Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED laptop review: Successful performance of the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370

Our test sample of the VivoBook S 14 with the model designation M5406WA can currently be found for just over US$1,200 online and for this price, you get the latest Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, 24 GB of (unfortunately soldered on) fast LPDDR5X-7500 RAM and a 1,000-GB NVMe SSD. Displaying content is taken care of by a shiny OLED screen with a resolution of 1,920 x 1,200 pixels and the much-loved 16:10 aspect ratio. This total package is rounded out by Windows 11 Home as an operating system.
Competitors to the VivoBook include other 14-inch laptops from 2024 such as the Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 (Core Ultra 7 155H) and the Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 (Ryzen 7 8845HS), as well as the Asus Zenbook 14 UM3406HA (Ryzen 7 8840HS). All of these candidates can be found in the tables below as comparison devices.
Possible competitors compared
Rating | Version | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Price |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
84.9 % | v8 | 08 / 2024 | Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | 1.3 kg | 15.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1200 | |
84.7 % | v8 | 07 / 2024 | Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | 1.5 kg | 12.9 mm | 16.00" | 2880x1800 | |
88.5 % v7 (old) | v7 (old) | 03 / 2024 | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core | 1.6 kg | 16.6 mm | 14.50" | 3072x1920 | |
88.1 % v7 (old) | v7 (old) | 03 / 2024 | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M | 1.5 kg | 16 mm | 14.00" | 2880x1800 | |
88.6 % v7 (old) | v7 (old) | 05 / 2024 | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M | 1.2 kg | 14.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1200 |
Please note: We have recently updated our rating system and the results of version 8 are not comparable with the results of version 7. More information is available here.
Case
As with most Asus laptops, the VivoBook S 14 looks pretty sleek overall. Its silver surfaces attract comparatively less dirt than devices with a black finish. While its lid is made from metal, the base unit has been constructed using plastic. Its build quality gives us no reason to complain.
Similar to many other (slim) laptops, only its stability could do with being a little better—be it the torsional rigidity of the lid or how the base unit behaves when pressure is applied (especially in the touchpad area). It gains plus points for its generous opening angle of 180°. The hinge does a fine job (you can open the laptop with one hand), although vibrations are only absorbed to a limited extent and result in the screen wobbling a little.
Weighing in at 1.3 kg, the 14-inch device is nice and lightweight and can be transported easily. Among the comparison devices, only the Zenbook 14 weighs even less (1.2 kg). At 1.59 cm, its build height is average.
Connectivity
Ports
The laptop's connectivity options are generally good. Although it doesn't feature an RJ45 port, everything else is on board that you would expect to see on a current all-round laptop. This includes an HDMI 2.1 port, two USB-C ports with DisplayPort support and Power Delivery (1x 4.0, 1x 3.2 Gen 1), a microSD card reader, and a 3.5-mm jack on the left-hand side. On the right, there are only two USB-A ports that comply with the 3.2 Gen 1 standard.
As most of the connections are situated on the back half of the case, you can use a mouse with no problems or limitations.
SD card reader
The installed card reader is unfortunately on the slower side. Its 40 MB/s are considerably surpassed by the IdeaPad Pro 5 and the Zenbook S16 from the same manufacturer.
SD Card Reader | |
average JPG Copy Test (av. of 3 runs) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (18.4 - 142, n=15, last 2 years) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) | |
maximum AS SSD Seq Read Test (1GB) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 (Angelbird AV Pro V60) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (22.5 - 207, n=15, last 2 years) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA (AV PRO microSD 128 GB V60) |
Communication
The integrated MediaTek chip's (Wi-Fi 6E MT7922) WLAN performance was a mixed bag during our test. While its receiving performance was on par with the competition, its sending performance was rather disappointing in our test (1-meter distance to the reference router).
Webcam
The device is fitted with a pretty standard 2-MP webcam, meaning its picture sharpness and color accuracy aren't the best. A positive, on the other hand, is that it comes with a mechanical privacy shutter.

Accessories
The laptop comes with a compact 90-watt power supply and a few information leaflets.
