This one is real according to multiple sources we have. And the fact that its in the XPS line implies that the build quality and feature set should be several notches above the rest of their consumer systems.
MS has always positioned the Surface Pro as a premium device, but as one with a very good TCO story and this has the potential to be the same. That is unless they price it even higher than MS prices the Surface Pro.
Yeah if it was OLED, it would be a killer device. OTOH a 3:2 OLED in that size doesn’t seem to be available from any of the OEMs we have access to. It is possible though they have contracted with somebody like Samsung on at least a short term exclusive
Interesting, I hadn’t had a chance to delve in to the specific specs. I think by far the biggest factor is if they run it at 28 watt TDP or 9 watt TDP.
If they do the former, it may real world be somewhat competitive with the Pro 8 because the Pro 8 processor rarely/only briefly runs at top speed due to thermals, but if they constrain it to 9 watts if will make the Pro X look speedy.
It’s a bit bigger of a gap this generation due to the differences in P core count. The -U series has just 2 big or performance (P) cores whereas the -P series has 6 big or performance (P) cores. The bulk of the multicore performance, just as it is on the desktop models, weighs heavily on how many P cores are in the mix. The -U series seems to have become a rebranding of the -Y series, what originally was Core M series. Meanwhile, the -P series is the new U series for all intents and purposes. Given that the Surface line has used the -U series and -P is now effectively filling that void, I would not be the least bit surprised if -P series Raptor Lake is what the Surface Pro 9 will use.
FWIW, NotebookCheck think the two options are 15W.
the tablet will be available with a choice between the Core i5-1230U and the Core i7-1250U, two 15 W processors that Dell uses in the new XPS 13 9315 too. For some reason, Dell has settled on LPDDR4x-4266 RAM for the XPS 13 2-in-1 though, not the LPDDR5-5200 RAM found in the XPS 13 9315.
That 's why I said “real world” , maybe should have bolded it. Unfortunately we are still in the case where most real workloads are barely optimized for two cores, let alone 4 or 8.
Artificial benchmarks absolutely but our test workloads which of course don’t apply to everyone, tell a different story.
I’m not arguing per se with your point, just that we are in the age where benchmarks are very much picked/manipulated to tell the story someone wants told. And as you know by now, I’m a huge benchmark skeptic (in the interest of full disclosure)
PS: something we have observed which hasn’t been adequately captured in any benchmark we’ve seen is how much more efficiently all the 12th gen chips, turbo up and then turbo down. And unfortunately as well some of the thermal management systems haven’t been updated to deal with that optimally either which is why you are hearing anecdotes about how “hot” 12th gen chips run.
That folio reminds me way too much of the original Galaxy Book 12, which later morphed to a proper kickstand. And wat’s with a glass back - I know it prevents signal interference, but aren’t these things at enough of a breakage risk without full glass casing front and back?