This SoC in the dev kit is pushed beyond other SKUs. Its power consumption likely isn't representative of other laptop SKUs.
This SoC in the dev kit is pushed beyond other SKUs. Its power consumption likely isn't representative of other laptop SKUs.100 watts?
Currently released SKUs:
X1E-00-1DE
X1E-84-100
X1E-80-100
X1E-78-100
X1P-66-100
X1P-64-100
X1P-46-100
X1P-42-100
Rumoured SKUs;
X1E-76-100
X1P-62-100
X1P-56-100
X1P-44-100
X1P-40-100
X1P-39-100
X1-24-100
X1-00-001
Release late 2025?Spotted this via notebookcheck.
Leaker reveals new insights into the state of next-gen Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite chipsets
Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite and Snapdragon X Plus chipsets have not been out long. Nonetheless, a leaker has provided early details about second-generation successors, which Qualcomm is said to be developing under the terms SC8480XP and 'Project Glymur'.www.notebookcheck.net
Here is the source article:Release late 2025?
| - | X Elite | Apple M4 |
| SoC | 169 mm² | 165 mm² |
CPU | 48 mm² | 24 mm² |
CPU % of total | 28.4% | 16.3% |
GPU | 24 mm² | ~30 mm² |
GPU % of total | 14.2% | 18.1% |
CPU/GPU area ratio | 2.0 | 0.9 |
| CPU+GPU % of total | 42.6% | 34.4% |
The Oryon CPU appears to be the star of the show in the X Elite, whereas the M4 is a much more balanced SoC design.
I'd be wary of trying to draw too many conclusions from die shot analysis like that. Different CPUs can be organized differently, and depending on how you measure the structures in the die shots, the measurements can vary wildly.
- SoC
area ratioCPU+GPU % of total
● X Elite and M4 have similar die size.
● X Elite's CPU takes up a much larger portion of the die than M4's CPU does.
● X Elite's GPU takes up a much lower portion of die area than M4's GPU does.
● X Elite's CPU+GPU takes up a larger portion of the die area than M4's CPU+GPU.
Apple spends almost equal amounts of die area for the CPU and GPU. Also the CPU+GPU accounts for a lower percentage of the total die area, which means Apple is spending more area on other components such as Display Engines, Thunderbolt Controllers, Media Engine, etc...
The Oryon CPU appears to be the star of the show in the X Elite, whereas the M4 is a much more balanced SoC design.
What leverage would they have to enter with astronomical prices?
It’s still odd to me that these tests aren’t run to max frequency. I mean one set of data at a fixed clock is fine. But not running another set to the max seems weird. And also the FP, we know M4 does 16.11 in a previous run of his to max frequency. So it’s just an odd choice.The video about LunarLake by Geekerwan has some tests of X Elite.
View attachment 108560View attachment 108563View attachment 108564
Well, the graph is Intel-oriented, so the results and curves are not fully depicted. Also, the graph shows the motherboard's power consumption, not the core itself (in X Elite, it is impossible to measure the consumption of the core itself). In general, the results are not very encouraging for the X Elite. I now understand why Geekerwan lost interest and didn't release a full-fledged X Elite review. It is very interesting to see how this will be implemented on the 8 Gen 4.It’s still odd to me that these tests aren’t run to max frequency. I mean one set of data at a fixed clock is fine. But not running another set to the max seems weird. And also the FP, we know M4 does 16.11 in a previous run of his to max frequency. So it’s just an odd choice.
Also, shouldn’t the top two graphs be reflective of the bottom chart in their values? The X Elite shows 13.58 points in FP on the bottom but in the chart above it’s roughly scoring 9.
Oryon V2 is rumoured to hit 5 GHz. Do you think it can be dine without adding more pipeline stages?And Intel/AMD needs to follow that direction, because I suspect large L1 caches are also contributing to efficiency in their designs because it keeps lot of data from going out into slower, higher power cache levels and memory.
The basis of Apple's design is also having stellar design team, because being able to have 4GHz clocks at such low power at just 9 pipeline stages and humongous L1 cache with 3 cycle latency is amazing. The E core team can still do quite a bit better, which is catch up with Apple's. It is even more impressive when you consider Mx chips have been stagnating for a while with smart engineers all into "AIeeee" hype and moving to startups.
But even the bottom graph the results of each aren’t anywhere near max clocks. The X Elite can hit 4.3GHz and yet it’s only being measured at 3.8GHz for both int and fp.Well, the graph is Intel-oriented, so the results and curves are not fully depicted. Also, the graph shows the motherboard's power consumption, not the core itself (in X Elite, it is impossible to measure the consumption of the core itself). In general, the results are not very encouraging for the X Elite. I now understand why Geekerwan lost interest and didn't release a full-fledged X Elite review. It is very interesting to see how this will be implemented on the 8 Gen 4.