Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100) vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V

We compared two laptop CPUs: the 3.4 GHz Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100) with 12-cores against the 2.2 GHz Intel Core Ultra 7 258V with 8-cores. On this page, you'll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.

Review

General overview and comparison of the processors
Single-Core Performance
Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks
Multi-Core Performance
Measure performance when all cores are involved
Power Efficiency
The efficiency score of power consumption
Integrated Graphics
iGPU capabilities for gaming and 3D-intensive tasks
NanoReview Final Score
Choose your main usage scenario to recalculate the Final Score and see which CPU suits your needs.
πŸ”Œ Usage Scenario:

Key Differences

What are the key differences between 258V and (X1E-80-100)
Advantages of Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100)
  • Supports up to 64 GB LPDDR5x-8448 RAM
  • Has 4 more physical cores
Advantages of Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
  • Has 6 MB larger L3 cache size, helping fully utilize a high-end GPU in gaming
  • Newer - released 11 months later
  • More modern manufacturing process – 3 versus 4 nanometers
  • Newer PCI Express version – 5.0
  • 20% higher Turbo Boost frequency (4.8 GHz vs 4 GHz)

Test in Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs across various tasks

Cinebench

Reputable cross-platform benchmark for high-performance processors
Cinebench 2024 (Single)
Cinebench 2024 (Multi)
Cinebench Scores (#176th place)

GeekBench v6

The new version of this benchmark emulates common operations often used in real-world apps
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
File compression 1150 MB/sec 1020 MB/sec
Clang compilation 135.5 Klines/sec 66.1 Klines/sec
HTML 5 Browser 363.5 pages/sec 287.7 pages/sec
PDF Renderer 357.9 Mpixels/sec 295.6 Mpixels/sec
Text processing 256.6 pages/sec 276.7 pages/sec
Background blur 63.4 images/sec 46.5 images/sec
Photo processing 128.1 images/sec 113.9 images/sec
Ray tracing 23.9 Mpixels/sec 14 Mpixels/sec
Sources: GeekBench [1], [2] – 10 samples

PassMark

Synthetic test that focuses on raw computational performance for low-level functions
Passmark CPU (Single-Core)
Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)
Integer math 65.1 GOps/sec 42.9 GOps/sec
Floating point math 98.2 GOps/sec 57.4 GOps/sec
Find prime numbers 291M Primes/sec 185M Primes/sec
Random string sorting 34M Strings/sec 21.6M Strings/sec
Data encryption 14.3 GBytes/sec 13.5 GBytes/sec
Data compression 224.2 MBytes/sec 176.6 MBytes/sec
Physics 1664 Frames/sec 1565 Frames/sec
Extended instructions 15.3B Matrices/sec 14.7B Matrices/sec
Sources: PassMark [3], [4] – 568 & 2133 samples

Blender

3D rendering test that measures CPU performance in 3D modeling tasks (uses all cores)
Blender CPU

Performance Per Watt

Shows the score you get per each watt of PL1 TDP
Cinebench 2024 / Watt 26.5 PPW 17.2 PPW
Geekbench 6 Multi / Watt 416.7 PPW 291.9 PPW
Passmark CPU Mark / Watt 653.8 PPW 510.4 PPW
Blender / Watt 6.86 PPW 3.48 PPW
These are rough calculations, as most CPUs surpass PL1 TDP wattage even in multicore workloads.

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100)
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-21 (Heisemerie)Geekbench 6 CPU2831 / 14992
Intel Core Ultra 7 258V
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-07-18 (THINKPAD T16 GEN4)Cinebench 2024122 / 584
πŸ“˜ 2026-07-06 (Matty)Cinebench 2024113 / 512
πŸ“˜ 2026-04-15 -> maheshkondrajuGeekbench 6 CPU2869 / 11446

Specifications

Full technical specification of Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100) and Intel Core Ultra 7 258V

General

Vendor Qualcomm Intel
Released October 24, 2023 September 4, 2024
Type Laptop Laptop
Instruction Set ARMv8 x86-64
Codename Snapdragon X Lunar Lake
Model number X1E-80-100 258V
Integrated GPU Qualcomm Adreno X1-85 Arc Graphics 140V
Rival Equivalent - Apple M4 (8-Core) -
Intel CPU rating (#88th place)

CPU

Performance Cores
P-Cores 12 4
P-Threads 12 4
Base Frequency (P) 3.4 GHz 2.2 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency (P) 4 GHz 4.8 GHz
Efficient Cores
E-Cores - 4
E-Threads - 4
Base Frequency (E) - 2.2 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency (E) - 3.7 GHz
Total
Total Cores 12 8
Total Threads 12 8
Bus Frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 34x 22x
L1 Cache 288K (per core) 192K (per core)
L2 Cache 12MB (shared) 2560K (per core)
L3 Cache 6MB (shared) 12MB (shared)
Unlocked Multiplier No No

Package

Fabrication Process 4 nm 3 nm
TDP (PL1) 35 W 17-37 W (configurable)
Max. Boost TDP (PL2) 80 W -
Socket Custom FCBGA-2833
Peak Temperature - 100Β°C
Laptop processors ranking (77th and 111th place)

iGPU

Integrated Graphics Qualcomm Adreno X1-85 Intel Arc Graphics 140V
GPU Base Clock 300 MHz 600 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 1250 MHz 1950 MHz
Shading Units 1536 1024
TMUs 96 -
ROPs 48 -
Execution Units 6 -
TGP 30 W 30 W
iGPU FLOPS

Memory Support

Memory Types - LPDDR5x-8448 - LPDDR5X-8533
Max. Memory Size 64 GB 32 GB
Memory Channels 8 2
Max. Memory Bandwidth 135.2 GB/s -
ECC Support No No

Misc

Official Site Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100) official page Intel Core Ultra 7 258V official page
PCI Express Version 4.0 5.0
PCI Express Lanes 12 8

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors
52 (60.5%)
34 (39.5%)
Total votes: 86

Comments

So which CPU will you choose: Intel Core Ultra 7 258V or Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100)?
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!
Avatar
ComputerNerd October 17, 2024 at 09:36 PM
Even with the amazing battery life and CPU performance of the snap dragon X Elite, especially in photo editing, I'd still take the Intel Ultra or AMD CPUs. The X86 software is not worth giving up.
+23 Reply
Avatar
noob October 29, 2024 at 03:24 AM
good competition between 2. but the problem is both are expensive. :(
+2 Reply
Avatar
Messier83 September 25, 2025 at 12:25 AM
Snapdragon 8 Elite chip have massive compatibility issue...even to this year the 8Xelite still has a lot of apps that doesn't run or even if it run it doesn't run at the same performance as the Intel X86 chips... so the Arm chip in the windows market still has long way to go.
+2 Reply