News MediaTek Wants a Piece of Windows on Arm

[Admin]

MediaTek to address Windows on Arm PCs with next-generation Kompanio SoCs.

MediaTek Wants a Piece of Windows on Arm : Read more

 

[PlaneInTheSky]

Those mini PC running Windows on ARM are super interesting.

They consume less power and are cheaper than Intel NUC. For about $200 you have a decent ARM mini PC.

They're also great if you play cloud games.

 

[-Fran-]

I don't think Microsoft will want to do ARM, since Intel won't give them any money to develop stuff. Maybe MediaTek can get AMD to help and convince Microsoft to grow their ARM offering a bit more.

No matter how efficient ARM is for mobile; if there's no software people can use, it's completely moot.

Regards.

 

[JamesJones44]

I don't think Microsoft will want to do ARM, since Intel won't give them any money to develop stuff. Maybe MediaTek can get AMD to help and convince Microsoft to grow their ARM offering a bit more.

No matter how efficient ARM is for mobile; if there's no software people can use, it's completely moot.

Regards.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. MS has invested huge amounts of time and cash to make supporting ARM completely transparent for .NET. So much so you have to choice not to publish an app without ARM or x86_64 support.

 

[bit_user]

It is unclear whether MediaTek plans to use performance-enhanced Arm Cortex-X cores for its notebook SoCs or will develop its custom Arm-compatible cores like Apple.

There's no way MediaTek is going to develop competitive cores, in-house. They're going to just use off-the-shelf ARM IP and will beat Qualcomm & Apple on pricing.

 

[bit_user]

I don't think Microsoft will want to do ARM,

Uh, but they did. They even went so far as to commission three generations (so far) of ARM-based SoCs from Qualcomm (SQ1, SQ2, and SQ3). You can read a review of the SQ3-based Surface Pro 9, here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/microsoft-surface-pro-9-sq3-arm

Or, you can run Windows 11 on a straight Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3-powered Lenovo laptop:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lenovo-thinkpad-x13s

Maybe MediaTek can get AMD to help and convince Microsoft to grow their ARM offering a bit more.

LOL, wut? Are you feeling alright?

As for subsidizing Windows-on-ARM development, maybe something like that happened with Qualcomm, because there was some kind of exclusivity agreement between them and Microsoft that I gather has now lapsed.

No matter how efficient ARM is for mobile; if there's no software people can use, it's completely moot.

Windows 10 had x86-32 emulation. In Windows 11, they extended that to now cover 64-bit x86 apps.

So, your argument really only applies if someone relies on compute-intensive x86 apps that would bog down with a slight emulation penalty.

 

[cfbcfb]

From someone who has investigated using arm based devices as a daily driver, looking for the performance I like from an x86 machine and not having much of a requirement other than chrome or a chromium browser that takes ad blocking extensions.

The mac mini is a great contender at the price. But you'll have to live with Mac OS inflexibilities (I REALLY want that top menu bar to disappear and never come back) or try to shoehorn linux into it.

On the ARM side, the new microsoft windows/arm development tool is one of the faster options, and it's $600. Slower that the mac mini mentioned above by a good amount.

RK3588 boxes are what you can find under $300, and they offer about the performance of a snapdragon 845 or 855 from years ago. My month or so with such a box that was $170 said that the performance just isn't even close to what I'd like.

Electricity usage will become The Big Thing over the next 10 years, as the world struggles to get rid of fossil fuels. So there IS a market for this, it's just not developed yet. But it will. And the big players are all pouring as much electricity as they can into cpu's and gpu's, trying to one-up each other.

Until I see better software options on a fast ARM machine for under $500, it won't really be for me. And I really don't care what the OS is, except for Mac OS. I wanted to love it, but nope. Linux, chrome os, windows are all good. Android would even do, if it allowed a right mouse click as the primary, had a desktop mode and wasn't Samsung. That's right. Most android loads only work with the left click, its baked into the kernel, and the right button does the "BACK" function. Pretty annoying if you're left handed.

This might be where Windows on ARM finally solves an actual business problem. Lower electric usage for the same levels of performance. Unfortunately, even the fastest ARM boxes that are under $500 just aren't cutting it.

Because up until now, saying "It's ARM....YAY! Are ya going to buy one?" didn't solve anyones problems. But "This will do the job with half the electricity" will solve a big growing problem.

 

[mbello]

Sorry to ruin it for you, but current ARM SBCs are neither lower power, cheaper or faster compared to Intel N5195/6005-based boxes.

Right now on AliExpress for instance, the best value for money for a cheap-yet-viable low-end PC is the N5195-based GK3 Pro which can be bought for $120 complete with power supply, case, 8GB of RAM and 128GB SSD.

Most ARM SBCs in that performance range sell for $150+ and that is just for the board. And you will have to deal with all sorts of driver problems because Rockchip and Mediatek suck in the software/driver department (at least on Linux which is what I care for).

 

[-Fran-]

I wouldn't be so sure about that. MS has invested huge amounts of time and cash to make supporting ARM completely transparent for .NET. So much so you have to choice not to publish an app without ARM or x86_64 support.

They did, yes. They crashed and burned previously with the initial Surface ARM variants.

And they have no choice with dotNET, since it needs to run in their Azure Linux infrastructure and Linux supports, well, anything. It's way more nuanced than that and just because they need to make dotNET suck less, doesn't mean it translates directly to Windows or its entire ecosystem.

Uh, but they did. They even went so far as to commission three generations (so far) of ARM-based SoCs from Qualcomm (SQ1, SQ2, and SQ3). You can read a review of the SQ3-based Surface Pro 9, here:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/microsoft-surface-pro-9-sq3-arm

Or, you can run Windows 11 on a straight Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3-powered Lenovo laptop:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lenovo-thinkpad-x13s

I guess I should've been a tad more clear: "do ARM again".

Having basic support so Windows just runs is not the same as pushing the whole ecosystem to run natively in it. Well, and enticing other software companies to support ARM as well.

Can you even compile with ARM as a target using VS? I'm sure as hell the Intel compiler doesn't (there's an asterisk, but I won't go into that rabbit hole).

LOL, wut? Are you feeling alright?

As for subsidizing Windows-on-ARM development, maybe something like that happened with Qualcomm, because there was some kind of exclusivity agreement between them and Microsoft that I gather has now lapsed.

Yes, I am feeling quite alright. Thanks for asking.

That is how the ball gets rolling. I'm not saying anything alien or unheard of. MediaTek is just not big enough to move the needle with Microsoft.

Windows 10 had x86-32 emulation. In Windows 11, they extended that to now cover 64-bit x86 apps.

So, your argument really only applies if someone relies on compute-intensive x86 apps that would bog down with a slight emulation penalty.

Emulation is iffy for complex applications. In either case, you're not wrong for the big majority of people. Then again, emulating removes the efficiency edge (quite) and at that point you may as well buy a regular X86 PC. It's not like X86 is that much terrible. The Apple SoCs are an anomaly, because of how the Apple ecosystem works.

Regards.

 

[TerryLaze]

Intel has used ARM in their FPGAs for years and has used very early ARM chips in network cards and other stuff since the previous millenium...

Also all of their FABs they are building now...the majority will be used for whatever the industry needs and that will be ARM to a large degree.
So intel has all of the incentives to make more people use more ARM which includes making software make use of it.
And no this is not shooting themselves in the foot because ARM is a supplement to big core CPUs at best.
Efficiency is great and all, but if you need power you don't care about efficiency.

They are talking about everything on the same chip even, so customers can pick and choose whatever they want.
(If they can do multiple on the same chip they definitely can do each one separately)
https://www.extremetech.com/computi...license-cores-that-combine-arm-risc-v-and-x86

There’s a connection between Intel’s aggressive foundry expansion and its plans to support multi-ISA manufacturing. Intel institutionally believes that its control of CPU manufacturing is vital to its own long-term success and profitability. Supporting multiple ISAs gives Intel the best chance of winning business from the widest range of customers.

 

[JamesJones44]

They did, yes. They crashed and burned previously with the initial Surface ARM variants.

