Assuming this is true (Android Authority rarely has its own leaks):
It's rare / the first time I've
ever seen power draw
per bin released for individual CPU SKUs. Some of this variance is
huge, so it makes sense why Qualcomm may have up to 8x SKUs.
Yet, confusingly, these are per-SKU, but then Android Authority says "
In practice, the better parts will simply get binned as the higher-end SKUs, though, so the distinction doesn’t have any significant implications in reality." But these are already
per SKU. There is no more segmentation, as far as we see.
So, one reviewer may get an X1E84100 that draws 98.5W, while another X1E84100 draws 82.3W? The former consumes +19% more power. That's not close, is it? Battery life tests between different units may be quite variable, especially under heavy loads (e.g., I assume these are maximum / near-peak power draw).
EDIT: and 1 out of 20 X1E84100 units may consume
more than 98.5W? There's something funky here with these numbers (or this SoC?), but I'll admit I'm not familiar with this variance in other mobile SoCs.
//
But, meta aside, I am a bit sad the lower-end X1 Plus SKU by default can push up to 35W+. That range of 35W-43W will not fly on a fanless device. Hopefully OEMs will have cTDP / TDP-down configurations, but disappointed why Qualcomm didn't limit them to ~20W max. on at least 1-2 lower-end SKUs.
Windows OEMs are notorious for copying the CPU manufacturer's default TDP and designing the laptop around it. So users invariable will get the added weight for larger heatsinks, fans, inlet / outlet, dust maintenance, etc., even if there is a software-configurable "quiet / fanless mode".