This article discusses the 2025 update of the Asus Zenbook Duo series, a dual-display portable laptop with Intel Arrow Lake H hardware and a slightly revised keyboard folio in this generation.
This Zenbook Duo is one of the few dual-display laptops available in stores, but a slightly different design from the other popular dual-display model, the Lenovo Yoga Book 9i.
This still offers two 14-inch OLED touchscreens, but the chassis is created so that the keyboard folio can be positioned between the display when using and closing the device, and the hinges allow for up to a 180-degree opening angle, not 360.
That means this Duo is still primarily meant for laptop use, but you can also detach the keyboard folio and make use of the integrated kickstand to position the computer so you can use both displays at the same time, one stacked over the other. However, tablet mode, while somewhat possible, isn’t practical on this design.
Below in this review article, I’ve gathered my thoughts on the overall practicality of this chassis and what you can expect in general usability, performance, and battery life from this Zenbook Duo 2025 series.
Specs sheet – Asus Zenbook Duo UX8406 (2025)
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UX3405CA, 2025 model
Screen dual 14 inch, OLED, 16:10 aspect ratio, touch, glossy with Gorilla Glass,
Processor Intel Arrow Lake H Core Ultra,
Video Intel Arc 140T, up to 2.35 GHz
Memory up to 32 GB LPDDR5-7467 (soldered)
Storage single M.2 2280 slot – WD PC SN740 drive
Connectivity Wireless 7 (Intel BE201) 2×2, Bluetooth 5.4
Ports left: 2x USB-C with Thunderbolt 4, 1x USB-A 3.2 gen1,
Battery 75 Wh, 65W USB-C compact charger
Size 313 mm or 12.3” (w) x 217 mm or 8.6” (d) x from 19.9 mm or 0.78” (h), with keyboard folio
Weight ~3 lbs (1.35 kg) without keyboard,
Extras clamshell dual-display format with a 180-degree hinge, detachable keyboard folio,
Design and functionality This Duo is a 14-inch laptop with similar traits and design ques to the other Zenbook models of the last few years. It’s mostly built out of anodized aluminum and feels well built and sturdy with everyday use.
Asus only offers it in a dark-gray color, with very clean branding elements in this 2025 generation. Very professional, but the dark metals can show smudges fairly easily, so you’ll have to constantly clean this off.
The chassis format consists of a main base that integrates the hardware and battery, as well as a screen part with the display. However, there’s also another display over the main base, and the keyboard and touchpad are part of a detachable keyboard folio.
This keyboard folio is made out of plastic but still feels excellently to the touch and with daily use. It latches magnetically and through a physical connector to the laptop when placed over the main chassis, or it can be removed and used independently. The entire process of latching and unlatching the keyboard works smoothly, with a minimal delay of 1-3 seconds required for the software to activate/deactivate the secondary display.
What’s great about this folio is that it’s designed to be tucked between the two chassis parts, and that means you can close the laptop with or without the keyboard in the middle.
As mentioned, this Zenbook Duo is still primarily made for laptop use, on the desk or on the lap. It is, however, a little thicker and heavier than a regular 14-inch Zenbook, as you can tell from these images down below.
Not much to complain about the ergonomics in this mode, though, except for the fact that the thicker profile can lead to the front lip putting some pressure on your wrists in certain cases, especially as that lip is rather sharp. Other than that, the keyboard stays snuggly attached to the laptop’s chassis and I never felt that the two parts are separate in any way.
Detaching the keyboard folio wakes up the second display. You can put a virtual keyboard on this second display, but that makes no sense to me. Instead, you should prop-up the laptop on its kickstand so you get to use both displays for actual content, a mode that sets this device apart from most regular laptops.
Now, this format will take some time to get used to and adapt to, because most dual-display setups have the screens one next to the other, not one of top of the other like in this case. For multitasking and general multi-purpose use, having twice the workspace of a regular laptop can sure come in handy, but weather this format is actually practical in real use is debatable.
Furthermore, I expect professional users to still prefer the option of hooking up an external mini-display to their existing laptop, for multiple reasons, such as the ability to choose the exact notebook that they want/need and overall cost, as this Duo is significantly more expensive than a regular 14-inch ultraportbale, and the dual-display format is what you’re paying the premium for.
