华硕 Zenbook A14 笔记本电脑评测--搭载骁龙 X 处理器的 14 英寸 OLED 亚笔记本电脑仅重 978 克
骁龙 X1-26-100 首次亮相。
华硕新推出的 Zenbook A14 是一款特别轻巧的 14 英寸笔记本电脑,重量不到 1 千克。它的外壳完全由铝合金制成,内部则搭载了全新的骁龙 X1-26-100 处理器。不过,这款笔记本的显示屏只能以 60 Hz 的频率运行。Andreas Osthoff, 👁 Andreas Osthoff (translated by DeepL / Ninh Duy) Published 🇺🇸 🇩🇪 ...
结论--Zenbook A14 的低重量需要妥协
新款华硕 Zenbook A14 的重点在于尽可能减轻重量,对于一款 14 英寸设备来说,不到一公斤的重量令人印象深刻,特别是考虑到其相对较低的入门级价格。其全新的铝合金外壳材料也有助于实现这一目标,既轻便又非常坚固。在诸如 Zenbook S 16等设备已经使用这种材料制成的盖子之后,现在 Zenbook A14 的基本单元也采用了这种材料。不过,这款设备的厚度只有不到 16 毫米,并不算特别薄。因此,你必须决定是使用尽可能轻的设备,还是使用更薄的设备(如 MacBook Air)。 Apple MacBook Air, 三星Galaxy Book4 Edge 14).
不过,在一些地方,你必须做出妥协,才能将重量控制在如此低的水平,你会觉得华硕不惜一切代价也要将重量控制在 1 千克以下。如果右侧有足够的空间放置更多的端口,第二个风扇可以连接到热管上,键盘也可以做得更好。此外,它的电池续航时间本身非常不错,但与宣传值相差甚远。
Zenbook A14 的基本型号依赖于高通公司新推出的入门级芯片 Snapdragon X(X1-26-100),它再次提供了较低的 CPU 时钟速率。这对其单核性能尤其不利,而且其 GPU 的速度也相对较慢。考虑到其 1099.99 美元的入门级价格,华硕对 CPU 的选择多少有些出人意料,因为从技术上讲,新的骁龙 X 应该能让更多价格低廉的笔记本电脑面世。搭载骁龙 X Elite 的高价机型性能更强,但在这个价位上,其 60-Hz 1200p OLED 屏幕值得商榷。
Pros
Cons
价格和供应情况
新款 Zenbook A14 可能将于 2 月中旬开始在华硕的在线商店订购,起价为 1,099.99 美元。
可能的替代品比较
Image | Model / Review | Price | Weight | Height | Display |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 ⎘ Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $819.09 ASUS Zenbook 14 OLED 2024 Bu... 2. $569.00 Asus ZenBook 14 Pro oled Q41... 3. $1,149.00 ASUS Zenbook 14 UM3406HA Bus... List Price: 1299€ | 978 g | 15.9 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI OLED | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA Intel Core Ultra 5 226V ⎘ Intel Arc Graphics 130V ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $999.99 ASUS Vivobook S 14 Copilot+ ... 2. $899.99 ASUS Vivobook S 14 OLED Slim... 3. $959.99 ASUS Vivobook S 14 Copilot+ ... List Price: 1099€ | 1.3 kg | 15.9 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI OLED | |
HP OmniBook X 14 Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100 ⎘ Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $891.24 HP OmniBook X Laptop 14.0" T... 2. $696.99 HP OmniBook X Copilot+ PC, 1... 3. $1,029.99 HP OmniBook X AI PC Laptop 1... List Price: 1299€ | 1.3 kg | 14.3 mm | 14.00" 2240x1400 189 PPI IPS | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100 ⎘ Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $685.00 Acer Swift Go 14 Intel Evo T... 2. $749.99 acer Swift Go 14 Intel Evo A... 3. $849.99 Acer Swift Go 14 Intel Evo T... List Price: 1149 Euro | 1.3 kg | 16.55 mm | 14.50" 2560x1600 208 PPI IPS | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS ⎘ AMD Radeon 780M ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: $819.09 List Price: 1199€ | 1.2 kg | 14.9 mm | 14.00" 1920x1200 162 PPI OLED | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100 ⎘ Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Amazon: $1,397.98 List Price: 1649€ | 1.3 kg | 17.5 mm | 13.80" 2304x1536 201 PPI IPS | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS ⎘ AMD Radeon 780M ⎘ 32 GB Memory, 1024 GB SSD | Amazon: 1. $819.99 Lenovo IdeaPad 5 14" Touch R... 2. $16.99 Mini Fast Charger Fit for Le... 3. $9.98 65W USB Type C Charger Fit f... List Price: 949€ | 1.5 kg | 16 mm | 14.00" 2880x1800 243 PPI OLED | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU Apple M3 ⎘ Apple M3 10-Core GPU ⎘ 16 GB Memory, 512 GB SSD | Amazon: $1,299.00 List Price: 1759€ | 1.2 kg | 11.3 mm | 13.60" 2560x1664 225 PPI IPS |