And they have no choice with dotNET, since it needs to run in their Azure Linux infrastructure and Linux supports, well, anything. It's way more nuanced than that and just because they need to make dotNET suck less, doesn't mean it translates directly to Windows or its entire ecosystem.

People building apps on .NET, the most popular windows development platform are likely going to leave that feature enabled. This will in itself increase app availability. When Apple did this the number of apps that supported both ARM and x86_64 exploded. You can't find an App for Mac that doesn't support both these days and it's only been 3 years.

Mac is a much smaller market place, but your major applications will likely support both for Windows in the same amount of time (all MS products already do).

 

[bit_user]

current ARM SBCs are neither lower power

Prove it. The recent Khadas Edge 2 Pro review measured the idle & active power of that RK3588S-based SBC, a popular Allwinner SBC from previous-generation boards, and the Pi v4. Here's what they found:

Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/khadas-edge-2-pro​

Each with 8 GB. Note that the Khadas VIM 4 & Edge 2 Pro both have an active CPU heatsink/fan.

Your move, Intel.

Most ARM SBCs in that performance range sell for $150+ and that is just for the board.

Orange Pi 5 is using the RK3588S. Preorders for the 8 GB version start at $75.

 

[bit_user]

They did, yes. They crashed and burned previously with the initial Surface ARM variants.

Apparently, it didn't crash or burn badly enough, because they went back and did the SQ2 and SQ3.

I guess I should've been a tad more clear: "do ARM again".

Instead, maybe try being a tad less wrong. The Surface Pro 9 review is from just 2 weeks ago.

You can't wish ARM out of existence that easily.

That is how the ball gets rolling. I'm not saying anything alien or unheard of. MediaTek is just not big enough to move the needle with Microsoft.

No, it's not the only way. MS recently had a market cap of $1T - much bigger than AMD or even Intel. They have the resources to support ARM, if they want. They don't need a smaller company to subsidize it.

And I believe MS doesn't want to be chained to x86. On ARM, I think they won't even want to be chained to Qualcomm. Especially given the legal kerfuffle that blew up between Qualcomm and ARM, and the ongoing delays on the Nuvia-based products. It would make sense for MS to diversify their ARM support. Maybe the SQ4 will come from someone other than Qualcomm.

Emulation is iffy for complex applications.

It has nothing to do with complexity. The short list of apps and games that don't work are things like virus-scanners and apps that use custom device-drivers (like some games do, for anti-cheat).

 

[-Fran-]

Apparently, it didn't crash or burn badly enough, because they went back and did the SQ2 and SQ3.
-
Instead, maybe try being a tad less wrong. The Surface Pro 9 review is from just 2 weeks ago.

You can't wish ARM out of existence that easily.
-
No, it's not the only way. MS recently had a market cap of $1T - much bigger than AMD or even Intel. They have the resources to support ARM, if they want. They don't need a smaller company to subsidize it.

And I believe MS doesn't want to be chained to x86. On ARM, I think they won't even want to be chained to Qualcomm. Especially given the legal kerfuffle that blew up between Qualcomm and ARM, and the ongoing delays on the Nuvia-based products. It would make sense for MS to diversify their ARM support. Maybe the SQ4 will come from someone other than Qualcomm.
-
It has nothing to do with complexity. The short list of apps and games that don't work are things like virus-scanners and apps that use custom device-drivers (like some games do, for anti-cheat).

I'll admit I didn't know MS released another ARM-based surface, so that's on me. Still, wait and see. I seriously doubt it'll gain any meaningful traction*.

Also, I'm not "anti-ARM" or anything like that. I just don't see ARM being useful for a Windows ecosystem because of how intertwined and Intel/X86-dependent it is. I'm just not being completely oblivious to how ARM has been received in the past and I seriously doubt it'll change now without a MASSIVE injection of cash. That money is not just to cover development and ports/emulation, but also all the marketing machine you will need to convince people they don't need an "Intel Inside" sticker to get their stuff done.

