ASUS Zenbook 14 OLED (Q425) review
ASUS Zenbook 14 OLED (Q425) — from 2024, 1.28 kg, performance 35.
Technical specifications
| Type | Ultrabook |
| Release year | 2024 |
| Screen | 14" · 1920x1200 |
| Processor | Intel Core Ultra 7 155H |
| Max. RAM | 32 GB |
| Weight | 1.28 kg |
| Battery | 75 Wh |
Performance scores
The Q425 twin: the 155H engine at the same ticket
The Zenbook 14 OLED (Q425) of 2024 asks the identical $1,084 as its Q415 sibling in this same batch, in the same body, with the same 32 GB of RAM — and one engine tier up: the Core Ultra 7 155H. Its verified strengths: reliability at 75 — 47.1 percent above the ultrabook-class median of 51, top quartile — and mobility at 81, 26.6 percent above median, also top quartile. The flagged weakness is the standing coverage artifact: graphics zero against a 3.84 class median, the platform's integrated silicon unscored by these axes.
The twin trade, printed once
Same body, same panel, same memory, same ticket: the choice between the Q415 and this Q425 is a printed trade — the sibling's reliability 84 and compute 87.02 against this machine's 155H badge, its mobility 81, and its reliability 75. Both are top-quartile builds; neither dominates. The buyer picks the stronger longevity reading or the stronger engine name and carry number, and the data prices them identically on purpose.
The blank column, the standing note
Graphics read zero because no scoring entry matches the 155H's integrated silicon — the coverage gap documented across this batch — and the empty capability sheet means no gaming claims exist to check. The machine's contract is office-and-carry: an OLED panel, a light body, top-quartile mobility, and an engine tier the badge advertises. Verify graphics at the source if they matter; the purchase otherwise rests on the two printed strengths.
Premium-shelf decay
The measured rate is 11.29 percent per year with no unit anchor. Two years retain roughly four-fifths of the $1,084 — the same gentle slope as the twin, appropriate to the same platform and body.
Positioning on the shelf
No analog peers are returned. The $1,084 pair is the shelf's cleanest twin experiment this batch: one body, one ticket, two engine readings, both articles printing the same trade. This seat is the engine-and-mobility corner.
Bottom line
For a buyer who wants the same OLED workhorse as the Q415 with the bigger engine badge and the better carry number, and who accepts a reliability reading nine points below the sibling's, this is that seat — priced identically, argued honestly. The graphics blank is the same printed homework. Two twins, one clean decision.
🧭 Your context
Stage: Refining requirements
You're refining — compare finalists head-to-head.
🎯 For your profile
You've viewed: You've recently viewed 3 models — compare this model with them in the analogs matrix.
⭐ What stands out
-
graphics performance absent (no data or feature not provided).
-
reliability is higher than typical ultrabook class (+47.1%) (high tier).
top 25% of its category -
mobility is higher than typical ultrabook class (+26.6%) (high tier).
top 25% of its category
⚙️ Configuration analysis
Top configuration suits everyday productivity, light photo editing, and esports titles.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 51) ↔ price (median 373.2).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 64) ↔ overall performance (median 41.7).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 4.4).
Zenbook 14 OLED (Q425): verdict
➡️ Next step
You're refining — compare finalists head-to-head.