华硕新推出的 Zenbook A14 系列设备是一款重量不到 1 千克的超小型笔记本电脑,尽管它配备了 14 英寸显示屏。该设备采用了高通公司的骁龙 X SoC 作为处理器,并配备了 1200p OLED 屏幕。配备骁龙 X1-26-100、16 GB 内存和 1 TB SSD 的新款 Zenbook A14 的起价为 1099.99 美元。我们的测试机(约合 1350 美元)配备了 32 GB 内存,但在其他方面与基本型号相同。配备性能更强的骁龙 X Elite(X1E-78-100)和 32 GB 内存的机型售价也在 1550 美元左右。
说到重量,它的主要竞争对手之一其实是 华为 Matebook X Pro但它使用的 OLED 面板要好得多,而且价格也相差很大(32 GB 内存约为 2,000 美元)。
» Notebookcheck多媒体笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck游戏笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck低价办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck高端办公/商务笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck工作站笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck亚笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck超级本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck变形本产品Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck平板电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck智能手机Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck评测过最出色的笔记本电脑屏幕
» Notebookcheck售价500欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
» Notebookcheck售价300欧元以下笔记本电脑Top 10排名
规格
外壳 - 铝
围绕新款 Zenbook A14 外壳的神奇词汇是 "Ceraluminum"--陶瓷和铝的结合,我们已经从诸如 Zenbook S 16.虽然那款笔记本电脑仅在盖子上使用了 Ceraluminum,但现在 Zenbook A14 的外壳完全由这种新材料制成。除了更轻之外,它还更耐用,不易沾染灰尘和指纹。我们的测试设备采用冰岛灰(也可选扎布里斯基米色),在这方面给人的印象很好,几乎看不到指纹,而且很容易擦掉。
该设备的稳定性同样令人印象深刻,尤其是底座非常稳定。我们只能将底座微微推入--即使施加了很大的力,也不会发出任何嘎吱嘎吱的声音。盖子本身的灵活性稍差,但我们也没有任何保留意见。不过,铰链有点过于光滑,允许的摇晃幅度很小。屏幕的最大开启角度约为 135 度。
Zenbook A14 的重量仅为 978 克,在同类产品中脱颖而出,但同时它并不特别薄,只有不到 16 毫米。因此,你必须决定是喜欢轻便的设备还是特别薄的设备(如 MacBook Air厚度为 11.9 毫米)。为了保持低重量,65 瓦的电源也相当小巧,包括 USB-C 线缆在内仅重 190 克(不含线缆仅重 116 克)。
连接性 - USB-C 4.0 和 HDMI
Zenbook A14 配备了两个最新的 USB-C 4.0 端口,其中一个还用于为设备充电。此外,它还有一个 HDMI 端口和一个普通的 USB-A 端口,在日常使用中仍然非常有用。特别是机身右侧还有很大的空间,可以很容易地用于放置另一个 USB-C 端口(允许从两侧为笔记本充电)或读卡器。由于内置了 NPU,Zenbook A14 被归类为 Copilot+ PC。
交流
价格较低的 Zenbook A14 使用 FastConnect 6900 Wi-Fi 模块(Wi-Fi 6E / 蓝牙 5.3),只有配备骁龙 X Elite 的配置才支持 Wi-Fi 7 / 蓝牙 5.4。即便如此,在使用 Wi-Fi 6E 模块的情况下,它与华硕参考路由器的传输速率也非常出色。Zenbook A14 没有配备 5G 模块。
Networking | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 6GHz | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 6GHz | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
iperf3 transmit AXE11000 | |
iperf3 receive AXE11000 | |
网络摄像头
笔记本电脑的 1080p 网络摄像头支持微软的 Studio 功能,画质尚可。此外,还配备了一个红外传感器,可通过 Windows Hello 进行面部识别。
维护
机箱底盖由 Torx 螺钉(T5)固定,可以取下。然后可以清洁风扇,必要时更换 M.2 2280 固态硬盘和拧紧的电池。查看散热系统后发现,两个风扇中有一个没有连接到热管。不过我们稍后会再讨论这个问题。
可持续性
Zenbook 通过了各种认证,如 EPEAT Gold 或 Energy Star 8.0,但制造商没有提供任何有关其产品二氧化碳排放量的信息。它的包装主要由可回收材料制成,但没有关于笔记本电脑本身的信息。
输入设备 - 1.3 毫米键程
这款笔记本的键盘采用白色背光(可通过传感器自动激活/关闭),键程为 1.3 毫米。不过,与其他 Zenbook 机型相比,它的打字手感稍差,主要原因是反馈有点松软。使用一段时间后就会习惯,但还是有更好的键盘可供选择。它的布局并不是最好的,因为仍有空间放置专用的上/下键。电源按钮集成在键盘中。
另一方面,大尺寸的 ClickPad 手感舒适顺滑,具有边缘手势功能,下部的点击声音低沉,质量上乘。只有触觉触摸板才是更好的选择。12.7 x 7.9 厘米的尺寸足够大。
