging this laptop on either side.
Overall, this Zenbook 14 generation is the most refined Asus ever made in this 14-inch space of compact portable designs over the years, perfecting the format and addressing a few of the ergonomic issues I had with the past models. At this point, this is a nearly flawless implementation.
Keyboard, touchpad on the Zenbook 14 Inputs haven’t changed from the previous Zenbook 14 2023 generation, and that’s fine, as they were already some of the better available in 14-inch Windows devices.
The keyboard is a standard Asus layout, with proper spaced and sized keys, but smaller arrows and without a Number Keypad. The keycaps are smooth to the touch and have a small ditch in them; the typing experience is among the better in this space, with solid feedback and average stroke-depth, at 1.4 mm. It’s also averagely quiet, but not the quietest in the segment.
As a side note, the silver version of the laptop comes with silver keys, which offer poor contrast alongside the white-lit illumination system. There’s no issue with these darker keycaps on this blue variant, though.
The lighting system is standard for this sort of device, with white LEDs and three brightness levels to choose from, as well as dedicated physical indicators for CapsLock and the microphones, but not for FnLock. Uniformity is better than on past implementations, but still not perfect, and some light still spills out from underneath the keycaps; but for the most part, this lighting system is fine.
As for the touchpad, this is a spacious glass surface, smooth to the touch and excellent for daily swipes, gestures and taps. It didn’t rattle with firmer taps on this sample, and even the physical clicks in the corners were smooth and not that clunky.
Furthermore, this touchpad acts a virtual numeric keypad if needed, a function enabled by pressing the activator zone in the top-right corner.
For biometrics, there’s no longer a finger sensor in the power button with this generation, as on other Zenbooks, but you do get a capable IR webcam with Windows Hello support.
Beautiful 120Hz OLED display Asus remain faithful to OLED screens on their ultraportables and I don’t think there’s any IPS option anymore for this generation. That means no matte display, only glossy finishes, in either touch or non-touch implementations.
Our configuration is the touch model of the 14-inch 2.8K Lumina OLED panel, with the extra layer of protective glass on top of the panel. The non-touch doesn’t get the glass, thus the screen part is slimmer and lighter as a result, without feeling weaker or poorer made – I’ve spent a little time with a non-touch variant of this laptop as well.
What I noticed is that the graininess that normally bothers me on touch OLED laptops , caused by the digitizer layer and mostly visible on white backgrounds, is no longer as pronounced on this generation. There’s still a difference between the touch and non-touch variants, with the whites being somewhat muddier on the touch model, but there’s no longer that noticeable grain. For me, this is a major change on this generation.
This aside, the panel is still mostly the same sharp OLED as before, with sharp resolution, beautiful colors and blacks and contrast, and rather limited brightness at less than 400-nits sustained. Asus mention 550-nits peak brightness in their marketing materials, but that’s misleading as is the peak-HDR brightness, and not what you’ll actually perceive with daily use – so don’t expect it this to be ideal for bright environments or outdoor use.
I’ll also mention that this is a 120Hz refresh 3K OLED screen, faster than the 14-inch panel on previous Zenbooks, plus benefits from the fast response times of the OLEC technology. These make it a fine choice for gaming, especially paired with the updated Meteor Lake hardware, even if there’s no dedicated discrete GPU and no dedicated Sync technology, as on dedicated gaming laptops.
Anyway, here’s what we got in our tests, with an X-Rite i1 Display Pro sensor :
Panel HardwareID: Samsung SDC419D (ATNA40CU06-0);
Coverage: 100% sRGB, 93.7% Adobe RGB, 100% DCI-P3;
Type: 10-bit with HDR500, 120 Hz;
Measured gamma: 2.22;
Max brightness in the middle of the screen: 372.62 cd/m2 on power;
Min brightness in the middle of the screen: <5 cd/m2 on power;
Contrast at max brightness: 1:1;
White point: 6600 K;
Black on max brightness: 0 cd/m2;
PWM: Yes, to be discussed.
The panel came well calibrated out of the box and turned up uniform in color and luminosity. Plus, since this is an OLED panel, you don’t have to concern yourself with light bleeding or blooming or other nuisances of IPS panels. If interested, this article goes indepth over the OLED panel technology available in laptops .
You do have to account for flickering on OLED notebooks, and even that is not really an issue on Asus devices if you’re using the flicker-free OLED Screen dimming option available in the myAsus app instead of lowering the brightness with the regular controls available in Windows or on the F5/F6 keys. This article on NBC better explains how that flicker-free technology works in comparison to most other OLED implementations that use more aggressive PWM for brightness adjustments.