Maintenance
Asus could do with making it a little easier to perform maintenance on this device. One of the 11 case screws (Torx) is hidden beneath a cover that is rather difficult to remove. Apart from this, the bottom case cover can be removed quite easily from its anchoring. We have a few negatives to note about the inside of the case: Firstly, the RAM and WLAN module are soldered on and secondly, there is only a single M.2 slot.
Sustainability
Asus primarily relies on cardboard when it comes to the laptop's packaging. It is protected by a fabric insert and a fabric bag (each labeled). A plastic film is only used for the power supply unit. We were unable to find any information on the device's CO2 footprint and the case's recycling status.
Warranty
In the United States, the laptop is covered by a standard 12-month warranty.
Input devices
Keyboard
Overall, the keyboard is pretty good. Although some layout decisions may be a little questionable (no separate power button, tiny directional arrows, ...)—but this is the case on most laptops—and the feedback could do with being a little more crisp in our eyes, it works just fine apart from this. Asus has given its VivoBook S 14 one-zone RGB backlighting that can be adjusted in several levels. Special functions are triggered by default without pressing the Fn key, which can be changed if required.
Touchpad
The manufacturer has come up with some nice features for the laptop's touchpad. For example, you can conveniently adjust the volume with a swipe gesture on the left-hand side, while the right-hand side is used to control the display brightness. The surprisingly large clickpad for a 14-inch laptop (approx. 13 x 8.5 cm) also feels nice and smooth during use. The click areas provide decent feedback but also sound a little rattly when triggered.
Display
OLED fans who aren't annoyed by reflective surfaces will be completely happy with the VivoBook S 14. The HDR-ready 14-inch panel achieves great contrasts thanks to its OLED-typical low black value.
|
Brightness Distribution: 95 %
Center on Battery: 385 cd/m²
Contrast: 12833:1 (Black: 0.03 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 1.99 | 0.5-29.43 Ø4.86, calibrated: 1.79
ΔE Greyscale 0.8 | 0.09-98 Ø5.1
97.2% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
100% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
99.9% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.204
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA ATNA40CT02-0 (SDC41A0), OLED, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W ATNA60CL10-0, OLED, 2880x1800, 16", 120 Hz | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 Lenovo LEN145-3K (LEN8AAF), IPS, 3072x1920, 14.5", 120 Hz | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 LEN140WQ+, OLED, 2880x1800, 14", 120 Hz | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA ATNA40CT02-0, OLED, 1920x1200, 14", 60 Hz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Display | -1% | -4% | 1% | -4% | |
Display P3 Coverage | 99.9 | 99.9 0% | 98.4 -2% | 99.9 0% | 98.6 -1% |
sRGB Coverage | 100 | 100 0% | 100 0% | 100 0% | 99.9 0% |
AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 97.2 | 95.6 -2% | 86.9 -11% | 98.9 2% | 87.3 -10% |
Response Times | 52% | -1812% | 49% | -1% | |
Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 1.3 ? | 0.56 ? 57% | 34.1 ? -2523% | 0.61 ? 53% | 1.31 ? -1% |
Response Time Black / White * | 1.2 ? | 0.65 ? 46% | 14.4 ? -1100% | 0.67 ? 44% | 1.2 ? -0% |
PWM Frequency | 240 ? | 480 | 240 ? | 480 ? | |
PWM Amplitude * | 30 | ||||
Screen | 35% | -118% | -31% | 36% | |
Brightness middle | 385 | 407 6% | 464 21% | 411 7% | 387 1% |
Brightness | 382 | 405 6% | 456 19% | 414 8% | 386 1% |
Brightness Distribution | 95 | 97 2% | 90 -5% | 99 4% | 98 3% |
Black Level * | 0.03 | 0.02 33% | 0.36 -1100% | 0.01 67% | |
Contrast | 12833 | 20350 59% | 1289 -90% | 38700 202% | |
Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 1.99 | 0.6 70% | 0.9 55% | 2.8 -41% | 1 50% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 3.69 | 1.2 67% | 2.32 37% | 5.5 -49% | 2.4 35% |
Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 1.79 | 0.35 80% | 2.2 -23% | ||
Greyscale dE 2000 * | 0.8 | 0.5 37% | 1.4 -75% | 1.8 -125% | 1.4 -75% |
Gamma | 2.204 100% | 2.2 100% | 2.218 99% | 2.21 100% | 2.24 98% |
CCT | 6474 100% | 6453 101% | 6669 97% | 6319 103% | 6466 101% |
Total Average (Program / Settings) | 29% /
29% | -645% /
-335% | 6% /
-10% | 10% /
21% |
* ... smaller is better
Moreover, it's great that the panel covers the DCI-P3 and AdobeRGB spaces almost completely. We also have nothing negative to say about its color accuracy, response times or viewing angles.