显示屏 - 60 赫兹 OLED
Zenbook A14 只配备不带触摸功能的 OLED 面板。反射式屏幕的分辨率为 1,920 x 1,200 像素,宽高比为 16:10,但频率仅为 60 赫兹。主观上看,它的画质具有良好的色彩鲜艳度。不过,仔细观察会发现,在描绘明亮内容时会出现轻微的光栅效应,总体而言,其他华硕笔记本电脑内的 120 赫兹 3K OLED 面板要好一些。总体而言,该面板与 Vivobook S 14-我们已经对其进行了测试,考虑到价格区间,它的表现还算不错。它的亮度和色温都可以自动调节。
在 SDR 模式下,屏幕的平均亮度为 387 cd/m²,由于黑阶较低,最大对比度非常好。在 HDR 模式下,我们测量到在显示小部分图像时的最大亮度为 604 cd/m²,在显示几乎全白的图像时的最大亮度为 562 cd/m²。不过,HDR 模式必须手动激活,而且没有可用的色彩配置文件。
|
Brightness Distribution: 98 %
Center on Battery: 386 cd/m²
Contrast: ∞:1 (Black: 0 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 0.9 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.9
ΔE Greyscale 1.5 | 0.5-98 Ø5.2
89.6% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.19
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA ATNA40CT06-0, OLED, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA ATNA40CT02-0 (SDC41A0), OLED, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | HP OmniBook X 14 BOE0C93, IPS, 2240x1400, 14", 60 Hz | Acer Swift Go 14 AI MNE507QS2-2 CSOT T9, IPS, 2560x1600, 14.5", 120 Hz | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA ATNA40CT02-0, OLED, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ LQ138P1JX61, IPS, 2304x1536, 13.8", 120 Hz | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 LEN140WQ+, OLED, 2880x1800, 14", 120 Hz | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU IPS, 2560x1664, 13.6", 60 Hz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | 3% | -11% | -16% | -1% | -2% | 3% | -1% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 100 | 99.9 0% | 78.9 -21% | 71.2 -29% | 98.6 -1% | 97.8 -2% | 99.9 0% | 98.4 -2% |
sRGB Coverage | 100 | 100 0% | 100 0% | 99 -1% | 99.9 0% | 98.2 -2% | 100 0% | 99.9 0% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 89.6 | 97.2 8% | 78.7 -12% | 73.3 -18% | 87.3 -3% | 87.3 -3% | 98.9 10% | 87.9 -2% |
Response Times | -24% | -3709% | -2130% | -8% | -2445% | 12% | -2660% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 1.08 ? | 1.3 ? -20% | 52 ? -4715% | 32 ? -2863% | 1.31 ? -21% | 38.9 ? -3502% | 0.61 ? 44% | 34.5 ? -3094% |
Response Time Black / White * | 1.17 ? | 1.2 ? -3% | 32.8 ? -2703% | 17.5 ? -1396% | 1.2 ? -3% | 17.4 ? -1387% | 0.67 ? 43% | 27.2 ? -2225% |
PWM Frequency | 480 ? | 240 ? -50% | 480 ? 0% | 240 ? -50% | ||||
Screen | -33% | -101% | -139% | -8% | -0% | -74% | -16% | |
Brightness middle | 386 | 385 0% | 303 -22% | 357.5 -7% | 387 0% | 606 57% | 411 6% | 525 36% |
Brightness | 387 | 382 -1% | 293 -24% | 341 -12% | 386 0% | 592 53% | 414 7% | 506 31% |
Brightness Distribution | 98 | 95 -3% | 90 -8% | 93 -5% | 98 0% | 94 -4% | 99 1% | 92 -6% |
Black Level * | 0.03 | 0.17 | 0.3 | 0.01 | 0.43 | 0.42 | ||
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 0.9 | 1.99 -121% | 2.6 -189% | 3.27 -263% | 1 -11% | 1.3 -44% | 2.8 -211% | 1.4 -56% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 1.7 | 3.69 -117% | 5.4 -218% | 6.83 -302% | 2.4 -41% | 2.1 -24% | 5.5 -224% | 2.8 -65% |
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 1.5 | 0.8 47% | 3.7 -147% | 5.14 -243% | 1.4 7% | 2.1 -40% | 1.8 -20% | 2 -33% |
