Even if Microsoft does keep around the thinner chassis found on the ARM model, I think the differences between Pro X and Pro 9 are too slim to differentiate them by name. Or, the alternative is it would allow room for a fan, possibly enabling Microsoft to overclock the SoC and squeeze out more performance.Įither option is a win for Surface Pro X fans, but it would come at the cost of the thin Pro X chassis we have today. It could put in a much bigger battery, which would enable the Surface Pro 9 with ARM to be the first Surface device with true all-day battery life. Hear me out - doing this would allow Microsoft to enhance the ARM model in one of two ways. Source: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central (Image credit: Source: Daniel Rubino / Windows Central) Plus, Microsoft could use this as an opportunity to merge the Pro X and Pro 9 chassis, putting the ARM SoC into the thicker Surface Pro 9 design and discarding the thinner Surface Pro X body. The Pro X is thinner and lighter, but is that enough to warrant different branding for each? I don't think so. Now, it's true that the Surface Pro X isn't identical to the Surface Pro 8. So, there's a precedent for this, and I don't see why Microsoft couldn't also do it with the Surface Pro 9 with Intel and ARM. If we look at the Surface Laptop 3 and Surface Laptop 4, those devices can be had with both Intel or AMD chips, with each offering different performance and battery benefits and disadvantages.

Plus, it's not like Microsoft hasn't done something similar before. The custom Snapdragon 8cx Gen3 expected to power the Surface Pro X this fall could rival that of an 11th-generation Intel Core i5 or i7, but the Surface Pro 9 is going to ship with 12th-gen Intel Core i5 or i7 chips, which are much more powerful than 11th-gen Intel chips.

It would make sense from a performance perspective, too.

Windows 11 surface pro x