Skip to main content

Qualcomm announces 5nm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 with 85% performance improvement

Snapdragon 8cx Gen3 Chip
Snapdragon 8cx Gen3 Chip (Image credit: Qualcomm)

What you need to know

  • Qualcomm has announced the new Snapdragon 8cx and 7c+ Gen 3 processors for Windows PCs.
  • The 8cx Gen 3 gets a boost of 40% for single-core, 85% for multi-core, and 60% for GPU over the 8cx Gen 2, making the most substantial improvement yet.
  • Games on the 8cx can reportedly run at full HD and hit 120 FPS.
  • The 6nm 7c+ Gen 3 delivers up to 40% better CPU performance and 35% better graphics performance than the 7c Gen 2.
  • Both chips will appear in consumer devices in the first half of 2022.

Qualcomm just announced two new processors for Windows on ARM at its 2021 Snapdragon Summit.

While these chips are not part of the next-gen Nuvia processors, which are expected to ship in consumer products in 2023, these are the most significant leap in performance to date for Windows on ARM. The new chips also push new technology like AI, Wi-Fi 6E, and 5G to more devices.

The Snapdragon 8cx and 7c+ Gen 3 chips are due to ship in new PCs in the first half of 2022, making a quicker turnaround than previous announcements for the company.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3

Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 Compute Platform Badge

Source: Qualcomm (Image credit: Source: Qualcomm)

The big story is the new Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3, which, for the first time, hits 5nm for Windows PCs.

Qualcomm claims the 8cx Gen 3 is substantially more powerful than the Gen 2, currently found in the Microsoft Surface Pro X SQ2 and the HP Elite Folio, with a boost of 40% for single-core, 85% for multi-core, and 60% for GPU performance over the 8cx Gen 2 making the most substantial improvement yet.

The claims seem to hold going by recently leaked Geekbench 5 benchmarks for the 8cx Gen 3. The single-core score of 1,010 puts the Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 in the range of the Lenovo Yoga C740 with an Intel Core i5-10210U CPU.

The multi-core scores of the Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 look even more promising. A Geekbench 5 multi-core score of 5,355 places the processor above the HP Spectre x360 14 with an Intel Core i7-1165G7.

Source: Qualcomm (Image credit: Source: Qualcomm)

While those numbers still fall short of Apple's M1 line of processors, for most consumers, getting Core i7 multi-core performance with much better battery life is still a winning combination, especially when put into unique 2-in-1 form factors that are entirely fanless.

Battery life is still claimed at "over 25 hours," although that number is device-dependent and under specific scenarios. Qualcomm, however, told us that battery life is effectively the same between the 8cx Gen 2 and Gen 3 despite the significant performance improvement.

Qualcomm goes into more detail in its press release:

The enhanced Qualcomm Kryo CPU combines high-performance cores for power when you need it and energy-efficient cores for less intensive tasks, delivering responsive performance and long-lasting battery life. Our efficiency cores now match the performance cores of the previous generation while significantly decreasing overall power draw. Along with the integration of new "Prime" performance cores, Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 delivers up to a 40 percent boost for single-thread workloads and 85 percent boost for multi-thread workloads compared to the predecessor. This improvement in performance per watt means getting work done faster, while saving plenty of room for entertainment and content consumption.

Gaming and graphics are also getting a "tremendous" boost:

… with up to 60 percent performance gains compared to the previous generation. That's more power for video and photo editing applications, video conferencing, and gaming. Games can run at full HD resolution at up to 120 FPS, making Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 an entertainment powerhouse.

Besides raw performance, the chipset is also getting upgrades in other areas, including:

  • Cameras: Up to four cameras are now supported, allowing for "multiple front-facing cameras on detachable form factors" as well as 4K and HDR. Camera startup time is also decreased by 15%.
  • Audio: Echo Cancellation and Noise Suppression are now included using advanced AI technologies.
  • AI: Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 has more than three times the AI capabilities of the previous generation and significantly leads the competition with over 29 TOPS of acceleration. This translates to more accurate and innovative experiences, along with faster security features like threat detection.
  • Improved 5G: The Snapdragon X55 Modem-RF System enables reliable connections with up to 7.5 Gbps speeds. Support will also be extended to the latest Snapdragon X65 Modem-RF System, allowing users the freedom to be productive from almost anywhere
  • Wi-Fi 6E + FastConnect: This connectivity system supports the fastest Wi-Fi speeds available, with multi-gig speeds supported at up to 3.6 Gbps. FastConnect 6900 also makes use of 4-stream DBS to support Wi-Fi Dual Station for extremely low latency and responsiveness.
  • Enhanced security: A Secure Boot process enables NIST recovery, designed to better prevent systems from loading corrupt firmware, while Microsoft Pluton integration into the Qualcomm Secure Processing Unit reduces the surface area open to attacks. Secure Camera for Windows Hello, enhanced sensors, and cutting-edge encryption practices round out Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 as a truly security-rich platform for online collaboration for consumers, businesses, and education.

Overall, the Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 looks very promising and more interesting than any previous upgrades to its PC compute line.

Of course, Intel is expected to announce its 12th Gen mobile processors in early 2022 (with a spring release), likely at CES, utilizing its similar Performance and Efficiency core design, possibly giving Qualcomm a run for its money.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c+ Gen 3

Source: Qualcomm (Image credit: Source: Qualcomm)

Up until now, Qualcomm has had the Snapdragon 7c and 7c Gen 2 processors for entry-level devices like the Samsung Galaxy Book Go. While the 7c Gen 2 edges out Intel's entry-level chips in some areas, they're still not very competitive as we've argued, suggesting people should wait for a "Gen 3."

The new Snapdragon 7c+ Gen 3 could be that chip. It will be sold alongside the 7c Gen 2, but it is considered a slightly higher tier.

Qualcomm didn't go into too much detail about 7c+ Gen 3, but it did note it's now a 6nm architecture. Performance is "up to 40 percent better CPU performance and 35 percent better graphics performance" than the 7c Gen 2, which is noteworthy.

Like the 8cx Gen 3, the 7c+ Gen 3 adds "FastConnect 6700, bringing incredible Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 6E speeds" and an integrated Snapdragon X53 Modem-RF System bringing 5G to entry-level devices for the first time.


Source: Qualcomm (Image credit: Source: Qualcomm)

While no new Windows PCs were announced with either chip, Qualcomm remarked that this would be quicker than previous announcements where devices didn't ship until an agonizing eight months later.

Instead, Qualcomm is confident we'll see new hardware with the 8cx Gen 3 and 7c+ Gen 3 in the first half of 2022. That means we could get some actual announcements during CES, which takes place in early January, with a commercial release towards May (which follows Intel and AMD's market execution).

Likewise, Qualcomm continues to push "always connected" 4G and 5G Windows on ARM PCs. Still, the company allows Wi-Fi-only models like Surface Pro X and Galaxy Book Go to compete more aggressively in price. That practice will continue with these news chips, leaving the decision up to OEMs on which features and price points they would like to target.

Besides the new PC processors, Qualcomm also announced a new gaming-specific chip. The Snapdragon G3x Gen 1 will be featured in a new handheld reference design made with Razer and focuses on game streaming. The company also announced its latest smartphone processor, the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1.

Daniel Rubino
Daniel Rubino

Daniel Rubino is the Executive Editor of Windows Central, head reviewer, podcast co-host, and analyst. He has been covering Microsoft here since 2007, back when this site was called WMExperts (and later Windows Phone Central). His interests include Windows, Microsoft Surface, laptops, next-gen computing, and arguing with people on the internet.