Meanwhile, its brightness is only just sufficient. Although an average of 382 cd/m² (SDR mode) is roughly in line with most competitors, those who spend a lot of time in brighter rooms or outdoors will quickly wish for a higher brightness (500 cd/m² upwards) due to the many reflections that occur.
Display Response Times
↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
---|---|---|
1.2 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.6 ms rise | |
↘ 0.6 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. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (20.6 ms). | ||
↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
1.3 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 0.7 ms rise | |
↘ 0.6 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. » 4 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (32.3 ms). |
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
Screen flickering / PWM detected | 240 Hz | ≤ 86 % brightness setting | |
The display backlight flickers at 240 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 240 Hz is relatively low, so sensitive users will likely notice flickering and experience eyestrain at the stated brightness setting and below. In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8426 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 343500) Hz was measured. |
Performance
The version of the VivoBook S 14 we are testing can be classed as a mid-range device. Alternative models fitted with the Core Ultra 5, for example, can be found for a slightly lower price. In addition, there is a completely foldable version on offer called the S 14 Flip.
Testing conditions
You can select between four different operation modes using the preinstalled MyAsus app. As the profiles performance and full speed result in the device getting uncomfortably loud under load and barely result in any improved performance, we performed all of our measurements using the standard mode which is already active in the laptop's delivered state.
Cyberpunk 2077 (FHD/Ultra) | Whisper | Standard | Performance | Full speed |
---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | 34 dB(A) | 39 dB(A) | 49 dB(A) | 53 dB(A) |
Performance | 23 fps | 25 fps | 26 fps | 26 fps |
Processor
Compared to the Zenbook S16, which we also tested using the standard profile, the VivoBook S 14 did a lot better in the benchmarks despite its identical processor. No wonder, as this model's CPU has access to a more generous TDP (54 watts instead of 28 watts PL1). The CPU rating certifies a 10 % higher performance for the VivoBook. This also became clearly visible in the Cinebench loop, although its performance unfortunately couldn't be kept completely constant in the long run.
Nevertheless, the HX 370 beat the CPUs of all other competing laptops—be it the Core Ultra 7 155H or the Ryzen 7 8840HS or 8845HS. Technically, the Zen 5 offshoot, which is manufactured using the 4 nm process, features 12 cores and can process up to 24 threads in parallel via SMT.
Cinebench R15 Multi continuous test
* ... 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 | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook |
AIDA64 / FP32 Ray-Trace | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (24673 - 37804, n=17) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (1135 - 32888, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / FPU Julia | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (95655 - 147937, n=18) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (5218 - 123315, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / CPU SHA3 | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (4421 - 5926, n=18) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (444 - 5287, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / CPU Queen | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (41744 - 99088, n=18) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (10579 - 115682, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / FPU SinJulia | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (16445 - 19115, n=18) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (744 - 18418, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / FPU Mandel | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (50357 - 93798, n=17) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (3341 - 65433, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / CPU AES | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (67015 - 118806, n=18) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (638 - 161430, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / CPU ZLib | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (1077 - 1530, n=18) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average of class Subnotebook (164.9 - 1379, n=68, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA |
AIDA64 / FP64 Ray-Trace | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (13665 - 20648, n=18) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (610 - 17495, n=68, last 2 years) |
AIDA64 / CPU PhotoWorxx | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (36752 - 51727, n=18) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (6569 - 64588, n=68, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA |
System performance
The VivoBook also took the top spot among the comparison devices when it came to its system performance. Its RAM performance wasn't bad either, as the AIDA64 table shows.