Gamma | 2.19 100% | 2.204 100% | 2.09 105% | 2.44 90% | 2.24 98% | 2.16 102% | 2.21 100% | 2.2 100% |
CCT | 6399 102% | 6474 100% | 6543 99% | 6026 108% | 6466 101% | 6842 95% | 6319 103% | 6876 95% |
Contrast | 12833 | 1782 | 1192 | 38700 | 1409 | 1250 | ||
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.79 | 0.95 | 2.2 | |||||
Total Average (Program / Settings) | -18% /
-22% | -1274% /
-733% | -762% /
-467% | -6% /
-6% | -816% /
-445% | -20% /
-33% | -892% /
-492% |
* ... smaller is better
我们使用专业的 CalMAN 软件对显示器进行了分析,华硕一如既往地提供了多种色彩配置文件供用户选择。预设的 "原生 "配置文件描绘的色彩有些过饱和,因此图像看起来更加鲜艳。另一方面,Display P3 配置文件是一个非常精确的配置文件,其中的色彩偏差极低,低于目标值 3。由于其完全覆盖了 sRGB 和 P3 色彩空间,因此在编辑图像/视频时不会出现任何问题。我们的 iProfiler 软件不支持 ARM Windows,因此无法提供校准配置文件。
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
1.17 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.62 ms rise | |
↘ 0.55 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.1 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.9 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
1.08 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.59 ms rise | |
↘ 0.49 ms fall | ||
The screen shows very fast response rates in our tests and should be very well suited for fast-paced gaming. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.165 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 3 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.7 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 480 Hz Amplitude: 22 % | ≤ 86 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 480 Hz (worst case, e.g., utilizing PWM) Flickering detected at a brightness setting of 86 % and below. There should be no flickering or PWM above this brightness setting. The frequency of 480 Hz is relatively high, so most users sensitive to PWM should not notice any flickering. However, there are reports that some users are still sensitive to PWM at 500 Hz and above, so be aware. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8648 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
在亮度低于 86% 时,我们测得频率为 480 Hz 的 PWM 闪烁。华硕在其 MyAsus 应用程序中提供了无闪烁 OLED 调光功能。这可以通过软件降低亮度,避免潜在的更有害的 PWM 范围。
在室外会出现反光,尤其是在明亮的日子里,这限制了笔记本电脑的可用性。除了在广视角下会有轻微的蓝色光泽(这是 OLED 的典型特征),其视角稳定性还是不错的。
性能 - Snapdragon X,16 或 32 GB 内存
Zenbook A14 只配备骁龙 X SoC,内存为 16 或 32 GB。内存不可扩展。
测试条件
华硕提供与 Windows 设置相关联的各种能源配置文件。我们使用预设的标准模式进行了以下基准测试和测量。
能源模式 | CB 2024 Multi | Steel Nomad Light | 最大风扇噪音排放 |
---|---|---|---|
Whisper | 576 分 | 1,147 分 | 31.5 dB(A) |
标准 | 646 分 | 1,146 分 | 42.7 dB(A) |
性能 | 704 分 | 1,154 分 | 50.7 dB(A) |
最高性能 | 706 分 | 1,154 分 | 51.7 dB(A) |
处理器 - X1-26-100
该设备的处理器是骁龙家族的最新成员,即骁龙 X(X1-26-100)。X1-26-100).与所有其他型号一样,它配备了八个 Oryon CPU 内核(30 MB 缓存),但这些内核的最高运行频率为 2.97 GHz,不支持单核涡轮增压模式。所有其他骁龙 X 芯片在单核模式下的主频至少为 3.4GHz,在双核模式下至少可达 3.2GHz,当然这也取决于功耗限制。根据我们的功耗测量,我们假设 Zenbook 的 TDP 在 25-35 瓦之间。
首先,让我们来看看本机测试的结果。它的多核性能一点也不差,例如,比搭载当前英特尔 Lunar Lake 处理器的 Vivobook S 14 略胜一筹 酷睿至尊 5 226V或 M3 MacBook Air 略胜一筹。即便如此,其他对比设备的性能还是更胜一筹。骁龙 X1 较低的时钟频率在单核测试中最为明显,在单核测试中,新款 X1-26-100 是对比设备中速度最慢的处理器。骁龙 M3 SoC在单核测试中表现最为明显,新款 X1-26-100 是同类产品中速度最慢的处理器。 M4 SoC.
