Product test
AMD Ryzen AI 300 tested - how well the Asus Zenbook S 16 performs
by Martin Jud
Microsoft Surface Pro for Business with the latest Intel chip tested
15.5.2025
Translation: machine translated
Pictures: Martin Jud
When tested, the Microsoft Surface Pro for Business with Intel chip convinced me more than the cheaper Qualcomm version. This is due to its better battery life and graphics performance. Nevertheless, there is one point apart from the price where Qualcomm has the edge.
Microsoft offers its Surface products in both consumer and business versions. The devices, which are actually intended for companies, are not normally of interest to private consumers due to their higher price. However, the Surface Laptop and the 11th edition of the convertible Surface Pro are only available in the business version with an optional Intel processor.
Since the hardware is practically identical apart from the chip, a comparison between the version with Qualcomm's Snapdragon X and the new one with Intel Core Ultra (Series 2) is obvious. I have included the test results of the Asus Zenbook S 16 in the graphics so that AMD's Ryzen AI 300 is also in the mix.
What distinguishes the business version from the consumer version
Apart from the fact that the Intel variant is only available in the business version, a Microsoft business device differs primarily in the following points:
Hardware overview: Test device with OLED and the latest Intel SoC
CPU performance: the only point where the consumer device is better
To test the processor performance, I rely on Geekbench 6 and Cinebench 2024.
Intel's new CPUs no longer have hyperthreading - i.e. one core only serves one thread instead of two. For this reason, and because it has fewer cores (eight vs. twelve) than the competition, it is already clear in advance that the Core Ultra chip is at a disadvantage compared to Snapdragon and Ryzen in multi-threaded benchmarks. However, this is not tragic for most applications apart from benchmarks and rendering, as very few programmes use more than eight threads.
In the single-core result, the results from Intel and Qualcomm are practically identical. AMD follows close behind. In multi-core, the Snapdragon of the consumer Surface Pro takes the crown. The Ryzen installed in the Zenbook follows with 6.4 per cent less performance. The Core Ultra of the business device has to admit defeat with 23.2 per cent less performance.
In the Cinebench results, AMD is ahead in the multi-core category:
The Ryzen is better suited for rendering 3D content than its competitors. The gap to Intel in multi-core is 37.9 per cent. Otherwise, the picture is similar to Geekbench.
In terms of pure CPU performance, the business device is therefore at a slight disadvantage. But raw multi-core processor power is not all that makes a good computer. And according to these two benchmarks, the tide is turning in Intel's favour compared to the consumer Surface Pro.
Graphics performance: AMD and Intel outperform Qualcomm
To test the iGPU of the three competitors, I run the Geekbench 6 graphics test with OpenCL and Vulkan API. I also render images with 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Unlimited.
The AMD Radeon 890M leads the way. Using OpenCL, Intel's Arc 140V achieves 22.7 per cent less performance. Using the Vulkan API, the gap is only 7.1 per cent. Qualcomm's Adreno iGPU brings up the rear with 42.8 per cent (OpenCL) and 40.3 per cent (Vulkan) less performance compared to AMD.
In 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Unlimited, the consumer Surface Pro is still in last place. However, it is only 15.1 per cent behind the best result. In this application, the Intel iGPU has an 8.7 per cent advantage over AMD.
Gaming performance: iGPUs from Intel and AMD are also good for gaming
I use 3DMark Fire Strike to test how well the devices perform when gaming in 1080p resolution using DirectX 11. You can see a blue overall score, green graphics values, yellow CPU values and a combined score in the graph.
Intel leads the Fire Strike Score with 5.4 per cent more points than AMD. Qualcomm follows in last place with 35.1 per cent fewer points than Intel.
To find out how many frames per second (FPS) are possible in a game, I run the benchmark from «Red Dead Redemption 2». For the resolution, I select the resolution that matches the 3:2 and 16:10 displays on all devices, which is closest to 1080p: 1920 × 1200 pixels (WUXGA). The graphics settings are all set to «Medium» and a number of super-resolution functions are inactive. Vulkan is used as the graphics API:
When using DirectX 11, the Intel iGPU had an advantage. Using the more modern Vulkan API, however, it runs better with the AMD iGPU.
Efficiency: Intel takes the battery life crown
In the video test, the same video is always played locally until the battery is empty. The Office test aims to achieve a «realistic task balance of writing, web browsing and video conferencing, separated by short idle times». The gaming test «puts the system under a constantly high load» by running the «Fire Strike Gaming Benchmark» in a continuous loop. It determines the lower limit of the runtime with one battery charge.
Unfortunately, only the PCMark 10 video battery life test is available for the consumer device with Snapdragon due to the Arm architecture. Therefore, there is only one bar to marvel at in the results graphic:
The battery life of the consumer Surface Pro with Qualcomm chip is also good. However, due to the identical innards and battery capacity of 53 watt hours apart from the chip and motherboard, it is clearly less efficient than the business device. Instead of 15 hours of video, there are only 13 hours here.
Fan volume: Intel convertible is minimally quieter
In a nutshell
Too expensive for most private buyers, but still convincing
For companies, the added value offered by the business versions of Microsoft's Surface devices can certainly justify the price. For private individuals, however, a 51 per cent surcharge is a lot of money. However, the business-exclusive Intel version is undoubtedly better.
The Intel model is superior to the Qualcomm version of the Surface Pro in almost all test points. The Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100 can only outperform the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V when it comes to pure CPU multi-core tasks. Intel is the better choice for pure graphics tasks, gaming, fan noise and especially battery life. And since you get a chip with x86 architecture from Intel, there are no programmes that cause compatibility problems. Although this has improved considerably with Qualcomm, not even half of the Adobe suite runs on it, for example.
I think it's a shame that there is no AMD Surface Pro. If there was one, I would prefer it to one with an Intel chip. This is because their latest iGPUs deliver better performance using modern graphics APIs. Graphics are the weakest link in lightweight mobile devices.
Pro
- Good CPU performance (especially single-core)
- Graphics performance almost comes close to AMD iGPU
- Very good battery life
- Handy, lightweight device with beautiful OLED and good (optional) accessories
- Business benefits (Windows 11 Pro, extended support)
Contra
- CPU weaker than the competition in multi-core tasks (still good enough)
- if you want a keyboard or a pen, you have to buy them separately
- "Business" surcharge offers little added value for private individuals
Martin Jud
Senior Editor
martin.jud@digitecgalaxus.chI find my muse in everything. When I don’t, I draw inspiration from daydreaming. After all, if you dream, you don’t sleep through life.
Computing
Follow topics and stay updated on your areas of interest
Notebooks
Follow topics and stay updated on your areas of interest
Tablet
Follow topics and stay updated on your areas of interest
