There are two aspects to Surface’s performance that we need to discuss: the user experience and then quantitative performance metrics.

User experience is equal parts hardware and software, and this is one area where Microsoft really delivered with Windows RT. Frame rates are solid and stable, easily delivering what appears to be 60 fps for UI transitions. If you try to push the hardware too much, RT seems to completely drop animations vs. animating choppily which seems to be the right tradeoff to make. Overall that doesn’t seem to happen all that frequently.

Scrolling down web pages is also very smooth, although you can get IE to behave very jittery if you hold your finger in the wrong place on the screen while scrolling. There are some rough edges with the RT UI but overall it’s still very good.

I’d say in terms of smoothness of UI, Windows RT on Surface is much more like the iPad (or Windows Phone 7.5) than most Android tablets. Jelly Bean does complicate things as it really fixes a lot of the UI performance issues that hampered Android. Even then I’d say Surface’s UI responsiveness is among the best.

Application launch times are another thing entirely. Nearly every application I launched took longer than I would’ve liked on Surface. I can’t tell if this is a hardware issue or a software optimization problem, but application launches on Surface/Windows RT clearly take more time than on an iPad. I timed a few just to put this in perspective:

Application Launch Time Comparison
  Boot Web Browser Mail Maps Games Center / Xbox
Apple iPad (3rd gen) 32.0s 1.0s 2.4s 1.1s 1.9s
Microsoft Surface 27.7s 2.6s 7.1s 5.0s 5.0s

Now once apps have been launched, switching between them using Windows RT’s excellent multitasking system is just awesome. Apps fly in with little to no lag and the process is just great.

The only other user experience issue I have with Surface has to do with CPU utilization when using Office 2013. Surface, like all Windows RT tablets, comes with a free installation of Office 2013 Student & Home Edition. Surface also happens to use a quad-core NVIDIA Tegra 3 SoC, featuring four ARM Cortex A9 cores running at up to 1.3GHz. At least for the Cortex A9 generation, I don’t know that Microsoft could’ve used anything slower. Simply typing quickly in Microsoft Word maxes the single threaded performance of Tegra 3’s ARM Cortex A9 cores. I’ve seen CPU usage a high as 50% when typing very quickly, but mostly it tends to sit between 20 – 40%. Switch to notepad and max CPU utilization drops to sub 10%. This says more about Office 2013 than the performance of NVIDIA’s Tegra 3, but there are not a whole lot of spare CPU cycles to go around with Surface.

This brings us to the next part of the performance discussion: quantitative performance analysis. Windows RT/8 will likely bring balance to the tablet benchmark scene, but all of the folks currently working on benchmarks are targeting a late 2012/early 2013 release. We will eventually see everything from PCMark to GLBenchmark ported to Windows RT, but until then we’re left in the same situation we have under iOS: relying on JavaScript benchmarks to characterize performance.

With only two Windows RT tablets in our possession (ASUS’ VivoTab RT and Surface), this section would be pretty bare. To rectify this problem I phoned a friend who let me borrow a soon to be released Clovertrail (Atom Z2760) based Windows 8 tablet. To avoid getting in trouble with the specific manufacturer of this tablet I’ll refrain from posting photos or calling out the device by name, but we’ve talked about it on the site before.

As a recap, Clovertrail is the x86 alternative to ARM for Windows 8 tablets. The Atom Z2760 integrates two 32nm Saltwell cores running at up to 1.8GHz. Each core is Hyper Threaded so the entire SoC can work on four threads at a time, similar to NVIDIA’s Tegra 3. The GPU is Imagination’s PowerVR SGX 545 running at 533MHz. The SoC features a dual-channel LPDDR2 memory interface. NVIDIA’s Tegra 3 has a single channel LPDDR2 interface running at a 1500MHz data rate in Surface.

On the user experience side alone, the Clovertrail tablet is noticeably quicker than Surface. Surface isn’t slow by any means, but had it used Atom hardware it would’ve been even more responsive.

Putting all of this into numbers, we have a collection of JavaScript performance tests, some of which were used in the iPhone 5 review. Note that all of these tests were run using IE10 in Windows RT/8 thus making the comparison less about software and more about hardware differences:

JavaScript Performance
Time in ms (Lower is Better) Kraken SunSpider RIA Bench Focus
Intel Atom Z2760 33855.7ms 714.9ms 3872ms
Microsoft Surface (Tegra 3 1.3GHz) 49595.5ms 981.1ms 5880ms

Across the board Clovertrail manages a 30 - 50% advantage over Tegra 3. Granted we’re not looking at power consumption here, but the Clovertrail tablet I’m comparing is even smaller/lighter than Surface for what it’s worth. We’ll have battery life numbers for it in the coming weeks.

