Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Türkçe
Svenska
Chinese
MagyarAsus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM Laptop Review: AMD Still Rules The 14-inch Gaming Space
Asus introduced its Zephyrus G14 laptop early last year which made headlines for its small 14-inch form factor, 8-core AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS CPU, and GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q Turing graphics. The then-new Zen 2 CPU would allow the G14 to outperform many larger 15.6-inch and 17.3-inch gaming laptops including those with 10th gen Core i9 CPUs.
For 2021, Asus has refreshed its Zephyrus G14 model to run on the newer Zen 3 Ryzen 9 5900HS Cezanne CPU and RTX 3060 Ampere GPU instead. The display and outer lid have also gotten new options to improve the visual experience. Our specific 144 Hz FHD configuration can be found online for $1500 to 1750 USD while the 120 Hz QHD option can be found for up to $2000.
Although the original Zephyrus G14 launched with no direct competitors in its size class, this 2021 version must now face off against the formidable Razer Blade 14. This review will therefore reference the Razer laptop and other larger gaming laptops for comparison purposes.
More Asus reviews:
potential competitors in comparison
Rating | Date | Model | Weight | Height | Size | Resolution | Best Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83.5 % | 06/2021 | Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM R9 5900HS, GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU | 1.7 kg | 19.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 83.6 % | 03/2020 | Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV R9 4900HS, GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q | 1.6 kg | 17.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 87.5 % | 06/2021 | Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 R9 5900HX, GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU | 1.8 kg | 16.8 mm | 14.00" | 2560x1440 | |
| 86.5 % | 02/2021 | HP Envy 14-eb0010nr i5-1135G7, GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | 1.6 kg | 17.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1200 | |
| 84.1 % | 01/2021 | Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG i7-1165G7, GeForce MX450 | 1.3 kg | 16.9 mm | 14.00" | 1920x1080 | |
| 83 % | 08/2020 | HP Envy 15-ep0098nr i7-10750H, GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q | 2 kg | 19 mm | 15.60" | 3840x2160 |
Case — Same Look With Some Shinier Trims
The mostly matte chassis remains the same as the 2020 model except for a couple of minor superficial changes: the Zephyrus font along the rear edge and the glossy logo near the corner of the outer lid are now more reflective and slightly purple, respectively. The small holes or perforations on the outer lid are also now reflective for a subtle rainbow effect. Dimensions and rigidity are otherwise untouched as is the optional Anime Matrix LED lighting feature.
For the enthusiasts keeping track, the Razer Blade 14 is both smaller and thinner than the Asus while weighing about 100 g more. The Zephyrus G14 is an older design, after all.
The Anime Matrix configuration is 2 mm thicker than the configuration without the feature since the outer lid must be able to hold the mini LEDs. Though unique, it's easy to forget that Anime Matrix exists since owners will almost always be looking at the screen and not its other side.
Connectivity — No Thunderbolt Compatibility
Port options and positioning haven't changed from the original G14. Thunderbolt remains elusive due to the AMD CPU, but at least the left USB-C port supports display-out, Power Delivery, and G-Sync.
Many of the ports are closer to the front edge than on most other notebooks where cables can get in the way.
Communication
An Intel AX200 comes standard for Wi-Fi 6 and Bluetooth 5.1 connectivity. Transfer rates are consistent over time for reliable performance.
Maintenance
The bottom panel is easily removable with just a Philips screwdriver. Upgrade options may be limited, but at least RAM is expandable unlike on the Razer Blade 14.
Accessories and Warranty
There are no extras in the box outside of the AC adapter and paperwork. The usual one-year limited manufacturer warranty applies.
Input Devices — Excellent Key Feedback
Keyboard
Key size and feedback remain the same as on last year's model. We prefer the typing experience on the G14 over the Blade 14 as its keys have both deeper travel and stronger feedback. On the flip side, the keyboard here supports only single-zone white backlighting compared to the per-key RGB lighting of the Razer.
The layout of some secondary functions have changed year-over-year. For example, the brightness controls for the keyboard backlight have been moved to the top row while a new "Aura" key for toggling the backlight has replaced the fast forward key.
Touchpad
The Precision clickpad is smaller than the one of the Blade 14 (10.5 x 6 cm vs. 11.1 x 7.6 cm). Cursor control is still smooth and with just a bit of sticking when gliding at slow speeds while the integrated mouse keys remain shallow and with not enough feedback.
Display — Smooth 144 Hz With Good Colors
Whereas the 2020 Zephyrus G14 uses a 120 Hz CEC PA LM140LF-1F01 IPS panel, our 2021 model uses a 144 Hz CEC PA LM140LF-1F02 IPS panel. Both appear to be essentially identical in color coverage and brightness according to our tests while other characteristics like response times and contrast ratios may be slightly better and worse, respectively, on the newer panel. It's a midrange to high-end panel overall even though it can't come close to the colors or response times of many 15.6-inch or 17.3-inch gaming-ready displays.