Furthermore, I will note that the touch-versions of this laptop should include an Asus pen Stylus in the box, if that’s something you’re interested in. Although, that’s hardly useful on this sort of a clamshell format.
I’ll also add that Asus also offer a lower-tier OLED screen on some of the base-level configurations of this laptop, a FHD 60 Hz panel. It’s still an OLED, though, so paints beautiful high-gamut colors and offers excellent blacks and contrast. It’s just not as sharp or as fast as the 2.8K 120Hz option, but that might not matter much at this size anyway.
Hardware and performance – Intel Meteor Lake processor, Arc iGPU Our test model is a mid-specced configuration of the 2024 Asus Zenbook 14, code name UX3405MA, with an Intel Core Ultra 7 155H CPU (Intel Evo certified ) and Intel Arc integrated graphics, 32 GB of LPDDR5-7500 memory, and a middling 1TB CPIe gen4 SSD.
Disclaimer: This review unit was provided by Asus for this article, and is an early pre-production unit. Initially, we tested the Asus Zenbook 14 with the software available as of mid-December 2023 (BIOS 201, MyAsus 3.1.20 app), just before the laptop was officially available in stores. That means certain aspects can change later on, with updates and more mature software package. So keep that in mind when judging the results of your tests and benchmarks.
Update (Dec 23rd): I’ve updated the benchmarks and findings based on the software available as of Dec 20th, after the laptop was launched: BIOS 203, MyAsus 3.1.20, Intel Graphics Driver 31.0.101.5122.
Update2 (Dec 28th): I’m ran a few more tests on the more recent BIOS 301, with MyAsus 4.0.2.0, Intel Graphics Driver 31.0.101.5122. At this point, the results in the article are based on this software package.
Update3 (March 16th 2024): I’ve retested the laptop with the more mature software available several months after launch: BIOS 304, MyAsus 4.0.6.0, Intel Graphics Driver 31.0.101.5333. You’ll find the updated results explained further down.
Update4 (May 3rd 2024): I’ve retested the laptop with the more mature software available several months after launch: BIOS 305, MyAsus 4.0.12.0 and the Intel Graphics available on Asus UX3405 drivers page. That’s the Graphics Driver 31.0.101.5126 from Dec 2023, and while there are newer Arc drivers on Intel’s website, for some reasons those yield poorer performance on this unit. So, I chose to use the driver that comes from Asus. You’ll find the updated results explained further down.
Update5 (Aug 5th 2024): The latest benchmark results in this article are on BIOS 307, MyAsus 4.0.16.0, and Intel Graphics Driver 31.0.101.5522.
Spec-wise, this series is based on Intel’s latest Core Ultra H Meteor Lake hardware platform, with Core Ultra processors and Intel Arc integrated graphics. In fact, this is the first laptop we’ve tested running this latest Core Ultra specs.
Our configuration is a Core Ultra 7 155H processor, a hybrid design with 6 Performance Cores, 8 Efficiency Cores, 2 extra Low Power Efficiency Cores, and a total of 22 combined Threads. In terms of capabilities, this processor is more of a follow-up of the Intel 13th generation Core i7 13700H CPU, and less-so of the Core i7 1360P normally available in the past in this size of laptops. It does run at a fairly limited power level here, at sub 30W, but still turns out quite a performer, as you’ll see in a bit.
The Meteor Lake Ultra processors incorporate 2x NPUs (Neural Processing Units) as well, Ai accelerators meant to enhance the performance and capabilities in certain aps. I didn’t get to properly look into these at this point.
A lower tier Intel Core Ultra 5 125H and a higher-tier Intel Core Ultra 9 185H processor variants are also available for this lineup.
Graphics are handled by the integrated Intel Arc chip, a major novelty for the Meteor Lake platform, both in terms of design and in terms of capabilities. This is a notable upgrade over the Iris Xe iGPU available in previous Intel devices, even in this power-limited portable implementation.
Our configuration also comes with 32GB of LPDDR5-7500 memory, faster than on previous Zenbooks. 8 and 16 GB configurations are also available in some markets.
For storage, Asus opted for a mid-level PCIe gen4 Micron 2400 SSD drive here, which is alright for regular use, but will struggle somewhat with sustained transfers. This aspect shows the mid-tier nature of this series.
