Intel doesn’t think that Arm CPUs will make a dent in the laptop market::“They’ve been relegated to pretty insignificant roles in the PC business.”
Of course intel would be the last company to admit x86 is dying. It just doesn’t make sense to keep doubling down on it anymore, Apple has proven ARM is more power efficient and in many cases more powerful than x86. I wanted to buy a new laptop this year but it makes no sense to do so considering Windows ARM machines are right around the corner and will triple battery life and increase performance.
This seems to be doggedly persistent rumor. Apple’s M chips are better due to better engineering and vertical integration.
There is no inherent benefit to the underlying isa
ARM has a more efficient instruction set, uses less power, and generates less heat while matching performance. Not really a rumor.
Source?
It’s down to the engineering. Saying ARM has a more efficient instruction set is like saying C has more efficient syntax than python. Especially these days with pipelining 'n stuff, it all becomes very similar under the hood.
Source?
That article may be out of date though. From the article:
What limits computer performance today is predictability, and the two big ones are instruction/branch predictability, and data locality.
This is true, and it points out one of the ways Intel has made their architecture so competitive, Intel has bet very heavily on branch prediction and they’ve done a lot of optimisation around it.
But more recently branch prediction has proven to be quite problematic in terms of security. Branch prediction was the root of the problem that led to the meltdown and spectre vulnerabilities. And the only real mitigation for this problem was to completely redesign how branch prediction was done, and significantly reducing the performance gains.
So yeah to sum up, one of the big differences between ARM and intel’s X86 architecture is branch prediction, except branch prediction just got nerfed big time.
CPU aside, it’s best to wait for thunderbolt 5 to mature. Might finally be able to go to using one device for travel and an eGPU for gaming.
I mean that’s fine. I’m just saying that x86 chips are still faster. If you want a beefy laptop, especially a work device that only needs to be slightly portable eg drag it to conference rooms and back to your desk, there is little current reason to go with ARM. I’m not saying they won’t catch up but folks in here seem to be thinking that ARM is currently faster.
What arm chips are faster than ryzen or Intel chips?
M2 Max chips are close to the high end i9, but the M series cpus are mobile chips. They’re designed for laptops. If competition is a bit harder then no doubt desktop-focused ARM CPUs will match their performance soon.
AFAIK they’re large chips though, and larger generally is more performance but also much more expensive to manufacture.
Intel is finally innovating because of increased pressure. Don’t let the Pat Gelsinger’s calm tone fool you, he knows exactly what the competition is bringing. Apple has proven what Linux users have known for a few years, the CPU architecture is not as directly tied to the software as it once was. It doesn’t matter if it’s x86, ARM, or RISC-V. As long as we have native builds (or a powerful compatibility layer) it’s going to be business as usual.
the CPU architecture is not as directly tied to the software as it once was
Yeah it used to be that emulating anything all would be slow as balls. These days, as long as you have a native browser you’re halfway there, then 90% of native software will emulate without the user noticing since it doesn’t need much power at all, and you just need to entice stuff that really needs power (Photoshop etc), half of which is already ARM-ready since it supports Macs.
The big wrench in switching to ARM will be games. Game developers are very stubborn, see how all games stopped working on Mac when Apple dropped 32-bit support, even though no Macs have been 32-bit for a decade.
Even AMD showed just how power hungry and thermal inefficient intel generally is
As Arm develops more every year, laptop OEMs will eventually switch just because of the insane power and thermal benefit.
I hope RISC-V gets its chance to shine too
Current gen AMD laptop CPUs rival apple silicon in performance and power consumption on mobile. x86 is nowhere near as close to dying as people think.
Aye exactly, Apple’s marketing, which is often basically lying, has a lot to answer for in the prevelence of this idea. They’d have you believe that they’re making chips with 14 billion percent more performance per watt and class beating performance. Whereas in reality they’re very much going toe to toe with AMD and other high end ARM chip vendors
Every vendor is guilty of doing this not just apple, even AMD. The fact is apple found a way to make desktop arm chips accessible and viable. If you’ve ever used an m1 or m2 Mac, you’ll understand how big of an impact they’ve made. My m1 Mac mini 8gb could run several games above 60fps at 1440p at reasonable settings, examples being WoW (retail with upgraded graphics), LoL and DotA2, StarCraft 2, diablo 3, etc. It was and still is a very capable chip.
Don’t agree with this. I have the newest 7840U that’s supposed to be THE answer to the M2. Performance per watt and battery life is way worse.
Which laptop?
