Qualcomm's Arm chip beats Intel in pre-launch Windows performance demo — Snapdragon X Elite X1E80100 takes down Core 7 Ultra 155H

Qualcomm
(Image credit: Qualcomm)

Qualcomm's upcoming Snapdragon X Elite came out ahead of Intel's Meteor Lake in a head-to-head comparison running Windows, shared by YouTuber Erdi Özüağ (via TechPowerUp). The Snapdragon X Elite X1E80100 beat the Core 7 Ultra 155H in all four benchmarks that were run, with two wider victories and narrower wins. The results are a good omen for the Snapdragon X Elite, though it's important to note the tests were in a controlled environment and definitely warrant at least a few grains of salt.

The performance demo was conducted at an official Qualcomm event during Mobile World Congress last month, but Özüağ's video seems to be the first time we've seen these benchmarks. Based on the language in the video and the fact that nobody else has disclosed these figures in the two weeks since MWC, we get the sense that maybe Özüağ wasn't supposed to show this stuff publicly — or perhaps Özüağ was just working on the video for the past several days and nobody else found the benchmarks interesting enough to talk about.

Both the Snapdragon X Elite and Meteor Lake laptops shown in the comparison were made by Qualcomm, and are the same models we've seen used for every other official comparison, such as this NPU performance test. The Snapdragon X Elite laptop was equipped with the 12-core X1E80100 CPU running at 28 watts and 4.3 GHz, and was paired with 64GB of RAM. The Intel laptop used a Core Ultra 7 155H, presumably (though not certainly) with the same RAM and power limit.

Qualcomm's reference laptops were set up to demo performance in 7-Zip file compression, Visual Studio code compilation, and 3DMark's Wild Life Extreme GPU test. The X1E80100 barely edged out the 155H in 7-Zip and was about 46% faster in Visual Studio, which are CPU-bound benchmarks. The two chips were tied in Wild Life Extreme, showing that Qualcomm can match Intel in integrated graphics.

Özüağ also showed performance data from UL Procyon, which tests NPU performance, and there the X1E80100 beat the 155H by a whopping 460%. That's an even bigger performance gap than Qualcomm showed in Stable Diffusion in a different MWC demo, though of course it also raises the question of whether the Intel system was properly optimized for the benchmark.

This all fits in with what we've seen from the Snapdragon X Elite in previous performance previews against both Intel and AMD processors. As with all pre-launch figures, some skepticism should be applied, especially when Qualcomm is making the reference laptop used to represent the competition and is showing just a handful of benchmarks in a controlled environment. It's clear that the Snapdragon X Elite is fast, but we don't have the full picture quite yet. We'll find out how it performs in a wider selection of benchmarks when it launches later this year.

Matthew Connatser

Matthew Connatser is a freelancing writer for Tom's Hardware US. He writes articles about CPUs, GPUs, SSDs, and computers in general.

  • slightnitpick
    Visual Studio code compilation
    Was the compiler's target architecture the same in both cases, or was the Snapdragon targeting ARM and the Intel targeting x86?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    The Intel laptop used a Core Ultra 7 155H, presumably (though not certainly) with the same RAM and power limit.
    Has nobody sanity-checked the benchmark scores of the Intel laptop, or did they use nonstandard workloads to make that impossible? The 3D Mark and UL benchmarks should be common, at least.
    Reply
  • rluker5
    bit_user said:
    Has nobody sanity-checked the benchmark scores of the Intel laptop, or did they use nonstandard workloads to make that impossible? The 3D Mark and UL benchmarks should be common, at least.
    Only one that popped up for 155h was faster, (42 fps vs ARM 39 fps) but in the same ballpark : https://www.3dmark.com/wl/377373Not a common benchmark for x86 devices. It is meant to be a mobile cross platform benchmark so probably more representative of mobile game performance.
    Reply
  • oomoot
    Core Ultra 7 155H's RAM is 32 GB as stated by the reviewer in Turkish.
    Reply
  • Avro Arrow
    "The performance demo was conducted at an official Qualcomm event"
    At a Qualcomm event, eh? Yeah, that's going to be 100% impartial....:rolleyes:

    No further information is necessary. There's clearly nothing to see here.
    Reply
  • shawman123
    I have no doubt that X Elite will be great. But what is this with all controlled benchmarking. Just release the damn thing and let the reviewers benchmark the laptops. That said its expected that these laptops will be in MBP price range. Then its irrelevant.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    shawman123 said:
    what is this with all controlled benchmarking.
    Two things, I think. First, they get only one chance to make a good impression. If the software isn't ready at launch, it won't matter much if some reviewers redo their reviews a couple months later and find a better situation, because the a lot fewer people will see those and most people will just stick to what the first round of reviews concluded.

    Second, because Windows/ARM is still pretty new (esp. the x86-64 emulator, which is new to Win 11), I expect they're doing a lot of performance tuning.

    shawman123 said:
    Just release the damn thing and let the reviewers benchmark the laptops.
    Because then you end up with reviews like this, where most of the benchmarks are testing x86 apps:
    https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-ThinkPad-X13s-G1-Laptop-review-Introducing-the-Qualcomm-Snapdragon-8cx-Gen-3.665008.0.html
    Reply
  • watzupken
    shawman123 said:
    I have no doubt that X Elite will be great. But what is this with all controlled benchmarking. Just release the damn thing and let the reviewers benchmark the laptops. That said its expected that these laptops will be in MBP price range. Then its irrelevant.
    Great or not, we won't know until the chip is reviewed by independent reviewers. I would however try not to inflate the expectations just because Apple M1 was an incredible success. The reason is because unlike Apple , Qualcomm have little to no control over software optimization in the Windows ecosystem. So while the chip may be powerful, a significant portion of the performance may be wasted due to inefficiencies with software. Hence in this case, they are clearly limiting what can be tested with the new chip.
    Reply
  • Pierce2623
    So is it still impossible to run Windows games in Windows on ARM? 2024 was supposed to be the year they made big advancements on that.
    Reply
  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    The irony of a publication telling readers to take the results with a grain of salt because of the controlled environment when said publication conducts their reviews in a very controlled environment on a PC locked to a soon to be unsupported Windows 10 release (from 2022).
    Reply