Principled Technologies, apparently featuring some of the same folks who were responsible for building the old Winstone benchmarks from over a decade ago, actually put out the first cross platform Windows RT/8 benchmark with some help from Intel. Despite Intel’s influence the test appears to have no native code, instead relying on just a heavy workload of large images and videos for its tests.

TouchXPRT 2013
Time in Seconds (Lower is Better) Photo Enhance Photo Export Video Transcode MP3 Transcode Photo Slideshow Creation
Intel Atom Z2760 210.83s 73.93s 53.91s 98.66s 85.81s
Microsoft Surface (Tegra 3 1.3GHz) 306.12s 116.36s 87.27s 160.99s 125.06s
ASUS VivoTab RT (Tegra 3 1.3GHz) 312.14s 109.89s 89.69s 155.84s 122.65s

The large files used in the workload do a great job of showing Atom’s memory controller advantages over that used by the Cortex A9. The results here likely overstate the Clovertrail performance advantage a bit (I’m not sure how much 1080p video transcoding you’re going to be doing on Surface as compared to web browsing) but the results tend to agree with what our browser based JavaScript tests show: Intel’s Atom Z2760 is considerably faster than Tegra 3 here.

I understand that Microsoft needed a good launch vehicle for Windows RT, however I really would have liked to have seen an Atom version of Surface. An Ivy Bridge version is in the works, but it’s also a bit larger. An Atom version could retain the same chassis size/weight, but deliver tangibly better CPU performance. Again we’ll have to wait to see what battery life looks like for these Clovertrail tablets before really deciding whether or not Atom would’ve been a better fit.

Battery Life Windows RT


View All Comments

  • kyuu - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    Agreed, I'd like some clarification on this as well. I certainly hope it's a simple micro-HDMI that can be used with off-the-shelf adapters. Reply
  • ervinshiznit - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link


    You mention that you would have liked to have seen the surface with x86. Is Windows RT only compatible with ARM or does it support x86 also? I realize it's just a compilation issue but I was under the impression that only ARM builds of Windows RT would ever be released by Microsoft.
  • MadMan007 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    Don't connect the hardware branding name 'Surface' and software. You are correct that WinRT=ARM only. But there will be Microsoft Surface devices using x86 hardware running full Windows 8.

    Will there be a budget Atom-based x86 Surface, in the same form factor as this one? I'm not sure off the top of my head, but that's probably what Anand meant.
  • ervinshiznit - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    There have only been plans announced for the Surface Pro, which would include a Core i5 and run full Windows 8.

    I bring up the Windows RT=ARM only because Anand brought up the performance issue in the context of MS Office, and he said that he would have liked to see an Atom in the Surface instead of this ARM core. But then it wouldn't be able to run RT. And that would also mean no free Office 2013 since it's not included in full Windows 8
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    Whether or not to include Office is basically arbitrary. Microsoft could include it with Surface Pro, as it's entirely up to them..

    The point to take home is not that RT doesn't run on Atom, but rather that Office on Surface is currently unusually sluggish. A SoC with better performance in lightly threaded situations (such as the Atom) would handle Office better based on what we're seeing.
  • Kevin G - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link

    Reading through this review and others seems to point the problem at Office being sluggish and not necessarily the Tegra 3. Even on the PC side where far higher performing hardware exists, Office doesn't give the impression of a speed champion. I'd love to see Office compared on the Surface, Surface Pro and a decent laptop. Yeah, the deck would stacked in favor of the laptop winning but it'd be a good reference point for users as well as reviewing the idea of usability on each device. For example, I can see the utility of viewing and making a quick and simple change to an Excel spread sheet on a tablet but for heavy Excel use restricted to an on screen touch keyboard would likely result in levels of frustration that'd have me snapping the tablet in two. Reply
  • kyuu - Thursday, October 25, 2012 - link

    That's the reason for the Touch/Type Covers... Reply
  • ervinshiznit - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link


    You say

    Application launch times are another thing entirely. Nearly every application I launched took longer than I would’ve liked on Surface. I can’t tell if this is a hardware issue or a software optimization problem, but application launches on Surface/Windows RT clearly take more time than on an iPad. I timed a few just to put this in perspective:

    And after the : I expected a chart or something but there's nothing there.
  • JumpingJack - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    I asked the same question, Ryan said they were overwhelmed with the iPad announcement, the 8350 launch, and his... He said Anand will fill in he info a bit later. Reply
  • michal1980 - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link

    apple products didn't get short changed reviews... I wonder why. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now