Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Qualcomm revealed X Elite's benchmark scores
- Thread starter sunny5
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Weird to me to see all the comments saying some version of "The M4 smokes this!"
Umm... is there an M4 MacBook I've missed?
AMD couldn't use Intel x86 core designs and the PC market worked just fine for decades. What is exactly 'novel' here?
Qualcomm may have their own Arm core implementation and Mediatek/Nvidia/etc uses Arm designs. Two core implementation designs same architecture. Big problem where?
Apple gets some traction if the PC/Widows market fragments itself into chunks about the same size at Apple's. Apple is 10-20% , Intel 30+% , AMD 30+% , Qualcomm 10-15% , Arm design 15-20% .
The Arm folks are not prohitibed at all from sharing R&D costs if they take the Arm design which are increasing going to come 'ready to go' instantiated on leading fab processes. GPU and uncore add on would be the differentiators.
As 3D packaging gets more mature things like UCI-e is only going to make it easier to put a ready-to-go Arm puzzle piece into a individual vendors SoC package. There is probably not going to be a huge fragmentation in the Arm space large than it was when x86 started out ( with 3-4? arch implementers ). Amazon, Microsoft , previous gen Ampere Computing , etc that are moving in Linux server space all were on Arm's design. There was no lots of fragmentation there. PC market is likely somewhat similar in that too much fragmentation isn't going to help as long as AMD and Intel both hold onto substantively large shares and Arm does a decent enough job. [ Arm is moving up the food chain a bit with more 'ready to go' stuff. lower volumes but higher per unit revenue generation. ]
According to rumours, notebook manufacturers will launch notebooks with AMD's latest SoCs next month.
AMD Ryzen AI 300 series launches July 15, Ryzen 9000 sales start July 31 according to retailers - VideoCardz.com
AMD Zen5 launch dates ‘teased’ by retailers Release dates confirmed? AMD has not given any indication when the new Ryzen CPUs will be available, only confirming it will be next month. However, those looking for new AMD products may discover listings through various retailers, some of which...videocardz.com
But will there be volume behind the launch? AMD has launched before with (dozens of design wins ) and then go to look computer retail store and see nothing. AMD is getting better on mobile releases.
It wasn't that long ago AMD launched "Hawk Point". ( Dec 2023 - Jan 2024)
Those took a while to show at major systems vendors. It hasn't been six months since those launch. All of those are suppose to instantly 'dry up' to make space for Strix Point very quickly?
Windows 11 2H typically comes out in Sept-Oct. The AI hype train that is pulling the release up to June probably has quirks. The general release for 2H24 is still Sept-Oct for 'normal' x86-64 systems.
More of a scramble to try to catch the AI wave and get people to commit quickly. If presold Strix system then user hasn't bought a X Elite or Lunar Lake one.
Last edited:
It really depends on perspective. There are many metrics to base comparisons on:Even if you only compare the CPU itself it matters if only performance or power efficiency or price or any combination of this is compared. Or are machines compared? In that case it again depends on the ratio you are basing the comparisons on and which aspects are valued to which extend. OS, CPU, GPU, screen (size, aspect ratio, refresh rate, brightness, colour accuracy, contrast)?
Thus I think it's fair com draw comparisons between everything and anything, if applied within a valid use case. And the determination whether it's valid depend on the framing and a users needs. That's what makes comparisons hard, and highly depended on the addressed demographic.
For instance the GPU benchmark performance in Max Tech's video positions it anywhere between M2 and M3. However at the same time Qualcomms 30fps Baldur 3 claims but it in the same range as real world M1 performance. There just isn't any universal metric.
The M4 is a CPU architecture and yes, it smokes these Qualcomm chips. In the benchmarks above the M3 smokes these laptops. It's not even close. These Qualcomm are one and a half years behind Apple on average.
That is a possibility. We don't have an M4 MacBook Pro or an M4 MacBook Air. The Nuvia SoC-based machines are barely out now.
Until we see all of the machines running, it's difficult to do more than guess.
The M3 also beats this handily, on both performance and efficiency.
I've spent the last couple of day on a Surface Pro Elite running the X1E80100. Have to say so far I'm quite impressed - the screen is spectacular for movies.
I suspect some perspective is required - in this instance, mine ;-) I was looking for a more flexible replacement for my 12.9" iPad, not a replacement for my 14 or 16" M3Max units. On that front, so far, I'm quite happy. Battery life has lasted all day even with all the setup stuff running.
There's some personal challenges about having multiple environments - I'm quite invested in Apple Notes for example, but in terms of hardware, performance, and battery life... I think I have my solution.
I'm not a gamer so haven't tried that - the only issue I've found in terms of installing stuff is NordVPN. I know I can use OpenVPN for that though (via Nord) so there's a solution.
I suspect some perspective is required - in this instance, mine ;-) I was looking for a more flexible replacement for my 12.9" iPad, not a replacement for my 14 or 16" M3Max units. On that front, so far, I'm quite happy. Battery life has lasted all day even with all the setup stuff running.