The SSD is the only upgradeable component here, as the Wifi chip is no longer an M.2 format. To get inside you need to remove the back panel, which is held in place by a couple of Torx screws. As a novelty, all the screws are easily accessible now, and there are no longer screws hidden underneath any of the rubber feet. The screws are still of two sizes, so make sure you put them back in the right order.
Inside you’ll find the motherboard with the thermal module, the battery, speakers, and the SSD and WiFi slots. Everything is packed up nicely, with no space left unused.
As far as the software goes, this ZenBook gets the standard MyAsus app which allows control over the power profiles, battery and screen settings, updates, etc.
There are three performance/thermal profiles to choose from:
Performance – allows the hardware to run at ~28W sustained, with the fan ramping up to ~40 dB;
Balanced/Standard – allows the hardware to run at 20W in sustained loads, with the fan ramping up to ~35 dB;
Whisper – limits the CPU at 15W to favor fan noise of sub 30 dB.
These settings are a little lower than on the previous 14-inch Zenbook UX3402VA, but the fans are also quieter on Performance and Standard modes. Overall, I’d recommend keeping the laptop on Standard in most cases, to prevent any stuttering or sluggishness. The Performance profile offers faster processing capabilities in sustained loads, but is also noisier. We’ll discuss the noise profiles further down, in the next section of the review.
We’ll get to that in a bit, but first, here’s what to expect in terms of speeds and temperatures with daily chores such as streaming video, editing text, or browsing the web.
Productivity Performance and Benchmarks – Intel Core Ultra (Meteor Lake), Arc graphics On to more demanding loads, we start by testing the CPU’s performance in the Cinebench R15 loop test.
On the Performance mode, the Core Ultra 7 155H processor peaks at ~50W of power for brief seconds, and then gradually drops and stabilizes at around 28W in sustained loads, with temperatures in the high-70s Celsius, and fan-noise levels of ~40 dB. These result in sustained Cinebench scores of around 1700 points.
On Standard, the system limits the fan to around 35 dBA. The Ultra 7 155H gradually stabilizing at 20W after several loops, with temperatures in the low-70s C, and scores of around 1200 points. That’s about 70% of the scores of Performance mode.
On Whisper mode, the processor quickly drops to 15W, with barely audible fans and temperatures in the low-70s C. At 15W, the Ultra 7 processor scores around 1000 points, roughly 60% of the Performance scores.
Finally, our sample performed very well on battery, stabilizing at around 28W of power on the Performance mode. That’s on par with the plugged-in performance.
All these are illustrated in the graph below.
To put these in perspective, here’s how this Core Ultra 7 155H implementation fares against other hardware platforms available in previous 14-inch thin and light laptops , such as the 13 and 12th-gen Intel Core and the AMD Ryzen 7 7000 hardware.
This is a close match for the i9-13900H at similar power, and 20% faster than the i7-1360P. However, Core H implementations usually run at higher power even in 14-inch laptops, and that allows them to outperform the Ultra in this test. The Ryzen 7 7840U, on the other hand, is still faster by a major extent at 30W, and even faster at lower power, due to the difference in architecture between the two platforms.
We’ll have a more detailed article on the Ultra 7 155H and the main Intel and AMD competitors in the next few days.
We then went ahead and further verified our findings with the more taxing Cinebench R23 loop test and in Blender. We measured similar behavior, power limits, fan noise and temperatures.
We then ran the 3DMark CPU profile test.
Finally, we ran our combined CPU+GPU stress tests on this notebook, on the Performance profile. 3DMark stress runs the same test for 20 times in a loop and looks for performance variation and degradation over time. This unit easily passed the test, which means the performance is not impacted in longer-duration sustained loads, as the heat builds up.
Benchmarks results and performance summary With that out of the way, let’s get to some benchmarks. We ran our standard set of tests with the laptop on Performance mode and the screen set at its default 2.8K resolution.
These results are based on the software package available as of early August 2024. Since the laptop has been available now for 8+ months, I expect little can still significantly change with later software updates.
Here’s what we got.
Here are the results on BIOS 307 and the Intel drivers available on Asus’s website in early August 2024. You’ll also find results on the previous BIOS down below, for comparison.
3DMark 13 –CPU profile: max – 5859, 16 – 5553, 8 – 4421, 4 – 3047, 2 – 1721, 1 – 921;3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 7911 (Graphics – 8498, Physics – 21187, Combined – 3219);3DMark 13 – Night Raid: 24844 (Graphics – 31779, CPU – 11109);3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 3673 (Graphics – 3355, CPU – 7952);3DMark 13 – XeSS: 6.96 fs OFF, 10.66 fps ON (52.9% performance difference).
Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 2021;Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Medium: 5434;
PCMark 10: 7035 (Essentials – 10663, Productivity – 10049, Digital Content Creation – 8820);GeekBench 6.2.2 64-bit: Multi-core: 12367, Single-Core: 2326;CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 2341 cb, CPU Single Core 248 cb;CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 5477 cb, CPU Single Core 660 cb;CineBench R23: CPU 12278 pts (best run), CPU 11262 pts (10 min loop test), CPU Single Core 1726 pts (best run);CineBench 2024: GPU – pts, CPU 630 pts (best single run), CPU 676 (10 min run), CPU Single Core 102 pts;x265 HD Benchmark 64-bit: 32.07 s.
And here are some work-related benchmarks, on the same Performance profile, on BIOS 307:
Blender 3.6.5 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 3m 28s ;Blender 3.6.5 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 9m 01s;
PugetBench – DaVinci Resolve: 492;PugetBench – Adobe Photoshop (25.5): 4022;PugetBench – Adobe Premiere (24.2.1): 3219;
SPECviewperf 2020 – 3DSMax: 20.82;SPECviewperf 2020 – Catia: 15.86;SPECviewperf 2020 – Creo: 20.25;SPECviewperf 2020 – Energy: 6.08;SPECviewperf 2020 – Maya: 73.70;SPECviewperf 2020 – Medical: 16.30;SPECviewperf 2020 – SNX: 5.74;SPECviewperf 2020 – SW: 34.78;V-Ray Benchmark: CPU – 7996 vsamples, GPU CUDA – 263 vpaths.
And these are the results on the previous BIOS 301 from mid-January 2024.
3DMark 13 –CPU profile: max – 6982, 16 – 5457, 8 – 4237, 4 – 3012, 2 – 1728, 1 – 926;3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 7648 (Graphics – 8405, Physics – 20072, Combined – 2938);3DMark 13 – Night Raid: 26266 (Graphics – 35214, CPU – 10766);3DMark 13 – Port Royal: 1330;3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 3754 (Graphics – 3424, CPU – 8295);3DMark 13 – XeSS: 5.50 fs OFF, 9.38 fps ON (70.6% performance difference).
Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 1876;Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Medium: 5259;PCMark 10: 6726 (Essentials – 10594, Productivity – 8793, Digital Content Creation – 8867);GeekBench 5.5.1 64-bit: Multi-core: 11184, Single-Core: 1770;GeekBench 6.2.2 64-bit: Multi-core: 12360, Single-Core: 2385;CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 2386 cb, CPU Single Core 263 cb;CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 5908 cb, CPU Single Core 698 cb;CineBench R23: CPU 13873 pts (best run), CPU 12132 pts (10 min loop test), CPU Single Core 1761 pts (best run);CineBench 2024: GPU – pts, CPU 629 pts (best single run), CPU 626 (10 min run), CPU Single Core 101 pts;x265 HD Benchmark 64-bit: 34.83 s.
And here are some work-related benchmarks, on the same Performance profile:
Blender 3.0.1 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 3m 24s ;Blender 3.0.1 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 8m 41s;Blender 3.4.1 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 3m 22s ;Blender 3.4.1 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 8m 42s;Blender 3.6.5 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 3m 30s ;Blender 3.6.5 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 8m 53s;
PugetBench – DaVinci Resolve: 443;PugetBench – Adobe After Effects: -;PugetBench – Adobe Photoshop (25.1): 1061;PugetBench – Adobe Photoshop (25.5): 4126;PugetBench – Adobe Premiere (23.6): 319;PugetBench – Adobe Premiere (24.2.1): 3068;
SPECviewperf 2020 – 3DSMax: 20.81;SPECviewperf 2020 – Catia: 16.10;SPECviewperf 2020 – Creo: 20.25;SPECviewperf 2020 – Energy: 6.08;SPECviewperf 2020 – Maya: 68.24;SPECviewperf 2020 – Medical: 14.98;SPECviewperf 2020 – SNX: 5.36;SPECviewperf 2020 – SW: 36.77;V-Ray Benchmark: CPU – 9075 vsamples, GPU CUDA – 214 vpaths.
Here’s a comparison of these results with a few other Intel and AMD platforms available so far in this space.