Now, you can also somewhat position the laptop so you get two displays side by side, but that means the screens are in portrait mode, so hardly usable for real work. On top of that, the way the hinges are designed also prevents this approach, as the two displays don’t line-up in the same plane.
And then there’s tablet mode, which is only possible when having the display open wide and placing them both on a table. That means you cannot fold the two displays 360 degrees for the same kind of tablet mode offered by regular 2-in-1 convertibles. Hence, I wouldn’t even consider this Zenbook for tablet use.
As far as the IO goes, there’s a proper selection of ports on this Zenbook Duo, with two USB-Cs with Thunderbolt 4.0, one full USB-A, one full HDMI, and an audio jack. Unlike on other Zenbooks, you get a USB-C connector on either side, so you can conveniently charge the laptop however you want.
Keyboard and trackpad The keyboard and touchpad are part of a dedicated folio. This connects physically to the laptop when placed over the chassis, or can be used stand-alone via Bluetooth connectivity. This means the folio gets a small battery inside, enough for a few hours of general use, and the battery charges up automatically when connecting the folio to the laptop, or via the USB-C port on the left side of the folio.
As a whole, the typing experience on this laptop is among the best I’ve experienced on any past Zenbook or ultraportable in general. The keys feel excellent to the touch, and their response perfectly suited my typing style. I don’t remember having the same experience with the 2024 Zenbook Duo keyboard, so Asus might have changed something with this 2025 generation update, but I can’t tell what.
The keys are backlit and the overall layout is identical to what’s offered by regular Zenbook 14 models.
As for the touchpad, this is a spacious plastic surface, smooth to the touch and excellent for daily swipes, gestures and taps. It doesn’t rattle with firmer taps on this sample, and even the physical clicks in the corners were smooth and silent.
Finally, for biometrics, there’s no finger sensor but the webcam includes IR and Hello support.
Screen There are two 16:10 OLED touch displays on this series, either the 2.8K 120Hz panels offered here, or some lower-tier 2K 60Hz panels on some versions and in some markets.
The 2.8K 120Hz OLEDs on this model are well known at this point, as they are implemented in many 14-inch thin-and-light devices. They’re excellent for general use, with strong contrast and beautiful colors, but don’t excel in bright-light environments. They’re also excellent for gaming, with the 120Hz refresh and sub 1ms response times.
On the other hand, these being touch OLEDs, you’ll notice that slight graininess effect on bright backgrounds, when browsing and reading/editing documents. You’ll also have to account for OLED flickering at lower brightness levels, although that can be somewhat mitigated if you’re using the flicker-free dimming option in the myAsus app for adjusting the screen’s brightness.
Anyway, here’s what we got in our tests, with an X-Rite i1 Display Pro sensor :
Panel HardwareID: Samsung SDC419D (ATNA40CU09-0);
Coverage: 100% sRGB, 93.7% Adobe RGB, 100% DCI-P3;
Type: 10-bit with HDR500, 120 Hz;
Measured gamma: 2.22;
Max brightness in the middle of the screen: 372.62 cd/m2 on power;
Min brightness in the middle of the screen: <5 cd/m2 on power;
Contrast at max brightness: 1:1;
White point: 6600 K;
Black on max brightness: 0 cd/m2;
PWM: Yes, to be discussed.
The panels came well-calibrated out of the box and turned up uniform in color and luminosity.
If interested, this article goes indepth over the OLED panel technology available in laptops .
One final detail worth adding is that these OLEDs are properly suited for this dual-display laptop format due to their wide viewing angles. That means you don’t have to adjust the kickstand and hinges so you’re always looking at the panels straight on, as you would have to with IPS panels. This aspect has been problematic on past Asus Zenbook laptops with dual displays, but less so on this design.
Hardware and performance Our test model is a top-specced configuration of the 2025 Asus Zenbook Duo, code name UX8406CA, with an Intel Core Ultra 9 285H processor and Intel Arc 140T graphics, 32 GB of LPDDR5-7467 memory, and a fast 1 TB gen4 SSD.