Note that Asus offers a higher resolution 1440p display option with full DCI-P3 coverage but a lower 120 Hz native refresh rate. The Blade 14 offers a similar 1440p panel as well albeit with an even higher 165 Hz native refresh rate.
FreeSync is enabled by default on the main display while G-Sync is supported for compatible external monitors.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brightness Distribution: 90 %
Center on Battery: 329.4 cd/m²
Contrast: 845:1 (Black: 0.39 cd/m²)
ΔE Color 4.01 | 0.59-29.43 Ø5.2, calibrated: 3.89
ΔE Greyscale 3.2 | 0.57-98 Ø5.5
67.7% AdobeRGB 1998 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
92.4% sRGB (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
68.1% Display P3 (Argyll 2.2.0 3D)
Gamma: 2.2
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM LM140LF-1F02, IPS, 14.00, 1920x1080 | Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV CEC PA LM140LF-1F01, IPS, 14.00, 1920x1080 | Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 TL140BDXP02-2, IPS, 14.00, 2560x1440 | HP Envy 14-eb0010nr AU Optronics AUOF392, IPS, 14.00, 1920x1200 | Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG Au Optronics B140HAN03.2, IPS, 14.00, 1920x1080 | HP Envy 15-ep0098nr Samsung SDC4145, AMOLED, 15.60, 3840x2160 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display | -1% | 26% | 11% | -7% | 29% | |
| Display P3 Coverage | 68.1 | 66.5 -2% | 97.2 43% | 77.1 13% | 60.9 -11% | 88.5 30% |
| sRGB Coverage | 92.4 | 92 0% | 99.9 8% | 99.8 8% | 90.4 -2% | 100 8% |
| AdobeRGB 1998 Coverage | 67.7 | 67.2 -1% | 85.4 26% | 76.7 13% | 62.3 -8% | 99.9 48% |
| Response Times | -27% | 57% | -73% | -7% | 94% | |
| Response Time Grey 50% / Grey 80% * | 34.4 ? | 43.6 ? -27% | 16.4 ? 52% | 61.2 ? -78% | 39 ? -13% | 0.8 ? 98% |
| Response Time Black / White * | 27.6 ? | 34.8 ? -26% | 10.8 ? 61% | 46 ? -67% | 28 ? -1% | 2.7 ? 90% |
| PWM Frequency | 242.7 ? | |||||
| Screen | 21% | 20% | 34% | -6% | 1% | |
| Brightness middle | 329.4 | 322.2 -2% | 331.1 1% | 412 25% | 323 -2% | 374.3 14% |
| Brightness | 311 | 302 -3% | 318 2% | 392 26% | 313 1% | 379 22% |
| Brightness Distribution | 90 | 87 -3% | 91 1% | 81 -10% | 80 -11% | 91 1% |
| Black Level * | 0.39 | 0.26 33% | 0.36 8% | 0.32 18% | 0.36 8% | |
| Contrast | 845 | 1239 47% | 920 9% | 1288 52% | 897 6% | |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 * | 4.01 | 2.43 39% | 2.25 44% | 1.88 53% | 4.86 -21% | 5.47 -36% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 max. * | 8.21 | 5.07 38% | 4.62 44% | 3.06 63% | 7.52 8% | 8.22 -0% |
| Colorchecker dE 2000 calibrated * | 3.89 | 2.29 41% | 1.96 50% | 3.64 6% | 4.61 -19% | |
| Greyscale dE 2000 * | 3.2 | 3.3 -3% | 1.7 47% | 2.2 31% | 4.83 -51% | 2.3 28% |
| Gamma | 2.2 100% | 2.22 99% | 2.3 96% | 2.1 105% | 2.64 83% | 2.09 105% |
| CCT | 7070 92% | 6902 94% | 6751 96% | 6650 98% | 7405 88% | 6340 103% |
| Color Space (Percent of AdobeRGB 1998) | 60 | 68.7 | 57.5 | 87.8 | ||
| Color Space (Percent of sRGB) | 91.9 | 99.8 | 90.3 | 100 | ||
| Total Average (Program / Settings) | -2% /
9% | 34% /
27% | -9% /
14% | -7% /
-7% | 41% /
24% |
* ... smaller is better
Color space covers >90 percent of sRGB to be more than enough for gaming and just barely passable for digital artists. Again, the WQHD option offers full DCI-P3 coverage for users who demand the deeper colors.
Asus claims a pre-calibrated display which our independent X-Rite colorimeter measurements can confirm. Average grayscale and color DeltaE values would barely change after attempting to calibrate the panel ourselves. Color temperature is a bit too cool, however, and so users may want to adjust it further.
