Laptops comparison
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR vs Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA
Both side by side, spec by spec — the better value in each row is marked, and prices are the ones we last recorded.
Key differences
From the spec sheets, so this compares numbers on paper and not how they feel in real use.
Where Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR leads
- Screen Size (inch): 15.6 vs 14
- Refresh Rate (Hz): 144 vs 60
Where Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA leads
- Costs ₹2,841 less
- Battery (Wh): 70 vs 48
- Weight (kg): 1.4 vs 2.3
Comparing 2 products
| Specification |
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR
Asus · Laptops
|
Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA
Asus · Laptops
|
|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | — | — |
| Price | ₹83,946 | ₹81,105 Lowest price |
| Scores | ||
| Spec Score | 48/100 | 52/100 🏆 |
| Performance | ||
| Processor | AMD Ryzen 7 7435HS | Intel Core i5-13420H ≠ |
| RAM (GB) | 16 GB | 16 GB |
| Storage & Memory | ||
| Storage (GB) | 512 | 512 |
| Storage Type | M.2 NVMe SSD | M.2 NVMe SSD |
| Performance | ||
| Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 | Intel UHD ≠ |
| Display | ||
| Screen Size (inch) | 15.6 🏆 | 14 ≠ |
| Resolution | 1920x1080 | 1920x1200 ≠ |
| Refresh Rate (Hz) | 144 🏆 | 60 ≠ |
| Battery & Charging | ||
| Battery (Wh) | 48 | 70 🏆 |
| General | ||
| Operating System | Windows 11 | Windows 11 |
| Features | ||
| Touchscreen | No | No |
| Design | ||
| Weight (kg) | 2.3 | 1.4 🏆 |
Crowd verdict: which would you buy?
Crowd verdict
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR vs Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA
Which would you buy? One vote per visitor.
More comparisons
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR vs Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR vs Asus Vivobook 16 X1607QA
Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR vs Asus Vivobook S16 S3607QA
Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA vs Asus Vivobook 16 X1607QA
Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA vs Acer Aspire Go 14 AG14-71M
Asus Vivobook S14 S3407VA vs Asus TUF Gaming A15 FA566NFR
How we score these two
Rows come from each category's spec sheet, and the winner is picked by direction: capacity, battery and refresh rate are better higher, while power draw, noise and energy use are better lower. Descriptive specs (panel type, compressor type) never get a winner. The overall score blends our editorial review score with reader ratings — read the full methodology.