Disclaimer: This review unit was provided by Asus for this article. We tested it with the software available as of early-February 2025 (BIOS 302, MyAsus 4.0.31.0, Intel Graphics Driver 32.0.101.6104). This is a launch-day software package, thus some aspects can still change with future updates.
Note: Installing the latest Intel Arc driver from Intel’s website (32.0.101.6559 for 04.02.2025) lead to poorer GPU performance both in benchmarks and in games. Hence, I’m using the Intel GPU driver for the Zenbook Duo from Asus’s website, which is a few months older.
Spec-wise, this series is based on the 2025 Intel Arrow Lake H hardware platform , with Core Ultra 200H processors and Intel Arc 140T graphics.
Our configuration is a Core Ultra 9 285H processor, a hybrid design with 6 Performance Cores, 8 Efficiency Cores, 2 extra Low Power Efficiency Cores, and a total of 16 combined Threads. Although there’s no Hyper-Threading on the Performance cores with this platform, the generational IPC improvements of these updated cores allow the Ultra 9 285H to outmatch the Ultra 9 185H in similar loads at mid-power settings. This laptop is a mid-powered implementation of the hardware, at around 35W sustained.
Graphics are handled by the integrated Intel Arc 140T chip, with 8x Xe2 compute units and clock speeds of up to 2.35 GHz. This is a higher-clocked variation of the Arc 140V iGPU implemented with Intel Lunar Lake hardware .
Our configuration also comes with 32GB of LPDDR5-7500 memory. 16 GB configurations are also available in some markets, paired with the more mainstream Core Ultra 7 255H processor.
For storage, Asus opted for a fast PCIe gen4 WD PC SN740 drive here.
The SSD is the only upgradeable component. However, getting inside this laptop is difficult, as shown in the video down below.
VIDEO As far as the software goes, this ZenBook gets the standard MyAsus app which allows control over the power profiles, battery and screen settings, updates, etc.
There are three performance/thermal profiles to choose from:
Full-Speed – allows the hardware to run at ~35-38W sustained and up to 60W PL1, with the fans up to ~50 dB;
Performance – allows the hardware to run at ~35W sustained and up to 60W PL1, with the fans up to ~45 dB;
Balanced/Standard – allows the hardware to run at 20W in sustained loads, with the fans up to ~35 dB;
Whisper – limits the CPU to 15W to favor fan noise of sub 30 dB.
I recommend keeping the laptop on Standard in most cases. The Performance profile offers faster processing capabilities in sustained loads but is also noisier.
We’ll get to that in a bit, but first, here’s what to expect in terms of speeds and temperatures with daily chores such as streaming video, editing text, or browsing the web.
Here are the logs on single display mode.
And when using the laptop with both displays active.
Productivity Performance and Benchmarks – Intel Arrow Lake H, Core Ultra 9 On to more demanding loads, we start by testing the CPU’s performance in the Cinebench R15 loop test.
The Intel Core Ultra 9 285H processor runs at ~60W for brief moments on Performance mode, but then stabilizes at 35W after a few loops. The scores end up at around 2200 points at that power level. Temperatures end-up in the high-80s Celsius with fan-noise levels of ~42 dBA.
The Standard mode keeps the fans quieter, at around 35 dBA, and the CPU gradually drops towards 20 W of sustained power, with lower temperatures in the low-70s C, and scores of around 1400 points.
Whisper mode keeps the fans quieter, at sub 30 dBA, with the power stabilizing at around 15W sustained. The scores stabilize at around 1000 points, about 40% of what this laptop can do in Performance mode.
On Performance mode unplugged from the wall, this platform performs identically to the first scenario, when plugged into the wall.
All these are illustrated in the graph below.
To put these in perspective, here’s how this Core Ultra 9 285H implementation fares against other hardware platforms available in current and past-generation thin and light laptops .
This scores about 10-15% higher than the mainstream Meteor Lake Ultra 7 155H and Ultra 9 185H implemented in most portable laptops of the past year, and significantly faster than the Lunar Lake Core Ultra 200V implementations. At the same time, though, recent AMD platforms outmatch it in this sort of multi-thread load, both the recent Ryzen 9 AI implementations and the older Hawk Point models.
We then went ahead and further verified our findings with the more taxing Cinebench R23 loop test and in Blender. We measured similar behavior, power limits, fan noise, and temperatures as described above.
