ARM: Intel a 'serious competitor', we're still better

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Underestimating Intel is one of the worst things ARM can do. It'll probably come back to haunt them in the future.

 

[senseamp]

Intel is the one that has been underestimating ARM. And it is coming back to haunt them, now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology

In low-end disruption, the disruptor is focused initially on serving the least profitable customer, who is happy with a good enough product. This type of customer is not willing to pay premium for enhancements in product functionality. Once the disruptor has gained foot hold in this customer segment, it seeks to improve its profit margin. To get higher profit margins, the disruptor needs to enter the segment where the customer is willing to pay a little more for higher quality. To ensure this quality in its product, the disruptor needs to innovate. The incumbent will not do much to retain its share in a not so profitable segment, and will move up-market and focus on its more attractive customers. After a number of such encounters, the incumbent is squeezed into smaller markets than it was previously serving. And then finally the disruptive technology meets the demands of the most profitable segment and drives the established company out of the market.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Intel is the one that has been underestimating ARM. And it is coming back to haunt them, now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology

Yeah... no. Intel has already shown that x86 can be brought to mobile devices with low power consumption/heat. I've yet to see any ARM microprocessor or SoC get anywhere near the same performance a modern x86 microprocessor like even a Core i3 can get.

Remember AMD and Intel; the Pentium and the Athlon 64 and what came afterwards? Again, NEVER underestimate Intel. They perform the best when under pressure and have some of the best CPU engineers on the planet. They also have tons of liquid assets.

I will say, however, that AMD is currently on top when it comes to GPU engineering. :whiste:

 

[dagamer34]

Yeah... no. Intel has already shown that x86 can be brought to mobile devices with low power consumption/heat. I've yet to see any ARM microprocessor or SoC get anywhere near the same performance a modern x86 microprocessor like even a Core i3 can get.

Remember AMD and Intel; the Pentium and the Athlon 64 and what came afterwards? Again, NEVER underestimate Intel. They perform the best when under pressure and have some of the best CPU engineers on the planet. They also have tons of liquid assets.

I will say, however, that AMD is currently on top when it comes to GPU engineering. :whiste:

I agree that Intel is the performance king, however performance isn't the key in tablets, it's battery life. Few ask for more power in their tablets, but they want them to last longer. When you're doing simple tasks like e-mail or browsing the web, you don't need a quad core CPU. This is Intel's weakness and they've been asleep at the wheel for too long.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I agree that Intel is the performance king, however performance isn't the key in tablets, it's battery life. Few ask for more power in their tablets, but they want them to last longer. When you're doing simple tasks like e-mail or browsing the web, you don't need a quad core CPU. This is Intel's weakness and they've been asleep at the wheel for too long.

Which is exactly what they're addressing with Medfield. Performance still definitely matters, however. A lot of people get irritated with a tablet/smartphone if, for example, UI elements aren't responsive or the screen doesn't register touch input. Many people get annoyed when they have two or more things open at once and it gets sluggish. Given performance on these is relatively low to begin with, raising performance definitely makes a difference in user experience.

 

[dagamer34]

Which is exactly what they're addressing with Medfield. Performance still definitely matters, however. A lot of people get irritated with a tablet/smartphone if, for example, UI elements aren't responsive or the screen doesn't register touch input. Many people get annoyed when they have two or more things open at once and it gets sluggish. Given performance on these is relatively low to begin with, raising performance definitely makes a difference in user experience.

I think with today's mobile CPUs, software quality has a much larger impact than hardware performance when you look at app responsiveness. Case in point (and not to start a flame war), you'd be hard pressed to find someone say that Windows Phone is sluggish and slow compared to Android, despite the fact that it's using far outdated hardware. Or for example, the iPhone 4S is considered one of the fastest phones released so far, despite the fact that there are Cortex A9 CPUs clocked 50% faster (800Mhz->1.2 Ghz). Or even with the exact same hardware and operating system, there are plenty of Android phones that have widely varying amounts of performance because of the skins they put on their devices. Software optimizations matters a LOT.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I think with today's mobile CPUs, software quality has a much larger impact than hardware performance when you look at app responsiveness. Case in point (and not to start a flame war), you'd be hard pressed to find someone say that Windows Phone is sluggish and slow compared to Android, despite the fact that it's using far outdated hardware. Or for example, the iPhone 4S is considered one of the fastest phones released so far, despite the fact that there are Cortex A9 CPUs clocked 50% faster (800Mhz->1.2 Ghz). Or even with the exact same hardware and operating system, there are plenty of Android phones that have widely varying amounts of performance because of the skins they put on their devices. Software optimizations matters a LOT.