  • Until they can get to a similar memory pipeline like the M1 uses they will always be behind. The way that works is the true secret sauce of the new Apple chips. With the M2 pending they will be even further behind.
  • Serious question: Did you come to this highly confident conclusion after watching Apple marketing videos? Or did you supplement your research with videos from The Verge?
  • I am not an Apple fan boy at all. I am referring to the actual way the chip is designed. They have the CPU and GPU using a pooled really fast pipeline. I really want others to succeed but Apple caught them flat footed. Qualcomm was just coasting on the past. There hasn't been much true innovation there for awhile. Tom's Hardware had a really good explanation.
  • Hmm. Trouble is though, that’s a fixed RAM size. The premium over 8G with Apple is horrid. They also have the same issue as Windows with emulated non native software. I wish Microsoft went all in on ARM.
  • I'm happy to read the Tom's Hardware article but I am very skeptical This One Trick is what makes the M1 so fast.
  • Interesting, So how come with all of this bleeding edge performance, It still doesn't work for 70% of I and most people use their computer for in office environments? Oh yeah... cause Apple is Apple. Remember when the Apple MacBook had powerPC chips that were better than the stuff on the Windows side in early 2000s? Remember when everybody switched to Macs all sudden because of that?... Oh wait, that's right, that didn't happen
  • The 8cx gen 3 (same as previous Gens) supports 8 channel LPDDR4X, so memory speed isn't a problem, it can actually suport higer memory bandwith then the base M1 while being a lower TDP SoC.
  • I mean why bother with other laptops or tablets either? There is nothing good but Apple!
  • I'm sure the 10% who use Apple PCs will find that very fascinating.
  • The true secret sauce is that it uses more power and uses TSMC's 5nm that is 30% better then samsung's
  • Deleted duplicate post
  • "Camera startup time is also increased by 15%." Shouldn't that read "decreased by 15%," or did the time to load actually get longer?
  • That's the kind of performance I was hoping for. Let's see what emulation looks like. Overall, very promising.
  • I'm hoping that they employed some sort of hardware trick to aid in x86/x64 emulation like Apple did in their M1 chips, but if they don't do it here, they (hopefully) may do it in the Nuvia chips that are coming.
  • Yeah, that's the thing as to why Apple M1 chips got that very native performance for non-native apps is thmmit does hardware emulation, which is more performant and battery efficient. Without it, M1 may not get this impressive performance on most apps that are emulated. Also it goes hand in hand with Rosetta 2 which does its emulation slightly differently than on Windows. If Snapdragon were to have x86-64 emulation on hardware level, that would be a significant boost for Windows were majority aren't ARM native. It doest need to beat M1, but that alone would be very critical enough for Windows users.
  • This is probably based on a Snapdragon 8 but with more X2 cores. The SD8 uses a Samsung 4nm process though.
  • It's looking more like a modified 888+ with more 4 X1 cores and 4 "medium perf" cores.
  • You're probably right. I am sure they didn't mention which cores they used for a reason.
  • I mean they're pretty decent, great gen over gen improvement. It's looking like 4x X1 and 4x A78. A7x is what last gen's high perf cores were.
    X2 isn't out yet iirc.
  • It's about time we got new 8cx chips. It will be very interesting to see how Windows 11 will specifically use the Qualcomm chip's AI functions to enhance the Windows 11 experience (like automatically sort incoming e-mails/notifications based on content, etc.) because I know that Android already uses it for AR, the Google Assistant, etc and other things.
  • Intel's “efficiency cores” are highly capable (you can even game on them). So no doubt Intel will be giving Qualcomm a run of their money. The question is who would be Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner in this upcoming tussle. Since Qualcomm had to get kicked into action (in terms of a WoA SOC) by Apple in the ARM space. On the flipside, laptops have very limited power budgets and the efficiency cores do need some what of a sustained high clock speed (in turn requiring more power) to be extremely capable in other tasks that are not basic background, word processing and browsing.
  • It will be interesting. Alder lake mobile u series i5 and i7 chips will be available in 9w and 15w segment with core combination of 2 big performance cores + 8 small efficiency cores which are basically their latest and greatest atom cores. Compared to that Qualcomm 8cx gen 3 got 4 big cortex x1 cores paired with 4 a78 cores so battery life advantage may not be that big because just like intel atom cores a78 cores are not as efficient as regular a-55 cores so performance upgrade will be there but with noticable battery life hit. My guess is intel alder lake mobile will easily beat Qualcomm 8cx gen 3 in performance but again loose in battery life and in performance per watt.
  • I think that has always been the debate. Will Intel and ARM produce chips that are similar in utility. Intel may always have better performance whereas ARM chips will always have better battery life. But for most people, they would rarely notice a difference. Sure, my ARM device can run for 20 hours and my Intel device can run for 12 hours. But I plug it in every day so I never run out of power. Further, my performance requirements are easily handled by either device. This is the same as the performance of SUVs. Will I ever need to tow a 12,000 pound trailer? For most SUV owners the answer is never. Maybe 10% of Pickup owners will tow a 12,000 pound trailer (think of towing a trailer holding a Bobcat Compact track loader.
  • Atleast it's better than having nothing. Performance is 70% of apple m1 & beats apple a15 in multicore. GPU performance should be good as well considering 8cx gen 1 and 2 had much more powerful GPU than Qualcomm mobile counterparts. Battery life will remain same as last generation despite moving to 5nm because of use of 4 big cores instead of 1 to gain performance unlike mobile socs. It should serve as temporary stop gap solution. Comparison with alderlake mobile should be interesting let's see how close is intel in terms off performance per watt. Overall it shows limitations of current arm cores and why Qualcomm is eying 2023 to deliver apple m1/m2 like performance. Because with current arm cores it's not possible to match apple.
  • 7c+ is looking damn good. It got
    4 a78 cores + 4 a-55 cores so it should beat or equal 8cx gen1/gen2/sq1/sq2 in cpu performance.
  • This is a good analysis.
  • Battery life might be worse actually, if Samsung's 5 nm process is compared to TSMC's. The SD888 fabbed on Samsung is showing higher thermals and less battery life than the previous gen on TSMC. The 8cx gen1 and gen2 on 7 nm TSMC is a surprisingly efficient chip.
  • Surface Pro neXt in the spring . . . ?
  • Skip for nuvia in 2023, hope it is a big thing
  • Good but not good enough, looks like it's still based on a old gen 888, instead of a new gen (8 gen 1) mobile cpu. Once again Qualcomm doesn't focus on PC CPUs enough, good that the exclusivity deal is coming to an end.
  • Thanks Daniel, Do we know or what are your thoughts on 8cx g3 being any improvement on x86 emulation? My Surface Pro X running the 8cx g1 already runs really well with ARM64 apps.
  • It'll be more just throwing brute force processing at it to make it "better." There's no new tech that I am aware of that changes things.
  • Thanks. That's what I was thinking too. To be honest I'm okay with the x86 emulation performance, it's absolutely nippier than it was at launch but you can see the difference compared to ARM64 apps.
  • Are they going to price this competitively or continue to massively overprice them? The platform has been largely ignored as the pricing is rediculous. You can't be more expensive than Apple with far inferior hardware.
  • "Are they going to price this competitively or continue to massively overprice them?"
    OEMs set prices for laptops with ARM in them, not Qualcomm. Do you have the price list that Qualcomm is charging per chip and by order size?
  • It is Microsoft's platform. If they can't price it competitively, why bother? I assume these devices are going to be more expensive or similarly priced to Apple's year old offering, but with 70% of the performance? That isn't a winning combination, as they have been proving.
  • I certainly agree that this is a big problem. I am interested in something like a Surface Pro X, but given the price for performance, I haven't done it yet.
  • Honestly if your consideration is solely price for performance you're looking at the wrong device. Price for performance just isn't what The Surface Pro X is about, it's never been what Surface Pro is about. Do you like what Surface Pro is? With added benefit of great battery, no fans, never gets more than luke warm. My Surface Pro X with the 8cx g1 is outstanding for web browsing, office work, social media, media watching.
  • You just totally went around Daniels reply and question to you. Seems like you once again have no clue what you're trolling about.
  • His question is kinda irrelevant, just making an excuse for Microsoft not properly building their platform. If Qualcomm is over-pricing their SoC, then they should be leveraging Samsung or someoneone else to compete with them. What did Microsoft do? Oh yeah, gave Qualcomm exclusive rights to Windows. This is Microsoft's platform and they are $&@&$$& it up, but once again you are ok with them making obviously stupid decisions based on a dollar today. That is why the trash SPX is $1500.
  • "It is Microsoft's platform. If they can't price it competitively, why bother? "
    It's not your business. Show me any evidence that Apple is gaining traction and/or taking away PC market share and your point would have some legs. You can't, so your argument is invalid. The fact is, all PCs, including Windows, are doing very well right now. If ARM was such a flop or pricing so prohibitive you would see the market adjust to reflect that. It hasn't because, as of now, companies like Samsung, HP, and Microsoft are OK with the results.
  • Do you think so? They can't be over the moon at the bad press. I thought it was telling Samsung released the Galaxy Book S only to release an Intel version later. And I'm a big Pro X fan.
  • Yet you'd continue to say they were crap if the price was lowered to a point build quality had to suffer? High end build quality still costs. Although I agree they're a little overpriced. The platform has been largely ignored because the web is full of people trashing the Surface Pro X because they're not it's target audience. When you can buy decent 400-600 Intel/AMD based laptops, would an ARM laptop suddenly be a sucess? Hard to say.
  • Daniel may or may not have an answer on this but I have to wonder how satisfied Microsoft is right now with Qualcomm with the SQ1/2 and if they want something better matched to the M1 for the next gen SPX would they look to another option like Samsung or even put out a request to different partners and seeing who can deliver what they want. GPU performance has always felt like the achillies heel on my SQ1 and if Samsung is partnering with AMD on that front, there's something to be said there given how tightly they work with them on the Xbox SOCs.
  • I think we have to understand that not every PC needs to beat an M1. For one, MBP sales have not had any impact on sales of PC, so the point is mostly moot. The people who care about this are people who read tech news sites. The fact is, most people buy PC stay with PC and most people buy mac stay with mac. There's no evidence that has changed. Now, if Apple sold M1 chips to HP, Lenovo, Dell, and Microsoft, Qualcomm should be worried. They don't, so, again, the "competition" here is mostly on paper. Second, Qualcomm's goal here is to mostly compete with Intel at the Core i5-level, where most laptops are at for performance. Nuvia-gen will attempt to surpass, well, everyone, including Apple, in 2023. For Surface Pro X gen 3, having Core i5 single-core and Core i7-multi-core performance in a fanless design with long battery life is that target market for that device. People aren't buying Pro X to edit 4K video full-time on because that's ridiculous. Not everyone compiles code, renders 3D graphics, outputs 8K video, or even games on PCs. Certainly not for the market for Pro X, which is productivity and inking. Sure, the extra performance is nice, but like iPads, all that extra horsepower doesn't translate into anything meaningful (at this time). Finally, I'll just repeat what I have been saying for a long time: This is a journey, not a race. ARM is making big strides across many PC segments now and it'll continue to grow, slowly but surely.
  • I think when most people are buying a laptop the first decision they need to make is whether to buy a PC or a Mac. (In North America at least). Not everyone is a PC or a Mac user already. It's hard to currently justify Surface products when Macs with M1 are blowing them out of the water not just in performance but with battery life as well. I've been a die-hard MS and Surface user for many years, PC user all my life, and I am not sure that I'll be buying Surface after my SB2 is done. The Surface Book line has been discontinued, and the Laptop Studio is only 14 inches with a flimsy screen. Unless MS comes out with a Laptop Studio 15 or 16 inch, I won't be continuing with Surface Products. At the moment, it seems foolish to stay with PC for the principle of not giving my money to Apple. But I'll wait to see what Panos has up his sleeve for a counter-punch.
  • "Not everyone is a PC or a Mac user already."