We then ran the 3DMark CPU profile test.
Finally, we ran our combined CPU+GPU stress tests on this notebook, on the Performance profile. 3DMark stress runs the same test for 20 times in a loop and looks for performance variation and degradation over time. This unit easily passed the test while flat on the desk, which means the performance is not impacted by the heat in longer-duration sustained loads.
Benchmarks results and performance summary With that out of the way, let’s get to some benchmarks. We ran our standard set of tests with the laptop on Performance mode (~35W sustained TDP) and the screen set at its default 2.8K resolution.
Here’s what we got.
3DMark 13 –CPU profile: max – 9928, 16 – 9626, 8 – 6771, 4 – 4353, 2 – 2378, 2123 – 1257;3DMark 13 – Fire Strike: 8786 (Graphics – 9303, Physics – 30129, Combined – 3544);3DMark 13 – Night Raid: 34920 (Graphics – 43449, CPU – 16532);3DMark 13 – Solar Bay: 15965.3DMark 13 – Steel Nomad Light: 3606.3DMark 13 – Time Spy: 4624 (Graphics – 4191, CPU – 11168);3DMark 13 – XeSS: XeSS Off – 7.64 fps, XeSS On – 23.51 fps, 207.9% performance difference.
Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Extreme: 2496;Uniengine Superposition – 1080p Medium: 6703;
PCMark 10: 7729 (Essentials – 11350, Productivity – 9369, Digital Content Creation – 11787);GeekBench 6.2.2 64-bit: Multi-core: 15135, Single-Core: 2709;CineBench R15 (best run): CPU 2841 cb, CPU Single Core 306 cb;CineBench R20 (best run): CPU 6603 cb, CPU Single Core 796 cb;CineBench R23: CPU 17348 pts (best run), CPU 15627 pts (10 min loop test), CPU Single Core 2070 pts (best run);CineBench 2024: CPU 892 (10 min run), CPU Single Core 127 pts.
And here are some work-related benchmarks, on the same Performance profile:
Blender 3.6.5 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 2m 21s ;Blender 3.6.5 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 6m 15s;Blender 3.6.5 – Classroom scene – GPU Compute, OneAPI: 1m 38s;Blender 4.3.2 – BMW Car scene- CPU Compute: 2m 26s ;Blender 4.3.2 – Classroom scene – CPU Compute: 6m 45s;Blender 4.3.2 – Classroom scene – GPU Compute, OneAPI: 1m 35s;
SPECviewperf 2020 – 3DSMax: 28.95;SPECviewperf 2020 – Catia: 25.20;SPECviewperf 2020 – Creo: 36.12;SPECviewperf 2020 – Energy: 7.24;SPECviewperf 2020 – Maya: 103.81;SPECviewperf 2020 – Medical: 17.15;SPECviewperf 2020 – SNX: 6.23;SPECviewperf 2020 – SW: 44.65;V-Ray Benchmark: CPU – 11914, CUDA – 319.
These are solid results for a daily-driver portable laptop. However, keep in mind that the platform allows for 60W of power in short-duration loads, thus some of the short benchmarks are skewed upwards and not indicative of performance at 35W. We’ll discuss the general performance of the Core Ultra 9 285H platform in a separate article.
Compared to last year’s Meteor Lake Core Ultra 9 185H configuration of the same Zenbook Duo (and same power settings), this Arrow Lake implementation shows 10-20% gains in CPU single-core and multi-threaded loads and 10-20% higher scores in GPU loads.
Compared to a Lunar Lake Core Ultra 7 258V, this 285H is significantly faster in the multi-threaded load, but otherwise close in single-core CPU and iGPU performance, with 3-10% gains in IPC and iGPU scores for the Arrow Lake implementation. But don’t forget this also runs at higher power than most Lunar Lake implementations.
As for how this compares to AMD’s platforms, the Ryzen 9 AI HX 370 in a similar-power implementation beats it by a small margin in sustained CPU loads, but comes behind in short-duration loads and single-core and iGPU tests. On the iGPU side, the Arc 140T scores as much as 25-30% higher in some tests.
However, real-life performance tends to favor the AMD platform, with faster processing times in Blender and higher scores in 3DSMax, Maya, or SolidWorks. Something to further look into as the software matures for Arrow Lake.
Gaming Performance We also ran a couple of DX11, DX12, and Vulkan games on the Performance and Battery profiles of this Intel Core Ultra 9 285H + Arc 140T configuration, at FHD+ resolution, with Low/Lowest graphics settings. I included a few other competing platforms for comparison.
Keep in mind these are with the Intel GPU drivers from Asus website. Installing the latest Arc drivers from Intel’s website results in notably poorer framerates.
Low settings Zenbook Duo 2025, Yoga Pro 14 2024 ,Zenbook S 14 2024 ,Zenbook S 16 2024 ,Zenbook Duo 2024, Zenbook 14 2024, Zenbook 14 2024,
Dota 2 83 fps (50 fps – 1% low)
74 fps (48 fps – 1% low)
82 fps (46 fps – 1% low)
80 fps (46 fps – 1% low)
72 fps (42 fps – 1% low)
76 fps (44 fps – 1% low)
81 fps (58 fps – 1% low)
Far Cry 6 53 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
48 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
52 fps (38 fps – 1% low)
54 fps (46 fps – 1% low)
44 fps (36 fps – 1% low)
46 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
43 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
Horizon Forbidden West crashed
40 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
43 fps (28 fps – 1% low)
40 fps (30 fps – 1% low)
–
35 fps (26 fps – 1% low)
–
Shadow of Tomb Raider 70 fps (46 fps – 1% low)
72 fps (56 fps – 1% low)
66 fps (44 fps – 1% low)
72 fps (56 fps – 1% low)
53 fps (32 fps – 1% low)
65 fps (48 fps – 1% low)
54 fps (3o fps – 1% low)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 fps (42 fps – 1% low)
46 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
53 fps (42 fps – 1% low)
60 fps (38 fps – 1% low)
44 fps (34 fps – 1% low)
45 fps (33 fps – 1% low)
44 fps (26 fps – 1% low)
Doom, Dota 2, Witcher 3 – recorded with MSI Afterburner in game mode;
Tomb Raider – recorded with the included Benchmark utilities.
All these games are playable here with these settings, including newer titles, as long as your expectations are realistic from this sort of thin laptop with integrated graphics.
At the same time, it’s worth noting that the framerates are more or less on par with the Arc 140v implementation tested in the Zenbook S 14 and the Radeon 890M in the Zenbook S 16, and I was expecting better due to the higher clocks on the 140T iGPU and based on the results in synthetic benchmarks. Hence, take these findings with a grain of salt at this point, as there could be room for improvement in these gaming results with future drivers.
Of course, there’s also the matter of XeSS in recent titles, which helps deliver smoother framerates in supported games. Haven’t tested this feature at this point, but will look into it for our analysis of the Ultra 9 285H platform.
With that out of the way, let’s go through some CPU/GPU logs.
The GPU runs at full blast on Performance mode on this laptop, but internal temperatures are high in the high-80s C and even touching 90s Celsius. The fans ramp up to 45 dBA on Performance mode. Having the laptop flat on the desk or raised up on a stand doesn’t affect internal temperatures in any notable way.
Full-speed mode pushes the fans even louder, closer to 50 dBA, and ensures slightly higher sustained power settings, but with still high temperatures and without any impact on the gaming performance.
Standard mode is a significantly lower-power mode on this laptop, with the hardware eventually being capped at around 20W, and that’s not enough to properly power the Arc 140T iGPU. Hence, gaming performance takes a hit, especially in the 1% lows on this sample. Whisper mode is even more limiting, so neither of these modes is suited for games and demanding loads in general.
Noise, Heat, Connectivity, speakers, and others Asus went with a dual-fan dual-radiator single-heatpipe thermal module here.
The exhausts are on the left and right edge, which means hot air blows away and not into the display, as on many other Zenbooks.
At the same time, this cooling module is barely adequate for this hardware and chassis. As shown earlier, on Performance mode the internals run hot in the mid-80s Celsius.
As far as the noise levels go, expect up to 50 dBA on Full Speed, 45 dBA on Performance, 35 dBA on Standard, and sub 30 dBA on Whisper mode, all at head level.
With daily use, the fans rarely stay idle, but they keep quiet on Standard mode and are noticeably more active on Performance mode even with light use. Hence, I’d recommend sticking with Standard mode as much as possible. I haven’t noticed coil winning or electronic noises on this unit.
As for external temperatures, the chassis keeps cool with light use, both with or without the keyboard folio attached.
*Daily Use – streaming Netflix in EDGE for 30 minutes, Whisper Mode, fans at 0 dB
With demanding loads, the keyboard deck barely goes past 40 degrees Celsius in its hottest spot, and that’s because the keyboard is separated from the components.
Take out the keyboard and the hottest part on the main chassis, at the screen level, is around 45 degrees Celsius. Acceptable, but still on the warmer side considering there’s an OLED display on that main chassis, and heat and OLED diodes don’t do well long-term.
The bottom of the laptop heats up to mid-50s Celsius right on top of the components. No surprise, given the internal temperatures on the CPU are around 90s C in this scenario.
*Gaming – Performance mode – playing Witcher for 30 minutes, fans at ~45 dB
For connectivity, there’s the latest-gen WiFi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 through an Intel module on this laptop, which performed fine during my time with the laptop.
Audio is handled by a set of stereo speakers that fire through grills positioned on the bottom of the chassis. They sound alright for this class, with loud volumes and decent quality, although still lack a fair bit in bass.
Finally, there’s an FHD camera placed at the top of the screen, flanked by microphones. The image quality is decent in good lighting, but washed out in bad light. There’s also IR functionality with Hello support offered here.
Battery life There’s a 75 Wh battery inside this 2025 Zenbook Duo 14, properly sized for its size.
Here’s what we got in our battery life tests, with the screens’ brightness set at around 120 nits (~50 brightness) and at its default 120Hz refresh rate. I also set the power mode in Windows 11 on Best Power Efficiency.
These are the results with only the main screen active:
<5 W (~15 h of use) – idle, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;7-9 W (~8-10 h of use) – text editing in Google Drive, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;7 W (~10 h of use) – 1080p fullscreen video on Youtube in Edge, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;7 W (~10 h of use) – Netflix fullscreen in Edge, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;9-12W (~6-8 h of use) – browsing in Edge, Standard Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;50 W (<2 h of use) – Gaming – Dota 2, Standard Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON.
And here’s what we got with both screens on. I’ve only tested idle and browsing because I don’t see why you’d keep both screens on for video streaming or gaming on battery.
7.5 W (~10 h of use) – idle, Whisper Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON;12-15 W (~5-6 h of use) – browsing in Edge, Standard Mode, screen at 50%, Wi-Fi ON.
These are fair results considering we’re testing the laptop on 0day drivers; I’d reckon energy use with streaming and light use could improve with future software, based on our findings on Lunar Lake, with whom this Arrow Lake H platform shares the Efficiency part.
Of course, activating both displays takes a toll on battery life, both with light use and with more serious multitasking. Nonetheless, you can get 5-8 hours of use on a charge, which isn’t bad at all.
The screen doesn’t automatically switch from 120Hz on battery power, but you can do this manually if looking to push the runtimes a little further. You could also use the Battery Saver options in Windows. I haven’t for these tests.
The laptop ships with a compact 65W USB-C charger. It’s a single-piece design with a long detachable cable and a USB-C plug. A full charge takes about 2 hours.
Price and availability- 2025 Asus Zenbook Duo OLED At the time of this article, the Asus ZenBook Duo UX8406CA is listed in some stores.
This exact configuration reviewed here, with the Ultra 9 / 32 GB RAM / 1 TB SSD and dual 2.8K OLED display, is listed at around 2100-2200 EUR over here and $1699 in the US.
That’s a steep MSRP price, and a significant premium over a standard Asus Zenbook 14 with similar specs and a single OLED display. For comparison, that’s $1299 in the US and 1500 EUR over here.
Configurations with a Core Ultra 7 processor, 16 GB of RAM, and 2K displays will be available at some point, at more affordable prices. Based on what Asus asked for the previous-gen Zenbook Duo, I’d expect those at $1499 starting price or even lower.
Follow this link for updated prices and configurations in your area . You can also find this at B&H Photo Video in the US .
