Microsoft Surface Pro 9 (SQ3) Review: Arm Takes Center Stage

Microsoft moves Arm chips into its flagship 2-in-1, sharing the bill with Intel.

Microsoft Surface Pro 9 (SQ3)
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Tom's Hardware Verdict

The Microsoft Surface Pro with 5G lets you get your work done just about anywhere, with long battery life and a vivid display. But the SQ3 Arm chip means you lose some features, like faster USB ports, to Intel. And ten years in, including a keyboard still adds lot to the price.

Reasons to buy

  • +

    Strong webcam and audio

  • +

    Type cover keyboard is still top-notch

  • +

    Vivid 120 Hz display

  • +

    Long battery life

Reasons to avoid

  • -

    No headphone jack

  • -

    Intel model gets faster USB ports

  • -

    Keyboard adds a lot to the starting price

  • -

    SQ3 has some (but way fewer!) app compatibility issues

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Over the last ten years, the Microsoft Surface Pro lineup has come to define the detachable two-in-one category. Recently, Microsoft has flirted with Qualcomm's Arm chips in a separate model from the mainline Intel versions. But with the Surface Pro 9, that's changing. For the first time, Microsoft is putting Intel's chips and Arm processors as options in the same device.

The Microsoft Surface Pro 9 with 5G ($1,299.99 to start, $1,899.99 as tested), the model with the Microsoft SQ3 processor, has the same dimensions, a 120 Hz display and the same keyboard (assuming you buy one) as the Intel model. Microsoft is planting a stake: Arm, the company is saying with its flagship tablet, is ready for primetime for Windows 11 on its flagship device.

If you want a 5G Surface, the SQ3 model is the only way to go. For some, that may be enough to make it the ​​best ultrabook. But there are tradeoffs. The SQ3 isn't as powerful as the Intel version, still has some compatibility issues (though significantly fewer than there used to be) with some Windows apps, and offers slower USB speeds.

But at its core, the Surface Pro 9 using SQ3 largely feels like any other Surface. Is Arm truly ready for the spotlight?

Andrew E. Freedman
Senior Editor

Andrew E. Freedman is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on laptops, desktops and gaming. He also keeps up with the latest news. A lover of all things gaming and tech, his previous work has shown up in Tom's Guide, Laptop Mag, Kotaku, PCMag and Complex, among others. Follow him on Threads @FreedmanAE and BlueSky @andrewfreedman.net. You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01

  • cknobman
    Unless Microsoft offers consumers a compelling reason to buy ARM based devices then they will never take off.
    As it stands they are not cheaper, dont offer better battery life, and slower than x86 laptops/tablets.
    Reply
  • PlaneInTheSky
    long battery life and a vivid display

    Great.

    At this point I won't even consider a x86 laptop.

    ARM was designed from the ground up to be battery efficient. ARM laptops simply have way better battery life, and that's always been the most important for me for laptops.

    The only real argument against ARM is compatibility of games. Which is a fine argument but one that is getting weaker over time. Many PC Gaming titles already support ARM since they run on ARM-based Nintendo Switch or Apple systems. It is also much easier to just port your title to ARM than it used to be.

    I would have been happy as a clam with an ARM-based Steam deck with good battery life, but Steam went with x86 and ended up with a Steam deck that needs noisy fans, a giant battery, and barely lasts 2 or 3 hours in 3D titles. So I never bought the device.
    Reply
  • Filippo_P
    What a disappointing review.

    What I would have expected from this review were charts and other performance metrics putting it in comparison with the Intel version especially for the emulation part, to understand how much you lose compared to it.

    Instead, only numbers for the Arm version or for other Arm devices were provided.

    What am I gaining from the Arm Surface compared to the Intel one? What am I losing? After reading the review, I still don't get the full picture.
    Reply
  • xyster
    Personally, I don't like the idea of a split x86/ARM Windows-world -- it means larger install files, more compatibility issues, and more headaches for developers. I have zero interest in supporting it as a developer until it's either mass adopted, or my compiler workflow just one day automatically starts creating ARM binaries.

