Tuesday, March 12th 2024
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Benchmarked Against Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite is about to make landfall in the ultraportable notebook segment, powering a new wave of Windows 11 devices powered by Arm, capable of running even legacy Windows applications. The Snapdragon X Elite SoC in particular has been designed to rival the Apple M3 chip powering the 2024 MacBook Air, and some of the "entry-level" variants of the 2023 MacBook Pros. These chips threaten the 15 W U-segment and even 28 W P-segment of x86-64 processors from Intel, such as the Core Ultra "Meteor Lake," and Ryzen 8040 "Hawk Point." Erdi Özüağ, prominent tech journalist from Türkiye, has access to a Qualcomm-reference notebook powered by the Snapdragon X Elite X1E80100 28 W SoC. He compared its performance to an off-the-shelf notebook powered by a 28 W Intel Core Ultra 7 155H "Meteor Lake" processor.
There are three tests that highlight the performance of the key components of the SoCs—CPU, iGPU, and NPU. A Microsoft Visual Studio code compile test sees the Snapdragon X Elite with its 12-core Oryon CPU finish the test in 37 seconds; compared to 54 seconds by the Core Ultra 7 155H with its 6P+8E+2LP CPU. In the 3DMark test, the Adreno 750 iGPU posts identical performance numbers to the Arc Graphics Xe-LPG of the 155H. Where the Snapdragon X Elite dominates the Intel chip is AI inferencing. The UL Procyon test sees the 45 TOPS NPU of the Snapdragon X Elite score 1720 points compared to 476 points by the 10 TOPS AI Boost NPU of the Core Ultra. The Intel machine is using OpenVINO, while the Snapdragon is using Qualcomm SNPE SDK for the test. Don't forget to check out the video review by Erdi Özüağ in the source link below.
Source:
Erdi Özüağ (YouTube)
There are three tests that highlight the performance of the key components of the SoCs—CPU, iGPU, and NPU. A Microsoft Visual Studio code compile test sees the Snapdragon X Elite with its 12-core Oryon CPU finish the test in 37 seconds; compared to 54 seconds by the Core Ultra 7 155H with its 6P+8E+2LP CPU. In the 3DMark test, the Adreno 750 iGPU posts identical performance numbers to the Arc Graphics Xe-LPG of the 155H. Where the Snapdragon X Elite dominates the Intel chip is AI inferencing. The UL Procyon test sees the 45 TOPS NPU of the Snapdragon X Elite score 1720 points compared to 476 points by the 10 TOPS AI Boost NPU of the Core Ultra. The Intel machine is using OpenVINO, while the Snapdragon is using Qualcomm SNPE SDK for the test. Don't forget to check out the video review by Erdi Özüağ in the source link below.
55 Comments on Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Benchmarked Against Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Even is Qualcomm has a winning design on their hands, there's still the matter of securing fab capacity to produce a significant number.
meteor lake is a joke. Perhaps lunar lake will be better. AMD ryzen zen5 looks to be much better as well.
Even if it can performance as a Apple M2 chip, and got better battery life than a AMD or Intel based laptop this is just too much, it had to be half the price to begin with than it would get a better foothold in the market.
I fail to see this being a good chip because of the price sadly, because at about 1000USD it would make better sense to go with.
For example, Intel’s upcoming lion cove + skymont and then panther cove + darkmont. We have to wait to evaluate those architectures to see how power efficient (or not) they will be. They will be produced on advanced nodes. And as we know, AMD’s 7800x3d is very power efficient for the gaming performance it delivers, relative to the competition.
so you can’t write x86 off just yet.
At the same time, Arm deals with 32bit, 64bit, Thumb, Neon, whatever, so it's going the opposite direction.
There's no reason to "fix" anything. It's better, more efficient, and it just works. X86 is the dominant ISA, and it's going to be here for a long time.
WTF:roll:
I'm waiting to one company would beat this Crapple finally, that's nonsense already.
I'm buying 7800X3D as a gaming PC, but I know it is probably my last X86 PC ever build, I'm just not delusional.
All chipmakers are facing limitations due to the laws of physics, including ARM. That's why recent ARM SOCs can reach around 20W for a short period but struggle to sustain performance, often experiencing thermal throttling and instability. The push to expand ARM into other markets stems from the fact that they've exhausted options in mobile and lack an x86 license.
Delusional suits you very well. :)
Between the 3 decades that have come to pass and people not realizing real world is not just a detail you can forget about, some still think Arm/RISC "must" happen.
I am a gamer, nothing more really, so unless EVERY game is converting or emulated very well, I don't see any reason to switch.
I mean Desktop CPUs of course...
There are markets where Arm does better. And there are markets where x86 has the upper hand. It's as simple as that.
Plus, there's a built-in fallacy to your statement: this isn't about Arm vs x86, its about implementations of both. x86 can be anything from Netburst to Zen4. Arm can also be anything from cheap Unisoc to Apple's M3...
I never had the impression that ARM had an intresic thermal issue compared to x86, just that some computers maker are stingy when it comes to coolling. (aka no vapor chamber, or jet engine noise level)