Zenbook 14 UX3405, Zenbook 14 UX3402, Zenbook 14X UX3404 ,Yoga Slim 6 ,
3DMark – Fire Strike 7911 (G – 8498, P – 21187, C – 3219);
5083 (G – 5442, P – 21800, C – 1923)
5618 (G – 6043, P – 24479, C – 2094)
7368 (G – 7919, P – 22331, C – 2893)
3DMark – Time Spy 3673 (Graphics – 3355, CPU – 7952)
1866 (Graphics – 1640, CPU – 8542)
2029 (Graphics – 1774, CPU – 11107)
3216 (Graphics – 2883, CPU – 9352)
Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme 2021
1070
1156
1498
CineBench R23 (best run) 12278 cb – multi core,
10512 cb – multi core,
14712 cb – multi core,
15194 cb – multi core,
Blender 3.01 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute 8m 55s
10m 01s
7m 28s
6m 20s
PugetBench – Adobe Photoshop 1061
764
904
943
PugetBench – DaVinci After Effects 492
467
473
500
SPECviewperf 2020 – 3DSMax: 20.82
14.13
14.91
25.52
SPECviewperf 2020 – Catia: 15.86
13.26
14.08
29.78
SPECviewperf 2020 – Maya: 73.70
56.65
57.65
113.68
The generational gains for the Meteor Lake platform are significant on the GPU side, almost 2x the scores of the previous Iris Xe iGPU. On the CPU side, this platform beats the 13th-gen Core P in most tests, except in single-core loads, due to the lower Turbo Boost frequency.
The i9-13900H in the Zenbook 14X scores higher, but that’s a rather misleading comparison, because the 14X is a much higher-power platform. At around 30W, the i9-13900H actually scores lower in multi-core tests than the Ultra 7 155H in the 2024 laptop, but still a little higher in single-core tests.
As for the AMD platform, that’s still faster in CPU loads, and by a notable margin, especially in sustained tasks. The Intel platform takes a win in the graphics department, where the Intel Arc iGPU outscores the Radeon 780M in the synthetic tests. However, that’s no longer the case when it comes to real-life test such as those included in Specviewperf. That might change with future drivers, though.
For the time being, though, and based on these early tests, the Intel Core Ultra hardware is competitive as a multi-purpose low-power platform, even against the AMD Ryzen U options (including Ryzen 8000 U Hawk Point APUs, which are merely slight refinements of the existing Phoenix SKUs). It seems to have a potential edge in GPU performance, but it trails the AMD platforms in GPU, so you can arguably say that Intel caught up with AMD in this segment.
At the same time, this is not match in GPU capabilities for devices with discrete GPUs, not even for entry-level configurations such as an RTX 3050/RTX 4050, and definitely no match for larger all-purpose or gaming rigs with dedicated graphics. Let’s keep realistic on what we can expect from an iGPU.
This laptop runs quieter than other Zenbooks on Performance mode, at 40 dBA at head-level, but perhaps you might still be interested in an even quieter experience.
Here are some benchmarks results for the Standard mode, in which case the fans won’t go over 35 dBA:
3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 6962 (Graphics – 8129, Physics – 14553, Combined – 2436);3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 2992 (Graphics – 2769, CPU – 5506);Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 1834;CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 3184 cb, CPU Single Core 638 cb;Blender 3.01 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 10m 14s.
You’re losing some of the processing power with this more power-limited profile, both on the CPU and on the GPU side. This mode is fine for daily multitasking, but I’d stick to Performance mode for demanding loads.
And here’s Whisper mode, in which case the fans are barely audible at sub-30 dBA.
3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 6108 (Graphics – 7258, Physics – 12039, Combined – 2087);3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 2350 (Graphics – 2195, CPU – 3931);Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 1412;CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 2542 cb, CPU Single Core 575 cb;Blender 3.01 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 12m 08s.
These scores are about 60-70% of what the laptop can deliver on Performance mode. Once more, Whisper mode is OK for light use, but I’d refrain from using it with serious multitasking or demanding activities.
Gaming Performance – the Arc iGPU updates the Xe of the past With these out of the way, we also ran a couple of DX11, DX12, and Vulkan games on the Performance profile of this Core Ultra 7 + Arc configuration, at FHD+ resolution, with Low/Lowest graphics settings. I threw in a few other platforms for comparison.
Note: I’ve updated the gaming results on BIOS 305 and the Intel drivers available in early May 2024.
