Going Pro: Thinking About Performance

Surface Pro outperforms Surface RT handily, providing us with a blueprint for how each might be best used

While most people reading this site probably understand the major architectural differences between Surface Pro and Surface RT, there are some other less obvious differences that are just as relevant. For example, once you get past the lack of desktop compatibility on Surface RT, you can perform many of the same tasks on that device as you can on Surface Pro. But performance issues make this less than desirable, putting Surface Pro over the top as for productivity.

We speak generally of these devices in terms that help define them. For example, Surface Pro is seen as a new type of Ultrabook that can be sometimes used as a pure tablet. And Surface RT is seen as a pure tablet that can sometimes be used as an Ultrabook. These pat definitions, where Surface Pro is primarily for productivity/creativity and Surface RT is primarily for content consumption, are convenient and perhaps tossed around a bit too easily.

There’s just one problem. These pat definitions are entirely correct.

Now that I can use Surface Pro and Surface RT side-by-side and alternate between the two for the same tasks, I can see that the performance difference between these two devices is quite stark. I always found Surface RT to be a bit … leisurely, for lack of a better word … but now it’s clear that this device barely gets out of its own way in routine productivity scenarios that even the cheapest PC wouldn’t struggle with. It’s amazing how much faster Surface Pro is. At everything.

One thing I’ve been doing since Surface Pro arrived is to disconnect from my Frankenstein-like desktop dock and try to compute wirelessly from around the house. I had done this previously with Surface RT, of course, but since I’ve replaced my desktop PC with Surface Pro this is a bit of a different kind of test. Aside from the desktop scaling issues I’ve already raised, and the short adaptation time switching from my large and ergonomic desktop keyboard to the much smaller and Ultrabook-like Type Cover, this transition is pretty painless and seamless.

But when I switch over to Surface RT, it’s annoyingly laggy. For example, I was working on the Xbox Music Book the other night. Performance on Surface Pro was exactly what I’d expect, and completely non-notable. It just worked, with no pauses or strangeness. Didn’t think about it once.

Switching to Surface RT was like swimming in molasses. You can open SkyDrive-based documents from within Word 2013 easily enough, so the lack of SkyDrive integration on the desktop wasn’t hugely problematic. But the document took a painfully long time to open, with Word hanging mid-way before recovering. The performance while writing and saving the document was terrible, noticeable. And, oddest of all, switching between Word (on the desktop) and Xbox Music (a Metro app) triggered the weirdest pauses and lags. For example, switching back to Word from Music, the desktop would appear first, empty, and then Word would finally appear after a pause. Every single time.

But it’s not just that. As I noted in my comparison of otherwise identical Intel Core i5 “Ivy Bridge” and Intel Atom “Clover Trail” PCs in A Tale of Two Hybrid Windows Devices: Clover Trail vs. Ivy Bridge, acceptable hardware can make a huge difference when compared to marginal hardware. But with Surface Pro and Surface RT, the difference is even more pronounced. No surprise there, as I had previously found that Atom “Clover Trail”-based PCs outperform Windows RT/ARM significantly. I wrote about this in Windows 8 Architecture Wars, Part 1: Clover Trail vs. ARM.

What this means is that apps open more quickly on Surface Pro and then run more smoothly (and no, I’m not going to use the term “fast and fluid,” but there’s a reason Microsoft came up with that). You can do more at one time, thanks to the additional 2 GB of RAM, without running into disk thrashing and even worse performance.

I know, this seems obvious. It helps to actually experience it in real world usage, however.

And to be fair, Microsoft designed the Windows RT system at the heart of Surface RT to deliver entirely consistent performance across devices, something that is impossible in the “Wild West” of the traditional Windows world. There’s no Windows Experience Index (WEI) score provided because each machine, conceivably, will work identically. Battery life is not predicted when you hover over the connectoid, you just get the percentage of battery life left. Heck, you kind of don’t need to know: Battery life on RT is stellar.

But in real world terms, what this means to me is that it doesn’t make sense—for me—to use Surface RT around the house, while keeping Surface Pro connected to my desktop dock set up. It’s just too slow.

Likewise, when I do fly, it doesn’t make sense for me to waste Surface Pro’s limited battery life on movies and other content. I’ll need to bring another device for entertainment. Surface Pro is just for work.

So via experience using each side-by-side, the stated missions of these devices become clear.