Display Response Times
| ↔ Response Time Black to White | ||
|---|---|---|
| 27.6 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 16.4 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 11.2 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows relatively slow response rates in our tests and may be too slow for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.4 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 63 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (22.7 ms). | ||
| ↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey | ||
| 34.4 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined | ↗ 15.6 ms rise |  |
| ↘ 18.8 ms fall | ||
| The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers. In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.25 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 36 % of all devices are better. This means that the measured response time is similar to the average of all tested devices (35.8 ms). | ||
Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)
| Screen flickering / PWM not detected |  | ||
In comparison: 53 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 19466 (minimum: 5 - maximum: 3846000) Hz was measured. | |||
Outdoor visibility is decent when under shade but otherwise subpar on bright days as the backlight isn't as bright as most dedicated Ultrabooks like the Dell XPS or MacBook. Viewing angles are excellent which is to be expected from an IPS panel.
Performance — 35 W AMD Zen 3 CPU With 60 W to 80 W RTX GPU
Asus is doubling down on AMD again by going with its latest Zen 3 Ryzen 9 5900HS CPU instead of an Intel Tiger Lake-H part. This particular processor directly replaces the Ryzen 9 4900HS on last year's Zephyrus G14. The Blade 14 and even smaller ROG Flow X13 are using the slightly different unlocked Ryzen 9 5900HX and 5980HS instead, respectively.
GPU options appear to be fixed at the GeForce RTX 3060 with resizable BAR and no 3070 or 3080 options. The maximum TGP (including Dynamic Boost) is only 80 W compared to 100 W or more on laptops like the Blade 14 or Aorus 17 meaning performance will be slightly slower on our Zephyrus G14. The Max-Q moniker may be gone, but its legacy remains when dealing with these small form factor gaming laptops.
RAM is soldered at 8 GB or 16 GB of DDR4-3200 depending on the SKU with one SODIMM expansion slot.
Our unit was set to Turbo mode via Armoury Crate prior to running any performance benchmarks below for the highest possible scores. Owners should become accustomed with the Armoury Crate software as key features like fan control, lighting, and performance are all toggled here.
Asus has confirmed with us that the system utilizes liquid metal thermal paste for the CPU.
Processor
Raw processor performance is essentially on par with the new 11th gen Tiger Lake-H Core i7-11800H that only just became widely available. This includes single-core benchmarks as well which is where AMD would normally falter. Users are truly getting the processor performance of a 15.6-inch or 17.3-inch gaming laptop in a small 14-inch form factor with the Zephyrus G14.
The gen-to-gen performance gains over the Ryzen 9 4900HS are about 10 to 20 percent. The 4900HS was already top-of-the-line when it launched early last year and so we weren't expecting huge improvements with the Ryzen 9 5900HS.
Any differences between the 5900HS and 5900HX are extremely minor as they are each limited by the overarching cooling solution of the laptop.
Cinebench R23: Multi Core | Single Core
Cinebench R15: CPU Multi 64Bit | CPU Single 64Bit
Blender: v2.79 BMW27 CPU
7-Zip 18.03: 7z b 4 -mmt1 | 7z b 4
Geekbench 5.4: Single-Core | Multi-Core
HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2: 4k Preset
LibreOffice : 20 Documents To PDF
R Benchmark 2.5: Overall mean
| Cinebench R23 / Multi Core | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX506HM | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (11426 - 13214, n=4) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
| Cinebench R23 / Single Core | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX506HM | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (1457 - 1488, n=4) | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 | |
| Geekbench 5.4 / Single-Core | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (1410 - 1547, n=3) | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| HP Envy 15-ep0098nr | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
| Geekbench 5.4 / Multi-Core | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (7767 - 7910, n=3) | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
| HP Envy 15-ep0098nr | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| HWBOT x265 Benchmark v2.2 / 4k Preset | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX506HM | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (12.7 - 15.4, n=4) | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
| HP Envy 15-ep0098nr | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
| LibreOffice / 20 Documents To PDF | |
| Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (50.7 - 54.9, n=4) | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| HP Envy 15-ep0098nr | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX506HM | |
| R Benchmark 2.5 / Overall mean | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| HP Envy 15-ep0098nr | |
| Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F15 FX506HM | |
| Asus TUF Gaming F17 FX706HM | |
| Average AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS (0.51 - 0.538, n=4) | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
* ... smaller is better
System Performance
PCMark 10 results are ever-so-slightly below that of the Blade 14 in Digital Content Creation due to the faster RTX 3070 GPU in the Razer system. Scores are otherwise very close to one another to be consistently higher than on last year's Zephyrus G14.