CrossMark: Overall | Productivity | Creativity | Responsiveness
WebXPRT 3: Overall
WebXPRT 4: Overall
Mozilla Kraken 1.1: Total
PCMark 10 / Score | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (6577 - 7646, n=10) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (4993 - 7788, n=57, last 2 years) |
PCMark 10 / Essentials | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (9363 - 11406, n=57, last 2 years) | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (9277 - 11262, n=10) |
PCMark 10 / Productivity | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (8497 - 10615, n=10) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (5435 - 10623, n=57, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 |
PCMark 10 / Digital Content Creation | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (9334 - 11422, n=10) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (5305 - 12442, n=57, last 2 years) |
CrossMark / Overall | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (1402 - 1847, n=9) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (365 - 2038, n=67, last 2 years) |
CrossMark / Productivity | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (1253 - 1719, n=9) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (364 - 1918, n=67, last 2 years) |
CrossMark / Creativity | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (1707 - 2211, n=9) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (372 - 2396, n=67, last 2 years) |
CrossMark / Responsiveness | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (1085 - 1610, n=9) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average of class Subnotebook (312 - 1899, n=67, last 2 years) |
WebXPRT 3 / Overall | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average of class Subnotebook (156 - 482, n=66, last 2 years) | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (252 - 342, n=9) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 |
WebXPRT 4 / Overall | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average of class Subnotebook (132 - 348, n=67, last 2 years) | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (210 - 277, n=10) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 / Total | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (265 - 1104, n=75, last 2 years) | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, AMD Radeon 890M (419 - 503, n=11) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA |
* ... smaller is better
PCMark 10 Score | 7646 points | |
Help |
AIDA64 / Memory Copy | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (72702 - 93640, n=18) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (14554 - 109035, n=68, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
AIDA64 / Memory Read | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (84635 - 102937, n=18) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (15948 - 122210, n=68, last 2 years) | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
AIDA64 / Memory Write | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (83907 - 108954, n=18) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (15709 - 117898, n=68, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 |
AIDA64 / Memory Latency | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Average AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 (87.2 - 119.4, n=18) | |
Average of class Subnotebook (7.2 - 187.8, n=67, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 |
* ... smaller is better
DPC latencies
DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA |
* ... smaller is better
Storage device
Asus has installed a 1,000-GB M.2 SSD as mass storage. The Micron 2400 is one of the medium-fast models among the NVMe drives. Fortunately, we noted no thermal throttling and its performance remained stable even under prolonged load (see DiskSpd loop).
* ... smaller is better
Reading continuous performance: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
Graphics card
A new iGPU has entered the scene, namely the Radeon 890M. Its main rival is the Intel Arc 8, which was able to compete with the successful Radeon 780M's performance and, thanks to improved drivers, has now even managed to overtake it. If you take all the benchmarks into consideration, the two chips didn't look all too different. The 890M was slightly faster in synthetic tests, whereas the Arc 8 was faster when running games. The Zenbook S16 was once again beaten by a long shot.
3DMark Performance Rating - Percent | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W -1! | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 -1! | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA -1! | |
Average of class Subnotebook |
3DMark 11 Performance | 15204 points | |
3DMark Ice Storm Standard Score | 180766 points | |
3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 39499 points | |
3DMark Fire Strike Score | 8792 points | |
3DMark Time Spy Score | 4073 points | |
Help |
Gaming performance
With the exception of super demanding games like Alan Wake 2, Avatar Frontiers of Pandora and Hellblade 2, the Radeon 890M can run almost all of the latest games smoothly in Full HD or the laptop's native resolution of 1,920 x 1,200 pixels—even if it is often only sufficient for low to medium settings. However, AMD still needs to work on its driver. Out of 38 games tested, 4 crashed reproducibly or wouldn't start at all (Resident Evil 4 Remake, Atlas Fallen, Dragon's Dogma 2 & F1 24).