It does matter a lot, but so does hardware. We need to strike a balance, which is exactly what Apple has done. Windows Phones are meh when it comes to hardware, plus there's the issue of apps (but I won't get too much into that). Android has facilitated very high-end (for a phone) hardware, but since it's for the most part completely open that means manufacturers have put things like 3rd party skins/software on them, most of the time making them more sluggish. When it comes to Android currently, if you're running the stock Google OS it'll be good when it comes to responsiveness and user experience. Ice Cream Sandwich is Google's attempt to make a unified interface that works more like iOS, therefore striking a balance between hardware and software. Unfortunately many manufacturers will install their own stupid versions of the Android interface and won't release updates, making the point moot.

We need new and better hardware to improve things like multi-tasking, running heavier apps, doing 3D gaming, driving higher resolution displays and media content, etc; we need software to take efficient and effective advantage of that hardware.

 

[MrX8503]

I agree that Intel is the performance king, however performance isn't the key in tablets, it's battery life. Few ask for more power in their tablets, but they want them to last longer. When you're doing simple tasks like e-mail or browsing the web, you don't need a quad core CPU. This is Intel's weakness and they've been asleep at the wheel for too long.

Medfield is a single core SOC. Its faster and more efficient than an ARM dual core.

 

[quest55720]

Yeah... no. Intel has already shown that x86 can be brought to mobile devices with low power consumption/heat. I've yet to see any ARM microprocessor or SoC get anywhere near the same performance a modern x86 microprocessor like even a Core i3 can get.

Remember AMD and Intel; the Pentium and the Athlon 64 and what came afterwards? Again, NEVER underestimate Intel. They perform the best when under pressure and have some of the best CPU engineers on the planet. They also have tons of liquid assets.

I will say, however, that AMD is currently on top when it comes to GPU engineering. :whiste:

I would say AMD is on top of intel when it comes to lower power CPU also. It is a shame AMD does not have a great fab like intel. Imagine a bobcat with intels fab it would be the pefect 86 tablet CPU. It just sucks that the glofo is such a disaster I was really hoping to get a quad core bobcat tablet this fall with W8 86.

 

[senseamp]

Medfield is a single core SOC. Its faster and more efficient than an ARM dual core.

Previous generation ARM cores on previous generation TSMC process. Comparing next generation engineering samples with current generation actual products that you can buy in a store now is a bit silly. OMAP 4460 had engineering samples a year ago. So relative to where Intel Medfield is now, it's a year older product. Medfield performance is good enough for it to not get laughed out of the room, that's about it.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I would say AMD is on top of intel when it comes to lower power CPU also. It is a shame AMD does not have a great fab like intel. Imagine a bobcat with intels fab it would be the pefect 86 tablet CPU. It just sucks that the glofo is such a disaster I was really hoping to get a quad core bobcat tablet this fall with W8 86.

AMD is on top there because Intel wants differentiation and to not cannibalize their own higher margin ultrabook laptop sales. Just imagine if Intel suddenly made a Celeron or Pentium Dual-Core with a 17W TDP and allowed it to go into a similar chassis. Most people using an ultrabook don't need very high performance, which means Intel would cannibalize their own sales. It would also be a devastating blow to AMD, given Bobcat has been the most successful product they had last year. In other words, it could have anti-trust implications in the future.

Since Intel doesn't want to compromise its own high-margin sales, AMD is free to step up and offer a lower-cost alternative. Whether AMD or Intel win this particular war will come down to availability and price, and to a smaller degree performance. If the 17W Trinity APU can bring comparable CPU and GPU performance to the current 35W Llano APU, then performance won't be much of an issue for the average consumer. Given how much the laptop Llano APUs consume, heat and battery life shouldn't be an issue either. Again, it all comes down to availability and price.

The only Atom Intel intends to pay a lot of attention to is Medfield.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Previous generation ARM cores on previous generation TSMC process. Comparing next generation engineering samples with current generation actual products that you can buy in a store now is a bit silly. OMAP 4460 had engineering samples a year ago. So relative to where Intel Medfield is now, it's a year older product. Medfield performance is good enough for it to not get laughed out of the room, that's about it.

I guess that means Tegra 3 performance is "good enough for it to not get laughed out of the room", right? After all, it's either comparable or a bit faster when it comes to performance than Medfield.

Also, this is the first-ever attempt to get x86 into a mobile device, and it seems to have been a successful proof-of-concept. How many years has ARM been on mobile devices again?

 

[senseamp]

What Medifield device can I buy right now? Oh that's right, there isn't one. It's just an engineering sample at this point. So it should be compared to other engineering samples. Here is a 28nm ARM A15 engineering sample also announced at CES:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/12/ti-omap-5-exclusive-demo-laptops-ultrabooks-ces-2012-video/

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

What Medifield device can I buy right now? Oh that's right, there isn't one. It's just an engineering sample at this point. So it should be compared to other engineering samples. Here is a 28nm ARM A15 engineering sample also announced at CES:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/12/ti-omap-5-exclusive-demo-laptops-ultrabooks-ces-2012-video/

And what Tegra 3 device can I buy right now? Oh, that's right, only one tablet. Stop hating on Intel; they already proved an x86 architecture SoC can run on a smartphone (be it an ES or not) with no issues. They did what many thought was impossible. Now, where's the ARM CPU or SoC that can at least match a Core i3 in performance?

 

[senseamp]

Who thought it was impossible? Pretty much anyone who understands Moore's law knew it was inevitable that eventually Intel would be able make a "good enough" x86 phone chip. Every process shrink you get more performance for less power from process alone, so it was always only a matter of time before Intel could fit an x86 CPU into a phone power budget. But that doesn't mean that ARM is wrong in saying that Intel is not going to be "the leaders in power efficiency." Just because it's "good enough" for phones doesn't mean it's the most efficient architecture.

 

[zsdersw]

"Power efficiency" is performance per watt (or, in this case, performance per mW). Medfield already appears to have greater performance at the same power usage of ARM's existing CPUs, and when A15 comes Intel will have the 22nm version to bring to the party.

At the end of the day, I don't think ARM is right to say Intel will never be the leader in power efficiency. Never is an awfully long time.

The SoC market for smartphones/tablets is too young to make credible "never" statements.

 

[alent1234]

Who thought it was impossible? Pretty much anyone who understands Moore's law knew it was inevitable that eventually Intel would be able make a "good enough" x86 phone chip. Every process shrink you get more performance for less power from process alone, so it was always only a matter of time before Intel could fit an x86 CPU into a phone power budget. But that doesn't mean that ARM is wrong in saying that Intel is not going to be "the leaders in power efficiency." Just because it's "good enough" for phones doesn't mean it's the most efficient architecture.

x86 is easy to fit into a SoC. most of the circuitry is cache and quicksync for faster video encoding. not this mythical x86 compatibility that is supposed to be some big problem

intel's problem is that SoC's sell for less $$$ and have less profit per CPU which is why they have always been bastard step children in the product line up

 

[alent1234]

And what Tegra 3 device can I buy right now? Oh, that's right, only one tablet. Stop hating on Intel; they already proved an x86 architecture SoC can run on a smartphone (be it an ES or not) with no issues. They did what many thought was impossible. Now, where's the ARM CPU or SoC that can at least match a Core i3 in performance?

too bad for Intel i3 is overkill for a large percentage of the computing user base

 

[MrX8503]

Previous generation ARM cores on previous generation TSMC process. Comparing next generation engineering samples with current generation actual products that you can buy in a store now is a bit silly. OMAP 4460 had engineering samples a year ago. So relative to where Intel Medfield is now, it's a year older product. Medfield performance is good enough for it to not get laughed out of the room, that's about it.

What's your point? Technology moves forward.

It doesn't matter if its current or next gen, the point is that Intel is showing something that is in striking distance of ARM. Intel has laid down the groundwork to be competitive with ARM. No one thought that Conroe (a sample) could take over AMD and we all know how that turned out.

Once Intel releases a competitive chip to get moving, they'll have the potential to take over ARM.

 

[alent1234]

it's only competitive if intel prices it lower than similar ARM CPU's making it cheaper to use in a product

 

[Arachnotronic]

Tick-tock -- that's how Intel's going to crush ARM. