Notebookcheck Logo

Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Analysis - More efficient than AMD & Intel, but Apple stays ahead

ARM Windows 2.0. Qualcomm launches the new Snapdragon X Elite about nine months after the official announcement - with support from Microsoft and all the major laptop manufacturers. We were able to test the small X1E-78-100 as well as the X1E-80-100 and compare them with current chips from AMD, Apple and Intel. Update: Benchmarks of the Snapdragon X Plus (X1P-64-100)

It was around nine months ago when Qualcomm announced the new Snapdragon X SoCs for Windows, and now we finally get devices with the new ARM chips. Microsoft calls these laptops Copilot+ and all major manufacturers offer corresponding devices. We already reviewed the new Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED with the Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-78-100), but now we want to take a closer look at the performance as well as the efficiency of the new Snapdragon chip. Microsoft's Surface Pro 11 with the faster Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100) with dual-core turbo has also arrived in our editorial office and will be included here as well.

Update June 22nd: Additional CPU benchmarks and efficiency results for the Snapdragon X Plus (X1P-64-100)

Snapdragon X Elite Overview

Snapdragon X Elite overview (source: Qualcomm)
Snapdragon X Elite overview (source: Qualcomm)

ARM processors for Windows are nothing new, but the experience so far was usually not really comparable to the x86 competition from AMD or Intel, and there were not many models on the market. Qualcomm now launches new Snapdragon X SoCs (4 nm design) in combination with an ARM version of Windows. Microsoft also supports the new devices heavily and there are exclusive AI features - at least for now. All new Snapdragon models are called Copilot+ laptops, so they are easy to spot. There are native ARM apps of many popular apps (like the full Office suite, browsers, many Adobe apps), but x86 apps have to be emulated. This worked pretty well in our tests so far and the best case scenario is that these emulated apps simply run a bit slower due to the emulation. However, 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.

The basic idea can be compared to Apple's ARM processors and efficiency is a big topic here. This also means users won't be able to upgrade the memory. The majority of new Snapdragon laptops is shipped with 16 GB RAM and some units offer 32 GB RAM. The Snapdragon X SoCs support up to 64 GB of LPDDR5x-8448 RAM. All Snapdragon chips are equipped with a fast Wi-Fi 7 module as well as Bluetooth 5.4 and there is an optional 5G modem.

Overview product range (source: Qualcomm)
Overview product range (source: Qualcomm)

The smallest chip is the Snapdragon X Plus with 10 CPU cores, while the Snapdragon X Elite SoCs have 12 CPU cores (Oryon CPU) with two clusters (performance cluster with 8 cores & efficiency cluster with 4 cores). The cores are based on the ARM v8.7 micro architecture and do not support Hyperthreading. The naming scheme of the new Snapdragon X Elite is pretty cryptic and many of the launch models are equipped with the entry-chip X1E-78-100, which does not support dual-core turbo, so all cores can reach the specified 3.4 GHz. The faster models support dual-core turbo frequencies in the range between 4.0-4.3 GHz and the two top models have a higher frequency of 3.8 GHz on all cores. However, our two review units already show that the processor does not really say much about the dual-core performance. Like on AMD and Intel chips, the results heavily depend on the power limits set by the manufacturer. Simply said, the Elite SoCs can operate in a TDP range between 15-80 Watts, which will obviously have a big effect on the performance.

Naming scheme Snapdragon X series (source: Qualcomm)
Naming scheme Snapdragon X series (source: Qualcomm)
Naming scheme Adreno GPU (source: Qualcomm)
Naming scheme Adreno GPU (source: Qualcomm)

The official designation of the integrated Adreno GPU is Adreno X1-85 and there are currently two versions depending on the processor. The GPUs of the two faster Snapdragon X Elite SoCs manage 4.6 TFLOPS according to Qualcomm, while the slower unit manages 3.8 TFLOPS (also applies for the Snapdragon X Plus). The GPU supports DirectX 12 and features 6 shader processors clocked at 1.5 GHz in the top model and 1.2 GHz in the slower version. there is no dedicated GPU driver like we are used to from AMD and Intel. Instead, there are additional settings (like Super Resolution) available in the GPU settings of Windows.

