Intel and Qualcomm Clash Over Arm-based PC Return Rates, Qualcomm Notes It's "Within Industry Norm"

[AleksandarK]

In an interesting exchange about product stance between Intel's interim co-CEO Michelle Johnston Holthaus and Qualcomm, both have offered conflicting statements about the market performance of Arm-based PCs. The dispute centers on customer satisfaction and return rates for PCs powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon X processors. During the Barclays 22nd Annual Global Technology Conference, Holthaus claimed that retailers are experiencing high return rates for Arm PCs, mainly citing software compatibility issues. According to her, customers are finding that typical applications don't work as expected on these devices. "I mean, if you look at the return rate for Arm PCs, you go talk to any retailer, their number one concern is, wow, I get a large percentage of these back. Because you go to set them up, and the things that we just expect don't work," said Holthaus.

"Our devices continue to have greater than 4+ stars across consumer reviews and our products have received numerous accolades across the industry including awards from Fast Company, TechRadar, and many consumer publications. Our device return rates are within industry norm," said Qualcomm representative for CRN. Qualcomm projects that up to 50% of laptops will transition to non-x86 platforms within five years, signaling their confidence in Arm-based solutions. While software compatibility remains a challenge for Arm PCs, with not all Windows applications fully supported, Qualcomm and Microsoft have implemented an emulation layer to address these limitations. Holthaus acknowledged that Apple's successful transition to Arm-based processors has helped pave the way for broader Arm adoption in the PC market. "Apple did a lot of that heavy lift for Arm to make that ubiquitous with their iOS and their whole walled garden stack. So I'm not going to say Arm will get more, I'm sure, than it gets today. But there are certainly, I think, some real barriers to getting there," noted Holthaus.




Overall, the Snapdragon X PC sales have been a bit slow. Even with a launch in mid-2024, it has been a few months now, and adoption has been underwhelming. According to Canalys, Qualcomm sold around 720,000 Snapdragon X devices, which accounts for only 0.8% of all PCs sold in Q3 2024. Snapdragon X-powered devices represent less than 1.5% of the Windows-based PC market, which is a tiny share compared to the massive x86 ecosystem that AMD and Intel control. Next year, NVIDIA and MediaTek are preparing a joint entry into the Arm-based PC world, so competition will heat up. Even so, Qualcomm allegedly skipped Oryon 2 cores and went straight to Oryon 3 for their following Snapdragon X2 processor lineup.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Jomale]

The big problem is software, outside the MS-world. Tools, Music/Video-editing programmer give no attention of 1% ARM devices with WIN-OS inside.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

Bestbuy was offering the Asus Vivobook S 3K Oled with the Snapdragon X Plus for only $499 marked down from $899, so there has to be some truth to the high return rate, otherwise a higher tier Asus device like that would never be offered with a $400 discount so soon after release.....plus, in the review section there were several people complaining about compatibility issues.

 

[LittleBro]

Holhtaus should rather care more about poor Lunar Lake sales. Lacking native software support is not a problem of ARM itself. x86 has been here for decades. Apple proved ARM can be used in same way as x86 in laptops (same way meaning for customers) and software support can be really good if you have money and developers. ARM taking over x86 mobile market is just matter of few years, currently the main problem is price of ARM devices, this really holds back their expansion rate. Intel is shitting pants. Michelle, how'bout you continue doing your sales & marketing magic and let the technical matters to someone else?

 

[londiste]

ARM taking over x86 mobile market is just matter of few years, currently the main problem is price of ARM devices, this really holds back their expansion rate.

Don't you find these two things rather contradictory?

 

[Tomorrow]

ARM wont be talking over laptops anytime soon. Price is not the main barrier. There are plenty of x86 laptops that are more expensive and sell well.

The problem is software compatibility. I would compare this somewhat to Intel's ARC launch where people were hesitant to buy the first generation due to driver problems.
Now most of these issues have been fixed but it's been years.

And problem for Qualcomm is that unlike Apple that can force a top down change since they control the ecosystem, Qualcomm cant make Windows on ARM better by themselves.
Considering how MS has fumbled even the simplest things on x86 i dont have high hopes for ARM version of Windows to improve very fast.
I mean until lately did did not even have public ISO images available (they do now).

 

[AcE]

Despite ARM going nowhere on PC right now Holthaus still seems desperate, why are Intel CEOs so doomed?

 

[LittleBro]

ARM wont be talking over laptops anytime soon. Price is not the main barrier. There are plenty of x86 laptops that are more expensive and sell well.

