Dell unveiled its reimagined XPS 13 at Computex 2026, and thanks to an introductory $599 price for students, it was immediately likened to Apple's MacBook Neo.

Windows Central Senior Editor Zac Bowden and I both got a chance to go hands-on with the new XPS 13 in Taipei, and we both came away with a similar opinion: it's way better than either of us expected, and it's surely going to be a great Neo alternative for Windows fans.

So, how exactly does the new XPS 13 compare to the MacBook Neo? Here's what you need to know.

Dell XPS 13 (2026) vs. MacBook Neo: Specifications

Specifications don't tell the whole story, but they're a good place to start before I get into a broader explanation of the similarities and differences between the XPS 13 and MacBook Neo.

Dell's new XPS 13 has the features you want in a laptop

Much of the hype surrounding the new Dell XPS 13 has to do with its feature set. Namely, features that fill in the MacBook Neo's blind spots.

For example, the XPS 13 has a backlit keyboard. That's a feature you expect to have in a laptop in 2026, no matter the price point.

The XPS 13 has a 1080p webcam, just like the Neo, but it adds an IR sensor for facial recognition through Windows Hello. The Neo also offers biometrics, but only of the touch/fingerprint variety.

The XPS 13 doubles up the Neo's speaker count, totaling 8W of output, and both laptops come with Dolby Atmos tuning. The XPS 13 also has newer Wi-Fi 7 wireless connectivity, with the Neo falling back to Wi-Fi 6E.

Then there are the ports. While the Neo might still offer a 3.5mm audio jack, its main selection of USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2) and USB-C 2.0 isn't exactly generous. It supports only one external display at 4K/60Hz.

The XPS 13 with Wildcat Lake chip (Core 5 320) has dual USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2), and the XPS 13 with Panther Lake (Core Ultra 7 355) has dual Thunderbolt 4. If you plan on using your laptop with more than one external display, Dell's PC is the right choice.

The new XPS 13 is lighter than the MacBook Neo

Like the MacBook Neo, the XPS 13 is built from aluminum and feels every bit as premium as its more expensive siblings.

When I first handled the XPS 13, I was impressed with how light it was. At just 2.2 pounds (1kg), it's significantly more portable than the Neo at 2.7 pounds (1.23kg).

The XPS 13 is just as thin as the Neo at 0.5 inches (12.7mm), but it does have a more compact footprint.

TL;DR? The new XPS 13 has more attractive features than the MacBook Neo, including a backlit keyboard, an IR camera, four speakers, and more powerful ports.

Dell's XPS 13 has a higher-res display with 120Hz refresh rate

Dell is also putting Apple behind it with the 13.4-inch display in the XPS 13. Not only is it slightly larger (by 0.4 inches) despite the XPS 13's smaller chassis, but it also has a higher resolution at 2560x1600 compared to 2408x1506.

The biggest difference, however, is in the refresh rate. The XPS 13 pushes all the way up to 120Hz and drops as low as 30Hz. It's all handled through a variable refresh rate that adjusts the screen based on how you're using the PC.

At 120Hz, you're getting far more eye comfort than the locked 60Hz refresh rate on the Neo. And at 30Hz, battery saving gets even better in the XPS 13.

The XPS 13's touch display hits about 500 nits of brightness and has VESA DisplayHDR 400 certification, as well as an anti-glare finish. It manages 100% DCI-P3 color reproduction, and it comes with Dolby Vision.

The Neo's display is not touch-enabled, but it does hit 500 nits of brightness and includes Dolby Vision certification.

TL;DR? The XPS 13's display is the superior option compared to the MacBook Neo, with a higher resolution and higher refresh rate.

Apple's A18 Pro chip has strong competition from Intel Wildcat Lake

Despite being aimed at budget devices, Intel's new Wildcat Lake CPUs offer respectable performance and efficiency that rival Apple's A18 Pro. I'll hold off on a deeper dive until we test the XPS 13 firsthand, but I can say that early Intel Core 5 320 benchmarks show a promising level of power.

In Geekbench 6, the Core 5 320 hits 2,575 single-core and 8,000 multi-core average scores, whereas the A18 Pro hits closer to 3,500 single-core and 8,500 multi-core.

👉 "We want this to be their first XPS": I found out more about Dell's XPS 13 strategy — and why it's the perfect starter PC

In PassMark CPU tests, the Core 5 320 hits 3,853 single-core and 15,033 multi-core scores. The A18 Pro managed scores of 4,086 (single-core) and 12,837 (multi-core).

If you do need more power, the XPS 13 will also be available with the Core Ultra 7 355 post-launch. It's important to also point out that the XPS 13 comes with up to 32GB of RAM and up to a 1TB M.2 PCIe 4.0 SSD. So while the entry-level models take on the Neo, the higher-end models are much better cut out for advanced users.

Battery life will be a big point of contention, I'm sure, but for now, I don't have concrete XPS 13 numbers. I can say that Dell is using a larger 52Wh battery with 800ED cells (providing extra density without taking up as much space).

Dell is claiming up to 17 hours of battery life when streaming video. Apple claims about 16 hours of life for the same task. It should be a close comparison, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the Neo take the award for best battery life, even if it's a small margin.

TLDR? Dell's XPS 13 should put up a strong fight against the MacBook Neo's performance and battery life.

Dell XPS 13 (2026) vs. MacBook Neo: Which should you buy?

If you're a fan of Windows, Dell just gave you the perfect Neo competitor with the XPS 13. Students can pay the same $599 for a laptop with a superior display, more powerful ports, a keyboard backlight, facial recognition, quad speakers, and more.

If you're a regular buyer, the introductory price only jumps up to $699, and beyond that, there are options to boost RAM to 32GB and storage to 1TB.

Apple, I think, will hold the edge on performance and efficiency, at least until the Core Ultra 7 355 config of the XPS 13 becomes available post-launch. But I'll have more to share once we actually get an XPS 13 to test first-hand in the lab.

The XPS 13 for 2026 is expected to launch in June, while the MacBook Neo is available now.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Microsoft has unveiled its new Surface for Business portfolio for 2026, with three new devices on the way. The 13-inch Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) joins the Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition), as well as the smaller 13-inch Surface Laptop for Business (1st Edition).

I'm focusing here on the new Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) model to see how it compares to the Surface Pro 11 and the Surface Pro for Business (11th Edition). Is it worth an upgrade? Let's find out.

Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) vs. Surface Pro 11: Specifications

Here's a look at the raw specs of the new Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) and 2024's Surface Pro 11 with Qualcomm Snapdragon X chips. I've also included the Surface Pro for Business (11th Edition) with Intel chips for a more complete view.

Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) vs. Surface Pro 11: Price & availability

The new Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) makes its debut at $1,949.99 for a model with Intel Core Ultra 5 335 CPU, 16GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, and LCD display. That price doesn't include a Type Cover or Surface Pen.

Prices climb all the way to $2,799.99 for a model with 5G, 32GB of RAM, and otherwise identical specs. This being a business Surface version, it's available directly from Microsoft.

It appears that the Core Ultra 7 models are not available directly from Microsoft's online store right now. Instead, Microsoft asks you to directly contact its sales team via phone.

The last-gen Surface Pro 11 is quite a bit cheaper, with prices at the time of writing starting at about $1,199 for a model with a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus chip, 16GB of RAM, 512GB SSD, and an LCD display.

That price is thanks to a $300 discount, and models usually start at $1,499. If you want to go with the more powerful Snapdragon X Elite chip, OLED display, 16GB RAM, and 512GB SSD, you're looking at $1,799.99.

There's also the Surface Pro for Business (11th Edition) with Intel chips starting at $1,699.99. This price gets you a Core Ultra 5 chip, 16GB of RAM, 256GB SSD, and an LCD display.

If you upgrade to a Core Ultra 7 chip, a model with OLED display, 16GB RAM, and 256GB SSD starts at $1,999.99. Prices climb to 2,899.99 for 32GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD.

Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) vs. Surface Pro 11: Design & features

The new Surface Pro for Business (2026) doesn't have any major changes to its design compared to the previous generation. It weighs the same 1.97 pounds (895g) as the Pro 11, which is just slightly heavier than the Pro 11 for Business.

Its dimensions are identical, and it still has the same Surface stand on the back and Surface Connect port for a Type Cover.

Ports haven't changed either, with dual Thunderbolt 4 handling practically everything else. A Nano-SIM slot is available in 5G models; these are restricted to the Surface Pro 11 and the Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition).

Dual 2W speakers continue to offer Dolby Atmos tuning, all models have a 1440p front-facing camera with IR for Windows Hello, as well as a 10MP rear-facing camera.

Wi-Fi 7 handles wireless internet, Bluetooth 5.4 handles wireless accessories, and, as mentioned, some models have optional 5G connectivity. That's a nice pickup considering the Surface Pro for Business (11th Edition) lacked any 5G.

Surface Pro for Business 12th Edition vs. Surface Pro 11: Display

Microsoft added an anti-reflective finish to its Surface Pro for Business (11th Edition), and it's here again for the 12th Edition model. This sets it apart from the standard Surface Pro 11's glossier finish.

Otherwise, you're still getting a 13-inch touch display in either LCD or OLED, with a 2880x1920 resolution (267 PPI), 120Hz dynamic refresh rate, Dolby Vision support, and brightness up to 600 nits.

Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) vs. Surface Pro 11: Performance and battery

Here's where the new Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) begins to separate itself from its predecessors.

It arrives with Intel's "Panther Lake" Core Ultra Series 3 chips, including the Core Ultra 5 335 and Core Ultra 7 366H. These are the next generation of chips compared to the Intel Series 2 CPUs found in the Surface Pro for Business (11th Edition).

Although we haven't yet had a chance to directly test the Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition)'s performance, I can make some assumptions based on our Surface Laptop 8 review.

Windows Central Editor-in-Chief Daniel Rubino discovered that the Core Ultra X7 368H chip, which is more powerful than the Surface Pro's Ultra 7 366H, fell behind the Snapdragon X Elite in the Surface Pro 11 Cinebench test.

In Geekbench, the Core Ultra X7 368H came out ahead of the Snapdragon X Elite chip, but keep in mind the new Pro for Business only has the Core Ultra 7 366H, which isn't quite as powerful.

What about efficiency and battery life?

Considering Qualcomm's Snapdragon X/X2 platform continues to offer superior battery life in laptops we test, I don't expect the Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) to be the more efficient laptop.

I'll update this comparison once we test it first-hand, but for now, I wouldn't recommend buying the new Surface Pro for Business (2026) with the assumption that it will run longer between charges.

Which should you buy?

The new Surface Pro for Business (12th Edition) doesn't reinvent the device, but it does update the performance hardware to the latest Intel "Panther Lake" Core Ultra Series 3 chips.

The hardware update, alongside the usual enterprise security features, makes the new Surface Pro (2026) ideal for professionals who prefer an x86 system.

Microsoft has stated that it plans to release a new Surface Pro with Qualcomm Snapdragon X2 chips in the coming months, and I expect that it will offer superior performance and efficiency.

As it stands now, the best option for regular Windows users remains the Surface Pro 11 with Snapdragon X Systems-on-Chip (SoC). It's the most affordable, it has excellent performance and efficiency, and it's readily available from more retailers.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Microsoft has unveiled four new Surface devices for 2026, including the Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) in 13.8- and 15-inch sizes.

Arriving first with Intel's latest Panther Lake Core Ultra Series 3 chips, the new Surface Laptop 8 for Business models bring a handful of upgrades compared to the Surface Laptop 7 and Surface Laptop 7 for Business.

Here's how the PCs compare to help you keep track of new features, pricing, and what's best for your needs.

Surface Laptop for Business 8th Edition vs. Surface Laptop 7: Specifications

Here's a quick breakdown of the specs that go into the new Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) and 2024's Surface Laptop 7 for Business with Intel chips. I've also included specs for the regular Surface Laptop 7 and Surface Laptop 7 for Business with Qualcomm chips.

Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition): Pricing and availability

The new Surface Laptop 8 for Business starts at $1,949.99 for the 13.8-inch version; that's $500 more than last generation's starting price, suggesting that Microsoft is hoping to sell this PC to enterprise customers with deep pockets.

From the previous generation, the 13.8-inch Surface Laptop 7 for Business with Snapdragon X chips starts at a more reasonable $1,449.99. The 15-inch model starts at $1,749.99.

If you're shopping for a Surface Laptop 7 for Business using Intel Core Ultra (Series 2) chips, you're looking at a starting price of $1,699.99 for the 13.8-inch model and $1,899.99 for the 15-inch model.

Why does the new Surface Laptop 8 for Business make its debut at a significantly higher price? As Microsoft explains, it's all about the ongoing RAM and storage crisis that's driving up costs for all PC manufacturers.

Beyond the component supply issues, the new Surface Laptop 8 for Business also comes with some notable upgrades that might help convince you that it's right for your needs. Let's explore.

Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) vs. Surface Laptop 7: What's new?

Aside from the updated performance hardware, which I'll tackle in the next section, the Surface Laptop 8 for Business has a few new features compared to its older siblings.

It's just slightly heavier (29 grams) than the Surface Laptop 7 with Snapdragon, yet it keeps the iconic design almost identical between generations.

👉 Microsoft Surface Laptop 7 review: This is the best laptop. Period.

Port selection hasn't really changed, unless you count an upgrade from USB-A 3.1 to USB-A 3.2. The larger 15-inch model still holds the best selection of ports, with the addition of a microSD card reader and an optional smart card reader.

The new Surface Laptop 8 retains its lauded haptic touchpad, and its keyboard is still just as good as ever.

Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) gets new display options

Perhaps the biggest change to the new Surface Laptop 8 is its display options.

The 13.8-inch model is now available with an optional integrated privacy screen with an anti-glare finish. If you're working in public and want to hide your info from passers-by, you hit one button, and it makes the screen impossible to see if you're not facing it directly.

The 13.8-inch display is otherwise the same as that from the previous generation, with a 2304x1536 resolution (201 PPI), touch functionality, Dolby Vision IQ support, and a dynamic 120Hz refresh rate. If you don't opt for the privacy screen, it comes with an anti-reflective finish to further cut down on glare.

The 15-inch Surface Laptop 8 display saw some bigger display changes. It's now been bumped up to a 3270x2180 resolution (262 PPI) compared to the 2496x1664 resolution (201 PPI) from the previous generation.

Windows Central Editor-in-Chief Daniel Rubino tested the 13.8-inch privacy display's color and brightness in his Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) review. He saw 100% sRGB, 89% AdobeRGB, and 100% P3 reproduction. Brightness hit about 500 nits, suggesting that you're not missing out on anything if you decide to go with the privacy screen.

Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) vs. Surface Laptop 7: Performance & battery

Aside from display changes, the new Surface Laptop 8 for Business is largely a performance upgrade.

Editor-in-Chief Daniel Rubino tested the 13.8-inch Surface Laptop 8 with a "Panther Lake" Intel Core Ultra X7 368H processor inside. It's the top-tier chip available, boasting 16 cores and a boost frequency up to 5.0GHz.

It bests the Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80) chip in Geekbench 6 tests, though it falls behind in Cinebench. As Rubino notes, "Intel is still a beast" when it comes to raw multi-threaded power.

Unfortunately, the chip comes in slightly behind the Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80) chip found in the Surface Laptop 7 with Cinebench testing. ARM is great at sustained performance, and it shows here.

One area where the new Surface Laptop 8 pulls ahead is in SSD speeds. It's practically twice as fast as the SSD found in the Surface Laptop 7, making the system feel overall more responsive. That's most important if you work with large files.

Has battery life improved in the Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition)?

Battery life in the new Surface Laptop 8 is one of the main complaints from Rubino's review, with the 13.8-inch model featuring a 54Wh battery only getting about 8 hours of real-world usage from a charge.

Qualcomm's Snapdragon X chips still offer the best efficiency, and with Surface expected to launch Snapdragon X2 Surface models for consumers (non-business) later this year, that trend is expected to continue.

Is the new Surface Laptop for Business (8th Edition) right for you?

The new Surface Laptop 8 for Business is probably not the mainstream PC update you're hoping for. It's a specialized PC designed specifically for enterprise environments, with features and a price tag to match.

What I will say is that the new Surface Laptop 8 for Business privacy screen option will likely be the main attraction for anyone who was on the fence anyway. It's an invaluable tool if you often work on the road.

For everyone else, I recommend waiting for the consumer Snapdragon X2 models expected in the next couple of months.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

LG quietly makes some truly thin, light, and premium laptops that, unfortunately, often go unnoticed by mainstream buyers. The company recently launched an updated gram Book 15 for 2026, and its $699 starting price caught my eye.

That's dangerously close to the MacBook Neo's baseline $599, and at the time of writing, the LG gram Book 15 is actually discounted by $100 to line it up nicely with Apple's massively popular notebook. I doubt that was a coincidence.

So, how does the LG gram Book 15 compare to the MacBook Neo? Let's find out.

LG gram Book 15 vs. MacBook Neo: Specifications

What does the LG gram Book 15 get right?

LG's gram Book 15 has the right $699 ($599 on sale) starting price to turn some heads, but is it actually worth that much?

For some, definitely. LG created this laptop as a lightweight daily driver for those who mainly focus on productivity, email, browsing, and streaming. There's really no sense spending thousands on a laptop if that's all you plan to use it for, which is exactly where the gram Book fits in.

The use of an Intel Core Ultra 5 115U is a tad confusing, especially considering the last generation of gram Book used a newer Core Ultra Series 2 chip, but with eight cores and a Turbo frequency up to 4.2GHz, it certainly has the juice to multitask.

The baseline model comes with 8GB of RAM, the same as the Neo, but it has twice as much storage (512GB) compared to the introductory MacBook model. LG also offers 16GB and 32GB memory configs, something that Apple refuses to do with the Neo.

A gram Book 15 with 32GB of DDR5 currently costs $799 after a $300 discount, which is quite a decent offer if you know you can't live without 8GB.

Better yet, the gram Book has two M.2 SSD slots inside, and they're accessible after purchase for upgrades. Everything inside the Neo is locked down.

Port selection also falls in favor of the gram Book. It has one USB-A 3.2 (Gen 1), one USB-A 2.0, two USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2), HDMI, and a 3.5mm audio jack.

The MacBook Neo offers just one USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2), one USB-C 2.0, and a 3.5mm audio jack. Wi-Fi 6E comes with the Neo, while the gram Book falls back to Wi-Fi 6. Is that a difference noticeable by the average user? Absolutely not.

The LG gram Book 15 has a 51Wh battery capacity that easily bests the 36.5Wh option in the Neo. That's a significant jump, and despite Intel's chip not being as efficient as the Apple A18 Pro, battery life should ultimately compare decently.

The audio setup in both laptops involves dual speakers with Dolby Atmos tuning. In general, there's not a lot of difference, although speakers installed in an aluminum chassis often sound better than those encased in plastic.

TL;DR: The LG gram Book 15 is a capable laptop with superior RAM and storage options, more ports, and an attractive price that compares to the MacBook Neo.

What does the MacBook Neo get right?

Apple's MacBook Neo is built from a solid chunk of aluminum, whereas the gram Book uses a plastic chassis with a metallic finish. If you prefer a more rigid feel, Apple is the way to go.

