The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite and Plus are out in the wild. Qualcomm claims that its latest laptop chips are, for the first time, full-fledged competitors against the best x86 processors from Intel and AMD. Is this true, and is ARM finally emerging as a real alternative to the Windows laptop?

Despite repeated attempts by Microsoft and Qualcomm, Apple was the first to show that an ARM-based processor was a good idea for an office laptop. Anyone who wanted to try Windows on ARM had to make do with Microsoft’s SQ processors, derived from Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 8cx platform. These CPUs were not high-flyers and failed to realize any advantages of the ARM architecture over x86. Essentially, Microsoft and Qualcomm are packing improved smartphone processors into a laptop bag.

This neglectful treatment is officially over. After months of hype, the Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 has been launched with a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite or X Plus under the hood. Both chips are based on the ARM architecture and are specifically designed for laptops. In the run-up to the launch, Qualcomm couldn’t keep quiet about their performance: they would outperform Core CPUs from Intel and Ryzen processors from AMD.

Big words, but are they true? ITdaily last week launched two of Microsoft’s latest laptops: one with a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite and a lighter version with a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus. We pit the chips against Core i and Core Ultra processors from Intel, as well as a Ryzen 7 chip from AMD. Has Qualcomm finally built an ARM powerhouse for Windows?

Five gladiators in the CPU arena

To make our tests as realistic as possible, we compare the chips in laptops with similar features. 16 GB RAM is the norm and all devices have integrated graphics.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 (Elite) has twelve Qualcomm Oryon processing cores on board and 42 MB of total cache. The chip has a base clock speed of 3.4 GHz, with a maximum boost frequency of 4 GHz on one core.

Little brother Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 (Plus) has ten processing cores and just as much cache (42 MB). The cores are clocked at 3.4 GHz, without a boost option. Both chips have the same number of cores and threads and therefore cannot handle multithreading on an Oryon core.

First and foremost, we compare with a Intel Core i7-1655UThe classic Intel Core chip has a slightly more complex configuration with a total of ten cores, including two P cores with hyperthreading and eight E cores without, for a total of twelve threads. The chip has a maximum clock speed of 4.8 GHz on the P cores and 3.6 GHz on the E cores. Intel provides 12 MB of cache.

Opposite we have placed a brand new one Intel Core i7 1650H. It is optimized for slightly more robust laptops and generates more heat than the other CPUs in this comparison. The processor has sixteen cores, including six P-cores (4.8 GHz) and eight E-cores (3.8 GHz). The chip has 24 MB of cache and supports a maximum of 22 threads.

Finally, we include the AMD Ryzen 7 7840U in comparison. This chip has eight identical cores with multithreading, which is enough for 16 threads. The base clock is 3.3 GHz, with a theoretical boost frequency of up to 5.1 GHz. AMD provides 16 MB L3 cache and 8 MB L2 cache.

Each manufacturer brings its own vision to the market. Qualcomm relies on the ARM architecture with cores that each support one thread, while Intel combines P and E cores. AMD, on the other hand, keeps it simple and relies on fewer cores but consistent multithreading.

CPU-tailored rendering

We’ll first take a look at the Cinebench 2024 test. Based on rendering workloads, it measures the raw performance of a CPU, both per core and overall. The benchmark is optimized for x86 and ARM and provides results that we can compare across architectures.

Here we can see immediately that Qualcomm was not lying. The ARM chips are absolute powerhouses compared to the x86 processors. This type of workload benefits from many efficient threads that can consume as much processing power as possible. The one thread per core approach on all cores pays off. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite is the absolute champion, but the Qualcomm Snapdragon

If you look at individual cores, the results are closer together. Here too, the brand new Qualcomm chips perform as well or better than the Intel counterparts, although the difference is smaller. AMD’s approach with the Ryzen 7 CPU relies heavily on multithreading, so the Ryzen 7 7840U falls behind here.

More diverse workloads

The Geekbench 6 test provides slightly more nuanced results, as it doesn’t just test CPU performance in terms of rendering capabilities. The test simulates the processor’s performance for more everyday workloads, such as office work. This test also works natively on x86 and ARM.

The results shift a bit, but we still see a clear trend: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite remains the fastest chip in the comparison. As the workloads are different and a bit more realistic, the advantage of multithreading becomes more apparent. The AMD CPU performs better and the Intel Core Ultra 7 is on par with the Snapdragon X Elite. The Snapdragon X Plus must be just a tiny bit inferior.

The Intel Core i7-1355U is the loser. Intel has opted for efficiency with this processor, with only two powerful cores combined with eight supporting cores. This approach is outdated, as our tests show.

In our tests, we try to push chips and laptops to their limits to see if and by how much the maximum frequency of a CPU drops under high load. throttling This happens quite quickly on many devices: the chip can work at boost speed for a while, but then quickly reduces it so that the laptop doesn’t overheat. It is noticeable that the Snapdragon X chips only have to throttle very little.

Promises kept

We can already draw some conclusions from these results. Qualcomm’s ARM chips are clearly more than competitive. In terms of hardware performance, they can’t just keep up with x86, the Elite chip even outperforms the competition in all areas, while the Plus CPU only has to compete against the most powerful Intel Core Ultra 155H in certain workloads.

In other words, Qualcomm has kept its promise. Under the hood of the Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 is a CPU that puts existing chips to the test. We also note that the chip stays relatively cool during this and other tests, and the ARM laptops themselves generally don’t have to work hard to deliver performance. Even under heavy load, the ARM chips are noticeably quieter than we’re used to from Intel or AMD laptops.

What about emulation?

In practice, the story is even more nuanced. Qualcomm has built powerful chips tailored to Windows laptops, and Microsoft hasn’t yet convinced all of its major partners and developers to optimize their code for ARM. When you run software built for x86 on an ARM laptop, that code runs through Microsoft’s Prism emulator. That creates extra work for the CPU.

This emulation story is more Microsoft’s responsibility than Qualcomm’s, but it’s relevant to the actual performance of the chips. If the majority of the software you run has to go through the emulation layer first, you’ll experience the performance of the Snapdragon X CPUs differently.

For this reason, we will conclude by running an older Cinebench test that is not optimized for Windows on ARM. What is left of the CPU performance after emulation?

Due to the effort required by the Prism emulation layer in the background, the Snapdragon X chips are suddenly no longer the fastest in their class. The latest processors from Intel and AMD once again earn the crown for both single and multi-core workloads. Nevertheless, it is noticeable that the ARM chips also participate in the emulation in the same category. They remain more powerful than the Intel Core i7-1355U.

The hardware is here

Qualcomm has kept its word. For the first time, we are seeing powerful ARM chips tailored to Windows laptops. It was about time: Apple showed the first MacBooks with ARM CPUs back in 2020 and now the architecture is also finding its way into data centers.

The Snapdragon X Elite and its little brother Snapdragon X Plus immediately compete at the highest level. In terms of performance, these chips fully meet expectations. In native ARM workloads, they significantly outperform their competitors from Intel and AMD.

If you are forced to run applications through the Prism emulation layer, the Snapdragon X chips are more than powerful enough to still deliver high performance. However, it will no longer be possible to outperform Intel and AMD. The ball is now in Microsoft’s court: Qualcomm has delivered respectable hardware that performs good to very good in all scenarios. The success of the ARM story will now depend in part on the number of native applications that appear on ARM for Windows.

ITdaily will test the Surface laptops and Snapdragon