NotebookCHECK - Notebook Forum

Wow... What crazy manipulation, everything hand-picked to fit the narrative... you've thrown any relevance you had in the garbage can. Do you think the public is retarded?

I have a 7840u and it runs videos in 4k using hardware acceleration drawing only 4-5w, all you have to do is use any browser without acceleration to manipulate it.
The reality is that the CPU loses in 98% of cases to x86 competitors, the GPU loses in 100% of cases. Nobody in their right mind should pay that price for a problematic and inefficient product.

"More efficient than AMD & Intel"

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Runs hotter and louder, has less battery life, less performance per Watt, Ryzen 8840U STOMPS it at any power limit you set be in iGPU or CPU performance, Meteor Lake is beating it at anything pretty much. It consumes more power even in idle than AMDs and Intels.

But yeah, the Flopdragon is more efficient, sure. Qualcomm propaganda goes hard. Dave2D level or "journalism" is coming here to this site too, sadly...

Meanwhile in reality: Impressive! But Also Not?! Snapdragon X Elite - Asus Vivobook S 15 Review (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SVz7oGGG2jE) (The Phawx on YT)

Could we get any clarity on the YouTube test? NBC hasn't used this test before.

Is that a peak power draw or an average? Which video was used? Same browsers in all? Were all laptops confirmed HW decode? How was system power draw measured (e.g., USB-PD power analyser)?

Would love to see additional laptops added from both Qualcomm & Intel/AMD.

I'll stick with Intel laptops. Don't need more than 15 hours of battery and thunderbolt really changes the office workstation experience. Don't care about anymore performance.

At the beginning of the article you mention that '...there is currently no app that can show the current consumption of the new Qualcomm chips and we can only make educated guesses...'. The "external screen power measurement" method is, from what I can tell, completely undocumented: it does not clarify anything, and assuming that a silly plug power meter is being used, it feels completely pointless on battery powered devices.

This article and the German one on the X Elite/Vivobook really scarred this site's reputation for me. Get your stuff together.

Would love to see power consumption and efficency in light tasks, such as your web browser test. I think this metric was on the nose since M chips appeared, as this is what defines battery life.

Hahaha, what a monstrous fraud.

In the multi-threaded test, the CBR24 supposedly won the M3 Max, but in the energy efficiency picture at the top of the list is no longer the M3 Max, but the simple M3 (the author probably hoped that no one would notice the substitution), which loses to any AMD in the multi-threaded test exactly 1.5 times, and the M3 Max there is no even multi-threaded energy efficiency in the results, which means that it is below par and loses even to hot Intel chips.

Stop making such shameful reviews - draw a performance graph on one axis of which is consumption, and on the other is productivity, and the points are the object of study. And it will immediately become clear who is really king of the hill in terms of balanced performance and consumption. And this is definitely not Apple, not to mention the junk from Qualcomm...;)

The only thing that is an absolute shame about x86 is playing 4K videos on YouTube - it is quite obvious that the SoC+MB+SSD combination should not consume more than 5-7W in this mode, but they consume 2-3 more and this is not normal.

In general, playing 8k@60fps/AV1 should already fit within 5-7W, and 4k@60 should consume less than 5W.

By the way, Lunar Lake is the first SoC with hardware support for H266 decoding.

It should have at least written "paid by Qualcomm"

There was a time i came to notebookcheck for deep analytical articles. they was transparency in the past not cherry picked charts to make broken SOC look good. guys don't count on these charts, just go to phawx youtube channel to see real picture of efficiency. i wonder if you NB-check is part of qualcomm/microsoft PR department !

QuoteHowever, there can also be crashes (often happened during gaming tests) or the apps simply won't launch at all. It is unfortunately not always easy to find our whether there is a native ARM app or not.

This is intolerable. No vendor should be selling a device that crashes/doesn't start on emulation, or not.