Surface with Windows 8 Pro doesn’t get enough battery life to be your only device, so it can’t ultimately satisfy that “one device that does it all” concept that so many are wishing to make real. You’ll still need an MP3 player or a small consumption device—a ~7-inch iPad mini, Nexus 7, or Kindle Fire HD, perhaps—for entertainment on the go. When it comes to productivity, of course, Surface Pro really delivers. And it does offer a peek at the future of hybrid computing because it can be used as a tablet, and can be used in some situations where a stock Ultrabook wouldn’t work. A cramped airline seat, for example. The pen—as you’ll see in a coming article—is pretty amazing if you need that kind of thing.

Surface with Windows RT, like the iPad, is more toy-like in that it’s an entertainment device first, with some abilities related to occasional productivity. I might argue that the inclusion of Office puts Surface RT over the top in this regard, but one might also make a more compelling argument for the iPad’s vast array of apps and content. I can’t refute that. And Surface RT performs almost poorly enough that the inclusion of Office is somewhat muted.

But as I noted previously, where Surface RT represents Microsoft’s vision of the future of computing, with the emphasis on “future,” Surface Pro is more aligned with the realities of today. It nods to the future, points the way. But the battery life keeps it stuck in 2nd gear.

Ultimately, all this testing has brought me back to step one. Performance and compatibility vs. battery life and light weight. Those are just some of the tradeoffs you must wrestle with when you examine these devices.

Discuss this Article 32

InfoDave
on Feb 10, 2013

Once again, I appreciate your candor. Surface Pro is not the panacea of computing devices. What I hear you saying is that we are really in need of two devices to get through the day, at least till Haswell.

lexar
on Feb 10, 2013

Thanks Paul... You said it all! "Surface with Windows 8 Pro doesn’t get enough battery life to be your only device, so it can’t ultimately satisfy that “one device that does it all” concept that so many are wishing to make real. You’ll still need an MP3 player or a small consumption device.

So I will buy a Surface Pro as my Ultra notebook and use my iPad mini as my small consumption device.

JERRYWACA
on Feb 10, 2013

Excellent analysis as usual Paul! I think for a lot of people Surface RTs really fit what they wish to do. Best Buy online has a lot of positive reviews from RT users.

xnederlandx
on Feb 10, 2013

The watch video link on http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-US (under "And then there were two.") also has a video which shows the Surface team's view on which device is for who.

JERRYWACA
on Feb 10, 2013

xnederlandx, thank you for the link! Good video. Looks line Microsoft has positioned the two devices well.

GoodThings2Life
on Feb 10, 2013

It's funny how each generation of technology brings us full circle around this same issues... performance, compatibility, battery life, and mobility.

Arguably, I do believe that the Surface Pro satisfies three of the needs, but obviously the battery life can be crippling for certain mobility needs. But I'm betting that most of us who need the performance of the Pro don't need to be 100% mobile or can cope with carrying multiple devices... let's face it, we already do with whatever gadgets we have today.

But now that I think about it... I can carry a Surface RT and a Surface Pro and still be carrying less weight than carrying pretty much every combination of MacBook/iPad or any other Windows laptop/tablet. Not a bad trade-off.

JERRYWACA
on Feb 10, 2013

GoodThings2Life, good comments. Two devices for some traveling power users makes sense. In my experience just a Surface RT would work well for many travelers and mobile workers.

SvenJ
on Feb 12, 2013

And the Surface Pro power supply will charge the RT, so you can save a little there, if you can organize yourself to not run them both down simultaneously.

mikesmikes
on Feb 10, 2013

I'm struck by how useless the "consumption" versus "production" categories are. These things depend on each individual's needs.

For my use cases, the Surface RT is a productive [1] device, and the Pro would just be a noisier version with terrible battery life. And the iPad would not be useful at all because I have no interest in "apps". I'm a web person. But this is just me! Everyone has different needs. I could see the iPad being wonderful for someone who wanted to play games and use "apps" and occasionally surf non-Flash websites without opening too many tabs.

Problem is, when I really need power, the Pro is not powerful enough. I WANT to buy the Pro, but it seems to fall between the cracks of my use cases.

[1] Research, occasional use of Office (when you need it you need it!!!), occasional limited JS/CSS/HTML development, working through tutorials, etc.

saqrkh
on Feb 10, 2013

After having used the Surface Pro now for 36 hours, I think it will shine most in an office/work-setting for most people. At work we carry our laptops around for meetings, presentations, to our colleagues and bosses for feedback on work, etc.

Being much lighter and capable (touch and digitizer/inking) the Surface Pro is a superb alternative to the traditional laptop for each of those functions. Even the sub-par battery life would be a non-issue since we always come back to our desks.