Low settings Zenbook 14 2024 – Zenbook 14X 2023 –Vivobook S 14 2023 –ZenBook S 13 2023 –Lenovo Yoga Slim 6 2023 –ZenBook S 13 2022 –ZenBook 14 2022 –
Bioshock Infinite 116 fps (65 fps – 1% low)
91 fps (63 fps – 1% low)
96 fps (62 fps – 1% low)
80 fps (52 fps – 1% low)
140 fps (79 fps – 1% low)
102 fps (63 fps – 1% low)
70 fps (48 fps – 1% low)
Doom: Eternal 74 fps (36 fps – 1% low)
39 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
38 fps (30 fps – 1% low)
29 fps (23 fps – 1% low)
74 fps (52 fps – 1% low)
45 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
29 fps (15 fps – 1% low)
Far Cry 5 46 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
37 fps (26 fps – 1% low)
32 fps (24 fps – 1% low)
29 fps (22 fps – 1% low)
48 fps (36 fps – 1% low)
45 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
31 fps (22 fps – 1% low)
Far Cry 6 43 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
–
–
–
39 fps (29 fps – 1% low)
–
–
Horizon Forbidden West 34 fps (25 fps – 1% low)
–
–
–
–
–
–
Dota 2 81 fps (58 fps – 1% low)
74 fps (55 fps – 1% low)
77 fps (51 fps – 1% low)
62 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
72 fps (41 fps – 1% low)
74 fps (46 fps – 1% low)
76 fps (52 fps – 1% low)
Shadow of Tomb Raider 54 fps (30 fps – 1% low)
43 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
41 fps (25 fps – 1% low)
26 fps (19 fps – 1% low)
59 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
47 fps (35 fps – 1% low)
36 fps (23 fps – 1% low)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt *44 fps (26 fps – 1% low)
*32 fps (23 fps – 1% low)
*38 fps (27 fps – 1% low)
*29 fps (21 fps – 1% low)
*41 fps (24 fps – 1% low)
41 fps (26 fps – 1% low)
38 fps (20 fps – 1% low)
Doom, Dota 2, Witcher 3 – recorded with MSI Afterburner in game mode;
Bioshock, Tomb Raider games – recorded with the included Benchmark utilities;
*Witcher 3 results for the 2023 models are different than on previous devices, due to the changes brought to the game by the 2023 DX12 updates and patches.
Pretty much all games are playable here with these settings, including newer titles, with this kind of settings. Of course, some games will struggle at higher resolutions at graphics settings, but here’s where XeSS should help. However, that didn’t work as expected with the current drivers on my units, so I’ll have to update on this matter once I figure things out.
In the meantime, just notice the significant increase in framerates over the Intel Xe configurations, and even how this Arc GPU trades blows with the Radeon 780M in the AMD Ryzen 7000 APU. Plus, with updated drivers, I’d reckon these results might actually improve.
That aside, here are some gaming results on the various power profiles, to help you make an idea of what to expect from potential lower-power implementations of the Intel Ultra 7 platform.
We’ll have a more detailed article on the Intel Arc iGPU and how it fares against the Intel Xe and Radeon iGPUs. Should be up soon.
— updating
Low settings Ultra 7 155H, Arc, Ultra 7 155H, Arc,XeSS – 28W, Ultra 7 155H, Arc, Ultra 7 155H, Arc,
Cyberpunk 2077 30 fps (18 fps – 1% low)
34 (??) fps (17 fps – 1% low)
25 fps (13 fps – 1% low)
21 fps (7 fps – 1% low)
Far Cry 6 43 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
–
40 fps (20 fps – 1% low)
22 fps (12 fps – 1% low)
Shadow of Tomb Raider 54 fps (30 fps – 1% low)
–
52 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
40 fps (18 fps – 1% low)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44 fps (36 fps – 1% low)
–
39 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
27 fps (15 fps – 1% low)
As mentioned, XeSS settings didn’t work properly on my unit with these current drivers. I’m still looking into it and will have an update at some point.
With that out of the way, let’s go through some CPU/GPU logs. The logs below are on BIOS 201, but nothing changes with the more recent software, expect from the GPU clocks being reported properly. I’ll probably update these at some point in the future.
First, the Performance mode. The hardware stabilizes at around 28W of power, which is not quite enough to allow the GPU to work at its full potential. However, this aspect is rather unclear from the logs, as HWinfo doesn’t record the GPU clocks properly at this point.
As far as noise and temperatures go, the fan still spins at 40 dBA with games, and the CPU stabilizes at temperatures in the low 80s C.
For what is worth, bumping the laptop off the desk helps lower the internal temperatures a fair amount, somewhere in the mid 70s. So I would advice placing the laptop on a stand for longer sessions of sustained work/gaming.
