They were the best of their era. IIRC the GUI was written in BASIC!
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
ARM-based computing
- Thread starter HACO
- Start date
They were the best of their era. IIRC the GUI was written in BASIC!
I don't think that this late Intel or AMD have either the time or resources to fundamentally change their philosophies as to how they design their x86-64 CPUs.
It's time to shift to ARM RISC and post-silicon semiconductors.
They could - they've done it before.
The future will likely be multi-arch (ARM and x86 aren't the only ones around). ISA is becoming less relevant these days due to how modern CPUs are built (different internal RISC ISA + micro-ops decoding). As for post-Silicon semiconductors, we're still at least 15-20 years from any realistic commercial processors outside of a lab. The first products that will come are purpose-built ASICs rather than commercial general-purpose CPUs.
15-20 years during which Intel won't progress that much, I am quite sure about this.
Look at two 4-core / 8-thread CPUs from Intel launched in Q4 2016 and Q2 2020 respectively - Core i7-7700K and Core i3-10300.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-7700K+@+4.20GHz&id=2874
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-10300+@+3.70GHz&id=3765
No performance improvement, no IPC improvement, I see a small regression in performance.
15-20 years during which Intel won't progress that much, I am quite sure about this.
Look at two 4-core / 8-thread CPUs from Intel launched in Q4 2016 and Q2 2020 respectively - Core i7-7700K and Core i3-10300.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-7700K+@+4.20GHz&id=2874
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-10300+@+3.70GHz&id=3765
No performance improvement, no IPC improvement, I see a small regression in performance.
Yeah, again not sure how any of that is relevant to anything. x86 has been stagnant for the last 10 years, you’re only stating the obvious. Intel and AMD are behind ARM in terms of IPC and the margin is already significant.
I'm actually surprised that neither of the big 'modern' (well newest) operating systems, Android and IOS didn't go for the 'nix/Linux model and force the distribution of source codes instead of binaries.
Just-in-time Emulation/re-compilation is all very well, but a truly ISA-agnostic OS and software is when you have the source code and recompile it as needed. Or rather a package manager does it for the user.
Some SIMD type stuff might be tricky, but maybe something like OpenCL could address this.
Of course, my biggest problem with these new operating systems - especially IOS - is how closed they are and little control the users have versus Apple and Google.
Pity the rise of Linux is still 'just around the corner' after all this time.
Universal binaries are the way to go, as Apple is doing for Mac and a lot of package managers do for Linux distros. This will become the norm in IDEs and other CI/CD tools as time goes on. Developers end up submitting binaries for several architectures and it's all handled behind the scenes, to the end user they just install a program like they always do.
A14X Bionic to Be ‘Nearly on Par’ With 8-Core Intel Core i9-9880H, According to Leaked Performance Data
https://wccftech.com/apple-a14x-bionic-leaked-performance-results-comparable-to-core-i9-9880h/
https://wccftech.com/apple-a14x-bionic-leaked-performance-results-comparable-to-core-i9-9880h/
A14X Bionic to Be ‘Nearly on Par’ With 8-Core Intel Core i9-9880H, According to Leaked Performance Data
https://wccftech.com/apple-a14x-bionic-leaked-performance-results-comparable-to-core-i9-9880h/
A13 was more or less on par with i9-10900K in single-threaded workloads. Assuming no huge surprises from Zen 3 are coming, A14 will likely be the fastest single-threaded processor in the world by a good margin.
I’m very much looking forward to the A14 variant that will be in the first Apple Silicon Mac. There’s a chance that it will even be faster than midrange x86 chips at running x86 code in emulation.
Apple has a history of changing CPU architecture every decade or so in their laptops and desktops. So it is not something tectonic.
take up of ARM based CPU will be decided elsewhere, not by Apple. But it is interesting that more complex CPUs are being made.
take up of ARM based CPU will be decided elsewhere, not by Apple. But it is interesting that more complex CPUs are being made.