The MacBook Neo is also considerably lighter and smaller than the gram Book, although you have to keep in mind that the former is a 13-inch device while the latter is 15 inches.

Speaking of the displays, the Neo easily wins with a 2408x1506 resolution, taller 16:10 aspect ratio, 500 nits brightness, and Dolby Vision. The only saving grace in the gram Book is touch functionality. It's otherwise not as high-res or bright.

Above the Neo's display is a 1080p webcam, whereas the gram Book has just an HD (720p) camera to work with. It does, however, add a privacy shutter.

Now on to performance. Apple's A18 Pro System-on-Chip (SoC) is an impressive piece of hardware, and despite it originally being used for mobile devices, it holds up very well compared to the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U in the gram Book.

The A18 Pro can deliver superior single- and multi-core performance, as well as superior integrated GPU performance. If you want the most power and efficiency, you'll want to stick with the Neo.

TL;DR: The MacBook Neo offers better performance and efficiency, a superior display, a higher-res webcam, and a sleek aluminum chassis.

LG gram Book 15 vs. MacBook Neo: Windows and macOS

The Windows 11 vs. macOS debate is always a lively one. I usually end up at the conclusion that I'm not likely to change your mind if you already live in one ecosystem or the other.

But if you're new to both operating systems, I can offer a condensed comparison. Windows 11 is a more flexible OS that can run many different tools and apps. It's much better for gaming, although I wouldn't recommend buying the gram Book as primarily a gaming system.

If you prefer a super simple and sleek OS, you'll probably enjoy macOS more. It might not be as flexible or offer as many options, but it is consistent and makes sense for creators. It's also a great choice if you already have an iPhone or iPad, since Apple's ecosystem is so comprehensive.

LG gram Book 15 vs. MacBook Neo: Which should you buy?

The LG gram Book 15 for 2026 has an attractive price, and if you're sold on Windows 11, it could be a great choice for lighter productivity work, streaming, web browsing, email, etc. The fact that storage is upgradeable after purchase and RAM can be configured up to 32GB means there's a good chance of it remaining relevant for years to come.

On the other hand, if you can stomach macOS, Apple's MacBook Neo delivers a whole lot of laptop for a low price. It's built to a higher standard, its display is superior, and its SoC is more powerful and efficient. The 8GB RAM cap is disappointing, as is the port selection, but for the average user (like a student), it's a great option starting at $599.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

The Surface Laptop 13-inch made its debut in June 2025 and was aimed at users who want a lighter, smaller laptop as a daily companion. Although it arrived with an $899 starting price tag, a recent Surface price hike now has it starting at $1,149.99.

Apple then shook up the budget laptop market in March 2026 with its $599 MacBook Neo. That price hasn't changed since its more recent launch, and it's one of the best laptops you can find in that price range.

Is the Surface Laptop 13-inch worth it over the MacBook Neo despite the growing price difference? Let's find out.

Surface Laptop 13-inch vs. MacBook Neo: Specifications

Surface Laptop 13-inch vs. MacBook Neo: Design and features

The MacBook Neo and the Surface Laptop 13-inch are of a similar size, with the Neo coming in at 0.5 inches thin compared to 0.61 inches. Despite the difference, both laptops weigh in at 2.7 pounds, making them both great options for an everyday carry.

They're both built to a rather high standard, as expected from Surface and MacBook, using aluminum for rigidity and an overall premium feel. The Surface Laptop 13-inch comes in three different colors, and the MacBook Neo four. If you want a more lively finish, the Neo is the way to go.

Both laptops feature a 1080p webcam with no facial recognition abilities. The Surface Laptop 13-inch does come with a fingerprint reader, and you can get Touch ID on the upgraded $699 MacBook Neo model. The most affordable $599 version does not offer the feature.

Audio is similar across both laptops. Each has two speakers with Dolby Atmos tuning, as well as a 3.5mm audio jack for connecting headsets and mics.

Joining the audio jack on the Surface Laptop 13-inch are two USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2) and one USB-A 3.1. The MacBook Neo otherwise offers just one USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2) port and a rather wimpy USB-C 2.0 port.

It'd be nice if both laptops had USB4 to handle high-performance peripherals and docks. Nevertheless, the Surface Laptop edges out the Neo.

As for wireless connectivity, you get more modern Wi-Fi 7 with the Surface Laptop. It's joined by Bluetooth 5.4. Conversely, the MacBook Neo offers older Wi-Fi 6E but newer Bluetooth 6.

Neither laptop offers a haptic touchpad; instead, they use traditional mechanical fare. Where the Surface Laptop 13" pulls ahead is with a backlit keyboard. Although the Neo's keyboard is comfortable, a lack of backlight could be a dealbreaker for some.

TL;DR: The MacBook Neo is thinner than the Surface Laptop 13-inch, but its set of features, including a lack of a backlit keyboard and weak port selection, leaves something to be desired.

Surface Laptop 13-inch vs. MacBook Neo: Display

Surface and MacBook generally always offer superb displays, but you can see where some cost is cut in these PCs.

The Surface has a 13-inch touch display with 1920x1280 resolution for a 3:2 aspect ratio. That's 178 pixels per inch (PPI). It tops out at a 60Hz refresh rate, it hits about 400 nits brightness, and it comes with Dolby Vision certification.

The Neo also has a 13-inch display, except it doesn't have touch functionality. It does have a higher refresh rate at 2408x1506 (219 PPI) for a 16:10 aspect ratio. It, too, tops out at a 60Hz refresh rate. It gets slightly brighter, up to 500 nits, and it has Dolby Vision.

TL;DR: With a higher resolution and brightness, the MacBook Neo's display wins out against the Surface Laptop 13-inch. At least for those who don't absolutely need touch functionality.

Surface Laptop 13-inch vs. MacBook Neo: Performance and battery

Apple's MacBook Neo runs on its own A18 Pro System-on-Chip (SoC), complete with 8GB of LPDDR5 RAM, a 5-core integrated GPU, and a Neural Processing Unit (NPU) capable of about 35 TOPS of power for AI.

The Surface Laptop 13-inch uses Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Plus (8-core) chip paired with 16GB of LPDDR5x RAM, Adreno integrated GPU, and Hexagon NPU at 45 TOPS.

With two extra cores to play with, the Surface Laptop 13-inch comes out well ahead in multi-core benchmarks. However, the A18 Pro chip does an outstanding job with single-core performance.

You can see the differences in the performance table below.

Apple's A18 Pro also has a strong 5-core GPU that comes out ahead of the Adreno chip in the Snapdragon X Plus. Neither laptop is going to be great for gaming, but creators using specialized software should take note.

Unfortunately, one of the Neo's main weaknesses is its 8GB RAM ceiling. If you're a heavy multitasker, the default 16GB of RAM in the Surface Laptop 13-inch might be too tempting to pass up.

This is far from a complete performance picture, but you get the idea; both laptops have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to raw power.

As for battery life, the Surface Laptop 13-inch has a larger 50Wh capacity compared to the 36.5Wh capacity in the MacBook Neo.

How does that translate to real-world battery life? When our friends at Tom's Hardware reviewed the MacBook Neo, they ran a battery test alongside the Surface Laptop 13-inch.

The test, involving web browsing, video streaming, and OpenGL graphics tests with screen brightness locked at 150 nits, reveals a large gap.

The Surface Laptop 13-inch lasted for 17 hours and 14 minutes, whereas the MacBook Neo ran for 13 hours and 28 minutes. That's nearly four hours of extra life from the Surface PC.

TL;DR: The Surface Laptop 13-inch offers nearly four hours more battery life, and it excels in multi-core workloads. However, the MacBook Neo comes out ahead with single-core CPU performance and overall GPU performance.

Surface Laptop 13-inch vs. MacBook Neo: Windows and MacOS

I doubt I'm going to change your mind about operating systems (OS) if you're already entrenched in one or the other, but since these laptops are aimed at students and more casual users, I'll offer a condensed comparison between Windows 11 and macOS.

Windows 11 is a far more flexible OS in terms of software and customization. Think of it like a toy box with a massive variety of tools inside, no matter the task at hand. It's also the better choice for gaming, though that doesn't really apply to a PC like the Surface Laptop 13-inch.

MacOS, on the other hand, is designed to be super simple and sleek. Think of it like a really pretty toy box that only holds specific toys that are guaranteed to operate consistently. It's the go-to choice for many creators, and it excels if you're already using an iPad or iPhone.

TL;DR: Windows 11 and macOS each have their own strengths and weaknesses. I recommend trying both before making a final decision, as it largely comes down to personal preference.

Surface Laptop 13-inch vs. MacBook Neo: Which should you buy?

From a hardware and features standpoint, the Surface PC is hard to ignore. But that's far from the whole story. Windows Central Senior Editor Zac Bowden remarked in his Surface Laptop 13-inch review:

"In a vacuum, it's a good device. Its build quality is superb, the keyboard and trackpad are great, and its lightweight chassis and compact size make it an excellent travel companion."

Bowden also notes that the biggest problem is the price, which at the time of his review was $899 to start. Now that it's risen to $1,149, those issues are only magnified.

The MacBook Neo's $599 starting price is nearly half that of the Surface Laptop 13-inch. With this framing around price, many of the Neo's drawbacks quickly fade into the background.

If you're a dedicated Windows user, I doubt the Neo will ever be for you. But for those without OS allegiance who just want a quality budget laptop, it's almost impossible to recommend the Surface Laptop 13-inch.

Microsoft is planning a Surface refresh this year, and I'll be sure to update this piece when the new PCs arrive.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

ASUS recently launched its new Zenbook A16 with Qualcomm Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme chips, and aside from being one of the lightest 16-inch laptops on the market, it's also a great way to gauge the newfound performance and efficiency.

ASUS also has a Zenbook S 16 paired with AMD Ryzen AI CPUs, and it shares a lot of similarities with the A16. Now that my colleague Ben Wilson has reviewed both PCs here at Windows Central, I've put together a comparison to help you choose the best laptop.

How do ASUS Zenbook A16 and Zenbook S 16 specs compare?

This specs table includes the new Zenbook A16 (UX3607) with Snapdragon X2 chips, as well as the Zenbook S 16 (UM5606) available with both Ryzen AI 300 and newer Ryzen AI 400 chips.

I expect the Zenbook S 16 with the older AMD CPUs will slowly disappear as models sell out, but it's still worth including here.

Is the Zenbook A16 lighter than the Zenbook S 16?

A big part of the Zenbook A16's appeal is its lightweight magnesium alloy chassis that weighs just 2.65 pounds (1.2kg). Although the Zenbook S 16 certainly should not be considered heavy as far as 16-inch laptops go, it does weigh in at 3.31 pounds (1.5kg).

👉 ASUS Zenbook S 16 (UM5606) review: AMD's new AI CPU challenges Snapdragon X and stomps Intel Meteor Lake

Both laptops use what ASUS calls "Ceraluminum," which is a ceramic-coated magnesium alloy that helps reduce smudges, fingerprints, and scratches.

Despite the weight difference, the Zenbook S 16 is actually the thinner laptop, measuring 0.51 inches at its thickest point compared to 0.65 inches on the A16.

Features across both laptops are quite similar. Both PCs offer Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4, both have six speakers and a 1080p webcam with IR for Windows Hello, and both offer a similar selection of ports.

Despite the thin designs, both laptops have dual USB4, USB-A 3.2 (Gen 2), HDMI 2.1, an SD 4.0 card reader, and a 3.5mm audio jack. Neither PC has a haptic touchpad, opting instead for a traditional mechanical pointer.

TL;DR: The Zenbook A16 is the lighter laptop, but it is slightly thicker than the Zenbook S 16. Features like camera, audio, and ports are so similar that your decision will likely come down to other factors.

Are there any major differences in display options?

Because the Zenbook S 16 is currently in flux between two generations, there are two display options to watch out for. The main difference between them is maximum brightness; older models top out at around 400 nits even with HDR enabled.

Newer Zenbook S 16 models with Ryzen AI 400 chips use what appears to be the same display as found in the A16, with peak HDR brightness of 1,100 nits and VESA DisplayHDR True Black 1000 certification. They're available in touch with pen support and non-touch options.

These OLED screens otherwise offer a smooth 120Hz refresh rate, a fast 0.2ms response time, and a crisp 2880x1800 (2.8K) resolution. The screens offer 100% DCI-P3 color reproduction and have PANTONE validation, making them great for creative work.

TL;DR: Older Zenbook S 16 models with Ryzen AI 300 chips don't have as bright a display as the newer models or the Zenbook A16. If you want the best, go with one of the new laptops.

Snapdragon X2 efficiency and performance is evident

The Zenbook A16 we tested most recently has the Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme (X2E-94) chip inside for Windows on ARM. This isn't the most powerful CPU that ASUS offers; you can opt for the X2E-96 chip instead if you want more power.

👉 I tested ASUS' Zenbook A16 with Qualcomm's incredible Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme CPU, and I'm convinced: This is everything a flagship Windows laptop should be

The Zenbook S 16 model we tested is also not using the most powerful AMD chip. We clocked the last-gen Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 for our benchmarks, but ASUS now offers up to a Ryzen AI 9 HX 470. On average, you can expect about an 8% performance uplift between generations.

Working with the numbers I have, it's clear that the new Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme chip has a lot of power, blowing the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 away in Geekbench and Cinebench scores.

We still plan to do more Qualcomm Adreno GPU testing now that proper drivers are available. AMD's Radeon integrated GPU in the Ryzen AI chips is an impressive piece of hardware, and I suspect Snapdragon will have a hard time keeping up.

A note on app compatibility: Snapdragon chips require ARM64-based apps or emulation via Microsoft's Prism layer. This has become almost a non-issue for the average user, and unless you absolutely know that one of the apps you need to use won't work with Windows on ARM, I wouldn't let this differentiation stand in the way of your final purchase.

After using the Zenbook A16 regularly, we were able to grab a relatively accurate Windows 11 battery report. It showed an average of 16 hours of life from a charge when tackling a regular workflow. In PCMark 10's local video playback test, the A16 lasted 20 hours and 30 minutes.

For the Zenbook S 16, we ran PCMark 10's Modern Office rundown and saw 13 hours and 11 minutes of runtime. While these aren't exactly 1:1 comparisons, the 16 hours we saw from the A16 when hitting a regular workload shows off Qualcomm's efficiency.

TL;DR: If you want the best mix of power and efficiency, the Snapdragon-powered Zenbook A16 is the better choice. However, AMD's Ryzen AI 400 models aren't far behind, and you might have better luck with app compatibility in certain specialized cases.

ASUS Zenbook A16 vs. Zenbook S 16: Which should you choose?

The Zenbook A16 model we reviewed, with a Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme (X2E-94) chip, 48GB of LPDDR5x RAM, and 1TB SSD, costs $1,699.99 at Best Buy. That's a fairly steep price for entry, but it does have a lot of memory, storage, and that gorgeous OLED display.

Comparatively, the Zenbook S 16 with last-gen Ryzen AI 9 365 CPU, 24GB of RAM, 1TB SSD, and a dimmer OLED display usually costs $1,499.99 but is often on sale due to its age.

👉 I compare the new ASUS Zenbook A16 to show how it dominates Apple's sleek notebook in key areas

Should you instead opt for a newer Zenbook S 16 model with Ryzen AI 9 465 CPU, 32GB of RAM, 1TB SSD, and OLED display, you're looking at about $1,899 at Best Buy.

That makes the Zenbook A16 a far better value with all things considered. My advice? Unless you absolutely need an AMD CPU or prefer a thin chassis over a light chassis, stick with the Zenbook A16. Both are great laptops, true, but you can get more PC for a lower price with the A16.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

When Apple introduced its new MacBook Air 15 with M5 chip on March 3, 2026, I knew it'd only be a short while before it began seeing serious competition from new Windows laptops powered by Qualcomm's latest Snapdragon X2 silicon.

ASUS has now launched its new Zenbook A16 for 2026, a laptop that Windows Central Senior Editor Ben Wilson tested and reviewed thoroughly, only to have a hard time finding any faults.

👉 I tested ASUS' Zenbook A16 with Qualcomm's incredible Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme CPU, and I'm convinced: This is everything a flagship Windows laptop should be

I've put together this comparison between the Zenbook A16 and the MacBook Air 15 based on design, display, features, performance, and battery life to help you make the right decision.

How do ASUS Zenbook A16 and MacBook Air 16 specs compare?

Before I get into a more detailed explanation of the similarities and differences between the Zenbook A16 and MacBook Air 15, here's a table with raw specifications.

It's worth noting that ASUS lists a Zenbook A16 model (UX3607QA) sporting a last-gen Snapdragon X (X1-26) chip starting at 16G of RAM and 512GB of storage. This model is perhaps arriving later on in different markets.

The UX3607OA model I compare in the table above is the one that's arriving first for US markets.

Is the ASUS Zenbook A16 lighter than the MacBook Air 15?

Despite having a larger display, a larger battery, and overall slightly larger dimensions, the ASUS Zenbook A16 weighs less than the MacBook Air 15. It's not exactly a close margin, either, with the A16 coming in at 2.65 pounds (1.2kg) and the MacBook Air 15 weighing 3.3 pounds (1.51kg).

I also want to note that the Zenbook A16's footprint isn't wildly larger than the Air 15. The Z-height (thickness) is really the biggest difference, with Apple's laptop maintaining its lead at 0.45 inches (1.15cm) compared to 0.54-0.65 inches (1.38-1.65cm).

ASUS uses a "Ceraluminum" material for its chassis, and it's basically a magnesium alloy that's super light but durable. The MacBook Air also uses an aluminum base that's plenty rigid and refined.

Looking at ports, the Zenbook A16 easily bests the Air 15. The ASUS PC comes with dual USB4, USB-A 3.2 (Gen 2), native HDMI 2.1 out, an SD 4.0 card reader, and a 3.5mm audio jack.

The MacBook Air 15 offers just two Thunderbolt 4/USB4 and a 3.5mm audio jack. That means that the Air 15 can only run up to two external displays, topping out at 4K@144Hz. With native HDMI and dual USB4, the A16 will offer better external screen support.

Both ASUS and Apple make excellent keyboards, and this area should come down to personal preference. One area where the MacBook Air 15 definitely pulls ahead, however, is with its pointer.

Apple's Force Touch trackpad uses haptics to simulate the feel of a click; this hardware is almost always preferable compared to traditional touchpads with moving parts below.

That's what the Zenbook A16 uses, and while its touchpad is certainly big enough with good accuracy, it's really the only downside we noted in our Zenbook A16 review.

Both laptops feature a six-speaker audio system, but only the MacBook Air 15 adds Dolby Atmos tuning. The webcams are similar with 1080p video capabilities, but because the Zenbook A16 is running Windows 11, its camera adds an IR sensor for facial recognition through Windows Hello. On the MacBook Air, it's fingerprint Touch ID or passwords.

And finally, both laptops feature cutting-edge Wi-Fi 7 connectivity. ASUS pairs it with Bluetooth 5.4, whereas the MacBook Air 15 gets newer Bluetooth 6.

TL;DR: Both laptops are impressively thin and lightweight; the MacBook Air 15 is thinner, but the Zenbook A16 is lighter. The A16 has a better selection of ports and facial recognition abilities, whereas the MacBook Air 15 has a better touchpad.

Does anyone prefer LED at 60Hz compared to OLED at 120Hz?