The problem is software compatibility. I would compare this somewhat to Intel's ARC launch where people were hesitant to buy the first generation due to driver problems.
Now most of these issues have been fixed but it's been years.

Software compatibility can't become better without raising platform popularity (ARM+Windows) and that can't get better without better pricing.

Don't you find these two things rather contradictory?

It may seem like that but growing ARM players in Windows area might really speed the process up.

 

[Vayra86]

Despite ARM going nowhere on PC right now Holthaus still seems desperate, why are Intel CEOs so doomed?

Yeah why the fck would you say this other than to prop up your own failing x86 CPUs.

Its so obvious and looks so bad. Its like a perfect way to paint a target on your own back. Especially worded the way it is 'I think I would perhaps maybe yeah'. Disgusting. Just be up front about what you're saying or STFU. Blegh.

 

[AcE]

Its so obvious and looks so bad. Its like a perfect way to paint a target on your own back.

Right, luckily she's just interim, so doesn't matter much, she'll be replaced anyway.

 

[john_]

I am expecting ARM to win some percentages when Nvidia enters the game. Let's not forget that Nvidia is "a software company that coincidentally also makes the hardware where that software will run on". So I am expecting Nvidia's ARM based laptops to have some extra (proprietary) software support for better compatibility. Or at least some good GPUs with excellent driver support that will be fixing the other problem that ARM is facing, very slow performance in games.

 

[Tomorrow]

Software compatibility can't become better without raising platform popularity (ARM+Windows) and that can't get better without better pricing.

Low end Chromebooks with ARM CPU's (well mobile SoC's actually) start at 168€.
Cheapest Snapdragon X Plus laptop with Windows starts at 712€.

Budget laptops are 300-600€.
Midrange is 600-1200€ and above that are high end machines.

Like i said. Current prices are not an obstacle. People spend the same or more on their smartphones.

 

[Nostras]

Software compatibility can't become better without raising platform popularity (ARM+Windows) and that can't get better without better pricing.

It may seem like that but growing ARM players in Windows area might really speed the process up.

I can't stress this enough. Pricing of these laptops is what kills market adoption which in turn kills interest in putting in the effort of making software for ARM based windows machines.
Neither Microsoft nor QC seems to be actually willing to increase market adoption and instead is trying their hardest to make it a luxury product that very few are willing to buy.
Now some people buy it, experience this mess, return the devices and badmouth the laptops deservedly.
There must be some reason why they're not doing it. Contractual obligations followed by change in vision/leadership perhaps?

 

[john_]

a luxury product

Qualcomm is the premium brand of mobile SOCs. They will NEVER try to pass as a budget alternative. I doubt they care to get market share at the moment, because I doubt they want their brand to be associated with budget offerings, in any market. It doesn't matter what they say in public. I believe their strategy is to become a known brand in the Win+ARM laptop market, before other ARM SOC makers get in the laptop market and wait for companies like Mediatek to offer the budget offerings.

 

[Fourstaff]

Waiting for the equivalent of Rosetta and Rosetta 2 when Apple transitioned from POWER -> x86 -> ARM. They did that with strong-arming but backed by a very competent translator, I don't see how Qualcomm cannot do the same (at least for the translation part).

 

[londiste]

I am expecting ARM to win some percentages when Nvidia enters the game. Let's not forget that Nvidia is "a software company that coincidentally also makes the hardware where that software will run on". So I am expecting Nvidia's ARM based laptops to have some extra (proprietary) software support for better compatibility. Or at least some good GPUs with excellent driver support that will be fixing the other problem that ARM is facing, very slow performance in games.

I have a nagging suspicion that if Nvidia would want to seriously encroach on x86 territory they would in a completely unexpected and surprising twist find common ground with Intel and AMD in terms of x86 licensing

 

[john_]

I have a nagging suspicion that if Nvidia would want to seriously encroach on x86 territory they would in a completely unexpected and surprising twist find common ground with Intel and AMD in terms of x86 licensing

Nvidia asked for a license from Intel some time before 2010. Intel said NO and they where smart to say no back then, because they would have been in the third place today in x86 CPUs. Then Intel decided to stop granting licenses for chipsets for the Intel platform, driving SiS and VIA to nothingness and forcing Nvidia to close it's chipset department. Of course Nvidia had much better legal department than SiS, VIA and even AMD, getting over a billion dollars from Intel for the cost of closing that department. Anyway what I am saying here is that Nvidia has the opportunity to get revenge from a number of companies that they might believe they hurt them in the past. From Intel for that chipset division and from Qualcomm also. Nvidia was whining 10 years ago that they had to abandon the smartphone SOC market because of Qualcomm's anticompetitive practices. Pure comedy, but also accurate.
In any case Nvidia will promote ARM over x86 in my oppinion. The fact they tried to buy ARM says that all their R&D is on that platform. Also investing in the ARM platform is safer than investing on x86 that is controlled by Intel and in a lesser degree AMD(x86-64), your two main competitors.

