Discussion in 'CPUs' started by jonneymendoza, Jun 23, 2020.
They already have ported photoshop on the ipad
I know... but there are no Macs with ARM to test the 'like for like' version against x86, hence the list "you can do a like for like on the iPad/iMac/PC/Intel based Mac"
It's the same.mac os will be identical and merged with iPads os
You are failing to see the point I made in the original post. Until we can do a like for like comparison then what can be done on the iPad is irrelevant. You need to compare the x86-64 version to it using the 'equivalent' hardware, there isn't an x86 iPad.
Games when coded for and optimised for RISC can run very fast - although it will probably mean at least at engine development level there will be a requirement for more people who are capable of working at the architecture assembly language level - but by its nature that tends to be less complex than x86.
Can be. Will anyone bother? Even on PC nowadays optimisations are lacking, especially on console ports.
But it isn't actually the same software - the functionality isn't the same (the ipad version is more limited).
A quick search suggests that there are no benchmark results even comparing similar operations between the ipad version and a desktop version
You kind of have to on RISC much more than CISC/x86 - it is often much harder to get acceptable performance from interpreted languages, etc. so you either have to get clever or get optimised.
EDIT: Though I don't know what Apple and the likes will do implementation wise - compiled languages on RISC tend to be less of a thing than on CISC platforms.
Hopefully we will see some decent ISP included in the laptop CPU and therefore good webcams integrated into Laptops.
I just don't see it happening any time soon. How this likely plays out is Intel start defending their IP and tie apple/microsoft and anybody else in Legal battles around emulation of x86/64 instructions likely preventing the techs release, at least in the immediate future say the next 4 or so years. Intel then lean heavily on the OEM's and the OEM's then wont kit out their machines with ARM.
Microsoft in the long run would need to port windows (which is already done) rather than add a layer of abstraction but as we have already seen that will fail as everybody writes apps for x86/64. I hope it does end up differently but I cant see it.
Sold in 2016 to the Japanese
Hard to see for me, gaming on a Mac is a very niche activity due to their rubbish GPUs (without spending '000s). Can't imagine devs will want to port games for presumably pretty low sales. x86 covers PC and both current and next gen PS/XBox.
Not had a single piece of arm tech that has had a usage lifespan like my x86 pc. My 10 year old cpu still in use today and performs well.
10 year old arm phone or tablet is useless. Even 5 year old arm tech struggles with basics like web browsing.
But would be real interesting to see what even a arm cortex A15 could do with 95w of power like desktop x86 cpus.
aren't the instruction sets much more basic on ARM CPUs, and won't this limit the level of performance per watt for traditional x86 applications?
My simple crude analogy. If a CPU has an instruction set for multiplication then it can calculate 4x2 in one instruction, but if it can only add then it needs to calculate 2+2+2+2, which will take more time.
(yeah i know this is not how it works, but hopefully you see my point....)
Not necessarily it will depend a lot application to application as to what kind of processing they do.
just came across this. The guy predicted it nearly a year ago that Apple will ditch intel
This is because ARM chips have become so much better in the last 10 years while x86 has been more or less stagnant with only minor improvements. So the operating systems, software and use cases have been updated to use the extra power, rather than becoming stagnant.
A core in Apple A13 is over 100 times faster than a core in Apple A4 (released in 2010).
A core in i9 10900K is almost 2 times faster than a core in Core i7 920 (released in 2008). Majority of the improvement also comes from clock speed improvements (2.93GHz vs 5.3GHz Turbo speeds).
If we've had a 100x performance improvement for x86 in the last 10 years, every OS, game, software and use-case would have been updated to use the extra processing power. In that case, your 10-year-old x86 chip would have seriously struggled as well. Stagnation is not a sign of quality or longevity, it's a sign of mediocracy, and that's what Intel has been in the last 10 years.
All modern CPUs (ARM and x86 included) are RISC processors and they use microcode to translate their ISA into their own internal instruction sets. ARM has no disadvantage here and their ISA is pretty much on par with x86 (with fewer baggage from the old days). ARM v9 is going to be even more complex and will add equivalents of AVX512 to ARM as well.
Separate names with a comma.