The NPU of the Snapdragon X SoCs is called Qualcomm Hexagon NPU and manages 45 TOPS. This means the NPU is slightly faster than the required 40 TOPS specified by Microsoft for the Copilot+ features.

Test Systems - Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED & Microsoft Surface Pro 11

Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED (X1E-78-100)
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED (X1E-78-100)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED (X1E-80-100)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED (X1E-80-100)

Our test systems are the Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED (here in review) with the entry-level Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100 as well as the Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ with the faster X1E-80-100. The interesting aspect is the TDP configuration, because there is currently no app that can show the current consumption of the new Qualcomm chips and we can only make educated guesses based on our own power consumption measurements when there are no specified values from the manufacturer. You also have to keep in mind that the TDP value of Snapdragon SoCs is not directly comparable to TDP values for AMD and Intel chips, since the Snapdragon TDP also includes the power consumption for the memory as well as the micro controllers.

The two chips are basically pretty comparable with 12 cores and a maximum clock of 3.4 GHz. The X1E-80-100 also features a dual-core turbo of up to 4.0 GHz. The integrated Adreno GPU (X1-85, 3.8 TFLOPS) as well as the NPU (45 TOPS) are identical, though. The Asus laptop offers different performance profiles (TDP range between 20-50 Watts), while the Surface Pro OLED seems to use a TDP range between ~25-30 Watts.

We will also get our hands on the new Samsung galaxy Book Edge 16 with the more powerful X1E-84-100 soon. This chip offers a higher dual-core turbo frequency, higher frequency for all cores as well as the faster iGPU variant. We will update this article as soon as we have test results.

Update June 22nd: We have received the base model of the Surface Pro Copilot+. It uses an IPS panel instead of the OLED screen and is also equipped with the new Snapdragon X Plus (X1P-64-100). It uses the same Adreno GPU (3.8 TFLOPS) as well as Hexagon NPU (45 TOPS), but only gets 10 instead of 12 CPU cores (number of efficiency cores is reduced from 4 to 2). The Surface Pro Copilot+ with the Snapdragon X Plus is also equipped with an active cooling solution and the TDP configuration seems to be identical to the faster Snapdragon X Elite SKU.

Testing procedure

We want to compare the different processors and integrated graphics adapters as fairly as possible. In addition to the pure performance in synthetic benchmarks, we also measure the power consumption to get efficiency results. We perform the power measurements with an external screen in order to eliminate impacts caused by different display sizes and technologies. We still measure the overall system consumption and do not solely rely on indicated values for the CPU and GPU. 

We usually use Cinebench R23 for our CPU measurements since the benchmark also runs natively on Apple's M-SoCs and we have plenty of data for this benchmark. However, Cinebench R23 has to be emulated on ARM Windows and the additional translation layer would affect the results. Therefore, we switched to Cinebench 2024, but this means we only have limited data to compare. We will also check the efficiency of the Snapdragon SoC with different power limits and compare the results with modern AMD/Intel chips (also with different power levels) as well as the current Apple M3 as well as the older M2 Pro. We still use the game The Witcher 3 for GPU efficiency results, since it is among the recommended games in Qualcomm's official review guide and we also have plenty of comparison data for this scenario.

Single-Core Performance & Efficiency

We start with the single-core performance and the two new Qualcomm chips perform very well. The X1E-80-100 with the turbo frequency of 4.0 GHz is around 15 % faster compared to the entry-level X1E-78-100 without turbo, both in Cinebench 2024 as well as Geekbench. The X1E-78-100 is sitting right between the two current chips from AMD and Intel and is even slightly ahead in Cinebench. The X1E-80-100 on the other hand is faster than both x86 chips and competes with the old Apple M2 Pro. Apple's M3 and the new M4 are out of reach, though. Apple's latest M4 chip has a massive advantage of 30 % in Geekbench.