 

[londiste]

Nvidia asked for a license from Intel some time before 2010. Intel said NO

Yes they did and there was the whole hoopla with that. However, times have changed. In 2010 ARM was not a competitor. The scenario I had in mind here is that if some of the other comments here become true, ARM is a real threat to Intel/AMD and Nvidia will starts to throw themselves in with ARM.

The fact they tried to buy ARM says that all their R&D is on that platform. Also investing in the ARM platform is safer than investing on x86 that is controlled by Intel and in a lesser degree AMD(x86-64), your two main competitors.

Nvidia tried to buy ARM to get control and arguably kill off competition. If given a chance to get the foot in the door for x86 and possibly play an equal role with Intel and AMD there, all bets are off. Revenge isn't high on companies priority lists usually and I feel it would actually be much more like Nvidia to throw in with a proprietary tech with some clear immediate advantages.

Nvidia does not seem to be doing much of actual work on ARM cores for now. Grace is running with seemingly bog standard ARM Neoverse v2 cores. They did and do a lot of things around organization, interconnects, packaging etc plus software support of various kinds, but apparently have not been earnestly doing the cores themselves. Project Denver about a decade ago was promising but fizzed out for reasons other than core/architecture design and they definitely do have the capability and capacity to be a strong player, they just are not doing that right now.

All this is my personal opinion of course.

 

[ScaLibBDP]

Intel co-CEO should be more concerned about current state of Intel rather than Qualcomm.

>>...Intel co-CEO claimed that retailers are experiencing high return rates for Arm PCs, mainly citing
>>software compatibility issues...

Absolutely true based on a number of refurbished notebooks with ARM processors listed on a Bestbuy website. Too many!

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Qualcomm came to the WOA market with a timed exclusive from MS and the whole "Copilot+" PC concept (yikes, the console video game approach). Those Copilot+ PCs featured a dedicated Copilot button on they keyboard and much hype about Recall, with the claim that the SDX's NPU was needed to power this new fangled tech. Fast forward to today, and Recall is still off in Insider land after getting hammered (rightly or wrongly) as a security nightmare, and now Copilot is off to being a standalone app that is only aimed at consumers. It's now to the point that MS has released guidance on how to remap that Copilot HotKey and uninstall the app in the corporate world because said app won't work with corporate MS accounts. So much for those big exclusives in these past 6 months. By the time x86 got their NPUs up to the artifical snuff, it's no longer even something they probably want to advertise. It's now just a case sticker and a special keyboard button. Maybe I lack imagination, but I don't see how other players are going to do that much better here.

 

[cal5582]

this seems like one of those things where they project really hard trying to make it happen.
why would i want a machine without backwards compatibility. thats pretty much the entire selling point of windows.

 

[SRB151]

Windows ARM PC sales are a bit slow? That's the understatement of the year.

 

[phanbuey]

I think it's a problem that solves itself... Alot of the backwards-compatibility doesn't need to be performant, it just needs to work, and with increasing abstraction this will eventually happen. That being said, ARM is now also becoming freakishly bloated as happened to X86... Maybe RISC V will make an appearance or maybe some combination of tiles a la intel.

Definitely a chip ahead of it's time, however. They didn't spend enough time on the compatibility aspect before trying to roll out a "Premium" product.

 

[OSdevr]

This isn't the first time an ostensibly superior architecture tried to replace x86. Remember Itanium? Granted it was targeted at servers and HPC instead of consumer machines, and performance of the initial models was disappointing, but architecturally it was in many ways better than x86 and even x86-64. And unlike these ARM machines the early models actually had hardware support for x86 without the need for emulation. In the end it didn't matter because x86 was so dominant, well studied, and cheap. Itanic (aka Itanium) by contrast was expensive, poorly supported and late to market to the point that x86 and others had already caught up to it. I expect ARM in PCs will go just as poorly, and this isn't even the first time they've tried it.

 

[cal5582]

i just dont see the need for arm when amd is killing it so hard right now.