3 ms·

Snapdragon Dev Kit for Windows – the fastest X Elite, tested

30 points by ingve 2y ago

modrisben 2y ago
[flagged]
darioatonal4 2y ago
[dead]
Georgeronald 2y ago
[dead]
gjsman-1000 2y ago
What a winning pitch to developers. Spend $900 of your own money ($400 more than the Apple Transition Kit, which itself was then fully refunded) to build ARM-native apps; for a <1% market after a disastrous launch with the Recall and Copilot controversies. And then what? Confuse your customers by asking users to pick x64 or ARM? You'll pay more in customer service costs helping confused customers, and from lost customers who downloaded the ARM version for their x64 PC and wrote off your software as dysfunctional (or, heaven forbid, they see the notice from Windows saying this software is not compatible with your device), than you'll ever gain from native ARM.
- goda90 2y ago
  Microsoft expects users to get apps from their store which I imagine will choose the correct binary automatically.
  - gjsman-1000 2y ago
    Well, that's even worse. Pay $900 and then be forced to redirect your users to the Microsoft Store so they aren't confused, where they'll be forced to see other competing software and/or sign in with a Microsoft Account, in order to cater to a <1% market. What a garbage pitch.
    - jamesgeck0 2y ago
      > or sign in with a Microsoft Account Most folks are already signed in with a Microsoft Account, thanks to years intensifying setup shenanigans. It's very hard to create a local-only user on initial boot.
      - gjsman-1000 2y ago
        … except for all the people who upgraded from Windows 10, which gets a free grandfathered in local account during setup. More than 1% of your users will come from that background.
      - a1o 2y ago
        So I had to do a fresh install yesterday, it works like this now, you need to shift+F10 as soon as the install start and disable the wifi netsh interface set interface "Wi-Fi" disable Then reboot, then when the screen comes that asks you to select a WiFi network but the list is empty you need to bring cmd.exe again with shift+F10 and type OOBE\BYPASSNRO and then it will automatically reboot and have a new screen that has a button made of only text that doesn't look clickable that you can click to skip and it will let you set up a local account.
        yusefnapora 2y ago
        “But the plans were on display…” “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.” “That’s the display department.” “With a flashlight.” “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.” “So had the stairs.” “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?” “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.” ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
- goosedragons 2y ago
  At least for $900 you get to keep this one? The Apple DTK had to be given back after 6 months with your consolation prize (after some kvetching too) being a coupon to buy something in the Apple Store.
a1o 2y ago
Why didn't Microsoft went the Universal Binary way like Apple did? Does anyone knows why the Windows binaries have to be specific to each platform?
- aseipp 2y ago
  I thought the same too, and my best guess would be that: backwards compatibility with older Windows is important, and Microsoft has a much harder time with that than Apple. It's both technical and social. macOS fat binaries are not actually mach-o "binaries", but they are really just an "archive file" which contain multiple files within them. When you execute one, the OS gets to pick which file to use. When you dlopen, it picks the right one, and so on. That's basically the long and short of it. But an important aspect to note of the macOS design is that "fat binaries" would not work on systems that do not implement support for it. For example, I'm not sure Mac OSX 10.3 (Panther) had support for fat binaries, but 10.5 (Snow Leopard) added them when the Core 2 x86_64 transition happened. This is obvious when you think about it for a second, but here's the key: macOS users actually upgrade their operating systems, quickly. What that means in practice, I think, is that if you started publishing fat binaries with multiple architectures, you could be reasonably sure that within, say, 1-2 years, 99% of your users will be using an operating system that will support fat binaries. The transition window where you need to support the old stuff for Panther users is there, but it's a small window in the grand scheme. Now think about how it works on Windows. Windows has been using the PE format for decades, and it does not have any notion of "separate sections for separate architectures" (just like Mach-O.) So, if you wanted "fat PEs", you'd need to introduce an entirely new executable format. But you can't introduce new executable file formats for Windows 8, just like how Apple couldn't add fat binaries to Panther. But millions of PCs still run Windows 8, whereas Panther was obsolete within a very short timeframe. So, if developers start publishing "Fat EXEs" that were actually in a different non-PE format, then you're not going to be able to use those on any older operating system. And the support gap for Windows is significantly larger, so you'd be supporting the transition for potentially many years depending on your userbase. That's a significantly different trade off compared to what MacOS developers and users might stomach. That said, they could still add support for "Fat PEs", and it would be great. But given the above calculus, I can see why they might not have gone this route, at least initially. This is my best educated guess and I don't know anyone who could confirm this kind of thing, but that's my 0.02c.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sagz 2y ago
A telling bit: > Generally, the performance was underwhelming compared to my expectations. I know from my work overclocking Raspberry Pis there are diminishing returns when you force-feed more power into a chip that's optimized for a certain level of performance. > There's a lot more power, a lot more heat, and only marginal performance gains. It looks like the Snapdragon X Elite on a laptop at 20-30W is only 15-30% less performant than the X Elite on the Dev Kit running at 80-100W! > And it's downright embarrassing, efficiency-wise, compared to Apple's M3 and M4 chips (M2 is close to comparable, at least).
kristianp 2y ago
This review feels a little underdone to me. I feel I should agree with all his points, but there's something about it. Maybe its the way he doesn't put comparison numbers for other systems in his benchmark numbers table. Or maybe it's because he doesn't mention why linux isn't working (is it locked down, or too new?) Or perhaps its because the value-prop for these systems is laptops with long battery life, not dev systems. I will agree that the fan is too loud and that Windows 11 seems to suck (I don't use it much, mostly linux here). By the way a Mac Mini with 32GB of RAM is $1699, not the hypothetical $1200-$1400 he estimates, but you get a M2 Pro, which is a better processor. So this system is cheap for the RAM you get.
- CatMaster5001 2y ago
  If anything just too new. There are patches submitted. If you were really up for it you might be able to cobble enough together at this point to patch up and build a kernel that could run, but I am not certain how much more if any is needed. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/20240911073337.90577-3-quic_sibis@quicinc.com/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/202...

30 points by ingve 2y ago

modrisben 2y ago

[flagged]

darioatonal4 2y ago

[dead]

Georgeronald 2y ago

[dead]

gjsman-1000 2y ago

What a winning pitch to developers. Spend $900 of your own money ($400 more than the Apple Transition Kit, which itself was then fully refunded) to build ARM-native apps; for a <1% market after a disastrous launch with the Recall and Copilot controversies. And then what? Confuse your customers by asking users to pick x64 or ARM? You'll pay more in customer service costs helping confused customers, and from lost customers who downloaded the ARM version for their x64 PC and wrote off your software as dysfunctional (or, heaven forbid, they see the notice from Windows saying this software is not compatible with your device), than you'll ever gain from native ARM.

goda90 2y ago
Microsoft expects users to get apps from their store which I imagine will choose the correct binary automatically.
- gjsman-1000 2y ago
  Well, that's even worse. Pay $900 and then be forced to redirect your users to the Microsoft Store so they aren't confused, where they'll be forced to see other competing software and/or sign in with a Microsoft Account, in order to cater to a <1% market. What a garbage pitch.
  - jamesgeck0 2y ago
    > or sign in with a Microsoft Account Most folks are already signed in with a Microsoft Account, thanks to years intensifying setup shenanigans. It's very hard to create a local-only user on initial boot.
    - gjsman-1000 2y ago
      … except for all the people who upgraded from Windows 10, which gets a free grandfathered in local account during setup. More than 1% of your users will come from that background.
    - a1o 2y ago
      So I had to do a fresh install yesterday, it works like this now, you need to shift+F10 as soon as the install start and disable the wifi netsh interface set interface "Wi-Fi" disable Then reboot, then when the screen comes that asks you to select a WiFi network but the list is empty you need to bring cmd.exe again with shift+F10 and type OOBE\BYPASSNRO and then it will automatically reboot and have a new screen that has a button made of only text that doesn't look clickable that you can click to skip and it will let you set up a local account.
      - yusefnapora 2y ago
        “But the plans were on display…” “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.” “That’s the display department.” “With a flashlight.” “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.” “So had the stairs.” “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?” “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.” ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
goosedragons 2y ago
At least for $900 you get to keep this one? The Apple DTK had to be given back after 6 months with your consolation prize (after some kvetching too) being a coupon to buy something in the Apple Store.

a1o 2y ago

Why didn't Microsoft went the Universal Binary way like Apple did? Does anyone knows why the Windows binaries have to be specific to each platform?

aseipp 2y ago
I thought the same too, and my best guess would be that: backwards compatibility with older Windows is important, and Microsoft has a much harder time with that than Apple. It's both technical and social. macOS fat binaries are not actually mach-o "binaries", but they are really just an "archive file" which contain multiple files within them. When you execute one, the OS gets to pick which file to use. When you dlopen, it picks the right one, and so on. That's basically the long and short of it. But an important aspect to note of the macOS design is that "fat binaries" would not work on systems that do not implement support for it. For example, I'm not sure Mac OSX 10.3 (Panther) had support for fat binaries, but 10.5 (Snow Leopard) added them when the Core 2 x86_64 transition happened. This is obvious when you think about it for a second, but here's the key: macOS users actually upgrade their operating systems, quickly. What that means in practice, I think, is that if you started publishing fat binaries with multiple architectures, you could be reasonably sure that within, say, 1-2 years, 99% of your users will be using an operating system that will support fat binaries. The transition window where you need to support the old stuff for Panther users is there, but it's a small window in the grand scheme. Now think about how it works on Windows. Windows has been using the PE format for decades, and it does not have any notion of "separate sections for separate architectures" (just like Mach-O.) So, if you wanted "fat PEs", you'd need to introduce an entirely new executable format. But you can't introduce new executable file formats for Windows 8, just like how Apple couldn't add fat binaries to Panther. But millions of PCs still run Windows 8, whereas Panther was obsolete within a very short timeframe. So, if developers start publishing "Fat EXEs" that were actually in a different non-PE format, then you're not going to be able to use those on any older operating system. And the support gap for Windows is significantly larger, so you'd be supporting the transition for potentially many years depending on your userbase. That's a significantly different trade off compared to what MacOS developers and users might stomach. That said, they could still add support for "Fat PEs", and it would be great. But given the above calculus, I can see why they might not have gone this route, at least initially. This is my best educated guess and I don't know anyone who could confirm this kind of thing, but that's my 0.02c.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

sagz 2y ago

A telling bit: > Generally, the performance was underwhelming compared to my expectations. I know from my work overclocking Raspberry Pis there are diminishing returns when you force-feed more power into a chip that's optimized for a certain level of performance. > There's a lot more power, a lot more heat, and only marginal performance gains. It looks like the Snapdragon X Elite on a laptop at 20-30W is only 15-30% less performant than the X Elite on the Dev Kit running at 80-100W! > And it's downright embarrassing, efficiency-wise, compared to Apple's M3 and M4 chips (M2 is close to comparable, at least).

kristianp 2y ago

This review feels a little underdone to me. I feel I should agree with all his points, but there's something about it. Maybe its the way he doesn't put comparison numbers for other systems in his benchmark numbers table. Or maybe it's because he doesn't mention why linux isn't working (is it locked down, or too new?) Or perhaps its because the value-prop for these systems is laptops with long battery life, not dev systems. I will agree that the fan is too loud and that Windows 11 seems to suck (I don't use it much, mostly linux here). By the way a Mac Mini with 32GB of RAM is $1699, not the hypothetical $1200-$1400 he estimates, but you get a M2 Pro, which is a better processor. So this system is cheap for the RAM you get.

CatMaster5001 2y ago
If anything just too new. There are patches submitted. If you were really up for it you might be able to cobble enough together at this point to patch up and build a kernel that could run, but I am not certain how much more if any is needed. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/20240911073337.90577-3-quic_sibis@quicinc.com/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/202...