Final thoughts- Asus Zenbook Duo OLED UX8406CA review There are pretty much two A-brand dual-display laptops available in stores today, and that shouldn’t come as a surprise, as these are niche devices that only cater to a handful of potential buyers.
When considering buying this Zenbook Duo, you’ll have to decide whether this sort of dual-display format with two screens stacked one over the other makes sense for your use cases. Having spent weeks with the Duos this year and last year, sure, having two screens comes in handy for daily multitasking and productivity; in fact, I use multiple screens on all my setups anyway, thus I could be in the market for something like this. However, two screens side by side are more practical and ergonomic to me than two screens on top of the other, and that means I’d have to change my habits if I were to get one of these devices.
Then there’s the matter of pricing, with this Duo being 400 USD/EUR more expensive than a regular single-display ultrabook with similar features and performance.
And then there’s the fact that this Duo is thicker, heavier and I’d argue more complex than a regular Zenbook.
So is this a good buy? Out of the two dual-display options available today, I would surely go with the Zenbook Duo format over the Yoga Book 9i chassis. It’s more versatile as a laptop, with a proper keyboard and touchpad and proper IO, and works excellently for multitasking when propped up on its stand on a desk. It doesn’t fold as a tablet as the Book does, but I’d argue tablet mode on a 14-inch Windows device doesn’t make much sense anyway.
But then there’s the matter of getting this Duo over a regular ultrabook paired with an external USB-C monitor only when needed, and I feel this latter option could be the smarter choice for most. You get to use a simpler and lighter traditional laptop for daily use, and only connect the external monitor when needed for your work. And that external monitor can be positioned anywhere you want around your main display. And you’re not limited to the hardware offered by this Duo, instead, you can go with any other laptop you might want and get the dual-display functionality when needing it.
On the other hand, you have to always remember to bring along both your laptop and the external display, while with this Zenbook Duo, there’s pretty much only one ensemble to look out for. So using the Duo is more convenient in this regard.
Bottom point, this Asus Zenbook Duo is arguably the best dual-display portable laptop available today, well-built, functional, and plenty powerful for daily use and multitasking, where it excels. But I’m not quite sold on its overall practicality and worth over a combo with a regular ultraportable and an external portable monitor. What do you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments section below.
Disclaimer: Our content is reader-supported. If you buy through some of the links on our site, we may earn a commission.
Terms .
Navigation: Ultrabookreview.com » Asus
Review by: Andrei Girbea
Andrei Girbea is a Writer and Editor-in-Chief here at Ultrabookreview.com . I write about mobile technology, laptops and computers in general. I've been doing it for more than 15 years now. I'm a techie with a Bachelor's in Computer Engineering. I mostly write reviews and thorough guides here on the site, with some occasional columns and first-impression articles.
NikoB
February 14, 2025 at 10:50 pm
Andrei, there is a technical error in the description. On the Asus website:
https://www.asus.com/laptops/for-home/zenbook/asus-zenbook-duo-2024-ux8406/techspec/
they claim that the screen panels have received Display HDR True Black 500 certification, not Display HDR 500, which is not stated in your review (not once), which should guarantee no more than 0.0005 nits of black level according to VESA certification.
But then comes the most interesting part (I have already noticed this on a number of websites).
On the Panelook website, there is no 14" version of the panel indicated to you, but there is a whole family of this series, for example this one
https://www.panelook.com/ATNA40CU10-0_Samsung_14.0_OLED_overview_66978.html
I specifically gave a link to an analog in advance. Moreover, there is also an older ATNA40CU06-0 – there is practically no difference in black level. And version 09 clearly does not stand out against their background.
You indicated that the black level is 0 nits in the review (like infinite contrast), on this website:
https://laptopmedia.com/screen/atna40cu09-0-sdc419d/
it is also indicated that there is supposedly 0 nits of black level.
Which of course is completely wrong. In fact, apparently both their and your calibrator are simply not capable of measuring the black level below 0.01 nits. Because according to the direct analogs indicated above on the Panelook website, they have the manufacturer itself specifies a typical contrast of 100k:1 in the datasheet. We divide 400-500 nits by 100K and get, in the best case, 0.004-0.005 nits of the minimum black level, which a calibrator designed for professional measurements of AM (OLED) panels with a True Black HDR nameplate must immediately catch as unacceptable, because the accuracy of the calibrator must be obviously higher than 0.0001 nits, right? So that there is a sufficient confidence interval?
