First benchmarks: Snapdragon X Elite on par with AMD Ryzen and Intel Core
We had the opportunity to get our hands on a Snapdragon X Elite notebook at Computex and run common benchmarks on it.
- Florian Müssig
As part of the gradual (and still ongoing) launch of the Snapdragon X processors, Qualcomm has already published benchmark results or run pre-selected benchmarks under supervision. However, an independent assessment of the chips' capabilities has not yet been possible. At Computex, we had the opportunity to test-drive a notebook running the Snapdragon X Elite ARM processor for a few hours without Qualcomm's supervision.
We got our hands on a machine with a twelve core X1E-78-100 model, i.e. the smallest of the three Elite variants. Qualcomm does not specify the permissible waste heat of the individual Snapdragon X models, but it is reported that the thermal design power (TDP) of the X1E-78-100 is in a range that would be between 15 and 28 watts for Intel's P series. The smaller Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100 also operates in this range, while the higher X-Elite models consume significantly more: the X1E-80-100 is more like an H processor (typically 45 watts) and the X1E-84-100 even an HX processor.
Pre-production notebook
The test system was a pre-production notebook with 16 GB of soldered LPDDR5X main memory and a plugged-in M.2 SSD, which will not be launched in the first wave of Snapdragon X devices. Not all drivers were ready yet (there were still exclamation marks in the device manager), the BIOS firmware was several months old and the associated Windows 11 is also not yet ready. As the pre-installation was outdated, we installed the Insider build 10.0.26120.751 offered to us by Windows Update before the tests.
We couldn't try out all announced AI helpers that come with Copilot+ because they simply weren't there yet. This also applies to the dozen or so notebooks that are currently available for pre-order: According to our sources, the brand-new functions won't even be available for download until June 13. This means that the notebooks with Snapdragon X delivered on the launch date of June 18 will have an outdated software version pre-installed, meaning that a major day-one patch will be necessary first, similar to video games.
Cinebench 2024
Common benchmarks such as Cinebench, Geekbench and 3DMark were already running - so we fired them up. Cinebench 2024 is available in a native ARM version, so the Snapdragon was able to flex its muscles: A few points more than 100 points under single-threaded load and almost 680 points under multi-threaded load make it a match for Intel's Core Ultra 100 (Meteor Lake) and AMD's Ryzen 8040U (Hawk Point).
A distinction must be made with regard to Apple's M3: In the MacBook Air, the passive cooling slows it down so that it is slower under load on all cores; in the MacBook Pro with active cooling, on the other hand, it manages more than the X1E-78-100. In both cases, Apple is ahead under single-thread load - and by a clear margin of around 140 points.
It remains to be seen how the thicker X1E-80-100 and X1E-84-100 models will fare in this respect: Although they burn up more energy, as written above, they also get turbo stages above the nominal frequency in return, which should help with single-core computing tasks in particular. The X1E-78-100 has to make do without Turbo and could not even maintain the nominal clock of 3.4 GHz on all cores under load in the test system: In Cinebench, the frequency hovered around the 2 GHz mark under load on all cores according to the Windows Task Manager.
(Image: c't / mue)
Geekbench 6
Geekbench 6 is also available in a native ARM version; we used version 6.3.0 for our measurements. Here, the (turbo-less) X1E-78-100 has to place itself just behind the turbo-powered competition from AMD, Apple and Intel in the single-thread test with around 2200 points; in the multi-thread test, the almost 13,800 points are slightly above the competition.
The statements all refer to chips in the same TDP range. The HX processors from AMD and Intel as well as Apple's M3 Pro/Max achieve higher values, but also consume more energy. We are therefore very excited to see what the X1E-84-100 can achieve.
3DMark
After the rather processor-heavy benchmarks Cinebench and Geekbench, we turned to the graphics benchmark 3DMark. This has long included a sub-test, Night Raid, which is available in an ARM version - we measured a good 25,000 points. This is significantly more than the 13th Core i generation achieved. However, the current Core Ultra 100 also achieves such values if notebook manufacturers allow it sufficient power consumption. The latter is important, because although there are nominally only U and H models for Core Ultra, many notebooks continue to operate in the P range up to 28 watts.
With around 5700 points in Fire Strike and less than 1900 points in Time Spy, the X1E-78-100 has to admit defeat to the current x86 competition. This is hardly surprising, as these two tests are only available as x86 compilations. Therefore, the Windows emulation layer takes effect, which eats up performance.
However, you don't have to go back that far to find similar results with x86 notebooks, namely only up to the 13th Core i generation. That in itself is a remarkable result, because hardly anyone will switch from such a notebook to a Snapdragon device. So anyone coming from an older notebook will get higher graphics performance either way.
AMD's Radeon 780M is higher than the Adreno graphics unit in the Snapdragon, but it is only found in Ryzen 7 models - the Radeon 740M in the Ryzen 5 is much slower. We would have liked to compare it with the graphics unit of the M3, but under macOS there is only Solar Bay as a useful 3DMark test for this. However, this test could not be started on the Snapdragon notebook, just like the two other ray tracing tests Port Royal and Speed Way.
The brand-new Steel Nomad (a good 420 points) and its slimmed-down offshoot Steel Nomad Light (over 1900 points) are available in native ARM code, but the test device did not achieve smooth frame rates in either of them - in the regular Steel Nomad run, they were even only in the mid-single-digit range. We don't have any comparative values from current x86 notebooks, but the stuttering graphics basically prove the established wisdom that integrated graphics units in the Windows world are not sufficient for blockbuster titles with high details and fancy effects.
Test impressions
Apart from the missing drivers, the test system ran without any noticeable problems and responded smoothly to inputs at all times. During our tests, we didn't notice any hitches, dropouts or graphics errors that would spoil the fun of a Windows-on-ARM notebook. This used to be quite different with Windows-on-ARM devices - and that was back then with hardware sold as production-ready and not with pre-production devices like the one we are now testing. The stable basis shown is more than welcome, because that is what many early adopters will be looking for in the new notebooks with Snapdragon X. Copilot+ is the cherry on top.
We have not yet been able to measure the power consumption or battery runtimes. On the one hand, there should no longer be any exclamation marks in the Windows device manager. In addition, long runtimes were also not a problem with previous Windows-on-ARM notebooks: there was a lack of performance in particular. Things are very different now: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite is at least on a par with current x86 technology. (mue)