在模拟基准测试中,测试设备再次垫底。在长时间负载和电池模式下,其性能保持稳定。更多 CPU 基准测试可在 技术部分。
Cinebench R15 Multi continuous test
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R20: CPU (Multi Core) | CPU (Single Core)
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 | 7z b 4 -mmt1
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
CPU Performance Rating | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 -1! | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 |
Cinebench R23 / Multi Core | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (1555 - 21812, n=65, last 2 years) | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
Cinebench R23 / Single Core | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (358 - 2001, n=65, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Multi Core) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (579 - 8541, n=61, last 2 years) | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
Cinebench R20 / CPU (Single Core) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (128 - 790, n=61, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
Cinebench R15 / CPU Multi 64Bit | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Average of class Subnotebook (327 - 3345, n=67, last 2 years) | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
Cinebench R15 / CPU Single 64Bit | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (72.4 - 307, n=62, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
Blender / v2.79 BMW27 CPU | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Average of class Subnotebook (159 - 2271, n=65, last 2 years) | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (11668 - 77867, n=58, last 2 years) | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI |
7-Zip 18.03 / 7z b 4 -mmt1 | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (2643 - 6403, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI |
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (0.97 - 25.1, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (38.5 - 220, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Average of class Subnotebook (0.413 - 1.456, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64: FP32 Ray-Trace | FPU Julia | CPU SHA3 | CPU Queen | FPU SinJulia | FPU Mandel | CPU AES | CPU ZLib | FP64 Ray-Trace | CPU PhotoWorxx
Performance Rating | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 |
AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (1135 - 32888, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (5218 - 123315, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Average of class Subnotebook (444 - 5287, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (10579 - 115682, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (744 - 18418, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
HP OmniBook X 14 |
AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (3341 - 65433, n=60, last 2 years) | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Average of class Subnotebook (638 - 161430, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA |
AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
Average of class Subnotebook (164.9 - 1379, n=60, last 2 years) | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA |
AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (610 - 17495, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (6569 - 54881, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () |
系统性能
在系统基准测试中,Zenbook A14 的成绩又一次相当低,但它仍然是一款反应灵敏的系统。另一方面,在日常使用中,你会发现在某些情况下性能略有不同,某些操作(如安装应用程序)需要的时间比配备更快 CPU 的设备稍长。我们在测试设备上没有发现稳定性问题,但必须注意的是,并非所有应用程序都能与 ARM 版本的 Windows 兼容。在购买设备之前,您应该了解一下兼容性。
WebXPRT 3: Overall
WebXPRT 4: Overall
Mozilla Kraken 1.1: Total
CrossMark / Overall | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (365 - 1971, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () |
CrossMark / Productivity | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (364 - 1875, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () |
CrossMark / Creativity | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (372 - 2210, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () |
CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Average of class Subnotebook (312 - 1899, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () |
WebXPRT 3 / Overall | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () | |
Average of class Subnotebook (156 - 448, n=58, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA |
WebXPRT 4 / Overall | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (132 - 325, n=57, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 / Total | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (363 - 1104, n=66, last 2 years) | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS () | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU |
* ... smaller is better
AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (14554 - 108756, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI |
AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (15948 - 122210, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (15709 - 117898, n=60, last 2 years) | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100 () | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ |
DPC 延迟
我们无法在 Snapdragon 设备上进行标准延迟测试,但在 4K YouTube 播放过程中没有出现跳帧(掉帧)问题。
存储设备
我们的测试设备中安装了美光 2500 的 1 TB 变体,其中 895 GB 可在首次启动设备后自由使用。在我们的测试中,PCIe 4.0 固态硬盘的传输速率非常好,最高可达 7 GB/s,但在连续负载的情况下,一段时间后会出现一些波动。不过,这对日常使用没有影响。更多固态硬盘基准测试 这里.
* ... smaller is better
Reading continuous performance: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
图形卡
骁龙 X 使用 Adreno X1-45显卡(1.7 TFLOPS,最大频率 1,107 MHz),我们已经在骁龙 X Plus (X1P-42-100).在我们的测试中,它的图形性能比速度更快的 X1-85 GPU 低了约 35-50%,而 X1-85 GPU 用于可选的 Snapdragon X Elite。与目前 AMD 和英特尔的 iGPU 相比,X1-45 也明显处于下风。在连续负载和电池模式下,图形处理器的性能都保持稳定。
这对于日常任务(包括播放高分辨率视频)来说已经足够,但在玩游戏时,其性能低下的问题尤为明显。如果还考虑到兼容性问题,则应尽可能使用 Xbox Cloud Gaming 等流媒体服务。更多 GPU 基准测试 这里.