That is why I am concerned about all these measurements and the possible fraud with the real black level (in complete darkness), because the question arises how ASUS (and others) issue such certificates of conformity, if the panel manufacturers themselves clearly write that the typical contrast there is 100K:1, and not the one required for this certificate, with a peak brightness of 500 nits. minimum 1M:1.
There is something clearly wrong here, either with the measurements or the integrity of the issuance of certificates from VESA. Why do panel manufacturers write a typical contrast 10 times lower than required for this True Black HDR certification, i.e. 1M:1 typical? They are clearly insuring themselves against accusations if someone actually undertakes to check all these statements with an ultra-precise calibrator with a minimum scale division of 0.0001 nits, at least.
And all this directly affects the real ability to display HDR10 content. In this case, if the real contrast is 100k:1 and the black level is 0.005 nits, respectively, then there will be a lack of gradations somewhere, because the requirement of 0.0005 nits is not just like that, but to ensure linear step accuracy in 30-bit color depth (although for 4k, 36-bit color is more likely needed for perfectly smooth gradients) – apparently so …
Andrei Girbea
February 17, 2025 at 1:05 pm
Niko, we don't have the tools to test black levels at that precision. I also don't have enough expertise on this matter to make any claims on that certification.
I know this is something that matters to you, based on your previous comments, but I don't know how important this is for most people on this sort of a 14-inch laptop screen. I mean, are you really realistically going to play HDR content on a 14-inch laptop screen and are your eyes able to distinguish differences of fraction of nits in black levels?
Piotr
February 21, 2025 at 10:35 pm
If it's the same "NikoB" as on notebookcheck, he will just start nitpicking whatever element and looking for conspiracies in benchmarking.
NikoB
February 25, 2025 at 9:34 pm
Some people may believe these declarations. How can they believe that it really has an HDMI 2.1 port (full version, without understanding the nuances and also with DP2.0+ – for example, Intel has now started writing in the Arrow Lake datasheet that HDMI 2.1 with FRL, but this means nothing, since the maximum mode number is not specified – it should be 6). And some people still naively believe that they receive a signal to monitors without losses in a number of modern 4K high-frequency monitors (with a channel cut to 24 Gbps via HDMI 2.1). And the task of reviews is precisely to point out the muddy and narrow points in the official declarations of manufacturers, isn't it?
The human eye will notice the difference – in dynamics. That's when everything becomes bad with smooth gradient fills (sunrise, sunset, etc.).
The fact itself is important – the datasheets indicate a typical contrast 10 times lower than the one promised by Asus, because it claims to have received the specified certificate of conformity, guaranteeing a maximum black level of no more than 0.0005 nits according to the description on the VESA consortium website – https://displayhdr.org – there is a full table there. Isn't this a reason for an investigation? If there is an error in my reasoning somewhere, then that is another matter, but I do not see it.
And whether this matters is up to the buyer to decide. My task is only to draw attention to this. After all, the buyer decides whether the product is worth the stated price, believing in the manufacturer's declarations, regarding his personal preferences and requirements.
will blake
February 25, 2025 at 10:07 am
Kinda disagree with you about "..significant premium over a regular.." BAD. Can't see it. You know, i'd pay premium for a laptop and a portable monitor with the same panel in it (heck, even just same resolution and brightness). In my case, 16-17 inches with fastest low power CPU and i'd also pay premium for uber class cooling which makes the thing silent. If this z-book design is useful for somebody, it's totally worth a"premium".
NikoB
February 25, 2025 at 9:48 pm
The less mass series (in demand), the more expensive it is in terms of production costs. There are already more than 8 billion people on the planet. Now it is not very difficult to find at least 1 million buyers for almost everything, even completely strange products from the point of view of other layers of buyers. It is only a question of price. Sometimes some models are made simply for the prestige of the brand and to increase its recognition in the world, without any hope for mass demand. Sometimes successful engineering and design solutions are found, they become solutions for mass series, and sometimes they are not. It is like formula 1.