It will be interesting if Apple together with other companies build an ecosystem which can rival Microsoft's and Intel's WinX86-64 ecosystem.
ARM CPUs coupled with appropriate popular OS, and all the DIY components - graphics cards, mainboards, memory, peripherals, games, apps and more.
ARM CPUs coupled with appropriate popular OS, and all the DIY components - graphics cards, mainboards, memory, peripherals, games, apps and more.
They're trend makers in technology. Where they go, others usually follow or at the very least, seriously consider following.
If/When Apple releases laptops with the same performance and maybe 3x battery life (which is actually conservative), or much faster laptops at small form factors without sacrificing battery life, others will either have to accept losing ground to Apple or they have to compete, and competitors will have no choice but to adapt. So either Intel and AMD would need to seriously improve their performance per watt to become competitive, or the likes of Dell, HP, Microsoft, ASUS, Acer, Lenovo, etc will look elsewhere for ARM CPUs.
What's more likely is that Microsoft will put a lot more effort in making Windows multi-architecture (like Linux). Don't expect DIY components with Apple CPUs though, the chance of that happening is very slim.
It was very telling that Microsoft Office was among the software that Apple demoed running natively on ARM macs (even though Microsoft itself didn't run Office natively on its own line of ARM laptops at the time of release). Microsoft doesn't have a dog in the architecture fights, they'll adapt and will support both x86 and ARM.
I don’t agree that Apple is trend setter in computing world. In design and mobile devices may be. Apple computers (not their iPhones, watch etc) are much small sale volumes than x86 based PCs.
I also know plenty people buy macs and run windows on them due to it being transferable in X86. Dunno why they just don’t get PCs but I guess they like the symbolism.
I also doubt that ARM can be 3x faster than x86 based CPU in the next year. ARM based cpu excelled at certain tasks but it need graphics accelerators and other components to make the machine fully functional. Especially anything graphically demanding like games, the whole package drains battery pretty fast. My iPhone has 3AH battery that will disappear under 1hr if I play games on it solidly. Latest AMD u series mobile chips are pretty amazing stuff. For a 25w and 45w chip they can do a heck a lot. I am not so sure there is an equivalent ARM chip out there can do the same on the same power profile. Remembering that these mobile chips got iGPUs.
I am not concerned about a pure ARM cpu taking over the world. I think intel’s big-small architecture has much more mileage where they can technically put a few hugely power efficient reduced instruction set cores with the more complex cores to drive efficiency.
what I am trying to say is that ARM by itself won’t take over but a hybrid chip will be a game changer.
then you probably have lots of market segmentation where ARM based CPUs are like those “netbooks” from 10yrs old. Low power slowish things. Then the hybrids for everything from low end to ultra thin stuff and some premium laptops. Then the full fat gaming Laptops and workstation laptops
I also can’t see those ARm based chips making their way to the PCs or the DIY market. From OEM perspective to provide support for diverging hardware is a pain in the back side. This is why Apple is doing ARM cos it stream line their support, design, and software. But for PC OEMs it is completely the opposite.
It is ok for data centres as they have to invest in hardware and each generation of hardware that becomes obsolete, next generation that replaces it will attract a certain amount of support and learning curve. So for them the offset of long term running cost would be significant. And when they are running arm based servers, these instances can be provided or designed to cater for very specific needs like number crunching. So there are (dare say) niche market for these. At individual computer level I just can’t see it happening.
Last edited:
They’re small, but they’re trend makers. That’s the thing, they’re always the first people to do X, and others will do the same pretty soon. Modern laptops are following the trend that Apple set with their MacBook lines in late 2000s and early 2010s for example.
days of doing that are unnerved.
I didn’t say 3x faster. I said 3x better performance per watt. i.e. same performance at a third of the power. That’s where they are compared to the current Intel offering. AMD is slightly better than Intel, but the scale is different in orders of magnitude when it comes to ARM. They can 100% do the same things on much lower power profiles, this is already incredibly well documented for various ARM chips in Linux, etc...
Neither am I. x86 will be around, but it has serious competitors now. You don’t need ARM to take over the world (it already has) for x86 to face competition. You only need it to be competitive, and it is competitive.
Hybrid multi-arch ARM-x86 chip isn’t happening (there’s no point hardware decoding two ISAs in one chip). But all AMD processors have ARM cores in them for example, doing specific tasks.
At the beginning, sure. First non-Apple ARM laptop won’t be a Dell Precision. Eventually, that gap will close down and ARM chips will find themselves in higher end models.
Why not? I mean, not for gamers but for other people? It already is a non-trivial market. In fact gaming system building is a small part of the DIY market.
You probably have a lot more ARM processors in your home than x86. They’ve become over 100x faster in terms of IPC in the last 15 years (x86 had 4-5x IPC improvements in the same period), and over 1000x faster in pure terms. There still is a gap between them and x86, closing down very fast, but they’re going to become performance competitive in every single way, at lower power profiles, within a few generations, unless x86 begins improving at the same rate (which they’re not, not even in the case of AMD).
Last edited:
ARM has better IPC. But that instructions per cycle isn’t comparable to x86 based chips.
x86 chips from intel over the last 6 yeaRs has stagnated in terms of IPC. Intel has to resort to higher clocks to give any gains in package performance. Thus more power draws etc. But as you look at the laptop space the reverse is true. Where per ghz performance has become more efficient over the last 6 years. Resulting much lower TDP mobile chips. This is obtained through refinement in architecture. X86 gets its big boost from node shrink in terms of IPC and better refinement in the design.
ARM is in everything that’s connected and is everywhere from phones to door bells. Raspberry pi can run windows etc etc. All that is true.
market segmentation at this level is a headache for hardware providers as well as software developers. It just won’t happen. Apple can do whatever it likes as it has a closed ecosystem anyways.
hybrids I am talking about isn’t a hybrid of ARM and X86, it is a set of x86 cores that have reduced instruction sets to perform simple task with relatively low energy. As everyone said, CPUs are RISC chips wrapped in CISC wrappers.
x86 chips from intel over the last 6 yeaRs has stagnated in terms of IPC. Intel has to resort to higher clocks to give any gains in package performance. Thus more power draws etc. But as you look at the laptop space the reverse is true. Where per ghz performance has become more efficient over the last 6 years. Resulting much lower TDP mobile chips. This is obtained through refinement in architecture. X86 gets its big boost from node shrink in terms of IPC and better refinement in the design.
ARM is in everything that’s connected and is everywhere from phones to door bells. Raspberry pi can run windows etc etc. All that is true.
market segmentation at this level is a headache for hardware providers as well as software developers. It just won’t happen. Apple can do whatever it likes as it has a closed ecosystem anyways.
hybrids I am talking about isn’t a hybrid of ARM and X86, it is a set of x86 cores that have reduced instruction sets to perform simple task with relatively low energy. As everyone said, CPUs are RISC chips wrapped in CISC wrappers.
Windows already runs on ARM. And Windows NT has been multi-architecture from the start - x86, Itanium, PPC, MIPS, and DEC ALpha.
Don't generally disagree with any of it.
Yeah just some server socketed stuff but that will change as well in the next half decade.
Yeah, just not that well because there's no full force behind it. It's the entire ecosystem that needs to be multi-arch, not just the pure OS itself. Most apps are just x86, we need more time (and Microsoft's determination and tools) to make sure that most apps become multi-arch in their future versions.
The one about chrome OS and MS is really the interesting nugget in that video. MS should be worried. They lost out in the mobile OS competition as Bill Gates stated a year ago that they didn’t go and compete and let google a free run at it. If they are not careful their OS market share will be cut if Chrome OS is successful especially at the low end of the desktop/laptop computing space.