    While true, the market is and has been, effectively flat for years because of saturation. Laptops, until the pandemic, were not a growth market precisely because most people who needed one had one.
    "It's hard to currently justify Surface products ..."
    No need to justify. Surface products have unique form factors with abilities not found in MBPs, or in other PCs. Surface is a boutique PC maker, an experiment, not a direct competitor to Apple. It's meant to serve as guidance for the industry to try new things, not sell a lot. If you don't need a 2-in-1 form factor or inking or Windows there is literally zero reason to buy a Surface. "It looks cool/nice" is not a good justification. There's no evidence that Surface has even ever turned a profit for Microsoft and it is quite reasonable to speculate it's a loss-leader.
    " I am not sure that I'll be buying Surface after my SB2 is done "Unless MS comes out with a Laptop Studio 15 or 16 inch, I won't be continuing with Surface Products. "
    This is why we have an open market and Lenovo, Dell, HP, Razer, Asus, Acer, Apple, to fill in the gaps. Actually, Dell/HP/Lenovo are 60% of the market already, so it's Apple, Microsoft, Acer, etc. that fill in the gaps, but the same point.
    "But I'll wait to see what Panos has up his sleeve for a counter-punch."
    I feel this went from Surface Pro X and ARM questions to a Ferenc rant on why you may not get a Surface laptop next year pretty quickly. I'm not here to challenge your reasons but would prefer we stick to the topic, if possible. Thanks.
  • Daniel, I am always amused that people don't remember the basic rule of economics. Bang for your Buck. We could go further in the past and talk about Adam Smith and his idea of the invisible hand. My dad bought an IBM XT PC in 1982. It cost close to $2K. But the PC in 1982 was a device built at the beginning of the technological development phase. Over the last 40 years, the invisible hand of the free market has profoundly improved the "bang for your buck" dynamics in the information economy. Will RISC chips surpass CISC chips in utility? Not really. They will sort of meet in the middle. One might have better battery life and another might have better performance. But for most people they will not notice a difference. What we are really talking about is the ecosystem which Adam Smith never considered. The PC versus the Mac debate has been around for decades. RISC versus CISC. Now we have the iOS versus Android. We talk about mobile devices. We talk about work from home and the importance of the PC. We talk about the digital divide and the lack of access to broadband. Will Azure and AWS split 90% of the cloud market? Will there be room for Google, IBM, Oracle, and others? This all comes down to billions of people using info tech to live their lives. Like you said. This is a journey that will never end.
  • I would gladly open my wallet to an Intel device with no fan, built-in LTE or 5G and decent battery life. They don't exist right now. The only way to get that combo is to go with Windows on ARM or more accurately, Windows on Snapdragon.
  • Yes, Intel invest billions in the modem business and lost. Late to the party and bad execution lead them to exit the market. ARM and Qualcomm were already the dominant solution in this market. In December 1992, I spent 2 weeks working for a small investment house as an unpaid intern. They handed me a prospective from a company developing digital solutions for the telecommunications industry. I looked at the science and said, well this is stupid. All they are doing is using gaussian elimination (if my memory serves me properly-methods I learned in a math class called numerical methods in 1985) to convert the analog signal into a digital signal. Anyone can do that. That was Qualcomm in 1992. Essentially, they hardcoded the math onto the chip to covert an analog wave form into a system of equations that transmitted the wave form in a digital stream. Intel decided to try to do this in the late 2000s, a decade or so after Qualcomm had developed the IT and know how to make the mobile chip. Qualcomm will (or should) be the natural mobile chip/SoC for WoA going forward. But a Surface using a 5G mobile chip with its Arc chip does have a reasonable technological solution to compete. Will it be a power efficient? No. Will it have better performance? probably because it does not have to emulate x64/x32. Similarly, Apple knows this and spent a lot of time and effort to build the M1 for their ecosystem. Intel would never be their go to solution for iOS. They did not want to be dependent on Qualcomm. Apple does what they always do. Control the