The Standard profile limits the processor’s power at around 20W, with a quieter fan at ~35 dBA. The GPU clocks average notably lower than on Performance, which also translates in a 15-30% loss in framerates. The CPU runs a little cooler, in the mid-70s, but I still don’t see the point of running games on Standard on this laptop.
No point on running games on Whisper mode either, which further limits the power and capabilities, but with even lower noise levels and internal temperatures.
And finally, the last log shows how the laptop performs on battery power, on Performance mode. Once more, this matches the capabilities of the laptop plugged-in.
Noise, Heat, Connectivity, speakers, and others Asus went with a single-fan dual-radiator single-heatpipe thermal module here.
For comparison, here are the cooling modules on the 2023 Zenbook 14 and Zenbook 14X models.
I like how they moved the heatpipe loop to the top of the fan, and thus were able to implement another radiator on this most recent ZenBook 14. This allows the 2024 model to run at similar power levels and temperatures to the 2023 lineups, but with lower noise-levels.
At the same time, the cooling on the Zenbook 14X is beefier, with more heatpipes and larger radiators and fan. Paired with the faster spinning fan, the 14X is a higher-power design.
Overall, the cooling on the Zenbook 14 is properly balance for this chassis, and keeps things within acceptable thermal and noise limits.
As far as the noise levels go, expect 40 dBA on Performance, 35 dBA on Standard, and sub 30 dBA on Whisper mode.
With daily use, the fan keeps mostly idle on all profiles, but kicks in with heavier multitasking, especially on Performance with the laptop plugged in. I haven’t noticed coil winning or electronic noises on this unit.
As for external temperatures, the chassis keeps cool with light use.
*Daily Use – streaming Netflix in EDGE for 30 minutes, Whisper Mode, fans at 0 dB
With demanding loads, this laptop runs acceptably warm on Performance mode, with a hotspot of around 50 C in the top side of the chassis, around the hardware and the rear radiator. The bottom runs quite hot, though, at 55+ over the CPU.
Those are with the laptop flat on the desk, and will be lower if you place it on a stand. Temperatures will also be lower on the Standard mode, but I wouldn’t use that mode for games.
These temperatures are higher than on the previous generation Zenbook 14, mostly due to the slower-spinning fan on this generation. They’re still fine for a long gaming sessions, though.
*Gaming – Performance mode – playing Witcher for 30 minutes, fans at ~40 dB
For connectivity, there’s the latest-gen Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3 through an Intel AX211 module on this laptop, which performed fine during my time with the laptop.
Audio is handled by a set of stereo speakers that fire through grills positioned on the side of the chassis. They sound alright for this class, with good volumes and quality. They’re also a bit punchier and richer than the speakers on the previous Zenbook 14 generation.
Finally, there’s an FHD camera placed at the top of the screen, flanked by microphones. The image quality is fine in good lighting, and still usable in bad light. There’s also IR functionality with Windows Hello support offered here, as well as a physical privacy cover. On top of these, an ALS sensor is also part of the camera ensemble.
Battery life – longer runtimes with Meteor Lake There’s a 75 Wh battery inside the 2024 Asus Zenbook 14, properly sized for its segment.
Here’s what we got in our battery life tests, with the screen’s brightness set at around 120 nits (~50 brightness) and at its default 120Hz refresh rate.
7.5 W (~10 h of use) – text editing in Google Drive, Balanced Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;5 W (~15 h of use) – 1080p fullscreen video on Youtube in Edge, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;6 W (~12 h of use) – Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;10W (~6-8 h of use) – browsing in Edge, Standard Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;38 W (~2 h of use) – Gaming – Dota 2, Standard Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON.
These are excellent runtimes, thanks to the efficiency of the Meteor Lake platform and that big battery. But the platform makes the major difference and allows this generation of the ZenBook 14 to outlast the previous 13th-gen Core P and Core H platforms available in older Zenbooks.
The screen doesn’t automatically switch from 120Hz on battery power, but you can do this manually if looking to push the runtimes a little further. You could also use the Battery Saver options in Windows. I haven’t for these test.
The laptop ships with a compact 65W USB-C charger. It’s a single-piece design with a long and thick cable and an USB-C plug. A full charger takes about 2 hours.
Price and availability- Asus Zenbook 14 OLED At the time of this article, the Asus ZenBook 14 UX3404MA is listed in some stores.
This exact configuration reviewed here, Ponder Blue and with the Ultra 7 / 32 GB RAM / 1 TB SSD configuration, is available for $1299 at Best Buy. That’s a fair MSRP price.