Yoga slim 6
1 - laptops usually ship windows out of the box 2 - windows ARM has some trouble due to partnerships 3 - not all apps will have equal parity between older arch to ARMs
Changes are bound to happen. They don’t want to pay for the ARMs fees probably. And if they don’t bring something at Apple Silicon level, it would be an issue to intel: Intel giant producer of CPUs Apple new to laptop/desktop grade cpu designs Kinda shameful
People are going to start to wonder what they have all the Windows OS for when all they do is run a browser. If someone makes a less hassle Linux distro…that runs well on Arm… Well we could finally have some advancement in mobile computing. ChromeOS was almost it but Google made it all cloud and Google only.
If you say browser only, then you are relegating to the cloud, no? Is then Google not doing things right?
ARM just makes sense for portable devices for obvious reasons, x86 isn’t dying though. For the average person who needs a laptop to do some professional-managerial work ARM is perfect.
What are those reasons that you think are so obvious? I have no idea what you could be referring to 😅
ARM is more efficient and as a “system on chip” reduces the need for as many other components on the boards, phones for example. Unless you’re doing heavy cpu or gpu intensive tasks there’s a bunch of upsides and no downsides to ARM.
That’s my impression as well. I’m confused about the “just”. There’s many non-portable devices that don’t have too heavy workloads and that I’d think would benefit from better energy efficiency.
Oh yeah the article is about the laptop market, but of course all sort of non-portable devices run on non-x86 platform. I’d even say x86 is the minority unless you reduce it to just desktop workstations.
Arm tends to be a lot more power efficient, so you can get better battery life on portable devices.
Not only that but also reducing the number of chips that need to be powered helps with efficiency.
And lower power consumption and heat production on all devices, so I don’t get the “just”
There is also a sizable market for laptops that do not do much more than log onto a remote desktop. Especially with remote working, that has becomes the perfect middle ground between security, cost, and ease of use. A cheap ARM processor would work perfectly for those machines.
I’m a sysadmin and would much rather have a light arm machine to remote in from than a standard Intel laptop.
Non x86 has been tried at least twice before on windows and failed. While this is certainly the best attempt yet, there is no guarantee of success. Sure would be nice however to get more competition.
reminds me of “In the world, there is space for 5 computers” or something along those lines
ARM is dead. Anecdotally, apple has the longest history of any company hitching to dead architectures (6502, 68k. Power PC, etc.). The only architecture that apple has hitched to that didn’t totally die is x86, and x86 will die soon to RISC-V. Why would anyone pay royalties to be controlled by ARM when an open alternative exists. RISC-V is the new future that all the old guard are trying their best to delay as long as possible. ARM was sold by the original owners the second RISC-V overcame its major legal hurdles. The new owners are trying to pump as much as possible to minimize their losses in the public stock exchange. Anyone with an ounce of sense can look at the timeline of RISC-V and the sale of ARM to see the real picture without fanboi nonsense.
RISC-V is still not going to take over x86 for quite a while. As much as I’d love for it to, it’s still going to take some work.
Give it about 8-10 years and I think that’s when x86 is going to be out the window, and will be an architecture delegated solely for enthusiasts.
I agree it will take awhile to completely take over even the low end market, but like there is already a data center running on RISC-V that was in the news cycle a month or two back. Intel has been putting a lot of money into it too because they know the change is coming. We are on the edge of a major shift needed for AI anyways. I think that will be the death knell for x86. The memory and cache bus structures need to change to accommodate tensor math much more efficiently. Why restructure the dying x86 so substantially when it could be done in RISC-V and make most hardware antiquated at the same time to finance the bleeding edge shift. I think The big players will still be on top, except ARM will fade into irrelevance like MIPS. Proprietary/planned obsolescence/exploitation in the digital landscape is a major problem that needs to go away. All the relevant companies have access to reverse engineered hardware from their competitors. Proprietary only exists to exploit end users. RISC-V is a small step in the right direction of restoring the right to fundamental ownership.
Id say more like 20-40 years. x86 won’t die that easily
RISC-V is about 5-10yrs behind the performance of ARM. If ARM continues to improve it may never catch up.
This is not how ISA, fab nodes, or hardware design work at all. ARM is not special. It was just a company that made it easier to put together a bunch of processor blocks and peripherals for a fee and royalty. It was just a convince thing for the trailing edge. Everything ARM can do RISC-V can do as far as ISA. No one is going to pay a royalty when the same thing is free. This is the realm of big money where the choice is obvious. Not to mention, we are on the final node already when it comes to scaling, the progress of the last 40 years has stopped. There is potential in new technologies like computing with light, but silicon lithography will never drop below 3-5 nanometers because that is the end of what physics allows with quantum tunneling effects. We will eventually move past the stone age of computing with silicon. Organic technology is the holy grail, but until a major shift is made, we are at the end of silicon progress despite what all the marketing fools hype and moan about. ARM has no where to go. The people that created it bailed ages ago because the writing was on the wall all the way back then.
What does RISC-V do that ARM does not with staying revenant post silicon? (Also, chill bro, Organic and Light computing are still in their infancy and we won’t be there for a while)
