Testing Graphics on Snapdragon X Elite Laptops: Can You Play AAA Games?

Qualcomm has made the biggest splash in the PC-computing scene this year, entering the Windows laptop market in full force with its Snapdragon X chips: the X Elite and X Plus. Our initial testing earlier this year showed promise, but only last month could we benchmark and review in full the first machines with these X Elite processors, the 2024 Microsoft Surface Laptop and Surface Pro.

Beyond talking about the hardware, those reviews cover the many facets of the Snapdragon X launch, intertwined with Microsoft’s Copilot+ PC launch and the complications of Windows running on an Arm-based processor. You have a lot to consider regarding performance and compatibility, but the upshot is that the Snapdragon X Elite is a snappy chip that competes with Intel’s and AMD’s current mobile processors; you can see plenty of processing speed results in those reviews.

The 13-inch 2024 Surface Laptop (Credit: Joseph Maldonado)

In those reviews, however, we touched only briefly on graphics performance, which deserves its own deep dive. While much of the reviews focused on processing performance and the neural processing unit (or NPU, which is a special part of the processor that drives AI workloads), here we’ll look deeper at the Qualcomm Adreno integrated graphics found in Snapdragon X.

As a general disclaimer up front, I know that this first wave of Snapdragon X laptops isn’t meant for gaming. These are mainly light and portable general-use laptops, some more powerful than others. Regardless, in the past, we put a slate of Intel- and AMD-based laptops with integrated graphics through real-world game testing, and so we’ve endeavored to do the same with the Snapdragon X Elite. Broadly speaking, the gaming performance in those older systems was a touch better than you may expect, capable of running several modern titles at around 30 frames per second (fps). After all, some folks have only one laptop, can’t afford a full-fledged gaming PC, or want to play lighter titles in a pinch. Like in that earlier story, I want to judge just how plausible that is on the Snapdragon X Elite.

For this round, I chose three of the new X Elite-based Copilot+ PCs we have on hand, selected a range of games, and ran the built-in benchmarks. The results will follow below, but first, here’s what you need to know.

Setting the Stage: Adreno, Snapdragon X’s Integrated Graphics

As a foundation to all this, know that general-use, ultraportable, and most laptops run on integrated graphics, meaning the same chip that handles processing also has a section that powers the graphics, and the graphics memory is just a slice of the main system memory allocated to that duty. This differs from true gaming and content creation laptops, which use discrete graphics chips from Nvidia or AMD with much higher power ceilings and their own dedicated banks of video memory.

But even within the integrated-graphics realm, each manufacturer deploys its resources differently, and they all vary in performance. A 30-frame-per-second (fps) showing is generally considered the minimum rate required for smooth-enough gameplay, while 60fps is the real target in 2024. Modern gaming laptops achieve this easily with most games, but existing integrated graphics systems do not, in our experience.

The HP OmniBook X 14 (Credit: Joseph Maldonado)

And so, that means the processor, and its graphics silicon, is the ultimate driver for gaming on these laptops. As mentioned, the initial Snapdragon X family of processors comprises Snapdragon X Elite and X Plus models. Both are derived from the same die; the X Elites are 12-core processors, while the X Plus has 10 cores. (All use the same Adreno integrated graphics silicon.) The X Plus is the less powerful of the two, found in the lowest-cost configurations and less powerful machines. We haven’t tested it yet, though, so we’ll be setting it aside entirely for this story; we’re looking at the X Elite here.

Making things slightly more complicated, the X Elite itself comes in a few different versions of the chip: the X1E-78-100, the X1E-80-100, and the X1E-84-100. In our testing, we’ve looked at the different performance levels among them on the processing side, but the top-end X1E-84-100 chip has more potent graphics, too, so it will be interesting to gauge the gaming-performance difference. (The Adreno silicon is clocked slightly higher with the X1E-84-100.) Take a look at the table below for the hard spec differences.

It’s a tough enough task for consumers to get a handle on the new Snapdragon X chips in general, and I don’t expect the vast majority of users to choose a Snapdragon-based laptop according to which version of the X Elite is inside. Which version of the chip makes the most sense for each system is predetermined by the manufacturer, with a range of options from Qualcomm, and shoppers will buy the laptop they want most for their needs. Still, while we’re testing the X Elite performance at large, it’s academically interesting to gauge the ceiling of the top-end model and see how much of a gap there is between the 78 and the 84 versions.

The Test Laptops and the Results: Adreno-Powered Playability

And so, I took three of the first Snapdragon-based laptops we have through a group of gaming benchmarks. You’ll find each system’s specs and game tests I ran with the following results. The goal isn’t to pit the X Elite against the existing Intel and AMD results we gathered in 2021—for a variety of reasons, this isn’t a fair 1:1 matchup, though we’ll look at the general playability on the platforms—but to gauge the gaming plausibility and 3D power of these chips.

The three laptops I tested for this analysis are the HP OmniBook X 14, the Lenovo Yoga Slim 7X, and the Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge. (Full reviews of the latter two are forthcoming.) The first two share the same X Elite X1E-78-100 chips, a version we’ll see in many systems, while the Samsung is the only laptop we’ve received so far with the more potent X1E-84-100.

The tests we ran are all built-in benchmark utilities inside each game that anyone could run; each was run at 1080p resolution. Generally, we set them to the most pure “medium” or “normal” settings possible. (I made a few minor judgment calls here and there depending on individual game settings.) Still, these are primarily the mid-level presets, with specific settings and any other active features like FSR noted in the relevant table.

The Lenovo Yoga Slim 7X (Credit: Joseph Maldonado)

Older AAA Games Testing

The first group of tests consists of five big-budget, or AAA, video games with built-in benchmark tests: Rise of the Tomb Raider, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry 5, Total War: Three Kingdoms, and Rainbow Six Siege. These represent a mix of adventure, open world, first-person shooter, simulation, and esports titles, and are largely relatively older titles—not quite legacy games, but not cutting-edge selections, either. (Three Kingdoms, released in 2019, is the most recent.) Realistically, anyone pushing the envelope on gaming and performance won’t use these laptops, but they may be fine for playing your old favorites, and I have some newer games in the next batch. Both Tomb Raider games were run twice, in DirectX 11 and again on the same settings in DX12.

While you’ll find a couple of caveats, these results show laptops capable of playing at or near 30fps on these titles. Games like Rise of the Tomb Raider and Rainbow Six Siege saw better performance than some of the more demanding games—the former (when set to DX12) averaged over 40fps on all three laptops. Playing a competitive game like Siege on this laptop isn’t ideal, but it is possible and representative of this genre of less visually demanding multiplayer titles; you could get a few rounds in if you have a mouse on hand and a Snapdragon machine the only laptop available. Three Kingdoms is a demanding game when inside the game’s real-time battles (the benchmark I ran, rather than the turn-based world map), and is one instance where you may be better off lowering the settings below the medium preset to achieve a 30fps average.

Also, the Galaxy Book4 with the superior X Elite chip performed better on these tests. The margin isn’t always significant, but the difference is clear: It achieved an average of 34fps across these seven runs compared with the OmniBook X AI’s 29fps.

Testing Newer AAA Games With FSR and…What’s ASR?

This next batch of tests uses more recent titles, including some with cutting-edge visual options. This isn’t a raw performance test with more demanding games only, though; these titles include options for AMD’s FSR resolution upscaling features, which, in short, make the game run better while retaining as high visual fidelity as possible. The first two are F1 22—run once with FSR turned off (TAA is the default sharpening setting) and again with FSR on—and Cyberpunk 2077, run once with FSR on to demonstrate FSR’s effectiveness in an exceptionally visually demanding game.

The third title is Borderlands 3, which has an interesting wrinkle to it. It was easy to miss in the deluge of Snapdragon and Copilot+ PC news, but Microsoft released an operating system-level, AI-based super-resolution feature alongside this launch. Automatic Super Resolution (Auto SR, or ASR) performs a similar function to Nvidia’s DLSS, FSR, and Intel’s XeSS but is available only on Copilot+ PC systems.

With the help of FSR and ASR, these results looked even better than the first batch. F1 22 ran well on these laptops even without FSR active and reached as high as 75fps with the feature active. That doesn’t hold up to most gaming laptops, but it’s also legitimately smooth performance. (The OmniBook didn’t fare as well, but it still reached nearly 60fps.)

Cyberpunk 2077 is a different beast, one of the most visually advanced and demanding open-world games, with much lower frame rates on average. Two of the systems averaged at or near 30fps, with the OmniBook again lagging. The success somewhat falls apart here, but if you’re keeping expectations realistic, it’s hardly surprising—I imagine some gamers wouldn’t expect Cyberpunk to be playable at all, especially on an Arm-based system.

For all three machines, the Medium visual preset may be a bridge too far with Cyberpunk 2077. (A 30fps average means you’ll sometimes see dips below that, which can be irritating.) Still, this game has a load of visual settings that, if you are patient, can help you find the right performance balance—at the very least, it’s not out of the question to squeak by playing Cyberpunk 2077 on these laptops.

As for Borderlands 3, our first experience with ASR is a success. Much like FSR, it delivered real frame-rate improvements, improving the results of these three laptops by an average of 12fps compared with the same test with ASR turned off. In the case of the OmniBook, that took it from less than 30fps to 39fps, which is a visibly valuable difference. ASR is only available in 11 titles at launch (choose the ASR filter on this guide to Windows on Arm games), but keep an eye on the evolving list of games for compatibility.

Compatibility Findings: Mostly Smooth Sailing

I found few issues getting these titles working, which is promising news for potential buyers and another best-yet showing for Windows on Arm. The benchmark experience wasn’t without hurdles, as Borderlands 3 took some coaxing to tweak the resolution and settings correctly before it would run. Returnal, another title I originally planned to use, would not launch on any of the laptops, so I dropped it early on. (If you’re interested in exploring the full range of games that are reported to work on Snapdragon X systems, check out the Works on Windows on Arm site for a current searchable tally.)

The Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge (Credit: Joseph Maldonado)

Like with the wider range of non-gaming applications you use every day, these are the one-off, trial-and-error things users may experience when switching to an Arm-based laptop. Qualcomm’s list of Arm-optimized apps grows, and the native support out of the box is better than it’s been in the past, but you have no guarantee every piece of software will run as well as on x86-based systems. A decent number of mainstream applications provide Arm versions for download, but that’s spotty, too.

When native applications aren’t available, as of Windows 11 version 24H2, Microsoft’s Prism emulator translates and runs the applications in emulation similar to Apple’s Rosetta solution. Alongside this gaming test fest, we did an anecdotal compatibility test of 31 non-Arm-native apps on a Snapdragon X Elite machine; see how the Windows Prism emulation did. But it speaks positively that, for this testing, no major manual elbow grease was required. Except for Returnal, the Steam app and every other game installed and ran normally, without interruptions and without notifying us emulation was active or requiring extra steps. For our Surface Laptop and Surface Pro reviews, some of the usual benchmark tests we know didn’t have a native Arm version performed a bit slower, but didn’t behave strangely, fail to launch, or otherwise notify you they were running through an emulation layer. Prism isn’t perfect (and you’ll still see issues with some major games, like Fortnite and PUBG), but it’s a sight better than Windows on Arm emulation schemes that came before.

Verdict: A Pleasant Surprise for Integrated Graphics Gaming

Qualcomm’s Snapdragon X Elite gaming performance fell in the expected range. The core takeaway is that real-world games, not synthetic tests, can run at or near 30fps on the chip’s integrated graphics at 1080p. Some games don’t reach that mark—you will likely need to lower settings toward their lowest to achieve this—but most we tested are, at minimum, playable. We also found some notable variation between the laptops in testing; the OmniBook X 14 fell well short of 30fps in games like Cyberpunk 2077, while the other two systems hit at or just below that mark.

This underlines the importance of individual testing like ours, which will come in future system reviews. But, at the end of the day (and hopefully, more improvements come in future updates), compatibility was not a roadblock to gaming on Snapdragon, and the performance is acceptable for integrated graphics. It was back in 2021 when we tested the Intel and AMD systems, so it’s not a comparable generation-to-generation set of results, but this is a slightly better average than what we saw from those systems at the time (a win for first-generation Snapdragon X and Adreno). If you’re the type to play games on your one general-purpose laptop and are eyeing a Snapdragon Copilot+ PC, low-end and mid-level gaming is possible on these chips. Just check the compatibility lists first.