The market is NOT going to rush to build native ARM on Windows apps, especially games, ESPECIALLY LEGACY GAMES! It happened for OSX because Apple's legacy software is very, very, very small compared to x86. And Apple supports graphics design, not games.

People stick with Microsoft due to legacy support, games, and Microsoft's 10 plus years of support per operating system. But crashes on emulation?! Not acceptable. The market won't tolerate it, and developers won't develop native apps for it if people don't rush to it.

This is DOA, calling it as I see it.

I agree that this article does not read like the usual, high quality reviews I came to respect Notebookcheck.net for. Moreover, the lack of emulated benchmarks is telling. Yes, x86-64 emulation performance is ABSOLUTELY important here. We all have software and games that we like/need that will never see a Windows-on-ARM version, so how does the emulation affect its performance and efficiency?

This is Qualcomm's 4th attempt to crack the laptop market (after Win-RT, SD850 and SD8cx line), so it's not like a fair bit of skepticism isn't out of the question and would paint you as trolls or something.

This is truly a great example of a deceptive review. Hawk Point is just simply better in almost every aspect, not to mention it just destroys utterly Snapdragon X in 3D/gaming. Not by a small margin. While consuming less power. It is the 4th try by qualcomm. Next iteration they better pull a rabbit out of a hat, in 3D they will need over double perf/watt improvement if they want to have any chance agains Strix (Ryzen 300 AI).

After reading this I must wonder: Is nbcheck biased peace of sh*t now?
Like this is just sad and not objective.

Did I read a different article? As a first look it seeks to answer questions people had about the big performance and efficiency claims Qualcomm made. Turns out these X Elite chips don't deliver game changing improvements to either, but at least offer a competitive alternative to AMD and Intel. And that's the focus of the article.

There are plenty of other considerations and details to get into. They've got compatibility to deal with, at least much improved since the days on Windows RT. They've got a short window to sell before new gen chips from Apple/AMD/Intel are likely going to beat them at all counts. Their one strong point in the NPU can only be leveraged with Windows Copilot/Recall, with questionable utility and demand. Pricing is also going to be a big factor in purchase decisions.

I don't see the bias, or any difference in conclusion as other publications.

Strange results for Intel/AMD power usage. Single core tests CB2024 is using 34W! Intel multi core at TDP 20W scores 4 times better than single core at less power (31W and). And more can be written for other results...

Real tests was shown on ASUSs' review and Snapdragon lose every benchmark to Meteors or Rysen's

Quote from: Deceptive on June 21, 2024, 04:29:58This is truly a great example of a deceptive review. Hawk Point is just simply better in almost every aspect, not to mention it just destroys utterly Snapdragon X in 3D/gaming. Not by a small margin. While consuming less power. It is the 4th try by qualcomm. Next iteration they better pull a rabbit out of a hat, in 3D they will need over double perf/watt improvement if they want to have any chance agains Strix (Ryzen 300 AI).

+1 You are absolutely right Hawk Point has destroyed and surpassed Intel in watt performance in its latest 14gen processor and it has been seen in many ultrabooks where AMD consumes much less and its graphics power with RDNA 3 is almost double.
Now we will have to wait but AMD ZEN 5 promises, according to synthetic tests carried out, that it surpasses this Qualcomm and what is coming from Intel the 15th gen in ultrabook while waiting for a comparison with the Apple ones.
Of the featured products that can get more performance out of artificial intelligence currently, SURFACE PRO 10, GALAXYBOOK 4 AND MINISFORUM V3.
These types of products are the stars of this 2024. I hope for a neutral and fair comparison from this website.

I'm seeing lots of fanboys in these comments.  So many people rushing to defend their own CPU choices. Why get so upset that you have to trash Notebookcheck? 

These chips aren't revolutionary, but they're rather efficient and great for day to day work that doesn't involve gaming.  Personally, I would never game on a laptop but I know people out there often place that high up on their list.