With the ASUS Zenbook A16, you're getting a 16-inch OLED display with a sharp 2880x1800 resolution, 120Hz refresh rate, and optional touch functionality.

It's a screen with 500 nits maximum base brightness, climbing all the way to 1,100 nits with HDR enabled. That makes it certified for VESA DisplayHDR True Black 1000, and a killer display for creators.

The MacBook Air has a 15.3-inch display with a slightly sharper 2880x1864 resolution, which works out to a higher pixels-per-inch amount due to its smaller dimensions. However, the display tops out at a measly 60Hz and doesn't have optional touch functionality.

It also doesn't get nearly as bright, often falling short of the advertised 500 nits brightness in SDR and HDR content.

TL;DR: With an OLED panel, twice as fast a refresh rate, far more brightness, and touch or non-touch options, the ASUS Zenbook A16's display is an easy winner compared to the MacBook Air 15.

Does the ASUS Zenbook A16 have better battery life than the MacBook Air 15?

Qualcomm's Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme chips are a rather significant upgrade over the first-gen Snapdragon X silicon, and that applies to performance and efficiency.

We tested the X2 Elite Extreme (X2E-94) chip in the Zenbook A16 for our review. It has 18 cores and a 4.7GHz maximum boost frequency. The Zenbook A16 is also available with the higher-tier X2E-96 chip with a higher boost frequency and a locked 48GB of LPDDR5x RAM. It costs $1,999.99 direct from ASUS.

If you want more power, it's available, but the X2E-94 chip we tested is impressive. In Geekbench 6, the X2 Elite Extreme hit 3,806 single-core and 22,872 multi-core scores. The M5 in the MacBook Air 15 hit 4,191 single-core and 17,276 multi-core scores.

Apple maintains single-core dominance, but not by a whole lot anymore. And multi-core isn't even close. We plan to test the GPU after the A16's launch when better drivers are available.

This is but a brief look at synthetic performance, and yet it suggests that Snapdragon X2 could be the true turning point for Windows on ARM that we've been waiting for.

Improved efficiency is another key ingredient in Qualcomm's latest silicon. During testing of the Zenbook A16, we basically used it for constant web browsing and some occasional photo editing and spreadsheets.

Windows 11's battery report estimates about 16 hours of life based on that type of use. In PCMark 10's local video playback test, the laptop ran for 20 hours and 30 minutes.

Streaming 4K video from YouTube with the screen set at about 65% brightness and volume at 10% resulted in 14 hours and 13 minutes of battery life.

Our friends at Tom's Guide ran a similar test on the MacBook Air 15 during its review process. With continuous web surfing and the display at 150 nits brightness, the MacBook Air 15 lasted 15 hours and 37 minutes.

That's roughly the same as what you can expect from the Zenbook A16, and it's a testament to the efficiency upgrade Qualcomm has promised from its X2 hardware.

TL;DR: The X2 Elite Extreme chip falls short of single-core performance compared to Apple's M5, yet it delivers superior multi-core performance. Efficiency is essentially the same between the two laptops.

ASUS Zenbook A16 (2026) vs. MacBook Air 15: Which should you buy?

There's one important aspect I haven't yet discussed: pricing. The Zenbook A16 makes its debut in the US for $1,599.99 at Best Buy. This price lands you the Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme (X2E-94) System-on-Chip (SoC), 48GB of LPDDR5x-9600 RAM, a 1TB M.2 PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD, and the usual 2.8K OLED display.

The MacBook Air 15 M5 starts at a lower $1,299 price at Best Buy, although it has just 16GB of RAM and half as much storage at 512GB.

Bumping the MacBook Air 15 M5 up to 24GB of RAM (still half as much as the Zenbook A16) and a 1TB SSD pushes the price to $1,699, a full $100 more than the ASUS laptop.

So while you can land a MacBook Air 15 M5 for a lower introductory price, Apple's laptop does become more expensive than the Zenbook A16, even without matching memory amounts.

With pricing and everything else I've covered above in mind, it quickly becomes evident that the ASUS Zenbook A16 is going to provide stiff competition for the MacBook Air 15.

If you're a regular Windows user, the choice is clear: the Zenbook A16 should be your next laptop. It's a tougher decision for regular macOS users. If you're beholden to Apple's OS, you're probably sticking with the MacBook anyway. But if you're considering a switch to Windows 11, the Zenbook A16 should be the best way to make an easy transition.

I dare say that the MacBook Air is no longer the best lightweight laptop on the market. The Zenbook A16 offers so much more for a lower price, and in this economy, that's perhaps the most important feature.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Lenovo and ASUS both unveiled new featherlight 14-inch laptops at CES 2026, and they're both expected to launch in Q2 this year.

The ASUS Zenbook A14, now in its second generation after a glorious debut in 2025, looks like it will remain the best option for budget shoppers, whereas Lenovo's Yoga Slim 7i Ultra Aura Edition (what a mouthful) will appease those who want more premium features and Intel hardware.

I put together this in-depth comparison to help you make the right decision when these laptops launch.

How do Yoga Slim 7i Ultra and Zenbook A14 specs compare?

Here's a look at the raw specs that go into these two laptops. Lenovo already has a fairly detailed spec sheet available, while the Zenbook A14 (2026) could have more configs when it launches.

Can I buy the Yoga Slim 7i Ultra and Zenbook A14 right now?

Lenovo's Yoga Slim 7i Ultra Aura Edition and the ASUS Zenbook A14 (2026) are not yet available to buy. They are both expected to launch in Q2 2026.

Lenovo mentioned a $1,499.99 starting price at its CES 2026 reveal, although whether or not that price sticks due to DRAM and NAND shortages remains to be seen.

Based on the first-generation PC, I am expecting the ASUS Zenbook A14 for 2026 to launch at a more affordable price compared to the Yoga laptop. You can still find the original Zenbook A14 from 2025 starting at $699 at Best Buy.

Two featherweight 14-inch laptops; which one has the better features?

The original Zenbook A14 that launched in 2025 absolutely blew us away with its lightweight chassis and overall sleek design. Former Windows Central laptop expert Zachary Boddy noted in their Zenbook A14 review:

"With a magnesium chassis as light as air and as tough as stone, Snapdragon X series chipsets that barely sip on the physics-defying massive battery, and a great balance of practical function and aesthetic form, the Zenbook A14 is one of the best laptops of the year."

This brilliant design really isn't changing for the new 2026 model. Compared to the new Yoga Slim 7i Ultra, the Zenbook A14 will have a slightly smaller footprint while weighing about 13 grams more.

It's also going to offer a much more varied port selection, with dual USB4 (which uses the USB-C form factor), USB-A 3.2 (Gen 2), HDMI 2.1, and a 3.5mm audio jack. The Yoga Slim 7i Ultra, on the other hand, offers three Thunderbolt 4 ports. It's far more likely you'll need to add a Thunderbolt docking station to the Yoga laptop in order to connect all your accessories.

Lenovo does a great job with its laptop cameras and speakers, and that's no different here. The Yoga Slim 7i Ultra comes with a quad-speaker setup with 8W of total output and Dolby Atmos tuning.

The new Zenbook A14 only lists stereo speakers. The original Zenbook A14 did have Dolby Atmos tuning, so I'm expecting it to return for the second-gen model.

Lenovo's camera is set at 5MP with an IR sensor for Windows Hello. The Zenbook A14 also has an IR sensor for that added layer of facial recognition security, but its camera tops out at 1080p (or about 2MP).

The Yoga Slim 7i Ultra has a small, raised camera bar along the top of the display, which allows it to house the superior hardware. I love the look, but others might prefer the straight Zenbook A14 top bezel.

The keyboard and touchpad quality will need to be tested, but I can say that Lenovo and ASUS both make great keys. The same goes for touchpads, with both PCs offering a spacious pointer.

OLED or pOLED? Lenovo and ASUS use slightly different displays

Lenovo and ASUS are each using 14-inch displays in their new laptops. For Lenovo, it's a Plastic OLED (pOLED) display that's more durable and resistant to drops. ASUS is using standard OLED tech, which should mean it has a glass covering. In any case, both displays come with a glossy finish.

Lenovo and ASUS both appear to be offering just one display option. In the Yoga Slim 7i Ultra, you get a 2880x1800 (2.8K) resolution, touch, 500 nits brightness (up to 1,100 nits with HDR), a 120Hz refresh rate, DisplayHDR True Black 1000 certification, Dolby Vision, and perfect color reproduction across sRGB and P3 gamuts.

Here's where I imagine a lot of the price difference comes into play. The Zenbook A14's screen hits a lower 1920x1200 (FHD+) resolution, a lower 60Hz refresh rate, and a lower peak brightness of 600 nits with HDR enabled. It does have DisplayHDR True Black 600 certification.

Ultimately, Lenovo's Yoga display should be the right choice for creators who need the extra pixels. However, the Zenbook A14's FHD+ display should save battery life while still delivering the outstanding color and contrast you expect from OLED tech.

Qualcomm Snapdragon X2 or Intel Core Ultra Series 3?

These two laptops are both using the latest hardware from Intel and Qualcomm, and the performance differences will be interesting to check out once we have an opportunity to benchmark firsthand.

I can, however, make some key initial comparisons when looking at the higher-level platforms.

Intel's Core Ultra Series 3 "Panther Lake" mobile chips are a big step forward, especially in regard to the integrated GPU. The Yoga Slim 7i Ultra will come with up to a Core Ultra X7 385H chip with 16 cores, an Arc B390 integrated GPU with power nearing a discrete RTX 4050, and a Neural Processing Unit (NPU) with 50 TOPS of power for AI workloads.

Lenovo will also offer a couple of wimpier Core Ultra 5 and Core Ultra 7 chips for its more affordable configurations. Make no mistake; these are still excellent performers.

ASUS has upgraded to the Snapdragon X2 Elite; more specifically, the X2E-88-100 with 18 cores, Qualcomm Adreno integrated graphics, and an NPU capable of 80 TOPS of AI power.

Generally speaking, you should expect superb productivity performance and efficiency from the Snapdragon X2 chip, with Intel Panther Lake delivering stronger GPU performance and no need for emulating certain programs and games.

Yoga Slim 7i Ultra Aura Edition vs. Zenbook A14 (2026): Which should you buy?

Both of these thin and light laptops are expected to launch in Q2 2026, and we'll soon have more information as to how exactly they perform, how well the designs work, and what the displays look like in real life.

As it stands now, the Zenbook A14 (2026) should remain the go-to lightweight PC for budget shoppers. No, the display, speakers, and webcam aren't as impressive, but that won't matter for a ton of people who just want a reliable PC that's easy to carry around.

Lenovo's Yoga Slim 7i Ultra Aura Edition, thanks to its set of more premium features, is expected to cost more, but will be more appealing to creators thanks to its high-res display and strong Intel Panther Lake integrated graphics.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

The Legion Go 2 launched in October 2025 as a Windows 11 PC gaming handheld. A few months later, at CES 2026, Lenovo revealed it was launching an official SteamOS version of the Legion Go 2, like the Steam Deck, only with more premium features and internals.

RELATED: Legion Go 2 (Windows) review | Steam Deck review

For those of you unsure of which of the operating systems to choose from when buying Legion Go 2, I've spent some time comparing these two devices and explaining their differences. Let's dive in and discuss how they compare.

TL:DR: Look for the TL;DR sections to get the highlights for each category.

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Specs

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Pricing

As of right now, we know that the Windows version of the Legion Go 2 has a lower $1,049.99 starting price compared to the SteamOS version's $1,199.99 starting MSRP.

Outside of their operating systems, these handhelds are largely the same, with the same layouts, buttons, processor options, displays, and ports.

It's honestly a bit surprising that the SteamOS version costs more, given that the Windows version of the Legion Go S has a higher price than the SteamOS version.

TL;DR: PRICE WINNER: Surprisingly, the Windows version of the Legion Go 2 has a lower starting price than the SteamOS version.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Performance

NOTE: I will conduct performance benchmark testing on the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) when I get my hands on it and will update this section as soon as possible. For now, this section utilizes official spec information for educated analysis.

Despite the Windows and SteamOS versions of the Legion Go 2 having the same Ryzen Z2 Series handheld processors and capacity options when it comes to memory and storage, it's likely that the SteamOS versions will run more efficiently.

RELATED: All AMD handheld chips and how they compare

This is due to the fact that SteamOS is far more optimized for handhelds than Microsoft's operating system. Where Windows 11 is bogged down by bloat and extra background processes, SteamOS is more focused, allowing it to take up less power.

As an example, previous benchmarks showed that the rival Xbox Ally X offered better performance running SteamOS than it did running the Windows 11 it ships with. As such, it stands to reason the Legion Go 2 will also perform better with SteamOS.

TL;DR: PERFORMANCE WINNER: I'll have to run tests to know for sure, but it's very likely that the SteamOS version of the Legion Go 2 will offer better performance.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Display

Both the SteamOS and Windows versions of the Legion Go 2 feature an 8.8-inch OLED touchscreen that tops at a crisp 1920x1200 resolution, a high 144Hz refresh rate, and offers VRR (variable refresh rate) support.

Altogether, they offer a fantastic color range and contrast with detailed visuals and smooth motion clarity.

As I noted in my Legion Go 2 (Windows) review, this is the best handheld display to date.

TL;DR: DISPLAY WINNER: It's a tie. Both the Windows and SteamOS versions have the same OLED display.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Controls and ports

There is no difference in the general layout between the SteamOS and Windows versions of the Legion Go 2. However, the SteamOS version does show the same game icons for the buttons that the Steam Deck uses.

Both handhelds have offset Hall Effect joysticks that won't develop stick drift, detachable controllers, and a touchpad under the right joystick. They both also have a right controller that has an FPS Mode, allowing the controller to act somewhat like a mouse when dragged around a surface.

I've personally used the FPS Mode for better control in certain games as well as to navigate my cursor around Windows 11 menus, programs, and Google Chrome. I'm guessing FPS Mode will work well in certain games on the SteamOS handheld and in the Desktop Mode. However, I'm not sure how well it will work in SteamOS's handheld mode. I'll be sure to check that out when I review the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS).

On top of the Legion Go 2 is an RGB circle, in the shape of the Legion logo, and at its center is a fingerprint reader that works very well on the Windows handheld. The thing is, this fingerprint reader is also located on the SteamOS version, but it cannot be used since SteamOS doesn't natively support this biometric login technology.

What about ports?

Port-wise, both Legion Go 2 versions offer an audio jack, a microSD card reader that supports up to 2TB, and two USB4 Type-C ports.

Thanks to DisplayPort support, both handhelds can be connected to a docking station and displayed on a TV or monitor. You'll just need to make sure you get a 65W docking station or higher in order for it to be compatible.

TL;DR: CONTROLS & PORTS WINNER: While the buttons, joysticks, and ports are the same between these devices, it's possible that FPS mode is limited on SteamOS and that the fingerprint reader is only supported on the Windows version, which makes Windows the winner here.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Software and games

As the names imply, the biggest difference between the Legion Go 2 versions is that one runs the Linux-based SteamOS while the other runs Windows 11.

Out of the box, SteamOS's handheld mode is intended to only access your Steam library of games, but as I explained in my Decky Loader guide, this plug-in makes it easier to access other game services like Battle.net, Epic Games, and more.

Meanwhile, the Windows version is far less optimized for handhelds; it literally operates like a Windows laptop or desktop, which has two main problems: First, many people find the Windows interface to be too convoluted for handhelds compared to the SteamOS interface's console-like simplicity. Second, Windows has far more bloat, with unnecessary programs (for handhelds) and extra processes running in the background. This bloat can slow the handheld down and make it work less efficiently, so it's good to uninstall unneeded programs.

These are some of the reasons why Windows handheld owners have opted to switch to SteamOS or the console-like experience of Bazzite.

Of course, the Xbox Ally X's Xbox Full Screen Experience (Xbox FSE) recently rolled out onto Legion Go 2 (Windows). This mode transforms Windows into more of a console-like interface using the Xbox App; it's an experience that's more akin to the feel of SteamOS, and it also reduces background programs to help Windows handhelds run more smoothly. Xbox FSE isn't quite where I want it to be yet, but Microsoft does have plans to improve it in 2026, so Xbox FSE could get even better this year.

It's also easier to update the SteamOS version and its software by going between your game library and the SteamOS system settings. Meanwhile, you'll need to move between Windows settings, your game services, specific games, AMD Software, and Lenovo Space to keep your Windows handheld and its games up to date.

However, there is a lot of good that comes with Windows as well. You can easily access a web browser, other gaming services, and download programs right out of the box if you know how to use Windows.

Then there's the game compatibility issue.

It's worth noting that the vast majority of PC games are specifically designed for Windows. SteamOS gets around this by using Proton, a compatibility layer, to make Windows games run on Linux. While Proton continues to get better every year, some games still aren't compatible with Proton and thus don't run well or don't run at all on SteamOS handhelds unless you do a lot of tweaking. Even then, there isn't always a guarantee that games will work on SteamOS.

As an example, many competitive multiplayer games require the use of an anti-cheat system to play, but most anti-cheat kernel-level drivers, such as Call of Duty: Black Ops 7's RICOCHET, aren't supported on SteamOS. People have found workarounds, but it's possible a game's anti-cheat could incorrectly flag these fixes and ban your account. This being the case, it's typically safer to play anti-cheat games on Windows devices.

In case you didn't know, you can connect a mouse and keyboard to both the SteamOS and Windows versions and then use them like a typical Linux or Windows computer. I've specifically used my Legion Go 2 to access various non-gaming programs, type up articles for work, and browse the internet using my Artciety Foldable Bluetooth Keyboard with a built-in touchpad ($34.99 at Amazon).

You'll really need to consider what games you intend to play on the Legion Go 2 and then determine whether SteamOS or Windows will do a better job of allowing you to play those titles.

TL;DR: SOFTWARE & GAMES WINNER: We've got a few tradeoffs here. SteamOS is better optimized for handhelds than Windows, and it offers a better console-like interface. However, certain games and most anti-cheat systems do not run well on SteamOS; more games are compatible with Windows.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Battery life

Both the Windows and SteamOS versions of the Legion Go 2 offer a 74Wh battery. That said, the SteamOS version likely lasts longer on one charge since its operating system is more efficient, is better optimized for handhelds, and has less bloat (like we previously discussed).

I won't know what Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) battery life is like until I do my own battery testing. That said, my previous Legion Go 2 (Windows) battery tests showed that it tends to run for 1.5 to slightly more than five hours, depending on settings.

Now, the SteamOS version has those same power-hungry Z2 processors, so it likely only runs a bit longer than the Windows version.

I'll update this section as soon as I can run a Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) through battery testing.

TL;DR: BATTERY LIFE WINNER: I won't know for sure until I can do testing, but it's likely that the SteamOS version lasts longer.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Grip ergonomics and comfort

The same ergonomic design and shape are at play with both the SteamOS and Windows Legion Go 2.

They are 11.64 inches long, 5.38 inches tall, and 1.66 inches thick, making them some of the largest handhelds on the market. Unsurprisingly, they're also some of the heaviest, ranging between 2.03 and 2.2 pounds depending on configurations.

But your hands and wrists shouldn't cry out just yet. Remember, the detachable controllers are only 0.46 pounds, so you can put the controller in tabletop mode if you tend to experience wrist fatigue.

