Opinion: Intel is Underestimating ARM

Status
Not open for further replies.

keyanf

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2010
101
0
18,680
0
Yeah, the rates start out low, but it quickly changes into something much higher. Read the contract before you sign it!

Wait...
 

fellskrazykayaker

Distinguished
Sep 2, 2010
109
0
18,690
3
I've been pretty disappointed that Intel doesn't have better low powered CPUs in the mobile sector. It's been good to see ARM chips give Intel some much needed motivation.

I've been pretty pleased with how ARM is doing in the mobile sector. It's forcing Microsoft and other app developers to properly write code for ARM starting from the ground up rather than trying to retrofit existing x86 code onto Intel's low power offerings (which have been pretty poor so far).
 
Oh, I think Intel will do well enough, unless their performance in the Smartphone market ends up sucking. Advanced purchasers will think "Hey, my Intel-based PC is smoking fast, why not an Intel-based smartphone?" and will go to it, unless / until reviews show that Intel is resting on its PC laurels and doesn't have the same performance in the smartphone segment.
 

DjEaZy

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2008
1,161
0
19,280
0
Intel is Underestimating ARM... while nVidia [tegra] and AMD [OpenCL] is cooperating... and... because intel haz no good GPU... ...
 
since amd hasn't been able to provide much (if any) competition for intel in the cpu field lately, so why not intel vs arm? anyone who forces intel to compete and drop prices is welcome as long as users win. :)
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
2,492
0
19,960
95
Intel is a company that is not to be underestimated, nor "prodded" by short term trends.

If they don't move hardcore on it, then short sell it.

Think about it, do smartphones really have a bright future now? I think the market has been tapped and you can't really do much more to them except merge them into "PsP" and call it good.... Get the gaming market into the smartphone market and not much else.... you just can't do much more with these things, and human nature is already running its course.
 

zanny

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2008
214
0
18,680
0
Its power intensive to decode variable length instructions. When the instruction set is simple, its easy to interpret them. There is power overhead in x86 that has given ARM the edge.
 

GreaseMonkey_62

Distinguished
Jul 3, 2009
521
0
18,980
0
Unlesss Intel uses an ARM based architecture, they probably won't get anywhere. If they're phone processors are still x86 based, that means the current phone operating systems won't work unless they are redesigned, which may or may not happen. I wouldn't mind seeing an AMD based fusion type ARM processor. That would be cool.
 
I agree, GreaseMonkey, as long as it doesn't suck down too much power. The batteries in smartphones are considerably smaller than the ones in tablets, which are pretty small as it is.
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,004
0
20,860
31
[citation][nom]GreaseMonkey_62[/nom]Unlesss Intel uses an ARM based architecture, they probably won't get anywhere. If they're phone processors are still x86 based, that means the current phone operating systems won't work unless they are redesigned, which may or may not happen. I wouldn't mind seeing an AMD based fusion type ARM processor. That would be cool.[/citation]

Windows 8 will work. Linux will work. And I want a full-blast OS on my phone, too, so I won't mind if it's x86. But they'll have to deal with the power consumption.
 

LuckyDucky7

Distinguished
May 5, 2010
303
0
18,780
0
I'm not sure why nobody's noticed this:

You know when you go to do something on a tablet, and you're playing catch-up while the screen decides how to tilt, then does it in a very jerky fashion?

Or how about when the screen decides to tilt all by itself- locking up the tablet for at least 5 seconds while it tips to the side, and then tips back?

Or how about the fact that ads slow mobile browsers to a crawl? (Granted this happens on x86 also but not as dramatically.)

That's because the ARM processor inside your device isn't fast enough to keep up with a slow pace of use on a device.

So even if it uses 1W at 100% load, it really needs to be faster to get something that people want to use- people who see the device respond instantly will be partial to it. To make it faster, you need to have a higher-powered CPU.

Now, the lowest-end CPU, which actually is the Z-01 from AMD (Intel doesn't have any good parts right now- their Atom sucks compared to the C-60 and E-450 mainly because their integrated graphics are awful).
It runs at 6W idle. It's a 40 nm part, runs at 1 GHz, and is a dual-core part. It's basically a lower-clocked E-350/C-50.

Now, Windows 7 is too heavy for this application. But Linux isn't- especially if you trim it down to the basics. So the machine will swap orientations and launch applications faster.

So if you could compile Android for x86, or introduce a compatibility layer (though for the developers it shouldn't be too hard) for ARM, it would be a good-sized gain.

Because if your tablet loads things instantly, if it swaps orientations instantly (shoudn't be hard with 80 graphics cores), people WILL buy it. The iPad 2 will look like a dinosaur.


The only issue is battery life. We don't seem to have any good batteries (which the chemistry department really needs to work on). So for extended use of a device it must be charged or the battery changed out for a fresh one.