There's some personal challenges about having multiple environments - I'm quite invested in Apple Notes for example, but in terms of hardware, performance, and battery life... I think I have my solution.
I'm not a gamer so haven't tried that - the only issue I've found in terms of installing stuff is NordVPN. I know I can use OpenVPN for that though (via Nord) so there's a solution.
The launch of Qualcomm SoC-based notebooks proves once again that Apple's product launches (branding, product presentation, time to market...) are much better than those of other companies.
Apples and oranges. Apple controls all the hardware. Qualcomm based hardware (notebooks, laptops) are produced by different manufacturers (Microsoft, Samsung, Asus, HP etc.) and they all have different marketing strategies (branding, product presentation, time to market etc.). You would have a point if (for instance) Microsoft made all the Qualcomm notebooks, but that isn't the case.
It is like saying "The launch of EV's proves once again that Tesla product launches are much better". IMO there is no logic in a 'many to one' comparison like that.
Last edited:
Time to market on billion dollar Apple Car is what?
Transition the product line to M-series is about two years ... Mac Pro arrives 2.5 years later.
2023 -- the year of the missing iPad.
The big screen iMac superfans are very happy right now with 'time to market' ?
'Apple Intelligence' ... substantive number of features arriving in 2025. CoPilot+ features arrving in Oct 2024 would still be before that.
Apple's "no roadmaps" , "no future products discussion" policy allows Apple to sweep lots of stuff 'under the rug' so it looks 'cleaner' from the outside.
Qualcomm is doing a subset of the system. Microsoft another. And multiple vendors are putting these together. Some of their coordination gets done relatively publicly. The chip and OS vendors need to get buy in from the system vendors and one way to do that is to get their customers to start asking about the 'features' the system contributors mention.
Cathedral versus the Bazaar.
The Cathedral and the Bazaar - Wikipedia
Over the long term, Linux 'ate' all of the big money Unix players.
There is little indication here so far that X Elite chips are actually going to 'harm' the Dell, HP , Lenovo , etc brands at all. The customers who do not like them ( 'booo, it doesn't have an Nvidia GPU in it') can buy something else from the line up. There was no edict from the system vendor that dGPUs were dead. You are going to find more folks grumbling "I am not going to buy that" in Windows because there are a broader set of choices so they have more options.
Selling to a broader audience is more 'messy' , but it is also a broader audience ( probably will get more units sold over time if execute well over a long period of time. It isn't a sprint. )
Oh wow, coming from such a credible source!!! How can I fail not to be impressed!!
🤣
NotebookCheck Review
This is pretty balanced and thorough.
TLDR, they are a decent start with some advantages over the current generation x86 incumbents, but nowhere near what Qualcomm claimed with its marketing blitz and significantly behind Apple.
This is pretty balanced and thorough.
TLDR, they are a decent start with some advantages over the current generation x86 incumbents, but nowhere near what Qualcomm claimed with its marketing blitz and significantly behind Apple.
Wow. This guy is just plain bad at this. Does heat mapping, puts the devices side by side.
The more I watch, the stupider he sounds when trying to get into technical information.
Good lord, “it beats the Mac!…now the 16GB version of the Mac did it 30 seconds faster than snapdragon but for some reason we chose to get the 8gb MacBook Air to run this entire video”.
People actually take this guy’s opinions as worth listening to?
Last edited:
Windows fanboys who told us not to trust leaked benchmarks and to wait for June 18...where are they now?
In all fairness, they are significantly better than those leaked benchmarks implied - they seem to split the difference between the terrible-performing leaks and the over-hyped promises. Though hyperbolic and often inaccurate, SemiAccurate's months-old claim has been vindicated here - Qualcomm's benchmark results indeed cannot be replicated at the TDP settings they claimed.
Either way, they are currently in the lead in the Windows world efficiency-wise, but then again, both AMD and Intel are about to release their next-gen that will likely even the playing field.
I think NotebookCheck makes a telling statement at the end of its review - that at this point, it's not obvious why one would choose one of these Qualcomm machines (unless the machine you want doesn't have any other option). The advantages are there, but are not what was promised, and that is only compared against soon-to-be-replaced AMD and Intel models, and there are ecosystem tradeoffs for Windows on ARM.
Windows fanboys who told us not to trust leaked benchmarks and to wait for June 18...where are they now?
"The big issue is that Qualcomm's marketing was pretty aggressive and that raised high expectation, which are not really met. You will definitely be disappointed if you were expecting passively cooled Snapdragon devices. There is also another aspect to consider. AMD's new Zen5 chips will be available within a couple of weeks and if you believe the rumors/leaks, they will be much faster and more efficient than Zen4. Intel's Lunar Lake processor should also arrive in a few months, and we also expect new MacBook chips in fall. The M4 in the iPad Pro already impressively shows where the journey is going for the Apple's laptop SoCs. Qualcomm could quickly fall behind the competition if it takes too much time before the second generation of Snapdragon X chips is launched."