| PCMark 10 Score | 6773 points | |
Help | ||
DPC Latency
LatencyMon shows heavy DPC latency issues when opening multiple browser tabs on our homepage. 4K video playback is otherwise smooth and with no dropped frames. CPU and GPU utilization would each sit in the single-digit range only.
| DPC Latencies / LatencyMon - interrupt to process latency (max), Web, Youtube, Prime95 | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| HP Envy 15-ep0098nr | |
| HP Envy 14-eb0010nr | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV | |
| Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 | |
| Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG | |
* ... smaller is better
Storage Devices — Just One M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 2280 Option
Instead of an Intel 660p like on last year's model, Asus has upgraded to the SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N which is able to offer significantly faster read rates approaching 3600 MB/s. Write rates are also faster even though they don't quite match the popular Samsung PM981a.
The internal M.2 slot does not fully support PCIe 4 SSDs that are becoming increasingly common on newer Intel laptops.
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM SK Hynix HFM001TD3JX013N | Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401IV Intel SSD 660p 1TB SSDPEKNW010T8 | Razer Blade 14 Ryzen 9 RTX 3070 Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR | HP Envy 14-eb0010nr Samsung SSD PM981a MZVLB256HBHQ | Asus Zenbook 14 UX435EG Samsung PM981a MZVLB1T0HBLR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS SSD | -28% | 10% | -20% | 9% | |
| Seq Read | 2923 | 1278 -56% | 3066 5% | 2127 -27% | 2861 -2% |
| Seq Write | 1801 | 1624 -10% | 2805 56% | 1427 -21% | 2837 58% |
| 4K Read | 50 | 57.8 16% | 49.8 0% | 52.5 5% | 60.3 21% |
| 4K Write | 109 | 163 50% | 119.7 10% | 122.9 13% | 164.2 51% |
| 4K-64 Read | 1400 | 582 -58% | 2093 50% | 947 -32% | 1598 14% |
| 4K-64 Write | 2216 | 849 -62% | 2009 -9% | 1598 -28% | 1572 -29% |
| Access Time Read * | 0.04 | 0.036 10% | 0.046 -15% | 0.072 -80% | 0.046 -15% |
| Access Time Write * | 0.102 | 0.112 -10% | 0.086 16% | 0.09 12% | 0.021 79% |
| Score Read | 1742 | 768 -56% | 2449 41% | 1212 -30% | 1945 12% |
| Score Write | 2505 | 1174 -53% | 2410 -4% | 1864 -26% | 2020 -19% |
| Score Total | 5088 | 2372 -53% | 6095 20% | 3674 -28% | 4966 -2% |
| Copy ISO MB/s | 2076 | 1660 -20% | 1799 -13% | 1605 -23% | 2414 16% |
| Copy Program MB/s | 879 | 443.5 -50% | 750 -15% | 847 -4% | 575 -35% |
| Copy Game MB/s | 1855 | 1162 -37% | 1830 -1% | 1632 -12% | 1408 -24% |
* ... smaller is better
Disk Throttling: DiskSpd Read Loop, Queue Depth 8
GPU Performance
Graphics performance with our Zephyrus G14 is almost 10 percent slower than the average laptop in our database equipped with the same RTX 3060 GPU. This deficit would remain true even when running the system on Turbo or maximum fan mode. Running the laptop in Performance mode instead of Turbo mode would result in a graphics dip of about 3 to 4 percent.
The slightly lower 3DMark scores translate to slightly slower frame rates during real-world gameplay. Performance in more demanding games like GTA V, Final Fantasy XV, or Witcher 3 would be behind the average RTX 3060 laptop by a few percentage points. Frame rates are nonetheless steady and without any unusual dips or micro-stuttering over time.
Users can still expect 15 to 30 percent faster graphics performance over the RTX 2060 Max-Q despite the below-average scores from our 60+ W RTX 3060.
| 3DMark 11 Performance | 19586 points | |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Standard Score | 44342 points | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Score | 17223 points | |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 7371 points | |
Help | ||
| X-Plane 11.11 | |
| 1280x720 low (fps_test=1) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU (93.7 - 156, n=41) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU (83.6 - 157.1, n=47) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU (15.3 - 152.8, n=59) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile (96.1 - 128.4, n=8) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile (83 - 117, n=11) | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (69.9 - 108, n=18) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile (56.9 - 107, n=18) | |
| 1920x1080 med (fps_test=2) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Laptop GPU (80.6 - 139, n=40) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU (73 - 138.3, n=47) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU (13.7 - 144.7, n=59) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile (85 - 114.1, n=8) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile (76 - 106, n=11) | |
| Asus Zephyrus G14 GA401QM | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile (63.5 - 95, n=18) | |
| Average NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile (50.5 - 93.6, n=18) | |