They'll do what every vendor does; find that one workload that it's better at, and play that off as if it's that performant at every workload. Bad at 3DMark? Try Cinebench, Superposition, PCMark, Geekbench, SiSoftware Sandra, or even some other customer benchmarking software no one else uses.

Qualcomm pulled an Apple with all the hyperbolic words and very specific and massaged performance numbers.

Even without the M4 it would be awkward when those chips appear in the real World in real situations.

IMO some people inside Qualcomm have been stretching the truth way too much even internally.

Worse, it’s going to be a very expensive part.

I know us nerds aren’t the market, but an mATX motherboard with elite x for like $700-800 would be a seller.

Qualcomm is laughing to the bank because MSFT doesn't have a choice.

but consumers do? (almost) Nobody will pay apple level prices for something that has less software support and, overall, a worse experience than on macos. TBH, other than gaming, not sure why anyone is paying 1k+ for a Windows laptop.

Come to any engineering schools, and I mean real engineering like Mechanical, Electrical, Civil and you will see almost no one uses Mac. The software just isn't there. And even when the software is available, the exhorbitant price of RAM make it a bad deal for many students.

Because despite the hyperbolic praise of the hackers here, Apple devices are worthless for some professional workloads.

Before you ask, I'm one user who has a Razer Blade 16 (4090) and Galaxy Book 4 Ultra that I use for CAD and BIM work. I'll pass on having a dedicated video editor.