Cinebench 2024 - CPU Single Core
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
141 Points +31%
Apple M2 Pro
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
123 Points +14%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
123 Points +14%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Microsoft Surface Pro Copilot+
109 Points +1%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
108 Points
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
102 Points -6%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
102 Points -6%
Geekbench 6.2 - Single-Core
Apple M4 (10 cores)
Apple iPad Pro 13 2024
3715 Points +51%
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
3054 Points +24%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
2845 Points +16%
Apple M2 Pro
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
2663 Points +9%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
2612 Points +6%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
2555 Points +4%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
2454 Points
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Microsoft Surface Pro Copilot+
2445 Points 0%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
2369 Points -3%

Let's talk about single-core efficiency next. At the bottom of our comparison chart are the two CPUs from AMD as well as Intel, while the new Snapdragon chips manage about twice the number of points per Watt. It is also interesting to see that the single-core efficiency of the two Snapdragon X Elite SoCs is basically identical. Apple's wo CPUs are out of reach, though. The old M2 Pro manages 25 % more points per Watt while the M3 almost manages twice the points per Watt. Unfortunately, we have no efficiency data for Apple's M4 yet since it is only available in the new iPad Pro and we are not able to perform accurate power measurements with an external screen. 

Update June 22nd: The single-core performance of the X1P-64-100 is on par with the X1E-78-100, which is hardly surprising considering the same core clock of 3.4 GHz. However, it seems that the Snapdragon X Plus is slightly more efficient here (at least our test unit) with better results compared to the two Snapdragon X Elite units.

Power Consumption / Cinebench 2024 Single Power Efficiency - external Monitor
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
12.7 Points per Watt +99%
Apple M2 Pro
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
8.98 Points per Watt +41%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Microsoft Surface Pro Copilot+
8.32 Points per Watt +30%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
6.76 Points per Watt +6%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
6.39 Points per Watt
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
3.11 Points per Watt -51%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
3.11 Points per Watt -51%
Power Consumption / Cinebench 2024 Single Power (external Monitor)
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
32.8 (26.6min, 27.7P1 - 71.3max) Watt * -94%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
32.8 (25.9min, 27P1 - 55.2max) Watt * -94%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
18.2 (15min, 16.3P1 - 26.9max) Watt * -8%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
16.9 (9.4min, 10.4P1 - 51.6max) Watt *
Apple M2 Pro
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
13.7 (9.84min, 12.2P1 - 36.1max) Watt * +19%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Microsoft Surface Pro Copilot+
13.1 (11.6min, 11.9P1 - 35max) Watt * +22%
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
11.1 (9.69min, 10.4P1 - 14max) Watt * +34%

* ... smaller is better

Multi-Core Performance & Efficiency

The Qualcomm SoCs also perform well in multi-core scenarios and Cinebench 2024 shows that they scale nicely. At 35 Watts, the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H (even at 50 Watts) is beaten and only the Ryzen 7 8845HS at 54 Watts is a bit faster. Apple's M2 Pro SoC is beaten when the Qualcomm chip can use 45 Watts or more. The Geekbench performance on the other hand is pretty much identical with different power settings and comparable to Apple's M3 Pro with 14 CPU cores. 

Qualcomm and some of the laptop manufacturers advertise the performance advantage over the Apple M3, and we can confirm that claim in multi-core tests. However, the M3 is usually passively cooled in most devices and the real competitors for the Snapdragon SoCs are the M3 Pro chips. We will add the data for the M3 Pro chips as quickly as possible.

