zlacker

>>ekianj+(OP)
Given we have the technology, I don't think it's wise to advertise this machine as ready for serious digital painting and video editing with only 100% sRGB gamut. Color accuracy can be recalibrated, but the gamut can't be expanded. Video editing really should be done in the wider gamut like 94-100% DCI-P3. The same thing applies to photo editing and digital painting in DCI-P3 or Adobe RGB. Many high-end phones have these specs and many monitor as well as the HDR screens on TV and projectors. However, all of the laptop with panels in the appropriate ranges for digital content creation (XPS series, ZenBook Pro Duo, ConceptD, etc.) are all running Intel chips -- so I'm still waiting.

>>toasta+Wc
Yes, and it boggles my mind that Apple is still the one building laptops with high resolutions.

>>yxhuvu+kE
The highest-end Zephyrus G14 comes with a high-res panel; windows defaults to 2x zoom. I've been very happy with it, not least since - well, thanks to the Vega chiplet there's no lag.

It also has an Nvidia for those times when you really need horsepower, but so far I've only needed it for ML.

>>Fillig+7U
I took a hard look at this laptop particularly with the 1440p resolution, but 101.2% sRGB, 71.7% DCI-P3 and 69.7% Adobe RGB still isn't in the color gamut ranges I'm considering acceptable for content creation. The truth is that ASUS are more focused on high refresh rates for gamers than they are content creation. When 60Hz was the norm a few years ago, a lot of gaming laptops offered wide color gamuts and high pixel density to stand out even though these don't help gaming.

>>toasta+jd1
I'm curious actually. The majority of users don't have a calibrated or wide-gamut screen, so how much does the color gamut really matter?

I have one laptop with an OLED panel that's (IIRC) 105% Adobe-RGB, and it's sufficiently nice that I'd like that everywhere if I could, but it isn't enough to rule out the G14 for me. Perhaps it's a good thing that I'm not into photo editing, as a rule.