Re:Microsoft is working to bring 64-bit Intel app emulation ...
by zlynx on Saturday November 16, 2019 @01:54PM
(#21554254)
I acquired a Surface Pro X. I can't compare it to a 7 but battery life is excellent so far.
One thing that my previous Surface Pro 4 did was Connected Standby. It would usually be fine and wake up after an hour asleep just 1 or 2 percent battery down. But then other times I'd go to use it and it'd be at 20%.
So far this X has not betrayed me like that. It's been good for regular tablet use (not continuous) for 10 hour days, easy.
Re:Microsoft is working to bring 64-bit Intel app emulation ...
by muststopmyths on Saturday November 16, 2019 @01:14PM
(#21554040)
Sorry, my phrasing was terrible, as usual. I know the emulated performance is terrible. My query is about native ARM desktop workloads vs native x86 desktop workloads (if Microsoft's vision comes to fruition) in terms of power consumption. I really can't imagine they'd be different, but I don't know enough about it other than "tech press" comparing phone battery lives to laptops.
Re:Microsoft is working to bring 64-bit Intel app emulation ...
by OkGoDoIt on Saturday November 16, 2019 @04:47PM
(#21555187)
I am also quite curious about this. Just like when I see review sites benchmark an iPad versus a surface pro running full windows, I can’t help but be confused as to what anyone really hopes to learn from such an apples to oranges comparison
I read two reviews which stated even 32-bit Chrome’s performance was terrible compared to the native ARM 64-bit Edge, and Photoshop, etc, are borderline unusable.
Stranger still, the Surface Pro X’s battery life has been reported to be on par or poorer than the less expensive Intel-native Pro 7’s - I’m rather confused by Microsoft’s strategy here.
The Surface RT didn’t work.