TL;DR: COMFORT WINNER: We have a tie. Both versions are the same when it comes to ergonomics, dimensions, and weight.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Comparison chart

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2: SteamOS vs Windows — Which should I buy?

In all honesty, both the Windows and the SteamOS versions of the Legion Go 2 could make for the perfect handheld, depending on what you want from your portable gaming device.

Generally, more people will likely prefer the SteamOS version due to its console-like interface and efficiency, but Windows can be a better fit for certain use cases.

In the end, choose the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) if you want a handheld that feels more like a dedicated gaming system than a full-blown PC. SteamOS is also a preferred option thanks to how efficiently it runs without unnecessary bloat.

Meanwhile, choose the Legion Go 2 (Windows) if you tend to play games with anti-cheat systems or other titles that don't run well on SteamOS. Alternatively, you might want to go with the Windows version if you want to use your handheld like a Windows gaming laptop or desktop, for school, work, or personal tasks.

NOTE: If you need a handheld right now, you're kind of out of luck, unless you're willing to give in to scalpers. The Windows Legion Go 2 has been out of stock at most retailers for a couple of months, and the SteamOS version doesn't launch until June 2026.

Back to the top ^

The Steam Deck was the only official SteamOS PC gaming handheld for several years, until the Lenovo Legion Go S — Powered by SteamOS entered the ring. Now, Lenovo has announced that its flagship handheld is also getting a new version, the Legion Go 2 — Powered by SteamOS.

Once this device launches, buyers will have the choice of going with either a Windows 11 Legion Go 2 or a SteamOS one.

RELATED: Legion Go 2 (Windows) review | Steam Deck review

But how does the new Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) actually stack up against the Steam Deck? I've compared these two devices in a number of different categories, based on available specs, to find out.

TL:DR: Look for the TL;DR sections to get the highlights for each section.

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Specs

TL;DR SPECS WINNER: There's no doubt about it. The Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) offers far more impressive specs. However, its starting price isn't at all budget-friendly, unlike the Steam Deck OLED.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Price & value

Recently, the Steam Deck LCD 256GB (2022) was discontinued (like the Steam Deck LCD 64GB before it) — its $399.00 starting price had made it Valve's most affordable handheld for a while. But even with Valve removing this entry-level option, the Steam Deck OLED is still more affordable than the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS).

You can get the Steam Deck OLED with either 512GB of storage for $549.00 at Steam or 1TB of storage for $649.00 at Steam. Meanwhile, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) has a starting price of $1,199.00 — that's more than double the starting price of the Steam Deck OLED.

Additionally, the Steam Deck OLEDs are currently available for purchase, while the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) isn't expected to ship until June 2026. As such, you'll have to wait a while before you can get your hands on this new official SteamOS handheld.

TL;DR: PRICE WINNER: In terms of affordability, the Steam Deck OLED is by far the better budget buy. Its starting price is less than double the starting price of the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS). The Legion Go 2 is more costly, but it does give you more features.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Performance

NOTE: I will conduct performance benchmark testing on the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) when I get my hands on it and will update this section as soon as possible. For now, this section utilizes official spec information for educated analysis.

Now, some of you are far more interested in the performance of a handheld than its price, so let's dive into how the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) performs versus the Steam Deck OLED.

Performance is a tricky thing, especially when it comes to handhelds. It's determined, not only by how powerful the internals are, but by how well the system of hardware works with the software it's running.

On paper, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) offers a much, much more powerful APU (Accelerated Processing Unit) — an AMD SoC (system on chip) that combines a CPU (central processing unit) and GPU (graphics processing unit) for better efficiency to fit a smaller form factor.

The Legion Go 2 (SteamOS)'s Ryzen Z2 Extreme's CPU utilizes eight cores and 16 threads using the latest Zen 5 architecture, while the GPU has 16 cores and utilizes RDNA3.5, which is the latest architecture for integrated GPUs.

In comparison, the Steam Deck OLED only has half of the CPU threads and cores (4C, 8T) and half the GPU cores (8C), while using older architecture for both. Having more cores and threads allows a processor to work more efficiently and take on more work at once, which is important for gaming performance.

RELATED: All AMD handheld chips and how they compare

Then there's also the fact that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) with 32GB RAM and 2TB SSD can have up to double the memory and storage space of the Steam Deck OLED with 16GB RAM and 1TB SSD. This not only gives the Legion Go 2 room for more games but also allows the system to access data quickly, theoretically resulting in faster loading and saving times.

One last thing to note is that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) supports VRR (variable refresh rate) while the Steam Deck does not. This is an important distinction since VRR reduces screen tearing and helps games play more smoothly. So even motion clarity is likely better on the Lenovo's handheld.

What this all means is that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) can take on more graphically intensive tasks than the Steam Deck can handle. As an example, some AAA games might not run well on Steam Deck or might not boot at all, but it's possible that those same games could run well on Legion Go 2 (SteamOS), depending on system requirements.

That all said, we'll have to see how well the Legion Go 2 specifically plays with SteamOS. My guess is that it will be a major performance improvement over the Legion Go 2 (Windows), given that SteamOS has a lot less bloatware and extra processes going on in the background.

What's more, previous benchmarks showed that the rival Xbox Ally X offered better performance with SteamOS than it did with its shipped Windows 11, so it stands to reason the Legion Go 2 will perform better with SteamOS as well.

As far as upgradability goes, I'm willing to bet that the Steam Deck is easier to upgrade than the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS). When I reviewed the Windows version of the Legion Go 2, I took a look inside of it and noted that it hadn't really been designed with easy upgradability in mind, so I'm guessing the same is true of the SteamOS option.

TL;DR: PERFORMANCE WINNER: The Legion Go 2's AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme chip is far more powerful than the Steam Deck's custom AMD chip. Lenovo's handheld also offers more memory and storage. All of this together means that the Legion Go 2 should be able to run games that the Steam Deck cannot.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Display

This is another area where the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) absolutely dominates.

The Steam Deck OLED has a 7.4-inch OLED touchscreen, but it tops out at 1280x800 resolution and a 90Hz refresh rate, which is pretty limited by today's handheld standards.

Meanwhile, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) has a notably larger OLED display that measures in at 8.8 inches. When side-by-side with a Steam Deck OLED, this screen size difference feels massive and allows you to make out more details in your games.

On top of that, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) has a wider color gamut for richer hues and better contrast. It can also hit a higher resolution of up to 1920x1200, providing much crisper imagery for you to view, while a 144Hz refresh rate and the previously mentioned VRR support reduce motion blur and provide smoother visuals.

It's worth noting that the Legion Go 2's display isn't just better than the Steam Deck's display; it's also the best handheld display to date.

TL;DR: DISPLAY WINNER: There is no debate here. The Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) OLED display is better than the Steam Deck OLED in every way, including higher resolution, refresh rate, color range, size, and VRR support.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Controls and ports

Controls and ports are where the Steam Deck and Legion Go 2 really show their physical differences.

They have the same general layout with joysticks on either side, ABXY buttons on the right, D-Pad on the left, bumpers, triggers, four back buttons, and a smattering of system and game buttons.

These controls mostly all function the same. In fact, the SteamOS version of the Legion Go 2 shows the same symbols on the buttons that the Steam Deck OLED does. So there shouldn't be any confusion on that score.

Now for the differences.

Perhaps the most important difference here is that the Legion Go 2 has offset Hall Effect joysticks and triggers, while the Steam Deck has inline analog joysticks. This means that the Legion Go 2 won't experience stick drift, but the Steam Deck might.

Another thing to note is that the Steam Deck OLED offers two touchpads, one under each joystick, while the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) only has one slightly smaller touchpad under the right joystick. To be fair, many people only end up using the right touchpad, but you might be an outlier with your preferences, so it's something to consider.

The biggest control difference between these handhelds is that the Legion Go 2 offers detachable controllers (Legion TrueStrike controllers), like the Nintendo Switch 2. You simply press a button on the back of the controllers and pull them down to remove them. Since the Legion Go 2 has a built-in kickstand, you can take the controllers in hand and play while the tablet part is propped up on its own on a table.

But wait, there's more; another feature the Steam Deck doesn't offer.

The Legion Go 2's right controller has an FPS (first-person shooter) switch on the bottom and comes with a magnetic stand. When this switch is toggled, and the controller is placed in that stand, the right gamepad can be moved around on a surface, a lot like a mouse, to navigate game menus or even be used for first-person shooters.

Both of the Legion Go 2's controllers also feature USB-C ports so they can be charged separately, if desired. But they also charge if they're connected to the Legion Go 2 while it's plugged in and charging.

Something to note is that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS)'s power button also doubles as a fingerprint reader. However, SteamOS does not natively support this biometric login feature, so it's unusable on this handheld. Of course, this also explains why the Steam Deck doesn't have a fingerprint reader.

What about ports?

When it comes to ports, the Steam Deck OLED is modest, but it gives you all the basics you need. There's one USB-C 3.2 Gen 2 port, one microSD card reader, and one audio jack.

In comparison, the Legion Go 2 also has an audio jack and a microSD card reader. It differs in that it has two USB4 Type-C ports, which are more than twice as fast and support higher resolutions. Additionally, having two ports is more convenient since you can charge your device with one connection while having an accessory plugged into the other port at the same time.

Since both the Steam Deck and Legion Go 2's USB-Cs support DisplayPort, both handhelds can be connected to a docking station and displayed on a TV or monitor. However, the Steam Deck only needs a 45W docking station while the Legion Go 2 needs 65W or higher for it to work.

TL;DR: CONTROLS WINNER: There are a lot of differences here, but the Legion Go 2's Hall Effect joysticks, detachable controllers, FPS mode, and dual USB4 ports make it the more convenient handheld in terms of controls and ports.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Software and games

There isn't too much to get into in this section, given that both the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) and the Steam Deck run the Linux-based SteamOS as their operating system. This means the menus and user interface are the same.

Out of the box, both devices are intended to only access your Steam library of games. But you can access other gaming services like Epic Games, Battle.net, and more using certain plug-ins and programs.

If you're interested in something like that, check out my guide on how to install Decky Loader on SteamOS handhelds.

As I mentioned previously, the Legion Go 2 configuration with a Z2 Extreme chip will be able to run more AAA games than the Steam Deck OLED since it has stronger internal hardware.

TL;DR: SOFTWARE & GAMES WINNER: Both handhelds might offer the same SteamOS operating system and interface; however, the Legion Go 2 is the winner here since it is powerful enough to run more AAA games than the Steam Deck OLED can handle.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Battery life

Simply by looking at the specs, it might appear as though the Steam Deck OLED's 50Whr battery has a shorter battery life than the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS)'s 74Wh battery, but that's probably not the case.

A battery drains faster if it has to support more power-hungry processors and displays, like those in the Legion Go 2. This being the case, it's very possible that the Steam Deck OLED has a longer battery life.

Typically, the Steam Deck OLED can last between three and 12 hours, depending on the settings it's running at. I won't know for sure how long the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) lasts until I run my own battery life tests on it.

However, I know from previous testing that the Legion Go 2 (Windows) tends to only last between 1.5 and slightly more than five hours. Considering that SteamOS lets handhelds run more efficiently than Windows 11, I expect the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) to have a longer battery life than the Windows version, but probably not by a ton.

TL;DR: BATTERY LIFE WINNER: Due to its more power-efficient system, the Steam Deck tends to last longer than the Legion Go 2.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Grip ergonomics and comfort

There's a lot of debate over whether or not the Steam Deck OLED is comfortable to hold. While certainly a beloved handheld, the Steam Deck isn't nearly as ergonomically shaped as the Legion Go 2, but it isn't as heavy either.

Valve's Steam Deck OLED weighs in at 1.41 pounds while being 11.7 inches long, 4.6 inches tall, and 1.9 inches thick. Meanwhile, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is much heavier at 2.2 pounds while being 11.64 inches long, 5.38 inches tall, and 1.66 inches thick.

Of course, one huge difference here is that you don't have to hold the entire Legion Go 2 in your hands if you don't want to. Those detachable controllers only weigh 0.46 pounds and won't strain your hands nearly as much as a whole Steam Deck OLED.

TL;DR: COMFORT WINNER: The Steam Deck might weigh less than the Legion Go 2, but Lenovo's handheld is more ergonomically shaped and has detachable controllers that won't strain your wrists as much.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Comparison chart

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) vs Steam Deck: Which should I buy?

I've compared just about every aspect of these handhelds, and it's time to declare one the winner. The thing is, they are both good options. What this final decision really comes down to is your preferred playing experience.

If you're specifically wanting a handheld so you can play the latest and greatest AAA games, then the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is the device you want. Just remember, not all games are compatible with handhelds, so you'll need to check system requirements on a case-by-case basis.

I also recommend the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) if you want a larger display that will be easier to see details on. Or if you deal with hand fatigue and want a handheld that will reduce discomfort.

But while the Legion Go 2 is undeniably the more impressive handheld here, you might not need the very best handheld to meet your gaming needs.

At the end of it all, the Steam Deck OLED remains the best budget-friendly handheld, even if it is older and not nearly as powerful. It can still be used to access a wide range of games, and it has a large community that is eager to share tips with newcomers.

Before you purchase either the Steam Deck OLED or the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS), think about what you want to do with your handheld, what types of games you want to play, how much money you're willing to spend, and any features you know you don't want to go without. Then choose the handheld based on that.

Back to the top ^

In 2025, I spent dozens of hours running benchmarks to eventually write up my ASUS ROG Xbox Ally X review and Legion Go 2 (Windows) review. I even wrote up a comparison piece pitting the Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows).

But now, thanks to Lenovo's announcement at CES 2026, we know that a new SteamOS variant of the Lenovo Legion Go 2 is coming to market.

I took some time comparing the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS)'s specs against the Xbox Ally X to explain how one of these devices is more impressive than the other. I've also discussed which one is a better buy for most people. Let's dive in.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Specs

Before we go any further, take a look at the individual specs for the Xbox Ally X and Legion Go 2 (SteamOS).

Note: I am not comparing the starting Xbox Ally (white) handheld against the Legion Go 2 since it is more of a competitor against the Legion Go S rather than the Legion Go 2.

Where the Xbox Ally X is the successor to the ROG Ally and ROG Ally X made via a partnership between ASUS and Microsoft, the Legion Go 2 is the next-gen Legion Go flagship handheld from Lenovo.

Let's discuss how these spec differences change the playing experience.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Price

I won't be surprised if your eyes bulged while looking at the prices for the Xbox Ally X and the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS); these are premium handheld gaming PCs with high prices to fit their features.

The Xbox Ally X has been available at stores since October 2025, but the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) doesn't launch until June 2026. Additionally, Legion Go 2 (Windows) models have been sold out at most retailers for a while now, as of the time of writing.

The Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) has a higher starting price of $1,199.99 compared to the Xbox Ally X, which is $999.99 at Best Buy; the reason being that Lenovo's handheld has several features that ASUS ROG's does not (we'll go into that more later).

For some reason, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is also more expensive than the starting price of the Legion Go 2 (Windows), which has a starting price of $1,099.99 at Best Buy.

Now, it's worth noting that both ASUS ROG and Lenovo offer less expensive handheld gaming PCs (Xbox Ally and Legion Go S), but the Xbox Ally X and Legion Go 2 are their flagship devices, so that's why they are so costly.

PRICE WINNER: There's no denying that the Xbox Ally X has a lower price point. Still, the Legion Go 2 offers many features that the Xbox Ally X doesn't have, so you should consider which one fits your needs best.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Performance and configurations

NOTE: I will run benchmark tests on the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) as soon as I can get my hands on it. For now, this performance section is based on device specs and educated conjecture. I will update this section once my testing has been done.

Both the Xbox Ally X and Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) utilize the latest AMD Ryzen Z2 series chip — both APUs (accelerated processing units) feature 8 cores and 16 threads with Zen 5 architecture, as well as 16 GPU cores with RDNA3.5 architecture. However, the key difference is that the Xbox Ally X APU has an AI-CPU while the Legion Go 2 does not.

What this means is that, when solely comparing the chips, the Xbox Ally X's APU is likely better suited to handling certain tasks than the Legion Go 2's APU, since the AI processor's NPU (neural processing unit) can take some of the load off of the CPU and GPU to help the system run more efficiently. Still, the processor isn't the only thing that determines a handheld's overall performance.

Since this Legion Go 2 model's non-AI processor is still a very powerful handheld chip and the device runs SteamOS, it's likely that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is still a more efficient device than the Windows Xbox Ally X.

The reason being, SteamOS is better optimized for handhelds. For instance, swapping Windows with SteamOS on the Xbox Ally X saw the handheld increase FPS (frames per second) by as much as 32% while also improving FPS stability and resume times (thanks, Tom's Hardware). As such, I expect the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) will offer better performance than the Xbox Ally X.

We don't fully know what memory and storage configurations will be available for the Legion Go 2, but we do know there will be up to a whopping 32GB LPDDR5X-8000 MHz RAM and up to a huge 2TB M.2 2242 SSD compared to the Xbox Ally X's 24GB LPDDR5X-8000 MHz RAM and 1TB M.2 2280 SSD.

To be clear, the Xbox Ally X's memory and storage are more than enough for handheld gaming, but more memory and more storage are especially helpful for people who play a lot of AAA games.

Additionally, unless there's been some big shakeup, I'm going to assume that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) will offer faster SSD read and write speeds than Xbox Ally X's SSD, given that in my own SSD testing, all of Lenovo's handhelds have been faster than the SSDs in their direct ASUS ROG competitors —including Legion Go S vs ROG Ally and Legion Go (Windows) vs Xbox Ally X.

Just keep in mind that the best gaming handhelds are in no way as powerful as the best gaming laptops or best gaming desktops since handhelds trade off portability for power.

⚠️ Warning for DIYers and customization enthusiasts: I'm not expecting the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) to have the best upgradeability, considering that when I opened my Windows model, I found that the Legion Go 2 (Windows) wasn't designed with upgradability in mind. It would take more work than many other handhelds just to swap out the SSD. But I'm sure that won't stop many of you from doing it anyway.

This is one of the areas where the Xbox Ally X is better. It's much easier to access the SSD and swap it out. What's more, WD_BLACK has designed SSDs exclusively for Xbox Ally X, so it was specifically designed for upgrading.

Of course, if you don't like opening your devices, both of these handhelds can have their storage expanded using the best microSD cards.

PERFORMANCE & STORAGE WINNER: These are both powerful handhelds, but the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is likely the better performer given that SteamOS is more efficient and Lenovo's handheld SSDs have typically been faster than ASUS ROG's.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Display

There's no beating around the bush here. The Legion Go 2's 8.8-inch OLED touchscreen is basically better than the Xbox Ally X's 7-inch IPS touchscreen in every way. In fact, the Legion Go 2 has the best display of any handheld to date.

In addition to being larger, Lenovo's screen has a wider color gamut, deeper contrast, crisper resolution, and a higher refresh rate than its competitor. What this means is that game scenes look richer, with more details and better motion clarity on Legion Go 2.

RELATED: IPS LCD vs OLED vs tandem OLED vs QD-OLED vs QLED vs AMOLED vs Mini LED: Which is the best display?