Cinebench 2024 - CPU Multi Core
Apple M3 Max 16-Core
 
1532 Points +60%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Max Performance 50W
1132 Points +18%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Performance 45W
1033 Points +8%
Apple M2 Pro
MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
1030 Points +8%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Balanced 35W
956 Points
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Performance 54W
912 Points -5%
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core
 
908 Points -5%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ Best Performance
893 Points -7%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 50W
878 Points -8%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Balanced 40W
842 Points -12%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Surface Pro Copilot+ Best Performance
795 Points -17%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Whisper Mode 20W
786 Points -18%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 35W
752 Points -21%
Apple M3
MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
601 Points -37%
Apple M3
 
598 Points -37%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Quiet 20W
567 Points -41%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 20W
440 Points -54%
Geekbench 6.2 - Multi-Core
Apple M3 Max 16-Core
 
21264 Points +49%
Apple M4 (10 cores)
iPad Pro 13 (2024)
14690 Points +3%
Apple M2 Pro
MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
14568 Points +2%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ Best Performance
14458 Points +1%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Performance 45W
14422 Points +1%
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core
 
14412 Points +1%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Max Performance 50W
14391 Points +1%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Balanced 35W
14256 Points
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Whisper Mode 20W
14114 Points -1%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Surface Pro Copilot+ Best Performance
13278 Points -7%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Performance 54W
12940 Points -9%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Performance 54W
12700 Points -11%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 50W
12499 Points -12%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Balanced 40W
12450 Points -13%
Apple M3
 
12066 Points -15%
Apple M3
MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
11992 Points -16%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 35W
11149 Points -22%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Quiet 20W
11073 Points -22%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 20W
7732 Points -46%

Our efficiency numbers clearly indicate that the new Snapdragon CPUs are generally more efficient than the two chips from AMD and Intel in multi-core scenarios. The most efficient power range of the Snapdragon X Elite chips seems to be 20-30 Watts, where they even slightly beat the Ryzen 7 8845HS at 20 Watts. Apple's M2 Pro is also beaten in this range. However, if you increase the power limits, the Snapdragon X Elite loses efficiency quickly, especially at v45 Watts or more. This is not a good sign for the faster Snapdragon variants. Apple's M3 is much more efficient and based on efficiency comparisons we did with Cinebench R23, we know that the M3 Pro chips are much more efficient than the M2 Pro models. It is therefore safe to say that the M3 Pro CPUs will also be much more efficient than the Snapdragon models.

Update June 22nd: The Snapdragon X Plus in the Surface Pro Copilot+ is between 8-11 % slower compared to the Snapdragon X Elite in the Surface Pro OLED Copilot+. It is also 31 % faster than the Apple M3 in Cinebench 2024, but the advantage shrinks to about 10 % in Geekbench. The efficiency numbers of the Snapdragon X Plus is a bit worse compared to the X Elite SKU, but the difference is not huge. Depending in the TDP limits, these values can obviously be different for other devices.

Power Consumption / Cinebench 2024 Multi Power Efficiency - external Monitor
Apple M3
MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
28.3 Points per Watt +57%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ Best Performance
22.6 Points per Watt +26%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Whisper Mode 20W
21.8 Points per Watt +21%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Quiet 20W
20.5 Points per Watt +14%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Surface Pro Copilot+ Best Performance
20.5 Points per Watt +14%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Balanced 35W
18 Points per Watt
Apple M2 Pro
MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
17.1 Points per Watt -5%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Performance 45W
16.6 Points per Watt -8%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Balanced 40W
14.8 Points per Watt -18%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 35W
14.5 Points per Watt -19%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 20W
14.1 Points per Watt -22%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Max Performance 50W
13.1 Points per Watt -27%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 50W
12.7 Points per Watt -29%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Performance 54W
11 Points per Watt -39%
Power Consumption / Cinebench 2024 Multi Power (external Monitor)
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Max Performance 50W
86.3 (70.1min, 74.3P1 - 91.7max) Watt * -63%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Performance 54W
82.6 (78.1min, 79.9P1 - 85.1max) Watt * -56%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 50W
68.9 (65.4min, 66.4P1 - 74.5max) Watt * -30%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Performance 45W
62.1 (53.4min, 56.2P1 - 86.9max) Watt * -17%
Apple M2 Pro
MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
60.1 (12.2min, 45.4P1 - 63.5max) Watt * -13%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Balanced 40W
56.8 (53.7min, 54P1 - 68.2max) Watt * -7%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Balanced 35W
53 (46.4min, 47.4P1 - 84.1max) Watt *
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 35W
52 (49min, 50.3P1 - 53.8max) Watt * +2%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100
Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ Best Performance
39.6 (32.7min, 33.4P1 - 41.1max) Watt * +25%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus X1P-64-100
Surface Pro Copilot+ Best Performance
38.8 (32.5min, 34.3P1 - 40.5max) Watt * +27%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon Whisper Mode 20W
36.1 (32.6min, 33.3P1 - 79.8max) Watt * +32%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
RedmiBook Pro 14 2024 20W
31.1 (28.7min, 29.8P1 - 34.1max) Watt * +41%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
VIA 14 Pro (M24) Quiet 20W
27.7 (25.7min, 26P1 - 41max) Watt * +48%
Apple M3
MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
21.2 (17.1min, 17.7P1 - 33max) Watt * +60%