I know plenty of people who would consider an ARM based laptop simply because they don't have legacy software (much of it is browser based). 

Quote from: JakeR on June 21, 2024, 15:27:58These chips aren't revolutionary,

Qualcomm was literally claiming that they are, for months, they even claimed "The PC Reborn" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R3QpKMciEw) multiple times in their very own presentations full of bs how their Snapdragon X Elite is "the most powerful and the most capable PC chip ever" and comparing it with everything from Intel 155U to i9 DESKTOP to Apple M3 Pro with bold claims how it's faster and more efficient than all of that. If you don't believe me and if you are lazy to watch the vid above, take a look at their YT channel and have fun: https://www.youtube.com/@snapdragon/videos (https://www.youtube.com/@snapdragon/videos)

Quote from: JakeR on June 21, 2024, 15:27:58but they're rather efficient and great for day to day work that doesn't involve gaming.

Again, THEY (Qualcomm) were claiming at any given opportunity how their SXE chips are capable to game as good as "legacy chips" (that's how they call x86) 😀 All perfectly smooth, fast, playable, no stutters, "next-gen iGPU gaming" and so on, here just one of literally 50+ examples (and that is Qualcomm representative talking, not random YouTube "influencer"): https://youtu.be/Auz3Sde2g_E?t=391 (https://youtu.be/Auz3Sde2g_E?t=391)

They even made a whole worksonwoa.com website to brag how 1500+ games is tested to be perfectly playable on their chips, here an NBC's article from a month ago: Snapdragon X Elite ohne Fortnite, Roblox & Co.: So gut laufen 1.481 Spiele auf dem ARM-Chip (https://www.notebookcheck.com/Snapdragon-X-Elite-ohne-Fortnite-Roblox-Co-So-gut-laufen-1-481-Spiele-auf-dem-ARM-Chip.840129.0.html)

While in reality not a single of their claims turned out to be true, and reputable (aka not paid by Qualcomm to publicly lie how getting the same performance on battery as when plugged in was never possible before on x86) YouTubers proved that the X Elite is worse in performance per Watt than x86 while generating more heat, more noise and having equally good battery life: Impressive! But Also Not?! Snapdragon X Elite - Asus Vivobook S 15 Review (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SVz7oGGG2jE) (The Phawx on YT)

Which is why people react as they do.

Extremely recommended read, btw: Qualcomm AI/Copilot PCs don't live up to the hype - Watch what they do, not what they say (https://www.semiaccurate.com/2024/06/18/qualcomm-ai-copilot-pcs-dont-live-up-to-the-hype/) (Jun 18, 2024)

QuoteWhat is Qualcomm hiding and why? Lets start out with the why side, it is easier. The x86 emulation sucks and they know it. Since x86 compatibility is a key marketing message from both players, they want you to believe your software will just run, they have to hide this failing at all costs. Let me split a hair here, the silicon is actually quite good on the x86 emulation front, the team didn't forget everything they did at Apple but coupled with Windows it, well, ends up sucking. Actually that is a bit unfair, lets just say the end user device sucks and not apportion blame to any one part.

When questioned, Qualcomm spokespeople will fall back to to a talking point about apps that they have tweaked/validated/worked on and those run fine, fast-ish, and without hiccups. This is true but that list is mighty short and chances you have a few apps that will blow up. Games, well, again they go back to casual games running fine which they probably do. Real games don't and most non-tweaked games don't either, casual or not. Qualcomm knows this and they are desperate to hide it.

QuoteAnd don't get me started on drivers. Got any hardware that isn't brand new? A printer bought during Covid perhaps? Scanners? Low level tools? Antivirus/antimalware? Got a game with an anti-cheat thread? VPN? This stuff WILL break on the Qualcomm ARM PCs unless they have tweaked it and chances are they haven't. And won't. These companies are desperate for this knowledge to not get out, and they are making sure it doesn't by making sure only tame reviewers and fluffy youtubers get devices. Even they they won't have time to dig in to the defects they do find.

