Samsung Challenges Intel For Chip Leadership

Status
Not open for further replies.

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
This is yet another poorly titled article to get people to read it.

This is no challenge at all. They are in almost completely different markets, and neither is challenged by the success of the other. Does Intel care if Mobil sells a lot of oil and has greater earnings? Why should they care if Samsung sells a lot of memory chips? In some ways, they benefit from it, if they improve performance.

Samsung and Intel are both top shelf makers. I've used their products for many years (as have many), and have to say I'm rarely disappointed. Well, except for Samsung hard disks, which have been unreliable for me (but they are being sold now anyway).
 
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]This is yet another poorly titled article to get people to read it.This is no challenge at all. They are in almost completely different markets, and neither is challenged by the success of the other. Does Intel care if Mobil sells a lot of oil and has greater earnings? Why should they care if Samsung sells a lot of memory chips? In some ways, they benefit from it, if they improve performance. Samsung and Intel are both top shelf makers. I've used their products for many years (as have many), and have to say I'm rarely disappointed. Well, except for Samsung hard disks, which have been unreliable for me (but they are being sold now anyway).[/citation]

well that statement should make AMD fanboi's breathe a sigh of relief because that list Has AMD at number 12
 

danwat1234

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
1,392
0
19,310
9
[citation][nom]titusffx[/nom]lol texas instruments actually has still kept grounds fairly well even though they are known for mostly calculators.[/citation]

Yea, TI calculators runs at 12MHZ or so and a Motorola 68000.
When will make a calculator that can actually graph instantly??

/TI rant and their stupid hold on the the marketplace with overpriced calculators that have 1980s computing power in them.
 

TitusFFX

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2011
300
0
18,810
7
>.> no clue when they will actually upgrade the technology but at least I've yet to see one of them explode into a ball of fire due to poor ventaliation or overheating ^.^
 

ares1214

Splendid
Dec 15, 2009
4,471
1
22,960
90
[citation][nom]TA152H[/nom]This is yet another poorly titled article to get people to read it.This is no challenge at all. They are in almost completely different markets, and neither is challenged by the success of the other. Does Intel care if Mobil sells a lot of oil and has greater earnings? Why should they care if Samsung sells a lot of memory chips? In some ways, they benefit from it, if they improve performance. Samsung and Intel are both top shelf makers. I've used their products for many years (as have many), and have to say I'm rarely disappointed. Well, except for Samsung hard disks, which have been unreliable for me (but they are being sold now anyway).[/citation]

Think again, Samsung makes ARM CPU's, Intel makes x86 CPU's. x86 and ARM are starting to clash, and it will increase more and more, so they are currently working against each other, and that will grow as ARM scales up and x86 scales down.
 

cybrcatter

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2008
146
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]ares1214[/nom]Think again, Samsung makes ARM CPU's, Intel makes x86 CPU's. x86 and ARM are starting to clash, and it will increase more and more, so they are currently working against each other, and that will grow as ARM scales up and x86 scales down.[/citation]
Not to mention that Windows 8 will support ARM CPUs.
 
Who knows? I remember back in the days of the 80286 (6 and 8 MHz - '84)hearing people in the industry wonder how they were ever going to make a CPU chip faster than 25 MHz.

Consider, the whole microprocessor industry evolved from the Intel 4004.

I'm not making any predictions.
 

shompa

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2007
72
0
18,630
0
12 years ago Intel had almost 0% high end workstation. It was Sun SPARC, HPUX, IBM stuff. Stuff that worked 24/7/365. PPC/RISC stuff. Most companies IT strategist wanted an all MS enviromet and ditched the other stuff.

The funny thing is that the world is "switching" back to PPC. Lowend will be owned by ARM(PPC). The next generation of ARM support 64bit and parrallel processing. You can have almost over 24 quod core 2.5ghz ARM with the same 130 watt like one singe quod core XEON.

I hope Microsoft can make a smooth transition to ARM(PPC) just like Apple did from PPC to X86. Apples Rosetta application made PPC code run on X86. Since that was a technology that Apple bought, I hope MS shells out a couple of dollars and have their version of Rosetta that translates X86 to ARM(PPC). if that happens ARM will take over the world.
 

shompa

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2007
72
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]LuckyDucky7[/nom]I wonder what would happen if Samsung were to enter into direct competition by developing an x86 CPU?[/citation]

Intel would not grant them an X86 license. The only reason why X86 exists is beacuse of Windows. Most of the X86 lifespan it has not been the fastest processor. SPARC/IBM has had faster processors.

X86 will be a niche market for people who believe that they need "highend" stuff for gaming.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
[citation][nom]ares1214[/nom]Think again, Samsung makes ARM CPU's, Intel makes x86 CPU's. x86 and ARM are starting to clash, and it will increase more and more, so they are currently working against each other, and that will grow as ARM scales up and x86 scales down.[/citation]

Think yet again. Samsung sales are mostly DRAM, not ARM. They do not make a high-end ARM chip, or sell them in volume. ARM will win, or lose, independently of Samsung. There are many ARM manufacturers.

The lion's share of Intel sales and Samsung sales do not in any way overlap. The cheaper and higher performance memory is, the better for Intel. The higher performance the processors are, and the incentive to upgrade, the better for Samsung.

Where both companies make most of their money is more cooperative than competitive. Besides, no one will match Intel's manufacturing prowess, the only one that is ever close is IBM.
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
1,207
2
19,285
0
[citation][nom]cybrcatter[/nom]Not to mention that Windows 8 will support ARM CPUs.[/citation]

You're not taking into account that an application written for Windows for x86 will not run on Windows for ARM. You'd need some software emulation, which would make the performance abysmal.

Windows doesn't sell processors. The applications that run on Windows sell processors. Since they won't run on ARM effectively, it's not at all clear Windows on ARM will make any difference at all. I don't know many people that don't think Windows sucks, and I don't know anyone who buys Windows because they love Windows (such freaks surely exist, I just have been lucky enough not to meet them). They buy it because of all the apps. Take that away, and how attractive is Windows 8 for ARM on the desktop? Probably not very.

So, its more for emerging markets, but Windows being as bad as it is, will it make much headway where the monopoly situation isn't the salient characteristic of the market? Will the familiarity of it win out against superior designs? I guess time will tell, but Microsoft almost invariably fails when they can't leverage their monopoly position effectively. It doesn't mean the will this time, but it's certainly of some predictive value.
 

TitusFFX

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2011
300
0
18,810
7
Most previous ARM was based on an OS that used 8/16 bit processes like in Windows CE so who knows what will come of a more complex OS using the same type of processors. >.> hopefully they will fix the issue of the backup battery saying it's dying even though it's a brandnew one in it....
 
G

Guest

Guest
The mobile sector is progressing at an alarming rate compared to the desktop market. If anything, Samsung is without a doubt one of the leading chip makers in this realm and portable device popularity is only expected to rise infinitely in the coming years. Whether or not this will cause overlap between Samsung's chip products and Intel's only time will tell. It is obvious though that Intel see's the huge potential of the mobile sector and is rushing to bring a smartphone suitable Atom chip to market but unless it stands out in some significant way, there are many players already in the mobile chip sector who have established themselves as leaders, Samsung being one of the key ones. The desktop as we know it is a gradually dying breed of machine in alot of homes today being replaced by laptops and mobile phone laptop like dock's, similar to what the Motorola Atrix currently offers will soon be staples in the house of the future (by future I mean in the next 5 years).
 

balister

Distinguished
Sep 6, 2006
403
0
18,790
2
[citation][nom]jdmp10[/nom]The mobile sector is progressing at an alarming rate compared to the desktop market. If anything, Samsung is without a doubt one of the leading chip makers in this realm and portable device popularity is only expected to rise infinitely in the coming years. Whether or not this will cause overlap between Samsung's chip products and Intel's only time will tell. It is obvious though that Intel see's the huge potential of the mobile sector and is rushing to bring a smartphone suitable Atom chip to market but unless it stands out in some significant way, there are many players already in the mobile chip sector who have established themselves as leaders, Samsung being one of the key ones. The desktop as we know it is a gradually dying breed of machine in alot of homes today being replaced by laptops and mobile phone laptop like dock's, similar to what the Motorola Atrix currently offers will soon be staples in the house of the future (by future I mean in the next 5 years).[/citation]

That's due to there not being a push for mobile computing until the last few years. Why improve a technology if there's not call for it? Once there is a call for said technology, money flows into the R&D for that technology and it takes off. Consider, we've had mobile phones since the 80s (yes, I'm refering to the bricks with antennas), but it wasn't till the late 90s, early 2000s that there really became a need for them and companies actually started putting stock into making better mobile phones. Now look at the mobile phone, and conversely, mobile computing, sector. It's gone nuts because there's been a demand for better mobile phones, if there hadn't been, we'd still have bricks with antennas.
 

sudeshc

Distinguished
Apr 30, 2009
261
0
18,780
0
in the early 2000/2001 Samsung's products were the worst but they did came back really strong by 2005-6 and now they are threatening Intel, but i have to say there products are really world class in every sense now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY