interesting, seems a bit more informative ... wondering for relevant data of such.
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
Spot on.
Dedicated consumer or small office systems is what Qualcomm is aiming for with the X Elite as well as corporate/consumer premium ultrabooks with a sealed package.
I can see :
Dell XPS 13 having such a chip and maybe the base XPS 15.
HP's Elite DragonFly ultrabook getting this - benefiting battery longevity, less heat under high performance load and the benefits of better video conferencing camera clarity (as advertised by Qualcomm).
HP using this in their Z9/Z10 Mini workstation in future models. The Z9 uses an NVidia Quadra T1000 which I believe is aimed primarily at AI and AutoCAD workflows?
It may take 3-4 generations for the top vendors Asus/Acer/Dell/HP/etc to consider a top tier product lineup solely on Qualcomm's desktop ARM chips.
But since NVidia has just announced their own ARM based chips ... the NPU race may just be dead in the water for Qualcomm, we'll see in time.
Still its a great announcement and hoping their achievements in shipping products deliver. I'd love to see the smaller Single-Board makers and super small desktop PC's (like the Elite 7 Pro) start to feature such products as their doing VERY well with AMD APU's.
So many questions:
- What was the cooling solution - Apple could beat their own performance if they were more aggressive with cooling and voltage. The new snapdragon gets either better performance OR less watts then M2 - not both at the same time.
- When will devices using it actually ship.
Apple generally ships when hardware is announced (or damn close), other vendors tease things months in advance.
By the time this actually ships, M3 will have been out in volume and we'll be talking about M4.
Yeah I feel like whatever Apple shows tomorrow will beat out what Qualcomm just recently showed pretty easily, and while I guess competition is good, really all I see is what was once a 2-3 year gap being closed to a maybe 2-3 month gap, similar to what happened right before Apple announced the A7 (first 64-bit ARM CPU), which for all we know will just widen back up tomorrow. Qualcomm was all over the place with their charts, which is also a very Apple thing to do, and there is just so many other factors there to consider, that this is a more of a “wait and see” thing rather than a sure fire thing like something Apple would claim.
Is anyone else thrilled by this? My major fear when I saw how dominant Apple silicon has been is that they wouldn't have any competition that could really push them where they care about winning. I want to see Apple and Qualcomm (Nuvia) going back and forth pushing each other to deliver the best processors in the world. If this is real we just might get that competition.
Why do you think that is? Would Apple switch to Pro/Max first, then base in the the future? If so, for what reason?
Perhaps future nodes are such a luxury that Apple wants to sell the premium products first.
@MayaUser Nice, that's much more interesting! More results also here: https://www.anandtech.com/show/2111...ormance-preview-a-first-look-at-whats-to-come
The CB 2024 result for the 12-core chip looks very reasonable, especially if they really manage to keep the total power under 25 watts (although I suspect that the actual power is higher). The single-core is underwhelming, especially if this is what their turbo can do in practice.
The CB 2024 result for the 12-core chip looks very reasonable, especially if they really manage to keep the total power under 25 watts (although I suspect that the actual power is higher). The single-core is underwhelming, especially if this is what their turbo can do in practice.
Let's hope Andrei has enough power to convince everyone in Qualcomm to get the marketing right.
By the way, Chips and Cheese published an analysis of Cinebench 2024 last week.
chipsandcheese.com
By the way, Chips and Cheese published an analysis of Cinebench 2024 last week.
Cinebench 2024: Reviewing the Benchmark
Maxon’s Cinebench is a perennial benchmark favorite. It’s free, easy to run, and scales across as many cores as you can give it. Its $0 cost allows the internet to provide plenty of res…
chipsandcheese.com
Last edited:
Those GPU performance charts really show that this chip is aimed at systems with a dGPU and thus the whole platform isn't going to achieve anywhere near Apple's numbers on performance per watt in graphically intensive workloads or mixed CPU-GPU workloads.