Other configuration will be available later one, most likely some quite a lot more affordable
I will update this section over the next days and weeks. In the meantime, follow this link for updated prices and configurations in your area .
Update: In the meantime, Asus also offers and AMD-based variant of this same chassis, built on AMD Hawk Point Ryzen 7 8840HS hardware and available in Jade Black. This is called the Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406 series, and the link takes you to our detailed review .
Competition for the Zenbook 14 UX3405 There are quite a few other 14-inch ultraportable laptops available out there, which you should at least acknowledge in your search:
Acer Swift Go 14 Asus Vivobook 14 Apple MacBook Air M2/M3 – premium metal build, excellent inputs, limited IO, IPS display, fanless design and amazing battery life, weighs 1.22 kg/2.7 lbs, competitive base models, but gets expensive as specced up;Apple MacBook Pro 14 – premium metal build, excellent inputs, good IO, mini LED display, way more powerful than the Airs, and still provides amazing battery life, weighs 1.6 kg/3.5 lbs, expensive;Dell XPS 14 HP Spectre x360 14 – premium metal build and 2-in-1 format, good inputs and IO, 14″ OLED touch display, Meteor Lake hardware, 68 Wh battery, weighs 1.4 kg/3.2 lbs, rather expensive;Lenovo Yoga/Slim 7i 14 Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon – premium business ThinkPad design, excellent inputs and IO, 14″OLED/IPS display, powerful Meteor Lake hardware implementation with updated cooling, 57 Wh battery, weighs 1.15 kg/2.5 lbs, expensive;
Furthermore, if shopping on a tighter budget, the previous-gen Zenbooks should be on your list as well, such as the Zenbook 14 UX3402 and Zenbook 14X UX3404 lineups.
Final thoughts- Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UX3405 review This 2024 Zenbook 14 is a result of multiple updates and refinements over generations of 14-inch Zenbooks, and is overall a very good laptop in its class of portable and compact daily drivers that won’t break the bank for you.
Gone are the sharp edges, the limited back angle, the annoying status LEDs placed in the line of sight, or a cooling module that used to blow hot air into the screen. Instead, this 2024 model is a masterpiece when it comes to ergonomics and ease of use, my only “complaints” being the lack of USB-C ports on both edges, to offer the convenience of being able to charge the laptop on either side, and perhaps having up-firing speakers instead of bottom/side placed ones.
Other than these, this laptop is still compact and lightweight in its class, without compromising on anything important. It’s built well, it offers a beautiful OLED touchscreen, good laptop inputs and plenty of ports, and is now more powerful and more efficient than the previous Zenbooks. It also runs quieter with sustained loads, and offers punchier speakers.
So yeah, I’m having a hard time finding reasons not to appreciate what Asus did here with this Zenbook generation. Hopefully their pricing gets even more competitive over the next months, and they are able to keep QC in check.
All in all, if you’re looking for a laptop of this sort in 2024, this Zenbook 14 is one of the better options out there.
That’s about it for my review of the 2024 Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UX3405MA series, but I will update things over the next weeks, as the software matures. I’ll also have a few follow-up articles coming in the next days, so stay close for those. And in the meantime, I’d love to hear your thoughts and question on this update.
Disclaimer: Our content is reader-supported. If you buy through some of the links on our site, we may earn a commission.
Terms .
Navigation: Ultrabookreview.com » Asus
Review by: Andrei Girbea
Andrei Girbea is a Writer and Editor-in-Chief here at Ultrabookreview.com . I write about mobile technology, laptops and computers in general. I've been doing it for more than 15 years now. I'm a techie with a Bachelor's in Computer Engineering. I mostly write reviews and thorough guides here on the site, with some occasional columns and first-impression articles.
Raymond Nayve
July 16, 2024 at 4:18 pm
bios 307 is out
Andrew
July 19, 2024 at 3:17 pm
Small Improvement in GPU & Multi Core results.
304
GeekB Single: 2353
GeekB Multi: 11574
GeekB GPU: 31760
CineB Single: 101
CineB Multi: 663
305
GeekB Single: 2320
GeekB Multi: 12225
GeekB GPU: 33642
CineB Single: 102
CineB Multi: 625
307
GeekB Single: 2335
GeekB Multi: 12556
GeekB GPU: 36798
CineB Single: 102
CineB Multi: 718
Andrew
August 13, 2024 at 9:08 pm
Bios 308 is now out!
Will post my results when I get a chance!