The Witcher 3 - 1920x1080 Ultra Graphics & Postprocessing (HBAO+) | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (31 - 36.7, n=5) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 | |
Average of class Subnotebook (8.5 - 43.7, n=46, last 2 years) |
GTA V - 1920x1080 Highest Settings possible AA:4xMSAA + FX AF:16x | |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA | |
Average AMD Radeon 890M (29.7 - 33.3, n=15) | |
Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W | |
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 | |
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA | |
Average of class Subnotebook (7.81 - 53, n=65, last 2 years) | |
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 |
Its constant performance should be mentioned on a positive note. In our 30-minute test running Cyberpunk 2077, its frame rate wasn't subject to any major fluctuations—as was the case with the Zenbook S16, for example.
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra FPS diagram
low | med. | high | ultra | |
---|---|---|---|---|
GTA V (2015) | 174.3 | 161.5 | 79.1 | 32.4 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015) | 171.8 | 135.7 | 35.8 | 33.6 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018) | 78.9 | 44 | 31.2 | |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018) | 78.2 | 58.6 | 46.2 | |
Far Cry 5 (2018) | 98 | 57 | 53 | 50 |
Strange Brigade (2018) | 186.7 | 76.3 | 63.8 | 54.2 |
Hogwarts Legacy (2023) | 42.6 | 36.8 | 24.8 | 19.3 |
Returnal (2023) | 32 | 30 | 26 | 22 |
Atomic Heart (2023) | 59.3 | 46 | 26.8 | 21.3 |
Company of Heroes 3 (2023) | 93.1 | 65.3 | 49.8 | 49.1 |
Resident Evil 4 Remake (2023) | 0 game wont start | 0 game wont start | 0 game wont start | 0 game wont start |
Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart (2023) | 31.8 | 26 | 21.5 | 20.9 |
Atlas Fallen (2023) | 0 game wont start (crash) | 0 game wont start (crash) | 0 game wont start (crash) | 0 game wont start (crash) |
Armored Core 6 (2023) | 49.8 | 43.3 | 40.1 | 33.1 |
The Crew Motorfest (2023) | 40 | 36 | 30 | 26 |
Lies of P (2023) | 62.5 | 53.9 | 46.3 | 38.4 |
Baldur's Gate 3 (2023) | 43.7 | 35.4 | 28.9 | 28.4 |
Cyberpunk 2077 2.2 Phantom Liberty (2023) | 46 | 36.3 | 29.3 | 25.4 |
Counter-Strike 2 (2023) | 117.3 | 90.7 | 52.3 | 35.8 |
Assassin's Creed Mirage (2023) | 52 | 44 | 42 | 32 |
Lords of the Fallen (2023) | 26.1 | 23.9 | 18.7 | 13.2 |
Alan Wake 2 (2023) | 21.6 | 20.2 | 19.8 | |
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 2023 (2023) | 77 | 64 | 49 | 43 |
Avatar Frontiers of Pandora (2023) | 22 | 20 | 17 | 12 |
The Finals (2023) | 94.6 | 69.9 | 60.2 | 46.2 |
Ready or Not (2023) | 75.3 | 59.8 | 43.8 | 27.5 |
Prince of Persia The Lost Crown (2024) | 209 | 168.4 | 160.3 | |
Palworld (2024) | 81.5 | 62.3 | 36.2 | 30.1 |
Enshrouded (2024) | 23.2 | 22.9 | 20.3 | 14.5 |
Helldivers 2 (2024) | 41.6 | 31.9 | 30.1 | 26.8 |
Skull & Bones (2024) | 48 | 41 | 34 | 26 |
Last Epoch (2024) | 60.4 | 44.9 | 38 | 30.2 |
Horizon Forbidden West (2024) | 30.6 | 27.3 | 21.1 | 19.9 |
Dragon's Dogma 2 (2024) | 0 game wont start | 0 game wont start | ||
Senua's Saga Hellblade 2 (2024) | 20.8 | 16.6 | 12.6 | |
F1 24 (2024) | 0 game wont start (crash) | 0 game wont start (crash) | 0 game wont start (crash) | 0 game wont start (crash) |
The First Descendant (2024) | 59.1 | 35 | 27.8 | 23.6 |
Once Human (2024) | 51.6 | 38.3 | 30.2 | 25 |
Emissions
Noise emissions
Apart from the fact that its noise emissions sometimes have a rather high frequency, the laptop's fans and fan control deliver a solid performance—at least in whisper or standard mode. In the latter, we measured between a comfortably quiet 24 to 27 dB in idle mode (the fans were often completely off) and a still acceptable 39 to 40 dB(A) under load.