* ... smaller is better

GPU Performance & Efficiency

We use the native benchmarks 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Unlimited, Geekbench, as well as GFXBench for our GPU comparison. The benchmarks show big differences and the OpenCL performance, for example, is worse compared to the immediate rivals. the new Adreno GPU sits between the Radeon 780M and the Intel Arc Graphics with 8 Xe cores in 3DMark, but Apple's M3 chips (and obviously M4 & M2 Pro) are faster. 

Qualcomm's Adreno GPU is slightly faster than the 8-core GPU of the Apple M3 in the two High-Tier tests of GFXBench, but all the other M3 GPUs as well as the M2 Pro are once again faster.

3DMark / Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
12997 Points +106%
Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
12094 Points +91%
Apple M4 10-core GPU
Apple iPad Pro 13 2024
8889 Points +41%
Apple M3 10-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
8286 Points +31%
Apple M3 8-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
6968 Points +10%
Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
6529 Points +3%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
6323 Points
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
6248 Points -1%
AMD Radeon 780M
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
5972 Points -6%
Geekbench 6.2 / GPU OpenCL
Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
50447 Points +145%
Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
42798 Points +108%
AMD Radeon 780M
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
30818 Points +50%
AMD Radeon 780M
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
27410 Points +33%
Apple M3 10-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
30470 Points +48%
Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
29233 Points +42%
Apple M3 8-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
25825 Points +26%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
20551 Points
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Microsoft Surface Pro Copilot+
20185 Points -2%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
19879 Points -3%
GFXBench / 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
92.2 fps +86%
Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
79 fps +59%
Apple M4 10-core GPU
Apple iPad Pro 13 2024
55.1 fps +11%
Apple M3 10-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
52.6 fps +6%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
49.6 fps
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
48.8 fps -2%
Apple M3 8-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
44.5 fps -10%
Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
41.6 fps -16%
AMD Radeon 780M
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
27.1 fps -45%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
210.7 fps +99%
Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
178.7 fps +69%
Apple M3 10-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
120 fps +14%
Apple M4 10-core GPU
Apple iPad Pro 13 2024
114.5 fps +8%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
106.7 fps +1%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
105.7 fps
Apple M3 8-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
101.7 fps -4%
Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
91.5 fps -13%
AMD Radeon 780M
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
60.8 fps -42%
GFXBench / Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
Apple M2 Pro 19-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M2 Pro
568 fps +111%
Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
481.9 fps +79%
Apple M4 10-core GPU
Apple iPad Pro 13 2024
339.7 fps +26%
Apple M3 10-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
331 fps +23%
Apple M3 8-Core GPU
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3 8C GPU
282.3 fps +5%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
269.4 fps
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Adreno X1-85 (3.8 TFLOPS)
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED Copilot+
266.9 fps -1%
Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Xiaomi RedmiBook Pro 14 2024
206.4 fps -23%
AMD Radeon 780M
SCHENKER VIA 14 Pro (M24)
146.7 fps -46%

Our GPU efficiency results are similar to the CPU results, because the Adreno GPU (which should consume around 12-15 Watts based on our power measurements) is once again more efficient than the competition from AMD and Intel, but is clearly lagging behind the Apple GPUs.

