Not saying pretty much says it all.
Not necessarily: If they came out right now and said that games run great, it might build expectations that they can’t meet.
I haven’t seen anything about a translation layer for x86 to ARM like MacOS has (rosetta?). Is this something ive missed?
answered my own question https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/gaming-laptops/snapdragon-x-elite-spotted-running-baldurs-gate-3-at-around-30fps-supporting-claims-that-windows-games-just-work-on-arm-chip/
Baulders Gate 3 running at 1080p hovering around 30FPS
24H2 is supposed to make it a lot better, but when I first used the translation layer on my M1 Macbook through parallels it ran things pretty well. But that was also an M1 Macbook Pro.
Qualcomm: “Hey buddy, could you please port some of your games to our shared ARM platform as a showcase how great it is for games?”
Microsoft Game Studios: “No.”
Qualcomm: “Not even Minecraft which you already ported to ARM for Nintendo Switch?”
Microsoft Game Studios: “No.”
Qualcomm: “Why?”
Microsoft Game Studios: “Until your chips are fast enough to power the next generation Xbox hardware, we don’t actually care about you.”
Frankly, gaming is not a use case they really need to focus on right now. I’m betting that’ll improve in time, also.
Your reply makes zero sense. People at Microsoft Game Studios are not the ones working on that Surface device, so no focus would have been taken away. They went through the trouble of testing 1200 games and concluded that gaming is no use case? Yeah, no.
You can test for a use case that you’re not optimized for just to prove it’s possible. Which is what it sounds like they’re doing.
What I’m saying is that their primary business case out of the gates is enterprise and consumer laptops and mid/high-tier tablets, and they are not explicitly targeting gaming at the moment as a core use case for Snapdragon X.