To phrase it differently: what makes a surface laptop (past, present or future) any better than an Android tablet or even an Apple device for running ARM-native applications? For basic usage, you can't deny an Android tablet already does 99% of what the Surface can do currently, except run Windows-native applications. Even more, most important services from Microsoft are now web-based and you can indeed use ARM tablets or even Apple devices to use them.

Just being better at power usage isn't a big enough advantage in a Windows ecosystem. AMD has already proven that, since Microsoft ditched them for Intel in their latest Surface laptops that last less time on battery. So... I don't know what else to tell you there.

Regards.

 

[TerryLaze]

That money is not just to cover development and ports/emulation, but also all the marketing machine you will need to convince people they don't need an "Intel Inside" sticker to get their stuff done.

To phrase it differently: what makes a surface laptop (past, present or future) any better than an Android tablet or even an Apple device for running ARM-native applications? For basic usage, you can't deny an Android tablet already does 99% of what the Surface can do currently, except run Windows-native applications

Yeah the target group that already uses ARM is big enough that MS doesn't need to push x86, they just need to convince smartphone users that they need windows for some reason. Being able to run x86 is just another tool for them to do that convincing.

 

[bit_user]

I seriously doubt it'll change now without a MASSIVE injection of cash. That money is not just to cover development and ports/emulation, but also all the marketing machine you will need to convince people they don't need an "Intel Inside" sticker to get their stuff done.

I'm skeptical. Lots of games run on phones & tablets. That means big studios have ported their game engines to run on ARM + Vulkan on Adreno/Mali GPUs. With Windows on ARM, you also have the option of Direct3D.

Aside from games, I don't see much in the way of other hurdles to running on ARM. For sure, MS Office runs natively. Web browsers: check. What else do most people really need?

Finally, I'm skeptical of how much stock most people put in "Intel Inside". Maybe you're right, but I doubt it's a major hurdle. Especially for either businesses or at the entry-level.

To phrase it differently: what makes a surface laptop (past, present or future) any better than an Android tablet or even an Apple device for running ARM-native applications?

I can't weigh in on that. I once bought into the idea of a tablet as a possible 2-in-1 device, but then I found it neither made a great e-reader nor was it a laptop-replacement. So, I bought an e-ink based reader and a sub- 3-pound 13" laptop. I have no reason ever to go back, because my aging eyes will always want at least a 13" laptop screen and I've found weight & battery life matters a lot in an e-reader.

However, I think it's a mistake to focus on Surface. I already linked a review to a Snapdragon 8cx Gen3-based Lenovo laptop. That's something I would buy, at the right price. I already have a Lenovo 13" laptop, and if I could get the same thing with an ARM CPU, I think I'd be perfectly happy with it.

I'm curious just how much volume MS gets out of surface. The sense I get from their ads is it's mostly aimed at kids and budget-conscious young adults. I think businesses and most professionals are sticking with conventional laptops.

Just being better at power usage isn't a big enough advantage in a Windows ecosystem. ... So... I don't know what else to tell you there.

If you listen to Qualcomm, they make a big deal of not just a little better battery life, and 5G connectivity. Also, instant-on.

For some people, those will indeed be key selling-points. I can't say how much, but it could be enough to get their foot in the door of the corporate market, which seems to be their aim.

 

[bit_user]

group that already uses ARM is big enough that MS doesn't need to push x86, they just need to convince smartphone users that they need windows for some reason.

LOL, no. Windows Phone is gone and not coming back. MS has a different strategy, now. They have their entire userland software stack ported over to Android, so that .Net apps will seamlessly cross over.

 

[TerryLaze]

LOL, no. Windows Phone is gone and not coming back. MS has a different strategy, now. They have their entire userland software stack ported over to Android, so that .Net apps will seamlessly cross over.

How has anything I said anything to do with windows phone????
We are talking about windows on android here.
Android is a huge market with many users and that is enough for MS to want to push windows to this market.

 

[bit_user]

We are talking about windows on android here.

No, we are not. I don't even know what that means.

Android is a huge market with many users and that is enough for MS to want to push windows to this market.

It can't. MS lost that war. Windows is too expensive and doesn't offer enough value over Android.