Noise Level
Idle |
| 24 / 25 / 27 dB(A) |
Load |
| 40 / 40 dB(A) |
![]() | ||
30 dB silent 40 dB(A) audible 50 dB(A) loud |
||
min: ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Noise | 3% | -1% | -1% | 0% | |
off / environment * | 24 | 24.7 -3% | 24 -0% | 23.9 -0% | 25.1 -5% |
Idle Minimum * | 24 | 24.7 -3% | 25 -4% | 23.9 -0% | 25.1 -5% |
Idle Average * | 25 | 24.7 1% | 27 -8% | 23.9 4% | 25.1 -0% |
Idle Maximum * | 27 | 26.4 2% | 30 -11% | 23.9 11% | 25.1 7% |
Load Average * | 40 | 35.7 11% | 36 10% | 44.3 -11% | 35.9 10% |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 39 | 36.8 6% | |||
Load Maximum * | 40 | 36.8 8% | 38 5% | 44.3 -11% | 42.2 -6% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 38 | 41.3 | 39.3 |
* ... smaller is better
Temperature
One of the few weaknesses of the VivoBook 14 is its suboptimal temperatures. Although the wrist-rest always remains within a reasonable range (even under full load), the rear third of the case bottom heats up to almost 60 °C in extreme cases, which doesn't bode well for setting it on your lap. The 14-inch laptop also tends to get warmer than most of its competitors in idle mode, although all values we measured stayed in the green range.
(-) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 49 °C / 120 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 59 °C / 138 F, compared to the average of 39.3 °C / 103 F
(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 27.4 °C / 81 F, compared to the device average of 30.8 °C / 87 F.
(-) 3: The average temperature for the upper side is 39.6 °C / 103 F, compared to the average of 30.8 °C / 87 F for the class Subnotebook.
(+) The palmrests and touchpad are reaching skin temperature as a maximum (32 °C / 89.6 F) and are therefore not hot.
(-) The average temperature of the palmrest area of similar devices was 28.2 °C / 82.8 F (-3.8 °C / -6.8 F).
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heat | 1% | 16% | 20% | 11% | |
Maximum Upper Side * | 49 | 46.9 4% | 43 12% | 39.6 19% | 43.1 12% |
Maximum Bottom * | 59 | 53.5 9% | 42 29% | 38.6 35% | 50.2 15% |
Idle Upper Side * | 28 | 29.5 -5% | 25 11% | 24.8 11% | 25.8 8% |
Idle Bottom * | 29 | 30.2 -4% | 26 10% | 25.3 13% | 26.4 9% |
* ... smaller is better
Stress test
Speakers
Our audio analysis confirmed that the VivoBook S 14 has a pretty decent sound. In addition to its maximum volume, its bass could also be a bit stronger. The Lenovo Yoga Pro 7, for example, is clearly ahead when it comes to sound.
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA audio analysis
(±) | speaker loudness is average but good (81 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 14% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (13.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 4.3% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.4% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 3.4% away from median
(±) | linearity of highs is average (7.3% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (14.2% 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, 81% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 audio analysis
(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84 dB)
Bass 100 - 315 Hz
(±) | reduced bass - on average 13.6% lower than median
(±) | linearity of bass is average (10.7% delta to prev. frequency)
Mids 400 - 2000 Hz
(+) | balanced mids - only 2.2% away from median
(+) | mids are linear (5.1% delta to prev. frequency)
Highs 2 - 16 kHz
(+) | balanced highs - only 2.6% away from median
(+) | highs are linear (3.5% delta to prev. frequency)
Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz
(+) | overall sound is linear (9.9% difference to median)
Compared to same class
» 6% of all tested devices in this class were better, 2% similar, 93% worse
» The best had a delta of 5%, average was 19%, worst was 53%
Compared to all devices tested
» 4% of all tested devices were better, 1% similar, 95% worse
» The best had a delta of 4%, average was 24%, worst was 134%
Power management
Power consumption
The laptop's power consumption measurements didn't reveal any particular anomalies. Although the 14-inch device consumed a little more than the competition in almost all scenarios, the VivoBook also managed the best overall performance. The included 90-watt power supply seems to be adequately sized.