It's also worth noting that the Xbox Ally X's panel has a 16:9 aspect ratio, which is typically preferred for most gaming needs. Meanwhile, the Legion Go 2's screen has a 16:10 aspect ratio, like the Steam Deck. This makes Lenovo's display larger vertically, making it more ideal for certain strategy games and general PC usage.

Neither aspect ratio is bad per se, but some people have strong preferences, so it's something to keep in mind.

DISPLAY WINNER: The Legion Go 2 OLED screen is much better than the Xbox Ally X's IPS display. It's larger, has a higher refresh rate, higher top resolution, better color gamut, and deeper contrast.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Buttons, joysticks, and grip

In general, the overall layout and control options on these devices are very similar, but there are a few key differences when it comes to features and technologies.

As you can see from the pictures, both handhelds have triggers, bumpers, ABXY buttons, various menu buttons, and a D-Pad, but only the Legion Go 2 has anti-drift Hall Effect joysticks, whereas the Xbox Ally X has standard analog sticks. Additionally, the Legion Go 2 has a touchpad on its right side, while the Xbox Ally X doesn't have any at all. Some people prefer the fine control that touchpads offer for game menus and certain games on handhelds.

One of the biggest complaints many people have with all handhelds is hand cramping and wrist fatigue. Handhelds might be relatively small devices, but gripping a top-heavy device and forcing it to tilt up slightly at your face can cause discomfort. My pinky fingers often go numb playing certain handhelds. The 1.57-pound Xbox Ally X and the larger 2.03-pound Legion Go 2 both found ways to assuage this pain, but using very different methods.

Xbox Ally X's most physical defining characteristic is its long, thick grips, which were designed after the Xbox controller. In my opinion, this design definitely makes it the most comfortable handheld to actually hold in handheld mode. Of course, Xbox Ally X only has handheld mode, while Legion Go 2 also offers a far less hand-straining tabletop mode.

The original Legion Go was a rather uncomfortable handheld for me to hold, but this newer Legion Go 2 has a far more rounded design with TrueStrike Controllers that feel nicer in your hands thanks to their improved ergonomics.

By detaching the Legion Go 2's TrueStrike Controllers, popping out the tablet's kickstand, and playing in the aforementioned tabletop mode, your hands will only deal with a combined 0.46 pounds of weight from the controllers. What's more, if you connect the Legion Go 2 to your living room TV via a docking station (like my favorite JSAUX 6-in-1 Docking Station $39.99 at Amazon), you already have controllers ready to go instead of needing to find an external one.

Finally, there is one last major design difference between the two devices. It might seem like a simple thing, but having a kickstand turns a handheld into more of an entertainment device. So out of the box, I don't have to prop the Legion Go 2 up against anything when I want to stream Netflix or skim YouTube, but I do have to do this with Xbox Ally X.

For this reason, I recommend grabbing an accessory like the dBrand ROG Xbox Ally X Killswitch at Best Buy to give your Xbox Ally X a kickstand.

By the way, there is a power button that doubles as a fingerprint reader on top of the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS), but SteamOS doesn't support native biometric login, so fingerprint login is unsupported. The Xbox Ally X's power button is also a fingerprint reader, but it isn't very reliable. It's failed to accurately scan my finger several times, leading me to log in via pin much of the time.

CONTROLS & GRIPS WINNER: Once again, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is the winner. It might weigh more, but you can put it in tabletop mode to put less strain on your hands and wrists. It also offers two features the Xbox Ally X doesn't have: Hall Effect joysticks that won't drift and a touchpad.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Compatible games & Operating system

The Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) and Xbox Ally X offer a night and day user experience since the former runs Valve's Linux-based operating system, while the latter runs Microsoft's program.

Many people prefer SteamOS to Windows since, as I said previously, it is far more efficient for gaming and offers a simplified, console-like interface that feels far more conducive to a handheld experience. Still, Windows offers some features and ease of mind that you might prefer.

Microsoft launched a new Xbox Full Screen Experience (FSE) with the Xbox Ally X that was designed to reduce Windows bloat and allow the handheld to run better, but the Xbox App interface really isn't great, and it's not as efficient as SteamOS. Now, Microsoft will be releasing more FSE updates that could improve this experience, but there's still a lot of work to do.

Then there's the whole matter of game services and game compatibility.

Out of the box, Xbox Ally X owners can easily exit Xbox FSE to access a web browser and navigate to dozens of gaming services (Epic Games, Battle.net, Steam, and more). Meanwhile, out of the box,

SteamOS does have a desktop mode, but it might be daunting for people who aren't familiar with Linux (but there are plenty of helpful guides online to help with that).

Meanwhile, SteamOS's default handheld mode is only intended to access your Steam library out of the box. Of course, you can make it so your Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) can access other game services if you follow my guide on how to install Decky Loader on SteamOS handhelds; it just takes a bit more work.

One thing I love about the Xbox Ally X is how much setting customization it provides. It's Armoury Crate utility software offers far more options than Legion Go 2's Legion Space program, so I can get my system running the way I want. For instance, I can manually change Xbox Ally X VRAM very easily, but the more complicated process for updating the previous Windows Legion Go 2 VRAM involves going into the BIOS. It's possible the SteamOS variant will use a different method.

Another thing to note is that fully updating the Xbox Ally X can be a nightmare compared to Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) since you have to install updates in Windows Settings, Armoury Crate, and AMD Software. Meanwhile, SteamOS updates are done within SteamOS's system settings menu.

As for game compatibility, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) can play a wide range of titles from small indies to the latest AAA games that meet its system requirements.

However, the truth is that most games are specifically designed for Windows and not Linux. SteamOS utilizes Proton, a compatibility layer to make Windows games work on its operating system. While Proton keeps getting better every year, some programs and games still don't work well on SteamOS handhelds.

For example, most anti-cheat software isn't compatible with SteamOS. So, games that require anti-cheat kernels like Call of Duty: Black Ops 7, Battlefield 6, Valorant, and more cannot be played on Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) unless you find a workaround. Even then, I don't recommend using these fixes since it's very easy for an anti-cheat to mistake your workaround for a cheat and permanently ban your account.

In the end, you'll want to consider what type of games you intend to play on your handheld and what kind of experience you want. Then, make a purchase based on which handheld suits your needs best.

SOFTWARE WINNER: This is the trickiest category to declare a winner, since it's largely a matter of preference. The Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) generally offers a better interface and gaming experience, especially if you're willing to learn how to use Linux. However, more games are compatible with Windows, and it's easier to access a web browser and any gaming service on the Xbox Ally X right out of the box.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Battery life

Since I haven't been able to run the 74Whr Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) battery through battery life testing yet, I cannot say for sure how it matched up to the 80Whr Xbox Ally X battery's life. I'll conduct testing and update this section as soon as I can.

That said, I'm confident the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) will last longer than ASUS ROG's handheld based on the battery life testing I did on the Legion Go 2 (Windows). As seen in the chart below, the Windows variant lasted longer than Xbox Ally X when playing games at max and lowest TDP, but didn't last as long when being used like a computer.

Thing is, SteamOS is far more efficient than Windows, allowing a handheld's battery to stretch further on one charge. So, if the Windows Legion Go 2's battery life was already better than the Xbox Ally X in many ways, the SteamOS variant must be even better.

Once again, I'll run the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) through battery life testing and update this section with the results as soon as I get my hands on it.

BATTERY LIFE WINNER: It's very likely that the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) offers better battery life than the Xbox Ally X since it has a less power-hungry operating system.

Back to the top ^

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (SteamOS): Which should I buy?

We've compared these handhelds from design ergonomics to features, and even operating systems to game compatibility. In general, the Legion Go 2 (SteamOS) is certainly the more impressive device with Hall Effect joysticks, the beloved SteamOS operating system, a far better OLED display, detachable controllers, an FPS mode, and, likely, better battery life (benchmark testing coming soon). These are all things you should expect from a premium handheld created by the biggest PC manufacturer in the world.

If you're willing to wait until June and don't mind spending more money for a Legion Go 2 (SteamOS), then you're going to get a fantastic handheld gaming PC that's far more powerful than a Steam Deck and offers more versatility than any of its handheld gaming PC rivals.

But that doesn't make the Xbox Ally X a bad handheld; I still love it, even if the Legion Go 2 is more eye-catching. Truth is, they offer such different features that they suit very different use cases.

If you want to save some money and care more about those meaty grips and ensuring Windows game compatibility, then the Xbox Ally X is the handheld to get. Plus, it's actually available right now, so there's no wait.

Of course, if your biggest gripe about Xbox Ally X is Windows 11, you can always buy this handheld and then use my guide to install SteamOS on it. You'll get the best of both worlds.

Back to the top ^

I'm going to preface this by saying that a handheld gaming PC is basically a mini PC with a built-in screen, battery, and controllers, but mini PCs and handhelds both have tradeoffs that might serve your gaming needs better.

There are several different handheld gaming PCs and hundreds of mini PCs to choose from. For the sake of brevity, this page will mostly focus on comparing the Xbox Ally X (since it's our best handheld gaming recommendation) against the Geekom IT13 mini PC, which is our best mini PC recommendation, but there are plenty of other options to choose from.

I've also included a section on this page that lists our top mini PC recommendations and top handheld recommendations while explaining what each device is especially good for.

Until then, let's discuss the pros, cons, and tradeoffs while comparing a mini PC against handheld gaming PCs.

Mini PC vs handheld gaming PC: Specs

Before we go any further, take a gander at the specs for the Xbox Ally X and the Geekom IT13.

Of course, there are plenty of other handheld gaming PCs and mini PCs to choose from. I'll go over some general differences between these two types of devices.

Mini PC vs handheld gaming PC: Price & use case

TL;DR: Mini PCs tend to offer more powerful CPUs and can cost less than handhelds, but they also require additional accessories like a monitor or keyboard. Handheld gaming PCs provide everything you need for portable gaming, but the best ones are rather costly.

Both mini PCs and handheld gaming PCs can be expensive, depending on the configurations you purchase.

In general, mini PCs tend to cost less (anywhere from $300 to $1,000+), while the latest and greatest Windows 11 handhelds can cost between $800 and $1,200.) That said, some handhelds are great value buys since you don't have to also buy a monitor or controller to interact with them.

For example, the Geekom IT13 mini PC's processor is technically more powerful than the Xbox Ally X; however, the Xbox Ally X is optimized for gaming, and it also provides a touchscreen, controllers, and a battery, which the mini PC doesn't have.

To be clear, mini PCs and Windows 11 handhelds are actual Windows PCs, just in smaller forms.

What it really comes down to is that the best gaming handhelds trade off power for portability. Some offer more premium features than others, so you might find one option that fits your needs better. They are also optimized for gaming by design, with systems that are more suited to GPU-heavy tasks. Still, they typically aren't as powerful as the best gaming laptops or best gaming desktops.

Meanwhile, mini PCs are intended for more general Windows computer use with a heavier CPU focus, but in a small package. They can be tucked away out of sight if you'd like a minimalist setup. Depending on their configuration, they can be used for everything from office work to gaming. Just note that the vast majority are not optimized for video games, and most don't have powerful GPUs.

Once again, a dedicated gaming laptop or gaming desktop is more powerful. But that doesn't mean you should rule a mini PC out.

Mini PC vs handheld gaming PC: Performance and storage

TL;DR: In general, mini PCs tend to be better at performing CPU tasks and often allow for RAM and SSD upgrades. Handhelds tend to be better at GPU tasks and sometimes are only designed for SSD upgrades.

As my colleague has previously pointed out, several mini PCs are only about the size of a bagel, and handhelds are relatively small devices as well. This means that there isn't a lot of room for upgrading certain parts, or at least, not as much room to do so as you can with a full-blown desktop

Still, it's pretty standard to see handhelds and mini PCs that offer 16GB to 32GB of RAM along with 512GB to 2TB SSDs. Depending on the company, some of these devices are designed around upgradability, so you can easily swap out storage and memory as needed, but you need to check on a device-by-device basis.

WD_BLACK has designed SSDs exclusively for Xbox Ally X, but there are several other options you can choose from. You'll just need to make sure you get the size that's compatible with your device.

For instance, it's very easy to upgrade the SSD on the Xbox Ally and Xbox Ally X. However, it's harder to get to the SSD on a Legion Go 2, and it requires more work to upgrade.

Of course, you can also insert one of the best microSD cards in most handhelds, and several mini PCs have SD card slots as well.

Now let's talk performance.

I alluded to this previously, but for the most part, handhelds tend to be better built for GPU tasks while mini PCs tend to be better suited to CPU tasks.

That's because most handheld gaming PCs out right now feature AMD Ryzen Z2 Series handheld APUs (accelerated processing units) designed around gaming, whereas mini PCs can have a much wider range of Intel and AMD processors at hand, but tend to have lower integrated GPUs.

There are exceptions to this, however, such as the pricey ASUS ROG NUC Gaming Mini PC, which has a laptop version of the RTX 5080 GPU and sells for $3,137.99 at Amazon. So if you really want a small computer that offers impressive graphics, this is the device to consider.

Mini PC vs handheld gaming PC: Software & Services

TL;DR: Windows handheld gaming PCs and Windows mini PCs can run the same programs and services. However, how well a game runs depends on the device's internals.

While there are exceptions, the vast majority of PC handhelds and mini PCs are Windows 11 devices that function just like a full-blown Windows desktop or laptop.

This means that both mini PCs and handhelds can be used to surf the web, stream shows, make video calls, download programs, run various games, and more. As always, every game has minimum system requirements, so your device needs to meet those in order to run a game well.

That said, the most popular handheld gaming PC to date is the Steam Deck, which runs the Linux-based SteamOS. In case you don't know, SteamOS operates very differently from Windows 11 and offers more of a console-like interface for convenient gaming.

There are also Android gaming handhelds and macOS mini PCs out there. As with any device, each of these machines can only run compatible software. If your main focus is PC gaming, then it's best to stick with Windows 11 or SteamOS devices.

You should be aware that there are a few services that can turn just about any device into a gaming machine, regardless of how good a GPU it has.

For starters, NVIDIA GeForce NOW is a subscription that allows you to stream supported games that you own from a powerful distant server onto your device via the cloud. In other words, a beefy computer far away runs your games, allowing you to get smooth gameplay on your simple computer.

NVIDIA GeForce NOW works on Windows 11, Android, and even macOS devices. I even have a handy guide explaining how to set up GeForce NOW on Steam Deck, if you're interested.

Another option is Xbox Cloud Gaming, which lets you stream a large library with everything from indie titles to AAA games.

Mini PC vs handheld gaming PC: Best options to buy

TL;DR: We've tested and reviewed every mini PC and handheld gaming PC listed below. Our top pick for handhelds is the Xbox Ally X, while our top mini PC pick is the Geekom IT13. But each device has its own perks and tradeoffs.

Best handheld gaming PCs

• Xbox Ally X: $999.99 at Best Buy — The most powerful current-gen, Windows 11, AMD Z2 Series handheld gaming PC on the market today. It offers plenty of settings customizations, too.
• Steam Deck: Starting at $399.00 at Steam — The most affordable handheld available right now. It runs SteamOS and has a simplified interface.
• Lenovo Legion Go 2: Starting at $1,099.99 at Best Buy — A current-gen Windows 11 handheld with detachable controllers, a large OLED display, and a built-in kickstand.
• Lenovo Legion Go S (SteamOS): Starting at $649.99 at Best Buy — This handheld runs SteamOS, but has more powerful internal components than the Steam Deck.
• ROG Ally (Z1 Extreme): $649.99 at Best Buy — While not the latest and greatest, this last-gen Windows 11 handheld can still run many PC games while costing less.

Best mini PCs

• Geekom IT13: $699.00 at Amazon — A fantastic computer with plenty of ports and solid CPU performance.
• ASUS ROG NUC: $3,137.99 at Amazon — This is an actual gaming mini PC with various configuration options. You can have up to an RTX 5080 L in here.
• Beelink EQR6: $439.00 at Amazon — It won't cost you nearly as much as some other mini PC, but it has better integrated graphics than most, too.
• Geekom GT1 MEGA: $799.00 at Best Buy — An AI mini PC with powerful internals to the point that you'll often forget that it is a mini PC.

Mini PC vs handheld gaming PC: Which should I buy?

So which type of device should you get?

Honestly, there are cases where a handheld will suit your specific use case better and cases where a mini PC will suit you better.

Choose a handheld gaming PC if: You love the idea of being able to move around your home while gaming, or want to be able to take your gaming device on trips.

Choose a mini PC if: You want a relatively inexpensive PC that doesn't take up a lot of room and is perfect for connecting your various accessories to.

You don't have to spend a lot of money to land a great laptop, and both the HP OmniBook 5 14 (G1q) and the ASUS Zenbook A14 are proof.

We've tested and reviewed both of these laptops here at Windows Central, giving you a good idea of where the strengths and weaknesses lie, but I thought a direct comparison would go a long way in terms of helping you choose the perfect new PC.

Whether you're shopping for a new laptop to replace your Windows 10 PC or you simply need a lightweight, affordable device to take on the go, you should have a much better idea of which option is better for you after reading this guide.

HP OmniBook 5 14 (G1q) vs. ASUS Zenbook A14: Specs, price, and availability

These two Windows laptops firmly sit in the $500 to $1,000 price range, and there are frequent discounts that push the price into truly budget territory.

For example, at the time of writing, the HP Omnibook 5 14 with an OLED display, Snapdragon X Plus chip, 16GB of RAM, and a 512GB SSD is down to $549 at Best Buy after a $150 discount.

If you're shopping at HP's official site, you'll find far more configuration options, and you might find a similar deal. At the time of writing, I found a model with a Snapdragon X (non-Plus) chip, OLED display, 16GB of RAM, and 512GB SSD on sale for $529. I recommend spending the extra $20 for the more powerful Snapdragon X chip.

The best place I've found to shop for the ASUS Zenbook A14, at least in terms of discounts, is Best Buy. Although models generally start at about $999, frequent promotions have dropped it well below $600.

At the time of writing, a model with a Snapdragon X Plus System-on-Chip (SoC), OLED display, 16GB of RAM, and 512GB SSD costs about $849 at Best Buy.

Because both of these PCs are so frequently discounted, I expect to see some big sales during Black Friday and Cyber Monday. The event officially begins on November 28, but retailers will undoubtedly begin dropping prices well before then. My ultimate recommendation? Don't buy either of these laptops at full price.

Before I get into a more detailed breakdown of the big categories, here's a look at the specs available in each laptop.

HP OmniBook 5 14 (G1q) vs. ASUS Zenbook A14: Design and features

These are both 14-inch laptops built to be easy to carry around, but the ASUS Zenbook A14 really pushes the idea of "thin and light" to another extreme.

The Zenbook A14 weighs in at just 2.16 pounds (that's less than a kilogram for us non-American folks), which is a lot less than the OmniBook 5's 2.84 pounds (1.28kg).

The OmniBook 5 is actually a bit thinner than the Zenbook A14 and has a similar footprint, so how did ASUS shave off so much weight? The answer lies in the unique "ceraluminum" material.

It's a fancy name for magnesium alloy, but it's 30% lighter and 300% stronger than an average laptop's aluminum frame. It's also coated in a scratch-resistant ceramic layer to further protect the device. The OmniBook 5 14 uses a more traditional aluminum build that's quite sleek; it just weighs more.

Port selection favors the Zenbook A14 thanks to the inclusion of dual USB4. This is a significant upgrade over standard USB-C that rivals the transfer and display abilities of Intel's branded Thunderbolt 4 tech.

The Zenbook A14 otherwise includes HDMI 2.1 for video out, USB-A 3.2 (Gen 2), and a 3.5mm audio jack.

The OmniBook 5 falls back to standard USB-C 3.2 (Gen 2) with 10Gbps bandwidth (compared to 40Gbps from USB4), and it adds an extra USB-A 3.2 (Gen 2) port as well as a 3.5mm audio jack.

A laptop's keyboard and touchpad are crucial to its appeal, and thankfully, both laptops have great hardware in these areas. According to Windows Central laptop expert Zachary Boddy in their OmniBook 5 14 review, "the keyboard is spacious, legible, and feels pretty great for typing."

Boddy notes that the Precision touchpad is fairly standard, but it's "consistent and responsive."

Boddy also reviewed the Zenbook A14, remarking that "the layout is spacious and thoughtful, the function row is smartly designed, the purplish, off-white keyboard backlighting is consistent, easy on the eyes, and even highlights secondary functions and symbols."

The only downside to note has to do with the coating ASUS uses on its keys. Boddy noted that "the gray keys do a great job combating fingerprint smudges and marks, but what ASUS describes as 'smooth' feels more like 'slick.'" You might not find it to be an issue.

As for the Zenbook's touchpad, it makes use of all the space possible below the keys and does a great job of pointing.

The OmniBook 5 sticks with Wi-Fi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3, while the ASUS Zenbook A14 steps up to Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 for wireless connectivity.

Will the average user see much of a difference in performance between the two Wi-Fi standards? Not really, and I wouldn't put a lot of emphasis on this difference when it comes time to make a final decision.

The camera setup is essentially the same, with both laptops sporting a 1080p webcam with an IR sensor for Windows Hello facial recognition.

HP OmniBook 5 14 (G1q) vs. ASUS Zenbook A14: OLED displays

Just a few years ago, it seemed like OLED display tech was reserved for high-end devices, but the perfect contrast and awesome color have now made their way into budget devices like these.

Both laptops feature a 14-inch OLED screen with a 1920x1200 (FHD+) resolution. Both have a 0.2ms response time, and both have a 60Hz refresh rate. However, the OmniBook 5's screen is touch-enabled while the Zenbook A14's screen is non-touch.

On the ASUS side, it's rated for VESA DisplayHDR True Black 600, with 600 nits peak brightness in HDR content. For standard content, the display pushed up to 395 nits in our testing. The Zenbook A14's screen also hit 100% sRGB, 96% AdobeRGB, and 100% DCI-P3 color reproduction.

For the HP display, our testing showed that it didn't push past 300 nits of brightness in SDR content. As for color reproduction, the OmniBook 5's display hit 100% sRGB and 93% DCI-P3. If you're concerned about glare and working under bright lighting, the Zenbook A14 is likely the better choice.

HP OmniBook 5 14 (G1q) vs. ASUS Zenbook A14: Performance and battery life

Neither of these laptops is designed to be a powerhouse system for specialized work and gaming, and that's OK as long as you're just looking for an affordable PC for an average user's workload.

Both PCs use Qualcomm's Snapdragon X ARM-based chips, but there is some nuance to the specific hardware in use.

HP offers the Snapdragon X Plus (X1P-42-100) or the Snapdragon X (X1-26-100) for the OmniBook 5 14, with the former offering better performance with a higher clock speed.

The Zenbook A14 also makes use of the Snapdragon X Plus (X1P-42-100) chip, and depending on your market, you might also see Snapdragon X (X1-26-100) and Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-78-100) options.

We tested the X1-26 version in the Zenbook A14 (the most affordable and the same chip that's available in the OmniBook 5), with Boddy stating:

"The ASUS Zenbook A14 performs totally fine. Windows is snappy and smooth, it's quick to boot up and log you in, apps open swiftly, and casual computing in general is a breeze."

If you want the most power, the Zenbook A14 is where you should turn, although you'll pay more as performance increases.

Turning to battery life, this is really where both laptops shine the brightest. While testing the Zenbook A14, Boddy was able to get about 12 hours of average real-world runtime from a charge.

Better yet, there was only about a 0.7% drop in CPU performance and a 1% drop in GPU performance when running on battery compared to AC power.

Despite having a smaller 59Wh battery capacity compared to the Zenbook A14's 70Wh, the OmniBook 5 comes out ahead for runtimes. According to Boddy:

"Looping an hour of Microsoft Office tasks and then an hour of an HD video through the Procyon benchmark suite drained just 6% and 4% of the battery, respectively. Battery life is genuinely exceptional, and it's not difficult to get two full days of work out of this machine."

Both of these devices are AI laptops with full access to Copilot+ tools in Windows 11 thanks to the Qualcomm Hexagon Neural Processing Unit (NPU) inside.

HP OmniBook 5 14 (G1q) vs. ASUS Zenbook A14: Which should you buy?

Choosing between these two laptops will ultimately come down to the price (especially at the time you're buying) and your expectations.

If you'd like more power and don't mind less battery life, albeit still at an "all-day" level, the Zenbook A14 and its X Elite chip option should be the better choice. The same goes for those who want a brighter OLED display, or those who can't live without a couple of USB4 connections.

If you'd rather get the best battery life possible, our testing certainly shows that the OmniBook 5 14 is the winner with nearly two days of runtime on a charge.

I mentioned that Black Friday and Cyber Monday are headed our way at the end of November, and I expect to see the discounts available at the time of writing this guide to pale in comparison.

Bottom line, if you're shopping for a new Windows laptops costing somewhere between $500 and $1,000, both of these PCs should be near the top of your list.

Apple revealed its new M5 silicon for MacBook Pro, iPad Pro, and Apple Vision Pro on October 15, 2025, roughly three weeks after Qualcomm unveiled its new Snapdragon X2 Elite and X2 Elite Extreme ARM-based chips for Windows PCs.

I'm not expecting to see any of Qualcomm's next-gen X2 Elite and Extreme chips arrive in PCs until early next year, and Apple is remaining tight-lipped regarding any performance benchmarks before the M5 officially arrives in the MacBook Pro 14 October 22.

Regardless, I've put together an early comparison of the Apple and Qualcomm chips, including some early leaked benchmark numbers.

Snapdragon X2 Elite vs. Apple M5: CPU performance

Qualcomm's Snapdragon X2 Elite platform is divided into three parts. There's the flagship X2 Elite Extreme (X2E-96-100) System-on-Chip with 18 cores, clock speed up to 5GHz, GPU clock up to 1.85GHz, and 228GB/s memory bandwidth.

One step down is the X2 Elite (X2E-88-100) with the same 18 cores but a lower 4.7GHz clock speed and 1.7GHz GPU clock. Then there's the X2 Elite (X2E-80-100) with 12 cores, 4.7GHz clock speed, and 1.7GHz GPU clock. Both of the X2 Elite chips offer up to 152GB/s memory bandwidth.

The new Apple M5 is home to just one chip for now; if Pro and Max versions are on the way, Apple still hasn't made anything official. Like the X2 Elite chips, Apple's M5 is built using 3nm technology.

👉 Related: Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme vs. Apple M4

Apple lays claim to "the world's fastest performance core" in the M5, and there are up to four of them in the 10-core CPU option (the other six cores are of the efficiency type). Compared to the M4, Apple says this combination delivers up to 15% faster multithreaded performance.

The M5's memory bandwidth hits 153GB/s, which is 1GB/s faster than the X2 Elite chips and 75GB/s slower than the X2 Elite Extreme.

A recent Geekbench leak (via Tom's Hardware) shows the M5 in a MacBook Pro ahead of the X2 Elite Extreme chip for single-core workloads. The M5 hit 4,253 in the leaked single-core result, higher than the 4,080 score that Qualcomm provided.

However, the X2 Elite Extreme comes out ahead in multi-core testing, hitting a score of 23,491 compared to the M5's 17,862. The performance difference there is mainly based on the X2 Elite Extreme's extra 8 CPU cores, so this result is a lot closer than I imagine Qualcomm would like it to be.

Qualcomm has mainly provided X2 Elite Extreme performance numbers at this point, which makes it hard to compare the non-Extreme versions of the chip. However, it's safe to assume that the M5 will maintain its single-core supremacy while inching closer to overtaking multi-core performance.

Snapdragon X2 Elite vs. Apple M5: AI performance

Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite chips kicked off the Copilot+ PC era thanks to the inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit (NPU) with enough power to run local AI tasks smoothly.

With the new X2 Elite and Elite Extreme chips, the NPU has improved greatly, hitting 80 TOPS compared to 45 TOPS in the older hardware. That bump essentially prepares the chip for the future of local AI tasks, inside and outside of Copilot+.

Qualcomm shows off a Procyon AI Computer Vision score of 4,151 for the X2 Elite Extreme, besting Apple M4's score of 2,121.

But Apple has also improved its 16-core Neural Engine for the M5. It's optimized for Apple Intelligence tools, and it complements the Neural Accelerators in the CPU and GPU.

Apple hasn't yet provided numbers I can use for comparisons, so this section will have to wait for post-launch benchmarks. However, I do know that the M4 boasted 38 TOPS of power for AI, so the M5 should surpass that.

Snapdragon X2 Elite vs. Apple M5: GPU performance

Qualcomm has buffed its integrated Adreno GPU for the X2 Elite chips, significantly boosting the frequency and, in turn, performance.

For the X2 Elite Extreme, Qualcomm used 3DMark's Solar Bay benchmark — which tests performance in ray-traced games — to test. The chip hit a score of 90.06. To compare, Apple's last-gen M4 scored 62.7 in the same test.

Within the Windows world, the X2 Elite Extreme's new GPU, combined with increased ARM compatibility in popular anti-cheat systems, has the potential to make gaming a whole lot easier on the next generation of Snapdragon laptops.

According to Apple, the M5 represents "the next big leap in AI performance" for its custom silicon. Thanks to a redesigned 10-core GPU architecture and a Neural Accelerator within each core, it's touted as being capable of delivering more than four times the peak GPU compute power than the M4.

Buffed M5 shader cores are also expected to boost graphics performance by about 30% compared to the M4, and a new ray tracing engine should boost performance by up to 45%. That puts it roughly in line with the X2 Elite Extreme's early benchmark numbers.

External display support continues to favor Qualcomm. The M5 in the MacBook Pro can support up to dual 6K@60Hz displays, each running on Thunderbolt 5. It can also run one 6K@60Hz display and one 4K@144Hz display at the same time using Thunderbolt and HDMI. For one display, the ceiling is 4K@240Hz or 8K@60Hz.

The X2 Elite series can run up to three 4K displays each at 144Hz, or three 5K displays each at 60Hz.

Snapdragon X2 Elite vs. Apple M5: More to come

I plan to revisit this comparison once more information becomes available, but for now, it's looking like the flagship X2 Elite Extreme has some serious competition from Apple's baseline M5 chip.

It will be interesting to see how Apple's M5 Pro and Max versions, if they do arrive, compare as well to these chips, and I'm also looking forward to the potential of Qualcomm releasing something more powerful than the X2 Elite Extreme.

Qualcomm announced its new Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme chip on September 24 at its annual Summit in Hawaii, and the press — including our Editor-in-Chief Daniel Rubino — attended a live benchmarking session to analyze performance.

The second-generation ARM64-based chips from Qualcomm provide strong competition for Apple's M4 series of chips, which are also based on the ARM architecture.

While I won't have any real-world performance numbers until laptops with the X2 Elite Extreme chip launch early next year, I can provide details as to how they're expected to compare against the M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max.

Qualcomm's Snapdragon Systems-on-Chip (SoC) are designed to incorporate a processor (CPU), graphics (GPU), and Neural Processing Unit (NPU), and that's what I've focused on in this comparison.

Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme vs. Apple M4: CPU performance

Qualcomm uses a "reference design" laptop with 48GB of embedded RAM for these tests, so it's worth noting that the X2 Elite Extreme that OEMs use in their own laptops might differ depending on thermal and power designs.

Nevertheless, the X2 Elite Extreme's Oryon CPU comes out ahead of the Apple M4 — tested in a 14-inch MacBook Pro in this case — when benchmarked using Geekbench 6.5.

The X2 Elite Extreme scored 4,080 points compared to the M4's 3,872 points for single-core, and Qualcomm's chip also came out ahead of the M4 in multi-core, scoring 23,491 points compared to the M4's 15,146.

It's worth pointing out that the standard M4 has either 8 or 10 CPU cores, while the X2 Elite Extreme has 18 cores. It's unclear which version Qualcomm used for its comparison.

Apple's M4 Pro is likely a better comparison to the X2 Elite Extreme, sporting either 12 or 14 CPU cores. That pushes its Geekbench 6.5 multi-core score to around 22,500 points, which is still about 1,000 behind the Qualcomm chip.

For Geekbench 6.5 single-core, the M4 Pro usually hits around 3,800-3,900 points. The X2 Elite Extreme remains out front with a score of 4,080.

Apple's top-tier M4 Max chip with 14 or 16 CPU cores can achieve multi-core Geekbench 6.5 scores beyond 25,000 points, placing it well ahead of the X2 Elite Extreme's 23,491 posting.

However, the X2 Elite Extreme continues to best the M4 Max in single-core, where Apple's chip generally tops out at about 3,850-3,900 points.

TL;DR: Qualcomm's X2 Elite Extreme beats the Apple M4 and M4 Pro in Geekbench 6.5 tests. It also bests the M4 Max's single-core benchmark, though the M4 Max comes out ahead in multi-core testing.

What about Cinebench?

Qualcomm also provided some benchmark numbers for Cinebench 2024, which again measure single- and multi-core CPU performance.

In Qualcomm's reference laptop, the X2 Elite Extreme hit a 162 single-core score and a 1,988 multi-core score.

Using similar performance ranges for Apple's full line of M4 chips, I can see that the X2 Elite Extreme comes in below single-core scores by about 10-15 points.

Multi-core results are a different story, with the X2 Elite Extreme besting the 10-core M4 and 14-core M4 Pro, only falling behind the 16-core M4 Max by about 60 to 70 points.

TL;DR: Qualcomm's X2 Elite Extreme falls slightly behind the M4 lineup in single-core Cinebench 2024 scores, but bests the 10-core M4 and 14-core M4 Pro in multi-core results. The 16-core M4 Max remains at the top for multi-core scores.

Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme vs. Apple M4: NPU performance

The NPU is designed specifically to run AI locally, and it's becoming ever more important as AI PC features ramp up.

Qualcomm's Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme features an NPU with 80 TOPS of power, which is currently unmatched by Intel, AMD, and Apple. M4 chips have an NPU with 38 TOPS of power.

Using the Procyon AI Computer Vision benchmark, Qualcomm showed off a score of 4,151. Apple's M4 managed a score of 2,121.

In Geekbench AI 1.5, the X2 Elite Extreme topped out at a score of 88,919. The M4 generally sits at around 52,000.

TL;DR: The NPU in the Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme with 80 TOPS easily beats the NPU of 38 TOPS in Apple M4 chips.

Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme vs. Apple M4: GPU performance

The Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme contains an integrated Adreno GPU that has received a substantial upgrade compared to the first-gen X Elite chips. It's more than twice as strong as its predecessor, and it now supports ray tracing.

Qualcomm's testing using a reference laptop shows the X2 Elite Extreme hitting a 90.06 score in 3DMark's Solar Bay benchmark (great for testing ray tracing), trouncing the Apple M4's score of 62.7.

The M4 Pro with a 20-core GPU, however, hits about 126.1, keeping it ahead of the X2 Elite Extreme. The Apple M4 Max GPU with either 32 or 40 cores remains the top dog.

Turning to 3D Mark's Steel Nomad Light test, Qualcomm posts a high score of 42.61. The standard M4 chip won't touch that; however, the M4 Pro with 20-core GPU bests it with a 58.1 score.

TL;DR: The X2 Elite Extreme's integrated GPU bests that of the Apple M4, but M4 Pro and M4 Max chips score higher in Solar Bay and Steel Nomad Light benchmarks.

Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme vs. Apple M4: Major takeaways

Qualcomm's Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme demonstrates a massive upgrade over the original X Elite lineup, and it's now better positioned than ever to take on the awesome M4 lineup from Apple.

These early performance numbers show the X2 Elite Extreme ahead of the M4 and M4 Pro in terms of CPU performance, with the M4 Max retaining its title in multi-core performance.

Qualcomm now has the most powerful NPU for local AI work at 80 TOPS, easily besting the 38 TOPS in the M4, M4 Pro, and M4 Max.

And for the GPU, the X2 Elite Extreme beats the M4 but falls behind the M4 Pro and M4 Max in the 3DMark results provided. I'll have more information to share once we can actually test the X2 Elite Extreme first-hand.

It's well worth noting that Apple plans to launch its next-gen M5 chips around the same time as the X2 Elite Extreme hits markets next year, providing a whole new set of numbers to pore over.

Hungry for more information? Check out my Snapdragon X2 Elite vs. X Elite comparison to see how the two generations compare.

Qualcomm just announced its second-gen Snapdragon X2 Elite chips for laptops during the Snapdragon Summit in Maui, and there are some interesting comparisons to be made to the first-gen X Elite hardware.

I'm focusing on the X2 Elite (X2E-88-100 and X2E-80-100) chips and the X Elite (X1E-84-100, X1E-80-100, and X1E-78-100) chips for this comparison.

Yes, Qualcomm also announced an X2 Elite Extreme version, but I'm waiting for some hard performance numbers before writing a separate comparison. There's also a first-gen X Elite (X1E-00-1DE) chip that was for developer kits, which I've likewise omitted.

I've separated the X2 Elite and X Elite comparison into CPU, GPU, NPU, memory, storage, and just about everything else for easier reading.

Qualcomm X2 Elite vs. X Elite: Oryon CPU

Qualcomm's Systems-on-Chip (SoC) are designed to package a complete computing setup into one small piece of hardware.

Each chip includes a Qualcomm Oryon processor (CPU), Qualcomm Adreno integrated graphics (GPU), a Qualcomm Hexagon Neural Processing Unit (NPU), memory (RAM), and more.

I'm starting this comparison by looking at how the Snapdragon X2 Elite's Oryon CPU has evolved compared to the first-gen X Elite chips.

Qualcomm's original Snapdragon X Elite Oryon CPUs feature 12 cores, 42MB of cache, and max multi-core frequencies that top out at 3.8GHz, boosting up to 4.2GHz in the X1E-84-100 model. These use a 4nm process.

The most notable change in the X2 Elite's CPU architecture, aside from the new 3nm process that lowers power consumption and boosts performance, is the arrival of new Oryon Prime cores.

They're joined by Oryon Performance cores, which, despite the name, aren't as powerful.

Qualcomm says that the new core setup is "tuned to provide premium responsiveness and user experiences in everyday workloads with extreme power efficiency."

The more powerful Snapdragon X2 Elite (X2E-88-100) features 18 total cores, split with 12 Prime cores and 6 Performance cores. The Prime cores can hit a 4.0GHz multi-core frequency, temporarily boosting up to 4.7GHz for both single- and dual-core workloads.

The Performance cores seemingly do not include boost capabilities, hitting a maximum 3.4GHz multi-core frequency.