If it gets an Nvidia GPU to go with it, all it has to do is compete with the MX architecture, and not even the high-end. We have Intel and AMD to do that already. It just has to be competitive in the mobile world.
So, in other words, how does it do against the base M3--not the M3 ultra super whatever....?
If it has a Nvidia gpu, the efficiency advantage they claim is gone. What then? x86 and the M3 will out perform it and the M3 will be more efficient.
Actually it is aimed at replacing those named dGPUs in more systems. The performance numbers are pretty close to a 3050 4G 45W. But it is done with a 25W cap. That is 55% decrease. With that kind of decrease it doesn't have to beat the dGPU purely on performance. That battery life offset and increased dGPU bill of material cost ('redundant RAM' ,etc. ) is enough to get the dGPU ejected from the system.
It doesn't have to limbo as low as Apple's SoC to get design wins. It just have to be a better Windows laptop than previous generations from 2-3+ years ago that are up for replacement.
Intel and AMD are doing the same thing. Their 2024 offerings are due to have some offerings that also 'eat' into the old laptop entry dGPU space.
Nvida ( and AMD ) laptop dGPU provide a much bigger power umbrella for these system to limbo under. "Not as good as Apple's" is mainly a misdirection. Apple SoCs are not being displaced in mainstream Windows laptops.
The more critical issue for Qualcomm is how big the gap will be between their iGPU and the new AMD/Intel iGPUs coming in 2024. They are kicking sand in the face of 'old stuff', but there will be more contemporary competition in 2024.
the lower end of AMD/Nvidia laptop dGPUs have mainly been comatose because this has been widely expected to happen (not just from Apple , but on the AMD/INtel side as well. Qualcomm is basically just in the expectation 'herd' here. )
If next year AMD/Intel match those iGPU scores then many of the systems with any of those three won't get a Nvida GPU at all. The Nvidia GPU costs more more and is a much bigger power drag on battery/thermals. For the bulk of profitable laptops sold ( thinner and more common business standard issue ones ) that battery life and cost savings will play a major factor.
Qualcomm doesn't have to sell everything to everyone on the first generation. They just need to sell the number of packages they order up at a good enough to cover margins price. They should be spending a lot more time and effort trying to get their own stuff together and more mature than adding to Nvidia's profts with first generation. If they get just 10-20 displacement wins that is likely very good. Expanding into the whole laptop offering product line is not really required.
That would be in more products than Apple is in. ( perhaps do not do the same volume as Apple , but major part of the Windows market core competency is concurrently juggling multiple product design competitions at the same time. )
The Linux Window gap isn't necessarily permanent the same width.
That Cinebench score of 996 at 25W while the M2 Max score of 918 at 23W seems suggestive that the "30% less" is relative to the the Elite X , not the M-series processor. If slow the Elite X down to M2 scores that the power drops. (i.e., closet to what the fab process is actually tuned for. )
I don't think there is going to be a contest as to who limbos lowest on power draw. Qualcomm is lower than the x86 competition. That way can offer the SoC in a 25W configuration and get away with it.
Unless I'm missing something, this isn't meant to replace the M-series CPUs Apple uses; the link states
"Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite CPU is designed purely for the Windows PC market where it will be competing against Intel & AMD while also tackling Apple's laptop portfolio based on their Arm chip architectures."
So, a competitor. If it's the bomb in the future, fairly sure Apple could adopt them; but given they're still semi-butthurt over having to use Qualcomm's modem chipset, I'd find it more likely they'd just update theirs to compete in speed/etc.
"Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite CPU is designed purely for the Windows PC market where it will be competing against Intel & AMD while also tackling Apple's laptop portfolio based on their Arm chip architectures."
So, a competitor. If it's the bomb in the future, fairly sure Apple could adopt them; but given they're still semi-butthurt over having to use Qualcomm's modem chipset, I'd find it more likely they'd just update theirs to compete in speed/etc.
in about 5h we will see if the new M3/Pro/Max/Ultra? that will be shipping next week are better than SnapdragonX that is shipping next year.
There is no way to lose for us, is there?
Competition is good.
I wish for 5G modem in macbooks. If iPads can have one..why not macbooks?!
There is no way to lose for us, is there?
Competition is good.
I wish for 5G modem in macbooks. If iPads can have one..why not macbooks?!
Notebook Check made an interesting comment.
www.notebookcheck.net
First Snapdragon X Elite benchmarks: Impressive gains over M2 Max, Ryzen 9 7940HS, Intel 13th gen-H, and 14th gen desktop CPUs
The Snapdragon X Elite's CPU and GPU reference benchmarks are now available showing impressive gains over current flagship processors from Intel, AMD, and Apple. OEMs can configure the Snapdragon X Elite up to an 80 W TDP, which allows the SoC to offer near-desktop-class performance...
It is a competitor with Apple in that macOS (as a whole) competes with Windows. Basically, when Apple gets up almost every fiscal quarter and says something to the effect of " 40-50% of new Mac users are former Windows users " . That kind of thing.
The meme has been for the last 2 years is that Apple is ripping huge chunks of market share away from Windows. The Qualcomm SoC would help with a 'stop loss' there. Mac products initially didn't see the post pandemic hardware bubble crash at first. "Apple walks on water .... M-series to infinity and beyond. Death of Windows coming soon... blah blah blah " . When it really just took longer to kick in for Apple. ( Mac sales tanking like everyone else last couple of Quarters. )
Not that Apple will adopt Qualcomm even if it does get better. They won't. The Elite X is build around the same UEFI boot system than Intel/AMD Windows boxes use. Apple tossed UEFI away with the Apple Silicon move. Direct official raw iron boot support is for macOS only. They added their own boot system ( based on iPhone). Apple has their own internal SSD controller. ( Elitie X doesn't). Added some corner case hardware to support Rosetta 2. Apple has their own GPU cores which they have spent lots of money on and are integral to the iPhone/iPad ecosystem that they are not going to walk away from at all. etc. Apple has done zero visible work to support 3rd party GPUs.
Apple set on fire and burn the bridge behind them on going back to using external SoCs.
This Elite X is far more about the "doom and gloom" folks have been throwing at Windows holding their market share, than anything Apple is going to do on hardware selection.
On the modem front, a pretty good chance it is about how Apple goes some proporietary integrate connector route for their modem versus some industry standard one for Qualcomm. ( Elite X using a M.2 slot that a variety of modems could slot into. ) Decent chance Apple will end up with something integrated onto the same package in some more pref/watt more efficient way.
Qualcomm is making rumbling noises that they intend to move custom Arm cores down to their mobile/phone SoCs also. The gap that the A-series enjoys would likely shrink. It isn't just a "mac" issue for Apple. Much of the noise here is that Qualcomm will keep a hold on the non-iPhone market also. Apple can't 'slow down and rest on laurels" on multiple fronts. [ And still quite far behind on modems. Not going to be 'cheap' to catch up there. ]
Notebook Check made an interesting comment.
First Snapdragon X Elite benchmarks: Impressive gains over M2 Max, Ryzen 9 7940HS, Intel 13th gen-H, and 14th gen desktop CPUs
The Snapdragon X Elite's CPU and GPU reference benchmarks are now available showing impressive gains over current flagship processors from Intel, AMD, and Apple. OEMs can configure the Snapdragon X Elite up to an 80 W TDP, which allows the SoC to offer near-desktop-class performance...
That is a bit of a leap. Qualcomm has been on a slippery slope as to when they were going to deliver for last 1.5 years. Leaving the number off of Windows is just prudent. It still has a lawsuit cloud over this SoC also.
If Windows 12 comes 3 years after W11 then that would put 12 in the Q4 2024 timeframe. That would be quite bad for Elite X. Even June 2024 is in the 'not good' category.
Some systems likely will ship with W11 and some that ship Q4 in 2024 might ship with W12 . So it is fungible as to what version of Windows might get.