Power Consumption / Witcher 3 ultra Efficiency (external Monitor)
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3
1.207 fps per Watt +66%
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
1.189 fps per Watt +64%
Apple M2
Apple MacBook Air 15 2023 M2 16 GB
1.116 fps per Watt +54%
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
1.096 fps per Watt +51%
Apple M3 Pro 12-Core
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M3 Pro
1.075 fps per Watt +48%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
0.725 fps per Watt
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U
Lenovo ThinkPad T14s G4-21F8002TGE
0.658 fps per Watt -9%
AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA
0.658 fps per Watt -9%
Intel Core Ultra 5 125H
Lenovo ThinkBook 13x G4 21KR0008GE
0.589 fps per Watt -19%
AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS
Framework Laptop 16
0.58 fps per Watt -20%
AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS
Lenovo ThinkPad P16v G1 AMD
0.571 fps per Watt -21%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Dell XPS 13 9340 Core Ultra 7
0.57 fps per Watt -21%
Intel Core Ultra 7 165U
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 2in1 G9 21KE004AGE
0.54 fps per Watt -26%
Intel Core i7-1355U
HP Pavilion Plus 14-ew0153TU
0.4698 fps per Watt -35%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9
0.437 fps per Watt -40%
Intel Core Ultra 9 185H
Huawei MateBook X Pro 2024
0.4246 fps per Watt -41%
Power Consumption / The Witcher 3 ultra (external Monitor)
AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS
Framework Laptop 16
171.3 (170.7min, 170.7P1 - 172max) Watt * -554%
AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS
Lenovo ThinkPad P16v G1 AMD
75.7 (74.7min, 74.8P1 - 78.6max) Watt * -189%
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
Lenovo IdeaPad Pro 5 14AHP9
69.8 (65.8min, 66.4P1 - 72.8max) Watt * -166%
Intel Core Ultra 9 185H
Huawei MateBook X Pro 2024
61 (59.1min, 59.4P1 - 75.7max) Watt * -133%
AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406HA
45 (34.3min, 34.4P1 - 50.7max) Watt * -72%
Apple M3 Pro 12-Core
Apple MacBook Pro 16 2023 M3 Pro
40 (38.1min, 38.3P1 - 41.6max) Watt * -53%
Intel Core Ultra 5 125H
Lenovo ThinkBook 13x G4 21KR0008GE
39.7 (36.7min, 36.8P1 - 49.1max) Watt * -52%
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U
Lenovo ThinkPad T14s G4-21F8002TGE
38.3 (37.6min, 37.8P1 - 44.1max) Watt * -46%
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
Dell XPS 13 9340 Core Ultra 7
36.5 (31.8min, 31.9P1 - 50.9max) Watt * -39%
Apple M3 Pro 11-Core
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3 Pro
32.8 (31min, 31.1P1 - 34.1max) Watt * -25%
Intel Core Ultra 7 165U
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 2in1 G9 21KE004AGE
30.2 (28.3min, 28.9P1 - 32.3max) Watt * -15%
Intel Core i7-1355U
HP Pavilion Plus 14-ew0153TU
28.1 (25min, 25.3P1 - 48.8max) Watt * -7%
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-78-100
Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED Snapdragon
26.2 (24.8min, 24.9P1 - 36.5max) Watt *
Apple M2
Apple MacBook Air 15 2023 M2 16 GB
25.1 (21.7min, 22.1P1 - 26.3max) Watt * +4%
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Pro 14 2023 M3
23.2 (22.2min, 22.3P1 - 23.9max) Watt * +11%
Apple M3
Apple MacBook Air 15 M3
21.9 (21.2min, 21.3P1 - 23.7max) Watt * +16%

* ... smaller is better

Power Consumption Idle & Video Playback

We also checked the power consumption of the laptops while idling and during playback of a 4K YouTube video (full screen). We once again used an external 4K display to avoid impacts from different panel sizes and technologies. The test video was our review of the Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED and we used the default browsers.