3DMark 11 Performance | 4540 points | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 3602 points | |
3DMark Steel Nomad Score | 235 points | |
3DMark Steel Nomad Light Score | 1146 points | |
Help |
Blender / v3.3 Classroom CPU | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Average Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS (711 - 1055, n=6) | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Average of class Subnotebook (241 - 1127, n=61, last 2 years) | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
* ... smaller is better
Cyberpunk 2077 2.1 Phantom Liberty - 1920x1080 Ultra Preset (FSR off) | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (8.48 - 31.4, n=35, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI |
GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ | |
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA | |
HP OmniBook X 14 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (7.81 - 53, n=57, last 2 years) | |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA | |
Acer Swift Go 14 AI |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra FPS diagram
low | med. | high | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
GTA V (2015) | 87.5 | 81.2 | 32.5 | 14.5 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 77 | 63.2 | 56.2 | 48.8 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 37.2 | 15.1 | 15.1 | |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 34.9 | 0 | ||
Far Cry 5 (2018) | 36 | 21 | 19 | 18 |
Strange Brigade (2018) | 85 | 30 | 23 | 19 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018) | 41 | 16 | ||
Baldur's Gate 3 (2023) | 13.1 | 11 | ||
Cyberpunk 2077 2.1 Phantom Liberty (2023) | 15.3 | 11.7 | 9.89 | 8.48 |
Total War Pharaoh (2023) | 46.1 | 0 |
排放物 - 噪音过大的风扇
噪音排放
基本上,这款笔记本电脑使用了两个散热器,但其中一个根本没有连接到热管,因此更像是一个机箱风扇。下一节中的热图像也显示,第二个风扇并不是特别有用。这就解释了为什么即使在日常工作中,风扇的启动速度也相对较快,这在骁龙笔记本电脑中并不常见。噪音不大,但风扇在工作。在 CPU 负载较高的情况下,噪音会超过 42 dB(A)。在使用 "耳语 "模式时,我们注意到的最大噪音为 31.5 分贝(A),而在两种性能模式下,噪音都超过了 50 分贝(A)。为什么第二个风扇没有连接到热管上,这对我们来说是个谜。在测试期间,我们的测试设备没有发出其他电子噪音。
Noise Level
Idle |
| 24.7 / 24.7 / 24.7 dB(A) |
Load |
| 26.4 / 42.7 dB(A) |
| ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min: , med: , max: Earthworks M23R, Arta (15 cm distance) environment noise: 24.7 dB(A) |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, SD X1-26-100, Micron 2500 1TB MTFDKBA1T0QGN | Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA Arc 130V, Core Ultra 5 226V, Micron 2500 MTFDKBA512QGN | HP OmniBook X 14 Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, SD X Elite X1E-78-100, WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00 | Acer Swift Go 14 AI Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, SD X Plus X1P-42-100, Micron 2550 MTFDKBA512TGE | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA Radeon 780M, R7 8840HS, Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM | Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, SD X Elite X1E-80-100, Samsung MZ9L4512HBLU-00BMV | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 Radeon 780M, R7 8845HS, SK hynix BC901 HFS001TEJ4X164N | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU M3 10-Core GPU, M3, Apple SSD AP0512Z | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | -6% | -2% | 6% | -7% | 2% | -10% | ||
off / environment * | 24.7 | 24.2 2% | 23.7 4% | 23 7% | 25.1 -2% | 23.8 4% | 23.9 3% | |
Idle Minimum * | 24.7 | 24.2 2% | 23.7 4% | 23 7% | 25.1 -2% | 23.8 4% | 23.9 3% | |
Idle Average * | 24.7 | 24.2 2% | 23.7 4% | 23 7% | 25.1 -2% | 23.8 4% | 23.9 3% | |
Idle Maximum * | 24.7 | 24.2 2% | 23.7 4% | 23 7% | 25.1 -2% | 23.8 4% | 23.9 3% | |
Load Average * | 26.4 | 28.8 -9% | 29.7 -13% | 35.9 -36% | 26 2% | 44.3 -68% | ||
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 28.7 | 37.6 -31% | 37.1 -29% | 28.13 2% | 31.5 -10% | |||
Load Maximum * | 42.7 | 45.6 -7% | 37.1 13% | 39.14 8% | 42.2 1% | 40.3 6% | 44.3 -4% | |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 39.3 | 41.3 |
* ... smaller is better
温度
机箱的温度通常保持在超低的水平,尤其是在低负载的情况下。但即使在压力测试中,我们也只测得一处温度超过 40 °C。因此,Zenbook A14 在任何情况下都可以放在大腿上,不会出现任何问题。热图像清楚地显示,热量主要分布在左上方和中间区域,第二个风扇的作用不大。在压力测试中,图形处理器始终以 1.107GHz 的全速运行,而处理器则在 2.4GHz 和 2.6GHz 之间波动。
(±) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 40 °C / 104 F, compared to the average of 35.9 °C / 97 F, ranging from 21.4 to 59 °C for the class Subnotebook.
(±) The bottom heats up to a maximum of 42.4 °C / 108 F, compared to the average of 39.4 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 24.9 °C / 77 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(+) 3: The average temperature for the upper side is 31.5 °C / 89 F, compared to the average of 30.8 °C / 87 F for the class Subnotebook.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are cooler than skin temperature with a maximum of 26.5 °C / 79.7 F and are therefore cool to the touch.
(±) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.3 °C / 82.9 F (+1.8 °C / 3.2 F).