MS' new strategy is to offer apps, a store, and cloud services. They came to accept they don't need to have a dominant operating system on mobile, in order to make a successful play on it.

 

[TerryLaze]

No, we are not. I don't even know what that means.

Jeesh, 'windows on devices that normally would only run android'.
When talking about arm PCs, as this article/topic does, it's usually 100% android.

 

[bit_user]

Jeesh, 'windows on devices that normally would only run android'.

Again, we're not. There's zero indication of that happening, and MS long ago and very publicly walked away from that strategy. That was one of the early, defining decisions of Satya Nadella's reign.

When talking about arm PCs, as this article/topic does, it's usually 100% android.

No, it's not. In case you didn't know, ChromeOS is not simply Android in fancy clothes.

 

[TerryLaze]

Again, we're not. There's zero indication of that happening, and MS long ago and very publicly walked away from that strategy. That was one of the early, defining decisions of Satya Nadella's reign.

What that are you thinking about?!
As ARM CPUs become stronger and stronger more and more companies will bring out good enough SOCs to run windows as well as android. Just like mediatek will try now.
That's not an MS strategy, this is just what happens.
MS already done their part by having a version of windows that runs on ARM CPUs.

To meet the performance expectations of Windows users, MediaTek plans to develop SoCs with enhanced CPU and GPU performance; the company reiterated this week.

"In CPU and GPU we are having to make some bigger investments as a foundational capability [for PC-oriented SoCs]," said Vince Hu, a corporate vice president of MediaTek at the company's event, reports PC World(opens in new tab).

No, it's not. In case you didn't know, ChromeOS is not simply Android in fancy clothes.

Yeah, android is linux in fancy clothes, and so is chrome.
Android is, not just but for convenience sake, the user interface, hence for ease of communication, windows on android=installing windows on a device that would normally be used with android (chrome/linux/beos/icaros etc).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_(operating_system)

 

[bit_user]

As ARM CPUs become stronger and stronger more and more companies will bring out good enough SOCs to run windows as well as android. Just like mediatek will try now.
...
Yeah, android is linux in fancy clothes, and so is chrome.

Clearly, what's happened here is that you didn't know that ChromeOS isn't Android.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS#Relationship_to_Android

Instead of simply admitting this gap in your knowledge, you're trying to argue that the sky isn't blue. This is almost as sad as it is pointless. I guess protecting your ego is more important to you than the truth. That's a value judgement, and one you're free to make. At some point, maybe you'll mature and come to see that embracing new information adds to your credibility more than trying to deny it.

 

[TerryLaze]

Clearly, what's happened here is that you didn't know that ChromeOS isn't Android.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeOS#Relationship_to_Android

Instead of simply admitting this gap in your knowledge, you're trying to argue that the sky isn't blue. This is almost as sad as it is pointless. I guess protecting your ego is more important to you than the truth. That's a value judgement, and one you're free to make. At some point, maybe you'll mature and come to see that embracing new information adds to your credibility more than trying to deny it.

Still doesn't change the fact that both are based on linux, also anything that runs android or chromeos on arm can have windows for arm installed on it, if the device is rooted, and mediatek is making an ARM CPU especially powerful enough to run windows for arm well.

 

[cfbcfb]

Sorry to ruin it for you, but current ARM SBCs are neither lower power, cheaper or faster compared to Intel N5195/6005-based boxes.

Right now on AliExpress for instance, the best value for money for a cheap-yet-viable low-end PC is the N5195-based GK3 Pro which can be bought for $120 complete with power supply, case, 8GB of RAM and 128GB SSD.

Most ARM SBCs in that performance range sell for $150+ and that is just for the board. And you will have to deal with all sorts of driver problems because Rockchip and Mediatek suck in the software/driver department (at least on Linux which is what I care for).

Truth. I've fiddled with an N5105 box (that has 24 gpu eu's vs the 5095's 16) and they're no joke. With chrome os flex on it, it made for a very adequate chromebox device. And they have been lurking around $150 for a while. Very low price point for four cores and a very usable iGPU.