That means we're effectively comparing native performance on M1 with emulated x86 performance via Windows on ARM. Cinebench R23, for example, has Apple M1 native code paths, but nothing equivalent for the Surface Pro X. And one of the problems Windows on ARM is struggling with, despite having existed for several years at this point, is that it has fewer native applications. There's been no architectural update.Įarly benchmarks must, as always, be taken with grains of salt, but the Surface Pro X is a pretty known quantity at this point, and its performance is already known to be inferior to x86. Qualcomm essentially punted on updating its SoC this year, and while there technically was a refresh for devices like the Surface Pro X, the performance is practically identical.

It must be said that this isn't particularly surprising, but it highlights the critical weakness in the nascent Windows on ARM ecosystem. Moving to 64-bit apps on Windows doesn't seem to do anything for the 8cx's overall performance.

That's the conclusion PCWorld reached (Opens in a new window) after comparing the Snapdragon 8cx against the M1, with a Core i5 (4C/8T, 1GHz base, 3.6GHz boost) machine tossed in for good measure. Qualcomm's 8cx platform and its minimal refresh earlier this fall have never been known for speed - these chips have been sold on the basis of excellent battery life, not pure performance.Įven with that said, the M1 eats Windows on ARM-powered laptops for breakfast. Now that Microsoft's Windows on ARM emulation layer can also run 64-bit x86 code, inevitably there will be questions as to how it compares with the Apple M1.

Macbook m1 handbrake