Laptop Idle consumpotion Consumption during
4K YouTube playback
Asus Vivobook S 15
(X1E-78-100)
6.27 Watts 7.79 Watts
Microsoft Surface Pro OLED
(X1E-80-100)
4.15 Watts 5.76 Watts
Apple MacBook Air 13 M3
Apple M3 8C GPU
3.01 Watts 3.53 Watts
Schenker Via 14 Pro
AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS
7.73 Watts 16.34 Watts
RedmiBook 14 Pro
Intel Core Ultra 7 155H
5.71 Watts 18.4 Watts

The idle measurements show that in addition to the SoC itself, the results also depend on the optimization by the manufacturers. The Snapdragon X Elite in the Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ is slightly more efficient compared to the Asus Vivobook S 15 OLED, for example. The RedmiBook Pro 14 with the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is sitting between the two Qualcomm chips, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS in the Schenker Via 14 Pro is lagging behind. We had no access to the respective U-series chips for this test, but we will add the data as soon as possible. Apple's M3 chip is still the most efficient SoC.

This is also the case for video playback, but the two Qualcomm SoCs are not far behind. Both the Intel as well as AMD system consume significantly more power in this scenario.

Verdict - Qualcomm with a successful premiere, but Apple stays ahead in terms of efficiency

In review: Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite
In review: Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite

Qualcomm's new Snapdragon X Elite chips are off to a good start and our analysis shows that the ARM SoCs are more efficient than current Intel and AMD chips, both in terms of the CPU as well as GPU tests. In the worst case, these SoCs are tied, which is quite an accomplishment for a completely new chip. 

The big issue is that Qualcomm's marketing was pretty aggressive and that raised high expectation, which are not really met. Yes, the Snapdragon X Elite chips offer more multi-core performance than Apple's M3, but the Apple-SoC is often cooled passively (like in the MacBook Air) and also has the upper hand in terms of single-core performance as well as efficiency. And the new M4 chip in the iPad Pro is a good indicator for the performance we can expect from the upcoming laptop SoCs.

You will definitely be disappointed if you were expecting passively cooled Snapdragon devices. So far, we have no information about such a device and high power limits have to be cooled, there is just no way around that. The Asus Vivobook S15 OLED is a bit quieter than AMD/Intel based laptops during everyday/light workloads, for example but it is very audible when you stress the processor. Microsoft's Surface Pro OLED Copilot+ is pretty quiet so far, but it is not cooled passively, either. We are already eager to see how the more powerful chips will behave.

Qualcomm manages to offer competitive products with their first-generation Snapdragon X Elite SoCs. AMD and Intel can usually be beaten in terms of performance and efficiency, but Apple is still ahead.

It is a successful launch from a technical standpoint and Windows runs extremely well on the new ARM processors. However, the new products raise the question whether the Snapdragon chips can become a permanent alternative for AMD and Intel. The additional AI features will be available on laptops with AMD Strix Point and Intel Lunar Lake as well, and there can be compatibility issues, especially when you want to play games. All in all, we are not sure why you should buy a Snapdragon laptop. it obviously depends on the manufacturers as well. Microsoft, for example, only offers the new Surface models (Surface Pro, Surface Laptop) with the ARM chips, so you do not really have a choice when you want such a device. But if you take the Vivobook, for instance, which is also available with AMD/Intel chips, it will mostly depend on the price.

There is also another aspect to consider. AMD's new Zen5 chips will be available within a couple of weeks and if you believe the rumors/leaks, they will be much faster and more efficient than Zen4. Intel's Lunar Lake processor should also arrive in a few months, and we also expect new MacBook chips in fall. The M4 in the iPad Pro already impressively shows where the journey is going for the Apple's laptop SoCs. Qualcomm could quickly fall behind the competition if it takes too much time before the second generation of Snapdragon X chips is launched.

Read all 36 comments / answer
static version load dynamic
Loading comments
Comment on this article
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Reviews > Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Analysis - More efficient than AMD & Intel, but Apple stays ahead
Andreas Osthoff, 2024-06-20 (Update: 2024-06-23)