Unfortunately, the battery life on this thing isn't good enough to make it a professional's best friend. That said, for the here and now, it's a great partner to have with you whilst in the office.

eboyhan
on Feb 10, 2013

I agree the SPro will be very successful in enterprises -- for the reasons you state. However, in your scenario I don't see 5 hour battery life as a problem. In the office you can be tethered/charging; when attending a meeting -- they're longer than 5 hours??? Sheesh!

I see the battery issue more for those who travel outside the office on long flights or drives.

Good news is by EOY 2013 battery life will be much improved due to new chips, and supplemental battery-containing accessories using the new accessory spine on the SPro -- as hinted by MS Surface Team on Reddit last week.

GWLeibniz
on Feb 11, 2013

And within Europe the trains have mains charging, at most airports there are charging facilities, in modern aircraft eg A380 there is power and at cafes - small pivate or monoliths like Starbucks - also have charging opportnties. I have lived with a heft Lenovo for a few years and never had a problem. I might be wrong but 5hrs to me is not a killer

Maelstrom
on Feb 11, 2013

The autonomy is a no-brainer for me and for the very same reasons you've stated above, guys.

That being said, since I'm in no hurry, I'm gonna wait some more and probably till Surface Pro 2 goes live.
Indeed, not only Haswell-based CPU's will be more efficient both in terms of performances and battery life but it may also improve the form factor even more, making it less bulky by removing the need for fans for instance.
Furthermore, by that time, we may have more choices in terms of periphericals such as docking stations fulling using options such as the magnetic port and/or the mDP on the Surface.
All this would help make it an even more palatable solution.

Pmaude
on Feb 10, 2013

For me it is going to be a surface pro, and an iPad mini, and good bye MBP. I think ms should have released an 8 inch rt version. The current surface pro, with office bundled and should have waited until they had a true metro version of office (god knows where that is !) before they did the current surface rt.

neteru1920
on Feb 10, 2013

This was a great analysis. I will say battery life "issue" is over analyzed. 5 hours seems standard for the ultrabooks, without battery expansion pack. My Macbook Air only lasts about 3.5 hours, I'm surprised the battery life receives so much coverage.I'll take portability over battery life as power is all over. Planes even have power now for you to plug up in-flight.

I don't believe there will every be a one device fits all solution, so Ill continue to use my pro, give my surface away, and keep my kindle fire to read.

multiplatform
on Feb 10, 2013

MacBook Pro 11 also doesn't get enough battery life to take you through the whole day because it has a decent processor. If you want a thin form factor, you can either have performance or battery life, but not both. At this point in time, that is the physical limit of laptop computing. I can't fault Microsoft for that any more than I can blame NASA for not achieving near light speed on their spacecraft.

With that said, it might be nice to be able to throttle resource usage with desktop apps so an upper limit can be imposed. The Windows 8 paradigm considers the Desktop as a single Metro app visually...it would be helpful for battery life if it was also treated that way in terms of resources with a slider that could define the maximum CPU %, I/O bandwidth, etc. for desktop apps as a whole.

Brett Howse
on Feb 10, 2013

Performance of the RT is terrible. It's the one thing that has held me back from a purchase. I'm hoping that there is at least one revamp of the Surface this year with a faster ARM SoC, or at least an Atom version. I think the size is just perfect, but I don't want to go that far back in performance.

arrow22
on Feb 11, 2013

I have felt like throwing mine at the wall at some points. Since then however, many updates were issued, and I did a full device reset. Haven't had an issue since! That's not to say loading times aren't a tad too long, but in terms of actual deal breaker issues like app crashes, or 100% disk writes that stalled the device completely, all gone.

I'm still on the look out as to whether this is a permanent change, but I'm hopeful. If Microsoft can solve those main issues, ditch the current Mail, People, Videos, Music apps which are just terrible and create some new ones, they'd have a nice competitive platform.

eboyhan
on Feb 10, 2013

So lets talk about performance and battery life. In general lower performance means longer battery life. In general a larger battery means longer battery life and increased weight.

Last week on Reddit, the MS Surface team was pretty clear that their goal was to keep performance up and the weight down -- even if they have to compromise of battery life. Their comparison point was the MacBook Air -- not various tablets.

That said I had thought that the soon to arrive Ivy Bridge "Y"processors (announced at CES 2013) from Intel would be an easy fix to battery life. So I went off to do some research to try and estimate how much "Y" chips might improve battery life.

It turns out that things aren't quite so simple, and it is now easy to understand (at least to me) why MS wasn't quick to jump onto the "Y" train.

Some background: the power profile of Intel chips is given in a "TDP" statistic which strictly speaking isn't a measure of power consumption at all, but rather a measure of the heat put out by the chip under certain operating assumptions. It is the removal of heat that is the big energy consumer in systems -- so TDP is advice to system builders as to how much heat they have to remove so they can design workable cooling strategies into their systems. If the OEM gets their cooling wrong, the chip will overheat and performance will go into the toilet.

These days most Intel chips have two ways of running: normal mode and burst mode. When the workload gets heavy, the chip can accelerate into burst mode for a limited period of time. A given chip's normal and burst clock rates are mapped against an expected workload profile to arrive at the TDP statistic. Chips with higher clock rates will have higher TDPs, and so on. The workload profile that Intel has been using is a fairly heavy one. Recently, Intel has noticed that mobile devices utilize a very different much lighter workload profile -- so they've come up with a 2nd power statistic, SDP that is based on this lighter profile. If the OEM decides to use the SDP number as the basis for their cooling solution, then the system will use much less power. However, if the OEM uses the SDP profile, and it's wrong for their customer base, then the system will overheat, and performance will deteriorate markedly, and in extreme situations the system could fail outright.

Which brings us to "Y". The current "U" Ivy Bridge chips have a TDP of 17 watts -- there is no SDP statistic for these chips. But starting with "Y" and continuing with Haswell Intel will be providing OEMs with both TDP and SDP numbers. On "Y" Intel is lowering the base I5 clock rate by 200Mhz, and the burst rate proportionately lower than on the "U" chips ("Y" chips won't have as much of a percentage boost in burst mode as the "U" chips do).

TDP for "Y" is 13 watts (down from 17W), and SDP is 7W! For Haswell TDP will be 14W and SDP will be 7.5W (but Haswell will be inherently more powerful than Ivy Bridge).

If SPro currently has a battery life of 5 hours, and the OEM designs to the 13W TDP, this might increase battery life to 6.5 hours. If they design to the SDP 7W number, battery life could be as much as 12 hours. No matter which number is used "Y" chips will be slower than the ones in current SPros. If the OEM designs for 7W, and you want to use an SPro as a desktop replacement, you may be facing a train wreck.

Hence, I think MS will be ultra cautious with the "Y" chip. Given their focus on performance, they may elect to wait for Haswell.

dfey
on Feb 11, 2013

I dearly want Haswell in whatever version of Surface Pro I get. I'm convinced by the device. Battery life might go up a bit but 5 hours isn't bad. Graphics performance will take a good leap or generate the same performance with less heat, depending on the use. I've decided I'll even "live with" the 16:9, but still believe 16:10 would have been better. But Haswell really feels like something worth waiting for.

AlexKven
on Feb 10, 2013

Could they design a hybrid Windows OS that contains both a normal processor and an ARM processor, so that when a Metro app is used, all computing is directed to the ARM processor, while in desktop mode, most work is done on the normal processor (even some desktop apps like explorer that are compiled for ARM could be processed on ARM)?

Silversee
on Feb 10, 2013

I don't disagree, but I think you are being too harsh on the Surface RT.

It's never been aimed at power users, despite including a version of Office and an OS with 'Windows' in the name. My wife is happy with hers, and has never once complained to me about performance. I'm sure she'd appreciate the responsiveness of the Surface Pro, but she would hate worrying about the battery, and thinking about legacy Windows settings and the general flakiness of dealing with a PC.

Surface RT behaves a lot more like a smartphone, and it's virtually immune to Windows malware. This first generation device may not be for you or me just yet, but this is the device Microsoft needs to nail.

The vast majority of consumers are not Windows power users, and Surface Pro should really be the niche product, not the popular one. Until that happens, Microsoft has no chance of catching Apple or Google.

Sen
on Feb 10, 2013

As is quite obvious, these trade-offs will start to disappear pretty soon. It is just that the chip makers were caught off guard, there are no processors today to cater to "high performance tablets". You either get a low-power SoC or a laptop chip repurposed for tablets. There's a massive delta in between - something like 6 times. AMD's Temash will be the first to split the difference, coming in 3 months' time. The high-end quad-core Bay Trail will provide a similar product, while Haswell Y-series will be the first Core chip really designed for a tablet. At CES they demoed a Haswell prototype that was 10mm thick - around the same ballpark as iPad/Surface RT - and passively cooled (i.e. no fans), getting 7 hours battery life standalone, and over 10 with the keyboard dock. This is almost certainly going to go into Surface Pro 2 and similar machines, and such a proposition is impossible to resist. On a related note, I wish they added a third cover with a proper hinge, for those who want the laptop experience. This dock could have batteries in-built and boost the batter life to 7-8 hours, which makes it a lot more appealing.