This is all to back the official message of fast and compatible, one of which is kinda true. Compatibility is not good enough, games break on the consumer side and corporate apps are hit and miss. Worse yet there wasn't a single mention of remote management since the November 2023 reveal. If you actually test the product you will find this out and possibly write it up before the official message has a chance to be repeated enough to 'become truth'. Don't believe the hype.

The response here seems mildly uninformed.... But it is doing really well imo. Looking at battery life to performance its doing really well. Emulation is proven to be really good only 10-15% nerf but otherwise very powerful for its power usage. Battery life is really strong, gaming is still where it struggles but its not too far off from what Intel is doing in their integrated GPU. I think we'll start seeing a lot more driver optimization now that its out here and will get tons of adoption similar to the days of M1. I'm sure gaming performance will continue to improve through driver optimization as well.

Let's not be naive, apple M1 came out almost 4years ago and it was compared to 2019-2020 cpus. intel was in 4core-10xx era and zen was in infancy as zen2 was quite new and not widely available. M1 implementation in the time was nothing short of marvelous. not only was better in performance but way better in efficiency and there wouldn't be any future x86 in mac ecosystem so switch was inevitable. also remember macOS carries way less baggage than windows. organizational/pro software almost non existent in macOS and most developer software/kits used are open source. which is in contrast to windows world. so adaptation in mac world happened due to superior silicon and no future alternative and less effort. these are not met in current day windows world. there would be upcoming and superior x86 SOCs. difficult to change/modify multi billion dollar x86 software developed in the past and far more legacy closed software. there is also gaming as lots of windows users are casual gamers.
so let's face it, snapdragon is not M1 and certainly windows is not mac. i believe if apple not started 4 years ago it wouldn't stand a chance today against current x86 progress specifically AMD. snapdragon is a web browsing/media consumption chip and does it very well and needs to be much cheaper to be attractive.

Notebookcheck, how came the qualcomm chip score almost identical numbers (14000) in Geekbench 6 multi, even though power levels were different (50w, 45w, 35w, 20w)?

How???

Andreas Osthoff — if you are the editor of this article, tell me how you calculated points/per watt for multi core. Did you take Cinebench 2024 as a reference? If so, what kind of formula did you use? Cause, I am getting different numbers....

nice vid explaining why the same X Elite machine can have a million different benchmarks (spoiler - Windows usual power plan/power mode fuckery)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDRV9eEJOk8

Actually, when previous gen Zen 4 is configured to the same optimum TDP for the X Elite, the AMD is more efficient, faster, and runs everything... Not to mention the just released Zen 5 which is even better.

So the conclusion of this review is simply wrong.

Review on Youtube by Phaux. Impressive! But Also Not?! Snapdragon X Elite

Quote from: Consumer_Not on June 23, 2024, 13:13:07is more efficient, faster,

yeah if your workflow is running benchmarks 100% of the time

Quote from: Consumer_Not on June 23, 2024, 13:13:07by Phaux

guy is a nobody
amd shills are ready to trust anyone as long as he is in their echo chamber

Quote from: NikoB on June 20, 2024, 19:37:19In the multi-threaded test, the CBR24 supposedly won the M3 Max, but in the energy efficiency picture at the top of the list is no longer the M3 Max, but the simple M3 (the author probably hoped that no one would notice the substitution), which loses to any AMD in the multi-threaded test exactly 1.5 times, and the M3 Max there is no even multi-threaded energy efficiency in the results, which means that it is below par and loses even to hot Intel chips.

that's because they have never measured M3Max in Cinebench 2024, lol

They have efficiency numbers for Cinebench R23 w/screen off though
M3 382 points/W
M3Max 306 points/W
155H 242 points/W

if you don't know why M3Max is less efficient than M3 then you shouldn't be here at all in the first place (spoiler - because it has much more to power)

It's weird how almost nobody is talking about the price.

