So it sounds like the old model was too slow even though it was a Snapdragon 855, and the 8CX is basically the same speed. So the new one is more expensive and still slow.
Depends on what you mean by slow, and what you're comparing it to. While I haven't used one of the 855 devices, the 8CX based Surface Pro X doesn't seems slow at all. Unlike the old WoA devices (eg Surface RT) that had eMMC storage, the Pro X has a true SSD and plenty of RAM, and is quite responsive. I expect this new Yoga will perform similarly. No these devices are not gaming laptops, but for most regular uses they should do just fine. And the more of them out there the more likely apps will get compiled and optimized for ARM64.
The C630 is competitive in performance with core-i5 laptops for native apps. You can clearly buy faster machines but they will be heavier and have worse battery life. Modern machines are not all about performance, rather they're a compromise between portability and performance. The right laptop for you comes down to your individual circumstances. I've used a C630 exclusively for over a year and the portability makes it perfect for my needs. I spend most of my time in Firefox, which has native ARM support and I find it plenty fast enough.
Stop bothering with this Qualcomm. Arm doesn't seem to improve their cores at the pace you need to reach parity with x86 CPUs and frankly even if they would (say use a apple custom core) they would still lag behind while consuming the same as an Intel cpu (btw arm doesn't get extra perf for free).
So it *starts* at $1500.. That price is way too steep for 256 GB of storage, 4 GB(?) of RAM and a performance that's only slightly above top-end mobile phone performance - or exactly the same due to the emulation overhead. mmWave 5G will be nearly useless for years as well, due to minimal coverage (in city centers only), while <6GHz "5G" is just souped up LTE. It's 24-hour battery is nice but it is not worth $1500+
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
8 Comments
Back to Article
Alistair - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
So it sounds like the old model was too slow even though it was a Snapdragon 855, and the 8CX is basically the same speed. So the new one is more expensive and still slow.domboy - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
Depends on what you mean by slow, and what you're comparing it to. While I haven't used one of the 855 devices, the 8CX based Surface Pro X doesn't seems slow at all. Unlike the old WoA devices (eg Surface RT) that had eMMC storage, the Pro X has a true SSD and plenty of RAM, and is quite responsive. I expect this new Yoga will perform similarly. No these devices are not gaming laptops, but for most regular uses they should do just fine. And the more of them out there the more likely apps will get compiled and optimized for ARM64.amb9800 - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
There's a typo in the text -- the Yoga 630 used a Snapdragon 850, which was a modified 845, rather than the 855. 8cx is a good deal faster.manatakahe - Tuesday, February 11, 2020 - link
The C630 is competitive in performance with core-i5 laptops for native apps. You can clearly buy faster machines but they will be heavier and have worse battery life. Modern machines are not all about performance, rather they're a compromise between portability and performance. The right laptop for you comes down to your individual circumstances. I've used a C630 exclusively for over a year and the portability makes it perfect for my needs. I spend most of my time in Firefox, which has native ARM support and I find it plenty fast enough.patel21 - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
Why would they put such priceyeeeeman - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
They wanna market it as a premium device but there is no way for them to hide the slowness of emulation.yeeeeman - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
Stop bothering with this Qualcomm. Arm doesn't seem to improve their cores at the pace you need to reach parity with x86 CPUs and frankly even if they would (say use a apple custom core) they would still lag behind while consuming the same as an Intel cpu (btw arm doesn't get extra perf for free).Santoval - Monday, January 6, 2020 - link
So it *starts* at $1500.. That price is way too steep for 256 GB of storage, 4 GB(?) of RAM and a performance that's only slightly above top-end mobile phone performance - or exactly the same due to the emulation overhead. mmWave 5G will be nearly useless for years as well, due to minimal coverage (in city centers only), while <6GHz "5G" is just souped up LTE. It's 24-hour battery is nice but it is not worth $1500+