Off / Standby | ![]() ![]() |
Idle | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Load |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | |
Key:
min: ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M | Average of class Subnotebook | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Power Consumption | 17% | 17% | 17% | 37% | 28% | |
Idle Minimum * | 6 | 5.4 10% | 4 33% | 5.3 12% | 3.6 40% | 4.27 ? 29% |
Idle Average * | 8 | 10.5 -31% | 5.5 31% | 7.2 10% | 6.6 17% | 7.37 ? 8% |
Idle Maximum * | 14 | 10.9 22% | 11.8 16% | 7.5 46% | 7.4 47% | 9.06 ? 35% |
Load Average * | 76 | 47.8 37% | 66 13% | 65.6 14% | 47.1 38% | 45.6 ? 40% |
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra * | 58.6 | 49.2 16% | ||||
Cyberpunk 2077 ultra external monitor * | 61.9 | 46.7 25% | ||||
Load Maximum * | 94 | 58.6 38% | 100 -6% | 89.6 5% | 54.3 42% | 68.8 ? 27% |
Witcher 3 ultra * | 55 | 73 | 47.4 |
* ... smaller is better
Power consumption Cyberpunk / stress test
Power consumption with external monitor
Runtimes
A very positive surprise was its battery life. The Ryzen AI 9 is super energy-efficient without a power supply unit. Almost 32 hours under ideal conditions (minimum brightness, Wi-Fi off, virtually no load) are just as outstanding as around 16.5 hours when surfing the web wirelessly with the brightness reduced to 150 cd/m². All of the competitors can only dream of these values—despite comparably large batteries.
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M, 75 Wh | Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606-RK333W Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, Radeon 890M, 78 Wh | Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14IMH9 Ultra 7 155H, Arc 8-Core, 73 Wh | Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9 R7 8845HS, Radeon 780M, 84 Wh | Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA R7 8840HS, Radeon 780M, 75 Wh | Average of class Subnotebook | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery Runtime | -35% | -31% | -31% | -24% | -15% | |
Reader / Idle | 1902 | 1965 ? 3% | ||||
WiFi v1.3 | 990 | 640 -35% | 680 -31% | 710 -28% | 774 -22% | 760 ? -23% |
Load | 165 | 107 -35% | 110 -33% | 123 -25% | 121.3 ? -26% | |
H.264 | 1204 | 1031 | 1046 | 967 ? |
Pros
Cons
Verdict
During our test, the Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED revealed itself to be a fast and almost entirely successful allrounder that barely allowed itself any mistakes.
The Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 already performs more than well enough in standard mode and can at least catch up with Intel's Core Ultra competition (especially when it comes to its CPU performance). Furthermore, the integrated Radeon 890M is a good option for casual gamers who don't necessarily need to play every single new game at maximum settings.
Apart from some minor details, the rest of the laptop is impressive, too. Its stylish case is comfortably lightweight and compact, and it gives users a large variety of ports to choose from. Adding to this are good input devices as well as a contrast-rich and vivid OLED panel—whose shiny surface unfortunately comes with its own disadvantages (strong reflections).
Truly impressive runtimes are the VivoBook S 14's main highlight, which help make the laptop a great portable companion.
All-in-all, the 14-inch laptop is roughly on par with the Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14, which is fitted with a Core Ultra 7 155H and has a similar price. In order to receive an even higher rating, the VivoBook S 14 OLED's case temperatures would have to be lower and its maintenance and upgrade options would have to be better (soldered-on RAM, only one M.2 slot).
Price and availability
The VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA is available from $1,199.99 and can be purchased via major online retailers such as Amazon.
Please note: We have recently updated our rating system and the results of version 8 are not comparable with the results of version 7. More information is available here.
Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA
- 08/27/2024 v8
Florian Glaser
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.