I've done my best to lay out the performance specs for both generations of Elite chips, using the "Performance cores" section in the table below for the first-gen X Elite's cores.

The new Snapdragon X2 Elite (X2E-88-100) features a significantly larger cache at 53MB compared to other chips. Even the X2 Elite (X2E-80-100) falls to 34MB, coming in below the original X Elite lineup's 42MB cache.

You'll also notice that Qualcomm is no longer measuring multi-thread frequencies, turning instead to multi-core frequency thanks to the new X2 Elite architecture.

Qualcomm says that the X2 Elite platform "boasts up to 31% faster performance at ISO power" while pulling up to "43% less power than the previous generation."

Qualcomm X2 Elite vs. X Elite: Adreno GPU

As with the Oryon CPU architecture, Qualcomm has made changes to the architecture of the integrated Adreno GPU.

The Snapdragon X2 Elite (X2E-88) features the same X2-90 GPU as the flagship X2 Elite Extreme, although it's clocked slightly lower at 1.70GHz (compared to 1.85GHz).

The X2 Elite (X2E-80) has a different X2-85 integrated GPU, but it clocks the same as the one in the X2E-88 chip at 1.7GHz.

Although Qualcomm doesn't include TFLOPS measurements for the updated Adreno GPUs in the X2 Elite chips, the significantly higher frequencies should indeed translate to a significant power boost.

API support for the first-gen X Elite chips includes DX12, and it appears that Qualcomm has expanded that to DX12.2 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenCL 3.0 for the X2 chips.

External display support has been upgraded to include up to triple 5K@60Hz or triple 4K@144Hz displays. The first-gen X Elite's Adreno GPU topped out at triple 4K@60Hz or dual 5K@60Hz.

Qualcomm states that its "new Qualcomm Adreno GPU architecture offers a 2.3X increase in performance per watt and power efficiency over the previous generation," although the company could be referring only to the X2 Elite Extreme chip.

I'll know more once we have raw performance numbers to look over.

Qualcomm X2 Elite vs. X Elite: Hexagon NPU

The chip's NPU is designed specifically to handle local AI work, reducing the need to reach out to the cloud when tapping AI for help.

The original Snapdragon X Elite chips introduced the world's first NPU powerful enough to run Copilot+ AI tools on Windows 11 at 45 TOPS (Trillion Operations Per Second), and the X2 Elite's NPU is once again the most powerful in the world for laptops.

Qualcomm has bumped the NPU up to a whopping 80 TOPS across all the new X2 Elite chips (including the X2 Elite Extreme), so there's really no competition between the two generations.

👉 Related: Best Copilot+ PCs

Qualcomm states that the new NPU is "built to run multiple intelligent experiences concurrently with faster responsiveness and reduced latency," likely owing to the 64-bit architecture and "increased memory access."

If you want the most powerful AI laptop from, well, an AI standpoint, Qualcomm's X2 Elite chips are the best out there before getting into assistance from discrete graphics.

Qualcomm X2 Elite vs. X Elite: Memory & storage

Memory support has been buffed in the X2 Elite chips.

Both the X2E-88 and X2E-80 rely on LPDDR5x-9523MT/s RAM with a 128-bit bus width and 152GB/s bandwidth. The maximum capacity has also been increased to 128GB.

The first-gen X Elite chips all use slower LPDDR5x-8448MT/s RAM with a 16-bit bus, working out to 135GB/s bandwidth. Capacity hits a ceiling at 64GB for the first-gen chips.

Storage support has also been upgraded for the new generation. Whereas first-gen X Elite chips relied on NVMe over PCIe 4.0, the X2 Elite chips now support dual NVMe PCIe 5.0.

The UFS version remains the same at 4.0 for removable flash storage, and the SD standard has been upgraded to SDUC with SD Express as well as SDXC with UHS-I.

Qualcomm X2 Elite vs. X Elite: Everything else

I've so far mainly pointed out the differences between Qualcomm's first- and second-gen Elite chips, but there are a bunch of specs that haven't changed between generations.

The X2 Elite chips continue to offer up to Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4 wireless connectivity; both generations use the Qualcomm FastConnect 7800 system.

Qualcomm upgraded its cellular modem to the newer Snapdragon X75 5G system, but peak download and upload speeds remain at 10Gbps and 3.5Gbps, respectively.

USB support also remains the same with USB4 at 40Gbps, with a maximum of three of these ports in one PC.

One thing that has changed with X2 Elite is the addition of "Snapdragon Guardian Technology." It's a subsystem out-of-band management tool that "combines hardware, software, and cloud services," making it much easier for users to manage their PC from "virtually anywhere."

While conducting our ASUS ROG Xbox Ally X review and our Legion Go 2 (Windows) review here at Windows Central, I spent dozens of hours playing games and running tests on either handheld.

With my experience at hand, I've compared these handhelds' specs and features against each other to see how they stand out in various areas.

Let's take a look at how the differences between the Xbox Ally X vs Lenovo Legion Go 2 2 can affect your gaming experience.

UPDATE Oct. 16, 2025: I've updated this entire article now that I've reviewed both the Xbox Ally X and the Legion Go 2.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2: Specs

I'll compare various aspects of these handhelds against each other, but first, take a moment to familiarize yourself with their specs and basic differences.

Note: I am not comparing the starting Xbox Ally (white) handheld against the Legion Go 2 since it is more of a competitor against the Legion Go S rather than the Legion Go 2.

In case you didn't already know, the ROG Xbox Ally X is the successor to the popular ROG Ally X handheld, but the Xbox name is on there because Microsoft has partnered with ASUS ROG for this new Windows 11 device.

Now that you've had a moment to look at these specs, let's discuss them more in depth.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Price

PRICE WINNER: There are two ways to see this. The Xbox Ally X costs less, but the Legion Go 2 does offer additional features and versatility, so you could argue it's a better value given its price.

Perhaps the first thing you noticed looking at the previous spec chart is how expensive these devices are, with the Legion Go 2 being the pricier option.

The Xbox Ally X sells for $999.99 while the Legion Go 2 has as starting $1,049.99 configuration and then a $1,349.99 configuration.

Remember, these are premium handheld gaming PCs. If you're after something more affordable, Lenovo offers the Legion Go S line with either a Windows or SteamOS option. And then, there is also a starting Xbox Ally (without the X at the end).

Now, the Legion Go 2's higher price point, while outside of many people's ranges, is warranted given that it has that larger OLED display, a higher refresh rate, detachable controllers, and a kickstand, which the Xbox Ally X doesn't have.

Both devices are slated to launch in October 2025. The Xbox Ally X is already available as of the time of writing, but it's unclear when the Legion Go 2 will hit store shelves.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Performance and storage

PERFORMANCE & STORAGE WINNER: The Xbox Ally X and Legion Go 2 both offer excellent CPU and GPU performance, but the Legion Go 2 has notably faster SSD read and write speeds.

When it comes to performance, one of the biggest differences between the Xbox Ally X and the Legion Go 2 is their AMD Ryzen Z2 series processors.

The Legion Go 2 sports an AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme, while the Xbox Ally X has an AMD Ryzen AI Z2 Extreme, an AI processor.

Both of these APUs (Accelerated Processing Units) feature 8 cores and 16 threads with Zen 5 architecture, as well as 16GPU cores with RDNA3.5 architecture. However, the Xbox Ally X's AI processor features an NPU (neural processing unit) that can reach up to 50 TOPS.

In case you don't know, this AI processor helps the Xbox Ally X work more efficiently when running certain AI processes, since the NPU takes some of the load off of the CPU (central processing unit) and GPU (graphics processing unit).

In my testing, the Xbox Ally X just barely beat out the Legion Go 2 in most of my CPU and GPU tests, but both offered impressive performance overall. That said, I'll say that the Legion Go 2 offers better performance overall since it has a much better SSD inside of it that reaches faster read and write speeds for game loading and saving.

Of course, the best gaming handhelds are in no way as powerful as the best gaming laptops or best gaming desktops since handhelds trade off portability for power.

As you likely already know, overall system performance is also determined by how well various parts of a computer system work together. Part of that includes having reliable memory and storage.

The Xbox Ally X has 24GB LPDDR5X-8000 MHz RAM, while the Legion Go 2 can have up to 32GB LPDDR5X-8000 MHz RAM. Both are more than adequate for handheld gaming. The more the better for intensive graphics games, especially. But the higher the capacity, the higher the cost of the device.

When it comes to SSD storage, both the Xbox Ally X's 1TB M.2 2280 SSD and the Legion Go 2's offering of up to 2TB M.2 2242 SSD provide ample SSD storage.

But you'll note that these devices use different-sized SSDs. Most other mainstream Windows handhelds on the market use the 2280 SSD, like the Xbox Ally X.

After opening the Legion Go 2 and looking inside, I learned that the Legion Go 2 wasn't designed with upgradability in mind. Meanwhile, the Xbox Ally X SSD is much easier to upgrade, and WD_BLACK has designed SSDs exclusively for Xbox Ally X.

Additionally, both devices have the ability to expand game storage space using the best microSD cards.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Display

DISPLAY WINNER: The Legion Go 2 OLED screen is better than the Xbox Ally X's IPS display in just about every way. The only downside to the Legion Go 2 having these better display features is that it makes the Lenovo's handheld more costly.

You'll have noticed by looking at the specs that the Legion Go 2 has a better display than the Xbox Ally X, in just about every way.

Its 8.8-inch touchscreen might not sound that different on paper from Xbox Ally X's 7-inch touchscreen, but believe me, the size difference is massive when viewed in person. You'll be able to make out more details without having to squint as much.

On top of that, the Legion Go 2 has an OLED display, which means the colors it produces are far more vibrant, and the contrast also looks better thanks to the display's ability to produce true black.

RELATED: IPS LCD vs OLED vs tandem OLED vs QD-OLED vs QLED vs AMOLED vs Mini LED: Which is the best display?

Unlike the original Legion Go, this new Lenovo handheld supports VRR (variable refresh rate), which helps games play more smoothly on your screen. The Xbox Ally X also supports VRR, but that was expected since the ROG Ally X did.

The Legion Go 2's 144Hz refresh rate is higher than the Xbox Ally X's 120Hz, while the WUXGA (1920x1200) resolution of the Legion Go 2 is also crisper than the Xbox Ally X's FHD (1920x1080) resolution.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Buttons, joysticks, and grip

CONTROLS & GRIPS WINNER: There are a few tradeoffs here. The Xbox Ally X has much better grips and is more comfortable to hold. However, the Legion Go 2 offers Hall effect joysticks that won't drift and it's more versatile. Unlike the Xbox Ally X, it can be put in tabletop mode if you don't want to hold the relatively heavy handheld.

Many of the controls are placed in similar locations between the two devices; however, there are some major trade-offs when it comes to comparing these handhelds' grips and controls against each other.

For one thing, the Xbox Ally X's grips were designed after the Xbox controller, which many people think is the most comfortable gamepad design out there. As such, the Xbox Ally X has better grips overall. As an example, my hands often get uncomfortable holding handhelds, but I don't have this problem with Xbox Ally X.

Both devices have offset joysticks, but only the Legion Go 2 has Hall Effect joysticks, which will prevent drift from ruining your playing sessions.

Additionally, the Legion Go 2 has a kickstand, and its TrueStrike controllers can detach from the main device, which gives players the freedom to play in tabletop mode. This is something that isn't possible on Xbox Ally X.

That said, if you're willing to pay, you can give your Xbox Ally X a kickstand using the dBrand ROG Xbox Ally X Killswitch at Best Buy.

So, even though the Legion Go 2 weighs more, being able to play in tabletop mode with detached controllers can lessen the strain it puts on your hands and wrists right out of the box. The kickstand also makes it easier to use your handheld as an all-around entertainment device, to prop up while you watch Netflix or catch up on YouTube channels.

What's more, the Legion Go 2's right controller can be put in FPS mode and slid around a surface to be used like a mouse, which is useful when playing games that rely more on aiming or clicking.

Additionally, unlike the Xbox Ally X, the Legion Go 2 has a small touchpad on the right side to give more fine control in specific menus and FPS games.

Overall, the Legion Go 2 has better controls and has more features than the Xbox Ally X, but not everyone needs all of these features. So if you want a more versatile playing experience, you should go with Legion Go 2, and if not, the less-expensive Xbox Ally X.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Compatible games & Operating system

SOFTWARE WINNER: Both Windows handhelds can run the same kinds of programs and games. However, The Xbox Ally X offers far more customization options in its software.

Both the Legion Go 2 and the Xbox Ally X run Windows 11, which means you can run any program or gaming service on these devices that you would on a Windows gaming laptop.

Now, Microsoft has been busy creating an Xbox full screen experience, a mode that reduces Windows 11 bloat and allows handhelds to work more efficiently when running games. It's currently only on Xbox Ally and Xbox Ally X, but could come to other handhelds in the future.

One thing I've loved about previous ROG Ally handhelds is that they give me far more control over the settings than the Legion Go line does. For instance, I can adjust VRAM easily within an app on ROG Ally X, whereas I need to go into the BIOS to change Legion Go 2 VRAM.

Meanwhile, some other settings changes aren't available at all on Legion Go handhelds, which can be frustrating.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Battery life

BATTERY LIFE WINNER: Overall, the Legion Go 2 offers better battery life when gaming, despite having the smaller battery capacity.

I put the Legion Go 2's 74Whr battery and the Xbox Ally X's larger 80Whr battery through the same battery tests and got some interesting results.

The Legion Go 2's smaller battery managed to last 20 minutes longer while playing Cyberpunk 2077 on Max TDP, with the screen around 200 nits brightness, and with the game on Steam Deck graphics preset.

When running Celeste, a pixel-art 2D platformer, on the lowest default TDP settings, the Legion Go 2 lasted 12 minutes longer.

However, when I put either device at the middle TDP preset with the screens around 200 nits, the Xbox Ally X surprisingly lasted two hours and 54 minutes longer. This is likely due to the fact that there is a specific Windows TDP setting on Xbox Ally X, which could have been further optimized for office tasks.

Of course, you're probably only going to be using your handheld gaming PC for, you know, gaming. So, yeah, the Legion Go 2 has better gaming battery life overall, even if it's only by a little.

To be honest, the battery life of both of these devices isn't where I'd like it to be, but this is just where battery technology is at this point.

Xbox Ally X vs Legion Go 2 (Windows): Which should I buy?

Both the Xbox Ally X and Legion Go 2 are excellent next-gen handheld gaming PCs. The thing is, they offer different conveniences, which will serve different needs.

The Xbox Ally X is definitely expensive, but it is the most affordable premium handheld of the two. It's also a great choice for anyone who wants meaty grips to assuage hand cramps and offers far more customization options in settings.

Meanwhile, the Legion Go 2 is an all-around better handheld between the two, if you're willing to spend the high amount to grab one. That gorgeous OLED on a larger screen will look stunning and offer buttery smooth motion clarity.

Plus, having the ability to pop out the Legion Go 2's kickstand and pull off the controllers gives you more ways to use this handheld out of the box than you can with the Xbox Ally X.

So, in the end, if you want a more affordable and traditional handheld that offers good performance and plenty of customization settings, then the Xbox Ally X could be the best fit. But if you want a versatile handheld with an amazing display, go for the Legion Go 2.

I have had the pleasure of conducting both the Lenovo Legion Go review and the Legion Go 2 review here at Windows Central, and since then, I've put dozens, if not hundreds, of hours into playing these handheld gaming PCs. I've even upgraded the SSD in the original and made other modifications to it.

These devices, affectionately referred to as LeGo and LeGo 2 by fans, have some notable differences. Here's how they compare against each other and the best gaming handhelds.

UPDATE Oct 3, 2025: I've updated this page with a link to my Legion Go 2 review and the final official specs for the next-gen handheld.

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Specs

Now that you've had a chance to look at these specs, let's discuss what these differences could mean for you.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Price & value

The original Legion Go released at the end of 2023 and has two variants, one that sells for $699.99 and another that sells for $749.99 at various retailers.

Now, the next-gen Legion Go 2 releases in October 2025, and also has two configurations to choose from — The starting device sells for $1,099.99 while the more premium offering has a $1,349.99 MSRP.

As you can see, the newer device is significantly more expensive, but it also offers several improvements over the previous model. I

It's also worth noting that the Legion Go line tends to be more expensive than other handheld gaming PCs on the market due to the features they provide, such as removable controllers, FPS mode for the right controller, built-in kickstands, large 8.8-inch displays, and Hall effect joysticks. Many competitors don't offer these things.

In other words, while they are relatively expensive, Legion Go handhelds are priced decently for the features they offer.

PRICE WINNER: The Legion Go is more affordable, which isn't too surprising given that it's the older model. However, the Legion Go 2 is well priced for what's on offer.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Performance

In my own testing, I learned that the Legion Go 2's AMD Ryzen Z2 Extreme APU, performs better than the Legion Go's Ryzen Z1 Extreme processor, but only by a modest amount.

For instance, when playing graphically demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 at similar performance settings and Low game graphics presets, the Legion Go 2 averaged 41.72 FPS (frames per second), which is only slightly better than the Legion Go's average of 36.43 FPS.

Despite this, games play a lot smoother on the Legion Go 2, since the OLED display actually supports VRR (variable refresh rate), where the original device doesn't.

Memory also plays a role in performance. The Legion Go 2's premium model provides 32GB 7500Mhz LPDDR5X RAM, which helps the device play games more efficiently than the previous 16GB RAM version.

PERFORMANCE WINNER: The Legion Go 2 offers modestly better performance than the Legion Go, but the new device looks a lot smoother in person since it supports VRR.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Display

At this point, I can easily say that the Legion Go 2's 8.8-inch OLED is the best handheld screen on the market. It produces a fantastic color range, with excellent contrast and crisp details.

Like I previously said, the fact that the OLED supports VRR on top of the 144Hz refresh rate, also makes it better than the original handheld's 8.8-inch LED display.

RELATED: IPS vs OLED vs QD-OLED vs mini LED: Which display is best?

To help improve performance and battery life, the Legion Go 2 screen resolution has been downgraded to WUXGA (1920x1200), compared to the original handheld's higher QHD (2560 x 1600), but this is plenty sharp enough for handheld use.

In case you didn't know, 8.8-inches is notably larger than most other handheld screens on the market. This size can make it easier to make out game details and makes it a favorite among people who don't want to squint as much.

DISPLAY WINNER: The Legion Go 2's 8.8-inch OLED panel is not only better than the Legion Go's 8.8-inch LED display, but also the best handheld gaming PC screen on the market to date.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Controls and play modes

Both the Legion Go and Legion Go 2 feature built-in kickstands and detachable controllers. Additionally, both handhelds feature a mouse wheel on the right controller as well as the ability to switch the controller into FPS mode so you can use it like a mouse on a surface when playing your games.

A notable difference is that the Legion Go 2 design is more ergonomic and fits better in your hands, making it easier to reach the buttons. Unlike many other handhelds, both the Legion Go 2 and Legion Go have Hall effect joysticks to prevent drift from happening.

When it comes to buttons and controls, there are two major differences between the first and second Legion Go iteration — The newer one now has a fingerprint reader on top, and the controllers have USB-C charging ports on them. These are helpful improvements that add an extra level of convenience.