Otherwise- I don't think Intel will enter the phone and tablet CPU market until either a.) ARM has a design that's actually fast or b.) Intel comes up with a design that can do x86 at faster-than-ARM speeds.
 

timeofdoom

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2011
1
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]since amd hasn't been able to provide much (if any) competition for intel in the cpu field lately, so why not intel vs arm? anyone who forces intel to compete and drop prices is welcome as long as users win.[/citation]

While i agree that competition IS a good thing for us users... I have to disagree with the first part of your statement. APU's are gobbling up the market from Intel, ( at least they are in my country - DK, btw.) so i'd say AMD is pretty competitive ATM.
Right, they didn't do a good job at BD. SB ate it completely. But that is only the ever-so-shrinking desktop market.
For laptops, which are on the rise, AMD's APU's are much more attractive, since they are so cheap - adn they get the job done.

Sure, their CPU power is weaker than the SB - by a mile - but buying a laptop with a weaker CPU, but a decent/good GPU versus buying the SB with a strong CPU, but a crap GPU...The choice should be quite easy to make.

So - right, don't start the: "But you can buy the SB paired with another GPU in a laptop"...That's not really attractive for the average joe, because of the even higher price.

If you are gaming on a laptop, (NOTE: YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG! :p ) then sure, go ahead.

But that is such a small niché.

No, AMD have done a good job by exploiting Intels weakness right there - and as a little bonus, they also hit nVidia at the same time.

Cheap APU's, which can multitask and play HD-content and smaller games for the average joe.
 

Jeteroll

Distinguished
Sep 11, 2010
156
0
18,680
0
Is this talking about ARM possibly trying to compete in the desktop/laptop scene? also how do you guys think this affects AMD?
 

pug_s

Distinguished
Mar 26, 2003
363
9
18,815
21
The Nvidia Kal-El and the recently announced ARM Cortex A7/A15 big/little strategy is going propel ARM to be competitive against Intel in the next year or 2. Not to mention that ARM enabled windows 8 will compete with Intel also.
 

RipperjackAU

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2006
260
0
18,790
1
[citation]If you are gaming on a laptop, (NOTE: YOU ARE DOING IT WRONG!) then sure, go ahead.[/citation]

Funny thing you said that, because RAGE runs better on my nVidia equiped laptop, then it does with my ATi/AMD CrossFire gaming rig!

 

burnley14

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
682
0
18,990
3
Intel believes that achieving higher performance will be more difficult for ARM vendors than lower power consumption for Intel.
I think he nailed it right there. And Intel's 22nm shrink with tri-gate transistors agrees.
 

Cazalan

Distinguished
Sep 4, 2011
2,672
0
20,810
23
Clearly Intel is taking ARM seriously. They've already started volume production of 22nm Tri-Gate designs. When that technology is perfected and applied to Atom they will have significant power savings. While TSMC/GF are struggling with 32/28nm.

ARM has a low power advantage now because their processors can't do a fraction of what a Sandy Bridge can. ARM is scaling up with A15 and Intel is scaling down. Performance/capability will cross as some point yet Intel will keep a 2+ year technology advantage in FAB technology.

The problem ARM developers have is the tremendous competition. Samsung, Apple, Nvidia, TI, Qualcom and more. All of these competing against each other with razor thin margins on the processors themselves.
 

MxM

Distinguished
May 23, 2005
464
0
18,790
1
[citation][nom]LuckyDucky7[/nom]I'm not sure why nobody's noticed this:You know when you go to do something on a tablet, and you're playing catch-up while the screen decides how to tilt, then does it in a very jerky fashion? Or how about when the screen decides to tilt all by itself- locking up the tablet for at least 5 seconds while it tips to the side, and then tips back?Or how about the fact that ads slow mobile browsers to a crawl? (Granted this happens on x86 also but not as dramatically.)That's because the ARM processor inside your device isn't fast enough to keep up with a slow pace of use on a device....[/citation]

No, that's likely because you are using android, seriously. iPad does not have those issues.
 
I really doubt they underestimate them at all. I have no doubt if they decided to focus on that market theyy would most certainly be able to take it over but they are not. They could easily throw a few billion at specfic RND and there you have it. easy as pie.
 

Tomtompiper

Distinguished
Jan 20, 2010
382
0
18,780
0
Talking about the competition for two years? Yeah, where? Some of us saw this coming and said so, we were laughed at, but now it is too late, ARM and PowerVR have the market sewn up and Intel and AMD are too late to the game. For low power there is only one way to go, and that is RISC and Tiled Graphics, Nvidia have dumped X86 and picked a winner. In the land of the blind the one eyed man is King.
 

jdwii

Splendid
Funny thing you said that, because RAGE runs better on my nVidia equiped laptop, then it does with my ATi/AMD CrossFire gaming rig!
Yeah 1 game out of a million. I sall a I3+240 from nvidia with a 6 Cell battery only game for about 45Min on average vs the APU 3800 game for 1 hour and a half. Also the APU last longer on normal tasks such as WEB and videos. And that's on a BIGGER DIE!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS