Question Anyone using ARM CPUs/SOCs?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Dec 19, 2014
43
1
71
#76
Non trivial ARM64 software needs to become available. Adobe is going some way towards ARM migration with full featured Photoshop on iOS and Premiere Rush, but Autodesk have no significant ARM software at all apart from Sketchbook. And thats only DCC software, there is very little high end games being ported to ARM, mainly due to space restrictions in mobile platforms with the slow rollout of 256 GB+ solutions. PS3/XB360 era games have long since been attainable on ARM SOCs but very few of them have been ported due to those space restrictions.

As for Linux and Android apps on Chromebooks, Google shot themselves in the foot there. Mainline Linux software is predominantly x86 and Android apps are predominantly ARM, meaning with Chrome you either get great Linux support with an x86 CPU, or great Android support with an ARM SOC. I'm still confused why so few Chromebooks have ARM SOCs when their performance is often favourably compared to Intel based counterparts.
 
Dec 19, 2014
43
1
71
#77
It might also be worth noting that SHIELD TV failed as an independent games console due to lack of interest porting games to ARM, and even cash flush nVidia balked at doing continuous ports themselves, as evidenced by the promised Crysis 3 port that never materialised. Even now, Half Life 2 remains a SHIELD exclusive after years.
With any luck, the new EPIC store may alter the status quo in games development for Android.
 

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,388
153
126
#78
And Windows is running Windows apps - who would have guessed that. Its just that x64 Windows running x86 and x64 Windows apps and ARM Windows is running ARM32, ARM64 and x86 Windows apps. Thats all to it. There is no inherent restriction whatsoever - contrary to Windows RT, which was running only ARM32 UWP.

In you argument you fail to realize, that most user only use a fraction of the available apps. As they become available under native AArch64 execution or running reasonable under emulation Windows ARM devices certainly are an option. Apps i am using 90% of the time are already native AArch64 - some of them i just compiled. You have to realize that re-compilation is an easy task for those who are familiar with it - it is not more complicated than under Linux.

If your betting that x64 CPUs will eventually achieve the efficiency - and thus the performance under certain power budget - of ARM CPUs you are up for a big disappointment. Either the Windows ecosystem can adapt to new architectures or its deemed to vanish. This holds in particular now, since alternative architectures do not have a technology disadvantage compared to Intel anymore. Intel/AMD had it much too easy to get away with its crappy x64 ISA in the past.
Windows cant adapt, UWP failed multiples times already, this is why there is x86 emulation in the first place, and it will be x64 as well.

This is like the 678th thread ive participated about how ARM is much better than x86 and x86 is doomed in the past 10 years, it is always "next year you will see", the only thing im saying here is if ARM wants to take on Windows, they to be competitive with X86 cpus thats it, once that happens you will realise as a horde of ARM notebooks is hard to ignore. Right now they are slower, the devices with them cost a lot, they lack x64 support and the mayor advantage is a GPU i cant even use as games are x64 now. Simple, dont try to tell me or anyone else what apps i should be using, before buying a Windows 10 S ARM or a Windows 10 ARM with x86 support i would rather get a Chromebook. You just cant beat Android + Linux ecosystem with the crappy UWP.
 
Apr 27, 2000
10,781
528
126
#79
As for Linux and Android apps on Chromebooks, Google shot themselves in the foot there. Mainline Linux software is predominantly x86 and Android apps are predominantly ARM, meaning with Chrome you either get great Linux support with an x86 CPU, or great Android support with an ARM SOC. I'm still confused why so few Chromebooks have ARM SOCs when their performance is often favourably compared to Intel based counterparts.
I don't see that as being a big disadvantage. As Chromebooks proliferate, you'll get more development targeting ChromeOS specifically, based on which hardware becomes dominant in the platform. Right now it's cheap x86 chips dominating the space. That could easily change.
 

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,388
153
126
#80
I don't see that as being a big disadvantage. As Chromebooks proliferate, you'll get more development targeting ChromeOS specifically, based on which hardware becomes dominant in the platform. Right now it's cheap x86 chips dominating the space. That could easily change.
Software matters a lot more than the platform it is running on. Google move of allowing android apps is brillant. This is why i would not use a Windows 10 S regardless of the platform.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
6,294
241
96
#81
Software matters a lot more than the platform it is running on. Google move of allowing android apps is brillant. This is why i would not use a Windows 10 S regardless of the platform.
Yeah many many platforms failed due to lack of software or said software was hard to find. Remember WinNT was on MIPS and PowerPC workstations and were DOA due to lack of applications.
 
Apr 27, 2000
10,781
528
126
#82
Software matters a lot more than the platform it is running on. Google move of allowing android apps is brillant. This is why i would not use a Windows 10 S regardless of the platform.
Point being, ChromeOS is an either/or proposition. If you want one for cheap Linux you get an x86 one, if you want it for cheap Android-on-something-better-than-a-tablet then you get an ARM one. Demand from the consumer will define which hardware variations become dominant in the ChromeOS ecosystem.
 

Thala

Senior member
Nov 12, 2014
617
14
116
#83
This is like the 678th thread ive participated about how ARM is much better than x86 and x86 is doomed in the past 10 years, it is always "next year you will see"
I have no influence on what strange messages you are trying to believe -wherever you heard them the 678th time the past 10 years. How about just sticking to my argument when replying to my posts?

Right now they are slower, the devices with them cost a lot, they lack x64 support and the mayor advantage is a GPU i cant even use as games are x64 now.
Either you are blind or just uninformed. Evidence shows, that ARM devices are faster than x64 counterparts under the same power budget - that is the very definition of higher power efficiency. Of course you already showed your ignorance early in this thread by using benchmarks, where the ARM devices ran x86 code under emulation - and trying to sell this as prove of your statements. Meanwhile we have Cortex A76 devices on the marked and ARM is going to release Cortex A77 in 1H2019 - not to mention Apple A12.
 
Last edited:
Dec 19, 2014
43
1
71
#85
Thala, bear in mind SoC implementation of any new high end ARM core lags at least 5-6 months behind its announcement, which is has been May the past 2 years, with the earliest implementation being Huawei/HiSilicon Kirin in october or november, next earliest being Snapdragon in late Q1 to early Q2 the following year.

Having said this, I do wonder if any non-Server implementations of Ares, Zeus and Poseidon may make it into flagship devices. I've still little idea of what they will bring, though A65-AE would seem to suggest SMT is forthcoming at the least, and possibly SVE or a new high end client side SIMD instruction set. The old research paper detailing ARGON came to mind when the new HELIUM SIMD launched with ARMv8.1-M, at this point NEON seems long in the tooth and SVE seems to be aimed at HPC wins more than anything else.
 

Shivansps

Platinum Member
Sep 11, 2013
2,388
153
126
#86
Either you are blind or just uninformed. Evidence shows, that ARM devices are faster than x64 counterparts under the same power budget - that is the very definition of higher power efficiency. Of course you already showed your ignorance early in this thread by using benchmarks, where the ARM devices ran x86 code under emulation - and trying to sell this as prove of your statements. Meanwhile we have Cortex A76 devices on the marked and ARM is going to release Cortex A77 in 1H2019 - not to mention Apple A12.
Ok i see you refuse to understand why Windows is Windows. If you dont understand why someone uses Windows instead of Linux, MAC, or Android thats no my problem.

Im going to ask you a simple question then. Why ARM presence in desktop and notebooks is nearly non-existant? There is always market for a power efficient SoC. AMD sold AM1 cpus and the only thing they were good for is power efficiency. OK by AMD own words they were a failure, but they existed and archived far more than ARM did so far.
 
Last edited:


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS