Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Powered ASUS Vivobook S15 Laptop Seeing Linux Patches

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Powered ASUS Vivobook S15 Laptop Seeing Linux Patches

    Phoronix: Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite Powered ASUS Vivobook S15 Laptop Seeing Linux Patches

    For those interested in laptops powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon X Elite SoC, it's looking like the ASUS Vivobook S15 model could be one of the first devices with decent Linux support. There are patches undergoing review for upstreaming the ASUS Vivobook S 15 DeviceTree support so that much of the basic functionality is working under Linux but various features are known to be broken...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Obviously, MacBook is the better option.

    Comment


    • #3
      So I have the choice between one proprietary instruction set (x86) and another one (ARM), where both options seem to provide power-efficiency and performance in more-or-less the same ballpark. In this case I'll choose the cpu which will cause me less troubles, which for now seems to be AMD/Intel. To be honest I am still waiting for an RISCV-equivalent of Snapdragon...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Linuxhippy View Post
        ....
        both options seem to provide power-efficiency and performance in more-or-less the same ballpark.
        ....
        Nah, for laptops in long-autonomy scenarios (i.e. low-power usage), ARM is going to offer much better battery life.

        Also, join a programming contest, solve a programming puzzle, and prove your skill:
        - https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...ramming-puzzle

        Comment


        • #5
          I would expect OEMs themselves to do this work. While I understand the wish to have new hardware work under Linux, it's annoying how manufacturers profit off of this free labour.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by edxposed View Post
            Obviously, MacBook is the better option.
            if only OSX wasn't such a gigantic shitshow, the GPU so limited, the damn NAND on a NVMe stick. Qualcomm provides official support for Linux that they pay for.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Alexmitter View Post

              if only OSX wasn't such a gigantic shitshow, the GPU so limited, the damn NAND on a NVMe stick. Qualcomm provides official support for Linux that they pay for.
              I’d say an M2 macbook currently has better linux support than this does and would be similarly performing. That said I am glad Qualcomm has finally released a processor for this segment that is reasonably competitive for general computing. I will be looking out for something in the tablet segment that is reasonably performant and has battery life that a least competitive with Apple’s that also runs linux well. Most everything either has been android or chromeOS or no where near as performant and battery life as Apple’s on amd64.

              Comment


              • #8
                Linux users 2004: It's amazing how all this hardware works on Linux

                Linux users 2024: All these Linux freeloaders are pissing me off. George is Getting UPSET.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Avamander View Post
                  I would expect OEMs themselves to do this work. While I understand the wish to have new hardware work under Linux, it's annoying how manufacturers profit off of this free labour.
                  That is a good thought.
                  Just to be more precise, I include COMPONENT manufacturers as "OEMs" also.

                  So, OEMs should be the ones doing the work.
                  But, what does the word "should" mean in this sentence (see what philosopher Hume said on using the word "should"). You used a slightly different word: "expect".

                  Of course, OEMs are first going to tackle the most lucrative market: Windows on laptops. After that, we would "expect" them to provide support for less-lucrative markets, like GNU/Linux. But, things do not always go as planned, and in many cases the OEMs just don't have enough resources for expansion into GNU/Linux.

                  In many cases, OEMs misjudge the importance of GNU/Linux market.

                  And in many cases, OEMs just exploit the free labor made available by some consequences of the GNU project.

                  So, a combination of several factors causes OEMs to not provide software support for GNU/Linux.
                  Which is a shame, because almost everyone in the world would be better off if support was provided.

                  It is actually a flaw in the capitalist market systems, just like externalities are.
                  No economic system can ever be perfect.


                  ( Also, join a programming contest, solve a programming puzzle, and prove your skill: )
                  - https://www.phoronix.com/forums/foru...ramming-puzzle

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by drastic View Post
                    Nah, for laptops in long-autonomy scenarios (i.e. low-power usage), ARM is going to offer much better battery life.
                    The actual ISA has not that much influence on power efficiency, sure x86 will need a bit more power to decode and maybe the TSO guarantees will make it a small bit less efficient in multicore-scenarios. but otherwise, what matters most is the actual implementation on microarchitecture-level (in/order vs out-of-order, size of reoder-buffers, ...).
                    This is also what Jim Keller recently said, ISA doesn't matter that much - once you get those basic 5-6 instructions right that really matter, you are basically there.
                    And looking at the Snapdragon and how its performance tumbles once it is thermally constrained prooves hin to be right.

                    And regarding the implementation of the ISAs, that Snapdragon Elite thing surely does well, but it didin't over-deliver on expectations. Reviews I read basically said: "better than what x86 devices currently offer, but those are not that far behind". So I guess what actually is a lot more efficient is the Soc part / GPU, not the cores themself.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X