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA Qualcomm Snapdragon X X1-26-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS | Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, Intel Arc Graphics 130V | HP OmniBook X 14 Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS | Acer Swift Go 14 AI Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-42-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS, AMD Radeon 780M | Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100, Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS, AMD Radeon 780M | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU Apple M3, Apple M3 10-Core GPU | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heat | -2% | -2% | 2% | -7% | -3% | 5% | 4% | |
Maximum Upper Side * | 40 | 38.4 4% | 44.2 -11% | 39 2% | 43.1 -8% | 47.1 -18% | 39.6 1% | 44.3 -11% |
Maximum Bottom * | 42.4 | 49.7 -17% | 44.5 -5% | 45 -6% | 50.2 -18% | 44.6 -5% | 38.6 9% | 43.4 -2% |
Idle Upper Side * | 25.7 | 25.1 2% | 25.1 2% | 24 7% | 25.8 -0% | 24.7 4% | 24.8 4% | 22.3 13% |
Idle Bottom * | 26.5 | 25.8 3% | 24.3 8% | 25 6% | 26.4 -0% | 24.5 8% | 25.3 5% | 22.1 17% |
* ... smaller is better
发言人
Zenbook A14 的立体声扬声器表现出色,比我们分析的对比设备略胜一筹。 MacBook Air 13略胜一筹。它们的声音响亮、饱满,但低音略显不足。
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (82.9 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 18.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 14% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 82% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 9% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 89% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (86.7 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.8% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 18% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 79% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 11% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 87% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
HP OmniBook X 14 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (91.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 20.9% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 1.8% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (3.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (4.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.5% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 26% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 68% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 16% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Acer Swift Go 14 AI audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (80.86 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(±) | higher mids - on average 6.8% higher than median
(+) | mids are linear (6.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.3% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (16.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 20% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 74% worse
» The best had a delta of 7%, average was 21%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 27% of all tested devices were better, 7% similar, 66% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 17.2% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (4.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.2% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (6.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 16% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 80% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 10% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 88% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.8 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 12.7% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.1% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (2.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.1% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (2.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (12.1% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 12% of all tested devices in this class were better, 4% similar, 84% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 8% of all tested devices were better, 2% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81.5 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(-) | nearly no bass - on average 15.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (8.2% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 3.9% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (13.4% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 19% of all tested devices in this class were better, 6% similar, 75% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 12% of all tested devices were better, 3% similar, 85% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (83.2 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.3% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (11.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 0.4% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (1.6% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 4.5% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (1.9% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (10.7% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 7% of all tested devices in this class were better, 3% similar, 90% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 5% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 94% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 25%, worst was 134%
电源管理 - 电池寿命低于预期
耗电量