The touchpad is slightly smaller on the Legion Go 2, but it works effectively to navigate around the screen.

CONTROLS WINNER: The Legion Go 2's rounded design makes it easier to hold the device and reach the buttons. Additionally, it offers USB-C charging ports on the controllers for easy charging and also has a fingerprint reader for convenient login.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Software and games

Both the original Legion Go and the Legion Go 2 run Windows 11, which means users can access any services, programs, or games that can run on a Windows gaming laptop.

Feel like playing Cyberpunk 2077 from your Steam library? Go for it. Itching to dive into Fortnite? Open Epic Games on either handheld. More interested in jumping into Diablo IV on Battle.net? Either Legion Go is ready and able.

As always, how well a game runs will depend on its hardware system requirements and how well your handheld matches up to those specs.

That said, there are ways to improve performance on the Legion Go, namely by adjusting game graphics settings, increasing Legion Go VRAM, lowering resolution to 1080p, and more.

Outside of gaming, I've used my Legion Go to write articles in Google Docs (using this keyboard accessory from Amazon), stream Netflix while in bed, and more. It's easy to forget that it isn't just a handheld, it's a full-blown PC that you can use for just about any normal computer need.

SOFTWARE WINNER: This is basically a tie. Both handhelds can play similar games or run the same kinds of programs.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Battery life

The Legion Go 2 has a 74 Whr battery, which is a significant increase from the original Legion Go's 49.2 Whr battery.

Despite this, the handhelds tended to run around the same amount of time when playing graphically demanding titles at the same settings.

For instance, the Legion Go was able to play Cyberpunk 2077 for around two hours, while the Legion Go 2 was only modestly longer, at around two hours and 17 minutes. It just goes to show how thirsty the new handheld is.

Of course, when running less demanding programs, both devices can run for a few hours, depending on system settings. The longest I got the Legion Go 2 to last was 11 hours and 30 minutes, but that was when I was using it to browse the internet.

On the subject of battery life, the Legion Go 2 controllers feature a USB-C charging port on the inside, which is something that the original Legion Go doesn't have. So, in some scenarios, it will be more convenient to charge the new controllers.

BATTERY LIFE WINNER: It might be by a small amount, but the Legion Go 2's larger battery does last longer when playing more intensive games.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Grip ergonomics and comfort

As shown in the embedded pictures above, the Legion Go 2 basically has the same back buttons as the original handheld, but they've each been changed slightly with either a different shape, placement, or slightly different orientation.

The more rounded design and improved texture feel far more comfortable in my hands compared to the blocky shape of the original handheld.

Now, the Legion Go 2 does weigh more at 2.03 pounds compared to the Legion Go's 1.88 pounds, but the nice thing is you can pull out the kickstand and detach the controllers if you don't want to hold it.

ERGONOMICS WINNER: The more rounded design and more reachable layout of the Legion Go 2's buttons make this handheld more comfortable to hold, even if it weighs more.

Back to the top ^

Legion Go 2 vs Legion Go: Which is better?

The Legion Go 2 modestly outperforms the OG handheld and has a few improvements that make it the perfect premium handheld. It has the best OLED display to date, a convenient fingerprint reader, USB-C ports on the controllers, and a far more comfortable design to hold.

All this together makes the Legion Go 2 a better device.

That said, the original Legion Go is still a great handheld that offers many of the same features at a lower cost. If you're shopping on a budget and don't mind having an LED display that doesn't support VRR, it's still a great option.

Back to the top ^

Gaming laptops are a convenient way to take your favorite titles with you wherever you go. I love to play on a high-end gaming laptop, but they do come with some downsides.

Gaming laptops often cost more than standard laptops; they're usually heavier and thicker, and they often don't have the right aesthetic to fit into a professional environment.

What if you could take a regular laptop with a Thunderbolt port and connect a full-size desktop graphics card (GPU) with just one cable? That's where Razer's Core X hardware comes into play.

The original Razer Core X and Core X Chroma external GPUs (eGPU) have now received a massive upgrade in the form of the Core X V2, bringing Thunderbolt 5 performance to handle modern cards.

I'm here to shed some light on the upgrades (and downgrades) you can expect, as well as my thoughts on value and who should buy this type of hardware.

Razer Core X V2 vs. Core X V1: Specs and availability

Razer's Core X V1 has become difficult to find seven years after its 2018 launch date, and the Core X Chroma V1 — an updated version with 50W of extra power and RGB lighting — is in the same boat, six years after its launch.

While you can still find some models for sale on eBay, your mileage will vary in regard to condition and pricing. The cheapest price I spotted was about $76, but prices climb to $500 and beyond.

The original model was available in Black and Mercury White color options, as well as with additional RGB lighting in the Chroma model.

Razer's updated Razer Core X V2 was officially announced on July 15, 2025, and it's expected to be "available soon" in a Black finish, according to Razer.

The Razer Core X V2 is set to debut with a $349.99 price tag. That's about $50 more than the Razer Core X V1's original MSRP.

Considering the new Core X V2 doesn't come with a built-in PSU like its predecessor, you'll want to add that cost to your total as well.

Here's a look at the specs that make up these two external GPUs from Razer.

What are the major differences between the Razer Core X V1 and V2?

The biggest difference between the Razer Core X / Core X Chroma V1 and the newer Core X V2 is their means of connectivity.

Whereas the V1 model used Thunderbolt 3 (and later Thunderbolt 4), the Core X V2 uses Thunderbolt 5. Even compared to Thunderbolt 4, the latest Thunderbolt standard doubles the bandwidth.

That means you can expect transfer speeds up to 80Gb/s (or 120Gb/s with TB5's Bandwidth Boost enabled), more than what is required to appease the eGPU's PCIe 4.0 x4 GPU slot that tops out at 64Gb/s.

The Razer Core X V2 also now supports larger GPUs, which is a welcome change in a market rife with monster cards that barely fit into many desktop cases.

Razer says the Core X V2 can handle 4-slot cards at full length, whereas the V1 model topped out at 3-slot cards.

The new Razer Core X V2 weighs a lot less than its predecessor, but that's because it no longer ships with a built-in power supply unit (PSU).

The Core X V1 came with a 650W PSU included, and the Core X V1 Chroma upped that to 700W when it launched shortly after.

Rather than guessing which PSU would best suit your GPU of choice, Razer left the space open in the Core X V2, with support for any standard ATX PSUs.

I don't necessarily mind this change, but the Core X V2 already costs $50 more than its predecessor when it launched. Adding a PSU will bump that price up considerably, at least unless you have an extra unit sitting around idle.

Because the Core X V2 can now deliver up to 140W of power back to the host laptop via the USB-C cable, Razer recommends adding at least 230W of power to the PSU on top of the power that's required to run the graphics card.

In terms of overall design, the new Razer Core X V2 has a much boxier shape that I'd say looks a lot more mature than its predecessor. It does not, however, offer any extra ports aside from the USB-C/Thunderbolt connection.

The Razer Core X Chroma V1 had four USB-A 3.2 ports and a Gigabit Ethernet hookup, which came in super handy for accessories and wired internet on laptops lacking the ports. It's a shame these were removed in the V2 model.

Thunderbolt 5 does have superior daisy-chaining abilities, and for a truly ultimate setup, you could add Razer's new Thunderbolt 5 Dock Chroma I reviewed into the mix.

Aside from a Razer logo on the Core X V2, there is a serious lack of RGB lighting; I wouldn't be surprised to see Razer follow up with a Chroma V2 model just like it did with its predecessor eGPU. Hopefully, it'll also come with some additional ports.

As for compatibility with laptops and GPUs, Razer says the new Core X V2 will work with Thunderbolt 5, Thunderbolt 4, and USB4 laptops and some gaming handhelds.

On the GPU side, NVIDIA and AMD cards are compatible. Razer has a GPU compatibility chart you can check to ensure your hardware will run properly, but it looks like basically everything from the RTX 5090 back to GTX 10-series cards will work.

For AMD, Razer lists Radeon RX 9000, RX 7000, RX 6000, and RX 5000 cards as compatible with the Core X V2.

The older Razer Core X V1 (Chroma) handles a wide range of older NVIDIA and AMD cards, up to RTX 30-series and Radeon RX 5000 series. Because the eGPU has its own PSU with 2x 2+6 power connectors, you need to stay in that arena in terms of GPU power.

Razer's Core X V2 is the logical choice in 2025

Considering the Razer Core X V1 and its Chroma companion are only available on secondhand markets, and considering how much of a performance improvement the Core X V2 brings with Thunderbolt 5, there's only one logical choice in 2025 for most people.

Sure, the Core X V1 will do a decent job if you're using an older NVIDIA or AMD GPU with a Thunderbolt 3/4 laptop, but I strongly recommend setting yourself up much better for the future with the new Core X V2 model.

It does, unfortunately, cost more than its predecessor when looking at MSRP, while lacking a PSU and extra outputs found in the V1 Chroma model.

But its Thunderbolt 5 performance, support for modern GPUs, and additional charging power are certainly perks that modernize the eGPU.

Razer should be giving its Razer Core X V2 the green light to buy for $350 in the near future. At the time of writing, you can sign up for availability notifications at the official Razer site.

And if you do want to take your chances on a used Razer Core X V1, do check out eBay for listings.

Lenovo's Yoga lineup ranges from versatile convertibles to premium notebooks, and attempting to choose the perfect PC for you isn't always easy.

That's especially true now that Qualcomm's Snapdragon X chips have entered the room, offering a strong alternative to Intel and AMD for those who want excellent efficiency and don't mind using Windows on Snapdragon.

Now that we've reviewed both the Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) and Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9) here at Windows Central — with both receiving a Best Award next to a high score — I've put together this detailed comparison to help you make the right choice for your next laptop.

Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) vs. Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9): Specs

Before I get into the in-depth comparison between these two Lenovo laptops, it's worth taking a look at the raw specs that go into the build.

I pulled this data from Lenovo's reference documents, so everything listed might not be available in all regions.

Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) vs. Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9): Price and availability

Lenovo's Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) is, by far, the more expensive laptop. At the time of writing, prices start at $1,819.99 at Lenovo for a model with an Intel Core Ultra 7 256V CPU, 16GB of RAM, and 1TB SSD.

Bumping the CPU up to the Core Ultra 7 258V option with 32GB of RAM costs about $2,049.99 at Lenovo. This model is cheaper elsewhere; you can pick it up for $1,999.99 at Best Buy.

If you're on a tighter budget, Lenovo's Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9) should be your top pick. It starts at $1,199 at Lenovo for a model with Snapdragon X Elite System-on-Chip (SoC), 16GB of RAM, and a 512GB SSD.

You can bump the specs up to 32GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD, which usually costs about $1,399.99 at Lenovo. However, at the time of writing, it's down to $1,149.99 with a running discount.

The Yoga Slim 7x is also available at Best Buy starting at $1,199.99.

Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) vs. Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9): Design and features

According to Zachary Boddy in their Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) review, the PC "may be the best-looking laptop Lenovo has ever released."

That's thanks to a thin build that lives up to the Slim name, measuring just 0.57 inches thin and weighing in at 2.71 pounds. The laptop has "smooth, glossy, curved edges" and a glass lid, yet it passes MIL-STD-810H durability testing.

The Slim 7x is another beauty, with an aluminum chassis that's thinner than the Slim 9i at 0.51 inches. Windows Central's Zachary Boddy also reviewed the Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9), remarking:

"If you think that means sacrificing premium materials or features, think again. The Yoga Slim 7x is constructed entirely of aluminum and glass, with a full multitouch display and certified MIL-STD-810H military-grade durability."

The thin design of both Yoga Slim laptops does have one major consequence: port selection. The Slim 9i (Gen 10) has just two Thunderbolt 4 hookups. That's it. The Yoga Slim 7x offers three USB4 ports — which are the non-Intel equivalent of Thunderbolt — but nothing else.

If you're using either of these laptops in a full desktop setup, chances are you're going to need a solid Thunderbolt dock to expand connectivity.

As for wireless, both laptops feature the latest Wi-Fi 7 standard for fast and reliable internet. Bluetooth 5.4 is available on both PCs for your wireless accessories.

The keyboard and touchpad, both designed by Lenovo, are a wash. Neither PC features a haptic touchpad, though the one on the Yoga Slim 7x is slightly larger. As always, I recommend trying out these keyboards first-hand before making a final decision.

Audio is also quite impressive across both laptops. The Yoga Slim 9i features a more powerful setup, however, which might make a difference if you often enjoy listening to music and watching movies on your PC.

It's set up with dual bottom-firing 3W woofers as well as dual 2W tweeters located underneath the keyboard, which makes it feel like audio is headed directly your way. Sound is supported by Dolby Atmos and a Smart Amp.

On the side of the Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9), it also has four speakers but with a bit less power. There are dual 2W woofers on the bottom of the PC, as well as dual top-firing 2W tweeters flanking the keyboard. They won't get quite as loud as those on the Slim 9i, but they come with Dolby Atmos and a Smart Amp.

One area where the Slim 9i (Gen 10) falters is the camera. Because the PC has such thin bezels, Lenovo embedded the camera beneath the OLED display. When the camera isn't in use, it's not visible.

But when it is in use, you get a hole punch look on your screen. What's worse, the under-display camera (UDC) has to capture images through the 4K panel, making for a terrible picture. It also lacks facial recognition through Windows Hello and human presence detection.

The Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9) takes a more traditional approach to the camera, offering an FHD camera with IR for facial recognition above the screen. It features human presence detection, which can automatically lock and unlock the PC when you depart or approach.

Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) vs. Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9): Display

The Yoga Slim 9i's defining feature is its incredible 4K OLED display. It has the thinnest bezels I think I've ever seen on a Windows laptop; so small that the camera is embedded beneath the display like a modern phone.

Reviewer Zachary Boddy calls it "the best screen on a 14-inch laptop," calling out the 120Hz refresh rate, 98% screen-to-body ratio, curved top corners, and excellent color reproduction.

In their testing, Boddy saw 100% sRGB, 94% AdobeRGB, and 100% DCI-P3 color, with infinite contrast thanks to the OLED panel. Not to mention Dolby Vision and VESA DisplayHDR TrueBlack 600 certification to push HDR content to its best. Brightness climbs to about 395 nits with SDR content, and it can push 750 nits with HDR.

Boddy calls out a couple of drawbacks, including the locked 60Hz/120Hz refresh rates (no automatic adjustments) and the use of pulse-width modulation (PWM), which can cause eye strain and headaches in sensitive users.

The Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9) has a slightly larger display at 14.5 inches, but it drops the resolution from 3840x2400 to 2944x1840 for less pixel density. It also tops out at a lower 90Hz refresh rate with no dynamic setting for automatic adjustments.

The panel is OLED with perfect contrast and super color reproduction; reviewer Zachary Boddy tested for 100% sRGB, 96% AdobeRGB, and 100% DCI-P3 gamuts.

If you're looking for a great laptop with a bright screen, the Yoga Slim 7x should be your first choice. The display climbs to roughly 500 nits with SDR, but it reaches 1,000 nits with HDR content. It comes with Dolby Vision and DisplayHDR True Black 600 certification.

The Yoga Slim 7x's display also uses the same PWM tech, so there's no difference on that front.

Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) vs. Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9): Performance and battery

There are some major differences between the two PCs when it comes to the hardware inside and the performance they offer.

The Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) uses an Intel Core Ultra (Series 2) 8-core chip as the centerpiece, meaning it runs standard x86 Windows with which everyone is familiar.

It's an Intel Evo laptop, so it benefits from speedy wake and boot times while sipping battery in standby mode. It keeps cool, for the most part, without making a ton of fan noise, but if you push the system, you'll definitely hear them running.

Reviewer Zachary Boddy notes:

"The Yoga Slim 9i is one of the best examples I've seen so far of how capable Intel Core Ultra (Series 2) can really be. [...] Performance is still more than good enough for what 99% of people do with their laptop, and the Yoga Slim 9i is future-proofed to survive years of software updates and feature creep."

On the other side, the Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9) is powered by a Qualcomm Snapdragon X chip that runs Windows on Snapdragon. The ARM64 architecture is different from x86, but the Windows experience is practically the same.

What you'll have to watch for are apps that don't run natively on ARM. Microsoft's Prism emulation layer takes care of most inconsistencies without really harming performance, and 99% of users won't notice a difference.

To boot, more apps are always picking up native ARM64 compatibility, making it easier for users with specialized demands — especially in the design and development arenas — to have a worry-free Snapdragon X experience.

👉 Related: Best native Windows on ARM apps

Reviewer Zachary Boddy tested the Yoga Slim 7x model with a Snapdragon X Elite chip (which seems to be the only one available in most markets), remarking:

"There are fans, and they will buzz on when you push this laptop, but for the majority of laptop tasks the Yoga Slim 7x is as cool as a cucumber and just as quiet. That's also reflected in benchmarks, where the Yoga Slim 7x is fantastically consistent and reliable both on and off the charger (especially notable when traditional Intel and AMD laptops often throttle when running on battery power)."

I grabbed synthetic benchmark numbers from both laptops to directly compare performance. As you can see in the table below, the Snapdragon X Elite System-on-Chip (SoC) comes out ahead of the Intel CPU in Cinebench, Geekbench, and Handbrake, while falling behind in Time Spy.

Battery life also falls firmly in favor of the Snapdragon X-equipped Yoga Slim 7x. Boddy saw the laptop run for more than 17 hours in a video rundown test, and real-world averages were just as impressive.

The Windows Battery Report came back with an average of more than 14 hours following plenty of use during the testing period, and Boddy notes that they could easily expect more than 10 hours of real-world usage on a day-to-day basis, no matter the task at hand.

The Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) didn't fare nearly as well, and a lot of that has to do with the Intel CPU and the 4K OLED display. Following the testing period, the Windows Battery Report shows an average of roughly six hours of runtime.

Bottom line? The Yoga Slim 7x can deliver far superior battery life while besting the Slim 9i's multi-core performance.

Lenovo Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) vs. Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9): Which should you buy?

Both of these Lenovo laptops received a Windows Central Best Award in their respective reviews, but only the Slim 7x (Gen 9) got a full five-star rating. After my comparison here, I can't argue with reviewer Zachary Boddy's scoring.

The Yoga Slim 7x (Gen 9) pulls ahead of the Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) in a number of key areas. It's the faster PC thanks to the Snapdragon X Elite chip inside, and battery life is far superior.

The screen, while not as high-res, gets brighter, and the OLED panel provides outstanding color and contrast. It has a superior camera above the display with an IR sensor and HPD, and its touchpad is slightly larger.

The biggest factor, however, is likely pricing. It starts at just $1,199 at Lenovo compared to $1,820 for the Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10).

That doesn't mean the Yoga Slim 9i (Gen 10) shouldn't be considered. It's the more attractive laptop with a superior OLED display that reaches a 4K resolution and a 120Hz refresh rate.

The keyboard is a bit more comfortable, and its audio is louder thanks to a full 10W of power. The real key here is its use of an Intel CPU, which allows you to run the standard x86 Windows without any limitations.

While Windows on Snapdragon continues to improve app compatibility, there are still some outliers that simply won't work on the platform. These exceptions are rare, especially for general users.

The vast majority of users won't have a problem with Windows on Snapdragon, and you'll be able to reap the performance and efficiency benefits from the platform.