Asus Zenbook Duo (2026) review: Premium Panther Lake

Two screens, one impressive iGPU.

Asus Zenbook Duo (2026)
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Tom's Hardware Verdict

For those who can never have enough screens, the Asus ZenBook Duo with Intel Core Ultra X9 388H delivers strong battery life and powerful integrated graphics, though you'll spend some setup time uninstalling software.

Reasons to buy

  • +

    Strong battery life, especially for dual screens

  • +

    Powerful integrated graphics

  • +

    Impressive dual OLED screens

Reasons to avoid

  • -

    Way too much software

  • -

    Webcam is just OK

  • -

    Pricey, though what isn't at this point?

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Recent updates

Editor's Note: When we began this review, we were told by Asus that it planned to open pre-orders in mid-February. We were later informed the company is "re-aligning timing" and no longer launching in that time frame, but that the "overall expectation remains within Q1."

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
TOPICS
Andrew E. Freedman
Senior Editor

Andrew E. Freedman is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on laptops, desktops and gaming. He also keeps up with the latest news. A lover of all things gaming and tech, his previous work has shown up in Tom's Guide, Laptop Mag, Kotaku, PCMag and Complex, among others. Follow him on Threads @FreedmanAE and BlueSky @andrewfreedman.net. You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01

  • Notton
    Okay, I'm impressed.
    It fixed all, or most, of the issues with the previous version (UX8406).
    Reply
  • DS426
    Dual screens don't do battery life any favors -- I see why ASUS went with a 99 WHr battery. Looking forward to seeing more traditional comparisons.

    I was just expecting better, but of course, this is the high-perf incarnation of P-Lake; the mid-range options should do better.

    Graphics perf is surprisingly good, which indeed that fast RAM really helps there.

    Overall and in most areas, a good improvement from Intel. Nice to see the competition heating up again.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    PCgamer right away complaining that PL doesn't have the PCIe lanes to support a dGPU. Maybe some gamers would want one, not sure, but seems like a huge limitation.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    DS426 said:
    ~14.5 hours of battery life isn't that great IMO considering the 99 WHr battery. Go back to the 75 WHr battery for a straighter comparison and then battery life comes to ~11 hours.

    I was just expecting better, but of course, this is the high-perf incarnation of P-Lake; the mid-range options should do better.

    Graphics perf is surprisingly good, which indeed that fast RAM really helps there.

    Overall and in most areas, a good improvement from Intel. Nice to see the competition heating up again.
    Not sure about this, since Hardware Canucks has the battery life 24++ hours. Comes down to efficiency though during operations. More real life studies needed.
    Reply
  • DS426
    Gururu said:
    Not sure about this, since Hardware Canucks has the battery life 24++ hours. Comes down to efficiency though during operations. More real life studies needed.
    That's more like what I was expecting.. and they did their testing on a traditional single-monitor laptop, yeah? Displays consume a huge share of battery energy.
    Reply
  • DS426
    Gururu said:
    PCgamer right away complaining that PL doesn't have the PCIe lanes to support a dGPU. Maybe some gamers would want one, not sure, but seems like a huge limitation.
    True, a compromise that isn't optimal for high-end gaming laptops. It'll be interesting to see how much this hobbles performance in comparisons.

    Hopefully Nova Lake will juice up PCIe connectivity.
    Reply
  • magbarn
    Can't wait for handheld version of PL which will blow away AMD's current options.
    Reply
  • Notton
    Gururu said:
    PCgamer right away complaining that PL doesn't have the PCIe lanes to support a dGPU. Maybe some gamers would want one, not sure, but seems like a huge limitation.
    🤦‍♂️
    The specs are listed.
    The non-X versions get an extra PCIe 5.0 x8 lanes for a dGPU.
    https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-doubles-down-on-gaming-with-panther-lake-claims-76-percent-faster-gaming-performance-new-x-series-chips-deliver-up-to-12-xe3-cores
    Maybe, just maybe, the Panther lake GPU tile runs off of the PCIe lanes... There's just so much 🤦‍♂️ :rolleyes:
    Reply
  • TheSecondPower
    Notton said:
    🤦‍♂️
    The specs are listed.
    The non-X versions get an extra PCIe 5.0 x8 lanes for a dGPU.
    https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-doubles-down-on-gaming-with-panther-lake-claims-76-percent-faster-gaming-performance-new-x-series-chips-deliver-up-to-12-xe3-cores
    Maybe, just maybe, the Panther lake GPU tile runs off of the PCIe lanes... There's just so much 🤦‍♂️ :rolleyes:
    The PCIe lanes are provided by the I/O tile. In the Panther Lake details Intel released last year, Intel specified 2 possible CPU tiles (4+8+4 or 4+0+4), 2 possible I/O tiles (12 or 4 PCIe 5.0 lanes), and 2 possible iGPU tiles (12 Xe3 N3E or 4 Xe3 Intel 3). Intel specified 3 possible configurations from these tiles, with every big iGPU model getting the smaller I/O tiles with fewer PCIe lanes. Which makes perfect sense; either you get a big dGPU and need the lanes, or you get a big iGPU. The smaller iGPU models still have all the media decoders and encoders and can easily handle light 3D workloads, so it'd be kind of pointless to pair with a big dGPU.
    Reply
  • redgarl
    This thing cost 2300$... 2300$...

    You can get a 395+ for 2000$ and it is not even comparable.

    Why the praise when the price is making this product a joke?!!!
    Reply