    Will I also some day be forced to use the Windows app store as well then? Because I am also definitely not going to be doing that-- not a chance. ( I also don't push apps to the macOS store ; direct download only )

    There is also a stack of obsolete ARM systems here that are useless because support ran out after a few years; no more updates, no more apps, and so no more use. This also includes Chromebooks and mobile phones. ARM systems just don't seem to have the legacy support that x86 systems have, so when the manufacturer decides it's over, it's done. Not so with x86 so far, where I still have multiple Intel 4770K systems running Windows 10 without issue. Is this issue being addressed?

    Oddly, even my 2012 Macbook mini was fine until the M1-chips came out, and then it also stopped getting updates; I kept that system upgraded with SSDs and RAM, and it worked well as a headless Mac server for a decade.

    I get that ARM is arguably more power efficient than x86, and I suppose Microsoft wants to compete with the M1 chips, the Windows laptops I do buy are beasts with Nvidia GPUs. If I want something running ARM, I'll use a budget Chromebook that I can just throw away in a few years for something newer.

    So yeah, zero appeal to me.
    Reply
  • blargh4
    So it has battery life that's nothing special, and compatibility issues on top of CPU performance that's several generations behind the Intel offering? Why would I want this?
    Reply
  • xyster
    Filippo_P said:
    What a disappointing review.

    What I would have expected from this review were charts and other performance metrics putting it in comparison with the Intel version especially for the emulation part, to understand how much you lose compared to it.

    Instead, only numbers for the Arm version or for other Arm devices were provided.

    What am I gaining from the Arm Surface compared to the Intel one? What am I losing? After reading the review, I still don't get the full picture.

    According to pcmag,

    Cinebench R23 = 2676 (Thinkpadf X13s) vs 12,363 (HP 14 Pavilion)
    Battery Life = 18:23 (thinkpad) vs 9:30 (HP Pavilion)

    Bleh
    Reply
  • PlaneInTheSky
    Personally, I don't like the idea of a split x86/ARM Windows-world -- it means larger install files, more compatibility issues, and more headaches for developers.

    Porting from x86 to ARM, today, is incredibly straightforward and simple.

    The compiler simply does all the work. That's why you see so many small indie developers port their x86 PC games to Nintendo Switch which runs on ARM.

    If you write horrible code or have some extremely optimized Assembly dll file, it is not that simple, but for 99% of projects the only thing you need to do is compile for your ARM platform and you're done.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Can I install Android in this? Linux at least?

    Windows with ARM sounds as enticing as warm vomit.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • xyster
    PlaneInTheSky said:
    Porting from x86 to ARM, today, is incredibly straightforward and simple.

    The compiler simply does all the work. That's why you see so many small indie developers port their x86 PC games to Switch which runs on ARM.

    If you write horrible code or have some extremely optimized Assembly dll file, it is not that simple, but for 99% of projects the only thing you need to do is compile for your ARM platform and you're done.

    Thank you for the reply. I'm just being grumpy, as historically these transitions have always punished early adopters and developers --ie: me.

    I'll make you a deal though, if Microsoft is willing to ship me a Windows 11 ARM dev kit / laptop, so I can debug and test my builds with, I'll start making more of an effort. :) As an open-source developer though I can't justify buying the hardware as is. I

    Mind you, I have blindly added ARM support, along with Windows x86/amd64, Mac Intel/ARM, RaspberryPi, and Linux support,.to one of my open-source projects already. It is a simple Electron.js app, and was fairly easy to enable, but I've also never had a user use the Windows ARM build yet that I know of -- nor have I been able to test it. It does make the bundled exe even larger in size; 3x larger than just a dedicated AMD64 build, which is hosted on Github.

    For my other open-source project using hardware video encoders, even on the Mac front it's been a painful transition. I'm not prepared to spend the time debugging that hot mess to work with Snapdragon yet, nor can I even really test it yet, so it will have to wait.
    Reply
  • xyster
    -Fran- said:
    Can I install Android in this? Linux at least?

    Windows with ARM sounds as enticing as warm vomit.

    Regards.
    I like the idea of Linux on this system actually. I run Ubuntu on Arm currently (Jetson), and if the drivers are available for Lenovo, it almost sounds like a fun system to hack on.. although with CUDA, I'd be wary about trying to do actual machine learning
    Reply