Most, if not all, 32GB RAM configurations are well above 2000$. That's an insane mark-up for a soldered RAM machine that has trouble running native x86 software. Pretty sure Zen 5 and whatever Intel is cooking next is going to bury this. This chip is not even that competitive with current gen x86 chips.

This in not an Apple M competitor chip as it cannot run fanless and windows is not MACOS.

No matter how much false marketing tries, prices that are several times higher than real demand will put everything in its place.

I have already written many times, without having its own ecosystem (like Apple) other company trying to get into the x86 market (by the way, it is interesting why Intel does not attack everyone who tries to apply x86 processing, as it did before - apparently it does not consider Apple, and especially Qualcomm, as competitors, and AMD is their eternal antitrust gasket, which they will never let go bankrupt), there is only one chance - full compatibility, plus performance NOT lower than that of Intel/AMD processors, with the same level of consumption and no more. And low prices. Which in reality no other option has. Therefore, their chances of gaining a foothold in the mass x86 market are negligible.

Winning a decent share in a market niche, in the first few years, when there is a powerful player with an overwhelming market share, is always a deliberate loss-making operation during these years, i.e. with maximum benefit for buyers. It is obvious that neither the management/beneficiaries of Qualcomm, nor the laptop manufacturers, whom they must sponsor for this enterprise, are NOT ready for such sacrifices, which means everything is in vain a priori.

The only real chance for a X Elite laptop to shine will be with a Linux OS.

Then all applications are compiled natively, as with all architectures in Linux, with no garbage translation layers to slow it down/increase the consumption.

Then it can be a real workhorse.

Quote from: Consumer_Not on June 26, 2024, 17:53:55Then it can be a real workhorse.

With a mass market share of 2% of strength. This also doesn't make sense. This is how a market share, where everything has already been divided, is not won.

We need to offer the average buyer something better than Windows+x86, for the same or less money. No one on the planet today is capable of this, otherwise Intel + AMD would have long ago lost the entire desktop and laptop market. AMD is at least clearly withdrawing from the x86 laptop and desktop market, because it did not even try in its best years since 2017 to sharply increase its market share by expanding production at TSMC. Although at that time this was obviously an extremely unprofitable strategy given the presence of Intel's cache. As a result, it waited until Intel itself was forced to bow to TSMC and now they are actually on equal terms in terms of technical process capabilities, i.e. AMD's chances will now rapidly melt like snow in June...

Very good. Qualcomm not allowing reading SoC package power makes efficiency test a lot harder but this is still the most (and almost only) useful review so far.

For CPU perf/efficiency benchmark, Zen 4 can get 70-80% of Avalanche at 20w, which is decent. But in actual light daily usage, there is still a huge power difference between the ARM and efficient x86 processors, as expected. That's the reason why X1E/X1P should exist.

After Intel/AMD marketing war dust settled

www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1XJAOf_W5w

really good efficiency in REAL-WORLD dev workflow, obliterates Meteor Lake FOR WORK.
X Plus better efficiency than M3 and overall a more interesting chip probably, unless you are buying laptop to run benchmarks 24/7.

one more generation and it will be on point. By that time all software should be available as ARM native too, apple silicon too didn't have all software available at launch

You are missing a key benchmark.
Copilot+ is marketing itself as an edge AI system so where are the most relevant tests of all about AI benchmarks, such as UL Procyon??
The only reason I would buy this PC is for this reason, yet you barely mention it? Poor form.

All I can say is my CoPilot+ PC is the first Windows laptop I've had in the past 10 years that is pleasure to use.  Light, fast, quiet, cool.

Quote from: Kin Yalbets on August 04, 2024, 12:36:05All I can say is my CoPilot+ PC is the first Windows laptop I've had in the past 10 years that is pleasure to use.  Light, fast, quiet, cool.

Why even post praises without mentioning the exact model. They all are different.