Zenbook A14 在空闲模式(低分辨率 60Hz OLED 在此有积极作用)和低负载模式下都非常省电。在压力测试中,我们测得的最大功耗略低于 47 瓦,在接下来的测试过程中,平均功耗为 40 瓦。因此,随机附带的 65 瓦电源装置完全够用,即使在负载情况下也有足够的电量同时为电池充电。Snapdragon X Elite 配置配备了功率更大的 90 瓦电源装置。
Off / Standby | 0.4 / 0.67 Watt |
Idle | 3.1 / 5.2 / 5.4 Watt |
Load |
13.8 / 46.8 Watt |
Key:
min: ,
med: ,
max: Metrahit Energy |
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA SD X1-26-100, Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, Micron 2500 1TB MTFDKBA1T0QGN, OLED, 1920x1200, 14" | Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA Core Ultra 5 226V, Arc 130V, Micron 2500 MTFDKBA512QGN, OLED, 1920x1200, 14" | HP OmniBook X 14 SD X Elite X1E-78-100, Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, WD PC SN560 SDDPNQE-1T00, IPS, 2240x1400, 14" | Acer Swift Go 14 AI SD X Plus X1P-42-100, Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, Micron 2550 MTFDKBA512TGE, IPS, 2560x1600, 14.5" | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M, Micron 2400 MTFDKBA1T0QFM, OLED, 1920x1200, 14" | Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ SD X Elite X1E-80-100, Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, Samsung MZ9L4512HBLU-00BMV, IPS, 2304x1536, 13.8" | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M, SK hynix BC901 HFS001TEJ4X164N, OLED, 2880x1800, 14" | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU M3, M3 10-Core GPU, Apple SSD AP0512Z, IPS, 2560x1664, 13.6" | Average Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS | Average of class Subnotebook | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | -66% | -44% | -34% | -67% | -31% | -123% | -44% | -20% | -87% | |
Idle Minimum * | 3.1 | 2.7 13% | 2.5 19% | 3.7 -19% | 3.6 -16% | 1.4 55% | 5.3 -71% | 1.95 37% | 3.45 ? -11% | 4.39 ? -42% |
Idle Average * | 5.2 | 6.7 -29% | 4.7 10% | 6.5 -25% | 6.6 -27% | 6.3 -21% | 7.2 -38% | 8.7 -67% | 5.62 ? -8% | 7.55 ? -45% |
Idle Maximum * | 5.4 | 6.9 -28% | 6.2 -15% | 7.8 -44% | 7.4 -37% | 7.6 -41% | 7.5 -39% | 8.9 -65% | 7.37 ? -36% | 9.35 ? -73% |
Load Average * | 13.8 | 34.5 -150% | 25.6 -86% | 47.1 -241% | 26.9 -95% | 65.6 -375% | 34.3 -149% | 15.6 ? -13% | 45.1 ? -227% | |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 19.6 | 43 -119% | 40.3 -106% | 25.4 -30% | 38.5 -96% | |||||
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra external monitor * | 19.7 | 41.9 -113% | 36.7 -86% | 28.5 -45% | ||||||
Load Maximum * | 46.8 | 62.7 -34% | 67.9 -45% | 67.04 -43% | 54.3 -16% | 40.7 13% | 89.6 -91% | 35.4 24% | 60.8 ? -30% | 68.5 ? -46% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 47.4 | 73 | 28.6 |
* ... smaller is better
Power consumption Cyberpunk / stress test
Power consumption with external monitor
运行时间
这款笔记本电脑的电池容量为 70 Wh,华硕宣称其视频播放续航时间长达 32 小时,高效工作续航时间略低于 20 小时,但遗憾的是,我们无法证实这一点。在我们的测试中,它的总体运行时间并不差,但在 150 cd/m² 的 WLAN 测试中,骁龙 Zenbook 的运行时间为 15 小时,不得不承认它输给了英特尔的姊妹机型--Vivobook S 14。 Vivobook S 14仅多出两个多小时。在全亮度条件下,我们注意到它的续航时间为 10 小时,而英特尔机型尽管采用了类似的显示屏,但也比它多出了一个小时。在视频测试中,它的续航时间达到了 21 小时,但仍比制造商规定的时间少了 9 小时。
设备开机后,电池完全充满需要 128 分钟;大约 62 分钟后,80% 的电量即可恢复。
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA SD X1-26-100, Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, 70 Wh | Asus Vivobook S 14 OLED S5406SA Core Ultra 5 226V, Arc 130V, 75 Wh | HP OmniBook X 14 SD X Elite X1E-78-100, Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, 59 Wh | Acer Swift Go 14 AI SD X Plus X1P-42-100, Adreno X1-45 1.7 TFLOPS, 75 Wh | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M, 75 Wh | Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 13.8 Copilot+ SD X Elite X1E-80-100, Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS, 54 Wh | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M, 84 Wh | Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 10C GPU M3, M3 10-Core GPU, 52.6 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -4% | -11% | 8% | -26% | -25% | -30% | -13% | -30% | |
H.264 | 1270 | 1199 -6% | 1298 2% | 1501 18% | 1046 -18% | 1181 -7% | 1031 -19% | 1044 -18% | 939 ? -26% |
WiFi v1.3 | 895 | 1030 15% | 1117 25% | 1313 47% | 774 -14% | 852 -5% | 710 -21% | 914 2% | 732 ? -18% |
Load | 222 | 174 -22% | 92 -59% | 128 -42% | 123 -45% | 80 -64% | 110 -50% | 171 -23% | 119.5 ? -46% |
Notebookcheck 总评分
全新的 Zenbook A14 首先以 978 克的低重量给人留下了深刻印象,但你也不得不接受一些妥协。它的键盘有点松软,只有一个 60-Hz 的 1200p OLED 屏幕,没有最多的连接,最重要的是,它的散热装置引起了一些问题。第二个风扇没有连接到热管,效率不高。因此,即使在执行简单的任务时,也能听到风扇的噪音。Snapdragon X 系列新基本型号的性能相对较低,电池续航时间也没有达到预期。
Asus ZenBook A14 UX3407QA
- 01/30/2025 v8
Andreas Osthoff
Transparency
The selection of devices to be reviewed is made by our editorial team. The test sample was provided to the author as a loan by the manufacturer or retailer for the purpose of this review. The lender had no influence on this review, nor did the manufacturer receive a copy of this review before publication. There was no obligation to publish this review. We never accept compensation or payment in return for our reviews. As an independent media company, Notebookcheck is not subjected to the authority of manufacturers, retailers or publishers.
This is how Notebookcheck is testing
Every year, Notebookcheck independently reviews hundreds of laptops and smartphones using standardized procedures to ensure that all results are comparable. We have continuously developed our test methods for around 20 years and set industry standards in the process. In our test labs, high-quality measuring equipment is utilized by experienced technicians and editors. These tests involve a multi-stage validation process. Our complex rating system is based on hundreds of well-founded measurements and benchmarks, which maintains objectivity. Further information on our test methods can be found here.