primary aspects of their ecosystem. Software integration into a piece of hardware they closely control. The M1 gives them primary control of the Hardware and the software for their devices. But this is the invisible hand. Did the initial team in San Diago in 1985 envision a future where their tech development would serve as the basis for the smartphone industry and transform the world in 20 years? Nope. Same as Watt did in the late 1770s improving the tech of steam engines. The population in England in 1348 was 8 million. The population in england in 1350 was 5 million. The population of england did not exceed 8 million until the early 1800s. In part because industrialization spurred on by the steam engine. How will the smart phone transform the world?
  • To be sustainable, we need venture out to space.. Both climate and a series of pandemics will reduce world population and landmass available for living...
  • "It's hard to currently justify Surface products when Macs with M1 are blowing them out of the water not just in performance but with battery life as well." Only the Surface Laptop you can say even competes with MacBooks. You could equally say it's hard to currently justify MacBook products when they're all Clamshell laptops. Besides like EVERY MacBook user they all seem to think everyone can afford a laptop costing a grand and if you can't you're to be pitied for using trash. Plenty of excellent laptops at the 400-600 range. Plastic builds, low quality screens but reliable and more than fine for web browsing.
  • So a year from now, we will likely have a new Macbook Air with an upgraded M1 for $999, while Microsoft will have an SPX2 with half the performance for $1499? Assuming pricing of these devices doesn't change, that is lame.
  • This will be nightmare 😣😣😣
  • ... and yet the Macbook Air still won't have: Pen/inking Touchscreen 4G and 5G built-in 2-in-1 form factor The fact you compare these things as if a consumer would look at buying either one and that they are equal is mindboggling inane.
  • Do you laugh at people who ride motorbikes because they're not sports cars? Your comparison isn't even a direct comparison. Don't care how fast M1 is on paper, have no use for it. My Surface Pro X runs really great thanks. Best PC I've owned.
  • The Pro X complaint it was poor at Photoshop and Premier came from such an elitist place. The same people were never ever using an Intel base Surface Pro to do these tasks, because they knew it was ridiculous. But still all tried Photoshop anyway, such to complain about something that NO Surface Pro has ever been designed for. The same people who still complain Chromebooks are poor, because they aren't their target audience. That said Photoshop and Premier ARE ARM64 compatible, have been since May.
  • It's really great. Can't wait to see surface team do with snapdragon CPU.
    wish list
    Surface pro x 2
    Surface laptop X
    Surface go X
    Surface n X
  • Hopefully we will see Surface Go form factor with ARM as a consumption device.
  • It would do more than consumption. Students use Office and the Web. Honestly for the majority of apps most people use (*) Windows on ARM runs great. I find Spotify a bit sluggish but Edge, Office, VLC, Netflix are all ARM64. Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop are ARM64 too, don't use them so can't comment. * Excluding Chrome and Gaming. Google supporting ARM would be a major boost for acceptance. Frustratingly when they released Chrome for Apple's M1 months ago.
  • Processors are always funny comment sections. It's as if you don't have the "most powerful chip" your computer won't work. A similar comparison would be "Ram trucks are the only trucks to buy because they have the 707-hp hellcat engine." No one needs a 707-hp hellcat engine. Wants maybe, needs no. For many a six cylinder Ford Ecoboost is more than enough. Most average consumers hardly know what the processor in their tech does and basically buy based on price.
    During black Friday I found myself perusing the phones at my local Bestbuy. A woman near me said to her husband, "Hey this phone has snapdragon! Is that a fancy camera?" He replied, "No honey, that's the name of the phone. It's a Motorola Snapdragon."
    So many consumers are just fine with an i5 device. My 4 year old i5 laptop is still running autoCAD just fine, and even my work tower running an i7-3770 still gets the job done.
  • I wonder if we'll see many consumer devices though. Because 8cx Gen and Gen 2 were hardly used. Surface Pro X is about the only hero device.
  • Galaxy Book Go here with snapdragon 7c gen2 ! a great pc but at least 6gb of ram would be better