Windows fanboys who told us not to trust leaked benchmarks and to wait for June 18...where are they now?
First and foremost this is a Mac forum. Second, M3 got its ass whooped by Snapdragon X Extreme ultra whatever the name of that chip is in CPU Multi-core performance by almost 50%. For the price of M2. I think this gives ARM Windows fans a lot to look forward to. Not sure why would you want ARM PC but it's an option, I guess.
It's worse than that ... he kept repeating that performance isn't affected by being on battery when it very clearly was. That might be true on ST test but while running CB R24 MT that's why he noticed that the chip was throttling while still cool. And his final on-battery MT CB R24 performance* was worse than scores from other outlets that ran their tests on-power.
Also, he went the other way too, claiming that Solar Bay didn't work because the Adreno GPU doesn't have hardware ray tracing. Adreno does have hardware accelerated ray tracing, Solar Bay runs just fine on Androids with Adreno GPUs, and Ryan Shout reported scores for it. Not sure why it didn't work for Max Tech, that's odd. There have been reports of frequent crashes and bugs with some benchmarks, but my understanding was that was mostly for x86-Prism emulated programs which Solar Bay isn't (pretty sure).
So yeah lots of mistakes and errors.
*As an aside: it's possible that there is an issue with CB R24: note that in the far superior NotebookCheck article the Snapdragon's CB R24 single core score is much worse relative to the M2 Pro than it is under GB 6.2. I suspect the latter is closer to the truth given that it should be perform almost exactly like an upclocked M2. Still figuring out the ramifications of that if true.
That's the point though ... it did so in an actively cooled laptop using much more power. That's why the base M3 is a difficult thing to compare to and why NBC took issue with the comparison in their closing statements which @Homy repeated. The base M3 can be fit, and perform well, in a passively cooled laptop/tablet and sip power even under load. The Snapdragon Elite isn't really in the same class of processor, even when binned. The Plus might be (more on that below). But bottom line if Qualcomm/Microsoft wants an Air competitor then they need a class of processor actually designed for those power envelopes, probably with a mix of performance and efficiency cores. They honestly need at least 2 SOCs to cover their use cases.
I want to be clear: Despite that their claims don't really hold up*, I don't think this is a bad first generation PC SOC at all. It's really quite good actually. I'm just worried for Qualcomm's sake that it's later than it ideally should've been. From Dell's leaked marketing slides, they're clearly 6-9 months behind at least. A year ago and they would've been in a much more comfortable position. Of course, we still have to see how AMD and Intel processors actually perform, no first party promises should be taken at face value, and Qualcomm's chips are reportedly much cheaper for OEMs. But, even so, Qualcomm's second generation SOCs will have to make substantial improvements (even more so to the GPU or get partners for dGPUs) and MS will have to grease the wheels to get more native apps and games.
*They were obviously playing word games, this is why I'm not disappointed or surprised. The marketing slides were pretty much accurate but presented in a way to give a misleading impression about what kind of device this would power. These are actively cooled devices and under load these Elite SOCs, especially the 80s and up, will use much more power than a base M3, especially in the passively cooled Air. Even the MaxTech video admitted that much and truthfully this was obvious even from their own presentations, they just hoped no one would notice. The Plus looks to be more similar to the base M3 under load and be a better comparison point. The few MT scores I've seen are slightly higher than the M3 as one would expect with probably more similar thermals and power envelope, obviously ST is a different story where the M3 is way ahead. And honestly for these classes of devices ST is probably the more important benchmark.
Last edited:
Is that their top chip against a base chip?
Sometimes I don't know why people post on the internet without links, specs and references.
How is the GPU performance looking? Around Intel iGPU level with nothing like high bandwidth unified memory?
What does machine cost have to do with CPU comparisons?
Those Qualcomm laptops are made from sub-par materials, cheaper and less sturdy build quality, and very janky designs. Off centre trackpad and keyboard just because they want to squeeze in a numeric pad? They don't appear to understand how uncomfortable that is for typists.
It's pointless trying to say 'This new CPU will make everything 20% faster" when the design of a laptop slows users down 20%.
Last edited:
It has been mentioned here that Windows on ARM will remain niche and that the majority of Windows users will remain X86 because they have a large library of software and games that will never be ported to ARM and run with a hit or crash on ARM.
That's the big downside of Windows being able to still run a catalogue of very old titles. Their deep backwards compatibility is great for software preservation but it is not great when they need to move the platform to a completely new architecture.
That's something Apple never had to deal with. They always informed developers and customers in advance that major changes will mean old titles will no longer work.
CPUs should be compared on the basis of CPU cost, but we don't know that. What other metric could we use to compare CPUs? Number of transistors? Die size and node type?