The problem with Surface RT is that Tegra 3 is obsolete. The Snapdragon S4 powered Samsung Ativ Tab is noticeably faster and according to some of the reviews gets insane battery life - 12 hours - more than any previous 10 inch tablet.

winkwink
on Feb 11, 2013

Off topic, if I may!
Hej Paul, why not use the drupal module: "external links", to open links on "new window". http://drupal.org/project/extlink
It's very effective...

neonspark
on Feb 11, 2013

ultimately what's the alternative? surface 2 pro may be the perfect device but version 1 isn't. Yet what's the alternative? ultrabook? same problems and it is more expensive and heavier. full notebook? ok that is fast but now you're down to 6hr of battery life and huge heavy box. ipad 128gb? you can't even use a mouse with the thing much less replace your ultrabook, so out the window it goes.

So yes surface pro kind of does suck against the hypothetical surface vaporware of the future which we seem to be alluding that you can buy today.

But let's live in the present, nothing quite achieves what surface pro can today: pc-like performance with a touch screen in the most compact factor ever, and that is just a FACT.

Scotsman
on Feb 11, 2013

Lenovo Helix maybe? Seems to have several use cases covered: tablet; hybrid tablet and ultrabook with associated battery use and performance. Expensive though.

In the current market, you're right: performance, thickness and battery life: pick any two.

Scotsman
on Feb 11, 2013

Paul: do you feel that your Pro-only test has a realistic chance of resulting in just that - you ditching your ultrabook and desktop? I feel like this is a reasonable desire (obviously not for gamers and some others) - one device that does enough as a consumption device and enough as a full computer, and it's what I'm considering. Put a few low cost monitors in a couple of rooms around the house, and switch the Pro between them as needed.

Or is the test more of an academic exercise, designed solely to see if it's feasible?

pthurrott
on Feb 11, 2013

My goal was to see whether it was truly possible.

I'm now over two weeks in. Some of the compromises have been tough to take. My feelings about whether this is possible--for me--are perhaps more negative than when I started. But I wouldn't call it academic: My needs are particular to me, and in all things I review, I try to understand how this would/would not work for others as well. I do think that many people will be happy with this as their sole PC.

We'll see how I feel about it on February 28. :) So far I have been using just the Pro, aside from the ancillary testing stuff.

Scotsman
on Feb 11, 2013

Interesting. Your needs are your own of course. I feel that it will be my only device. I'm upgrading from an old Core 2 Duo system, so its performance can't be anything but better. The battery life complaints are a mystery to me: it has a core i5, so what exactly are people expecting?

The stylus and touchscreen offer me functionality not available on my current notebook (a 2006 MacBook....) so there's another advantage. I don't need the fastest system out there - after the usual basic stuff, photo editing is my main activity and the Surface will crush my MacBook.

The Lenovo Helix would be a contender, and I wish there were some real world reviews. I guess it just depends on how long I want to wait.

trivor
on Feb 11, 2013

Actually, Asus has already released a low end version of their Vivobook 202 - it is a core i3, 11.6 inch ultrabook with a touchscreen, 500 GB conventional HD (if it has a 128 GB SSD for $50-100 more this would be a great ultrabook). Everyone talks about performance - for Modern UI apps and a touchscreen and normal work a core i3 (3217u int this case) at 1.8GHz should be plenty for Office, E-mail, web surfacing and media. It lists for $499 and comes in 2.9lbs - the only thing it doesn't have is detachability (is that a word?). Nobody is putting the Surface Pro in tablet mode (@ 2lbs) on their lap or in their hands for an extended period of time.

taohansen
on Feb 11, 2013

The following two tweaks noticeably boost performance on Surface RT.

1.Searching for Performance under Settings in Windows RT, navigating to the Advanced tab and manually setting to the page file to the Recommended: 1990 mb.
2.Turning all graphical effects off under Performance.

Are there any other tweaks, registry edits or other obscure tricks of hackery I can do to noticeably speed up my sluggish Surface RT?

dhscrugco
on Feb 11, 2013

Thank you Paul for the excellent analysis. Could fixing the Surface Pro be accomplished by simply redesigning it with a bigger battery? Would adding, say 5 or 6 ounces of weight to achieve 7 to 8 hours of battery life not be a sensible compromise? It seems like target weight interfered with what was possibly a more important priority. Just suggesting!

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use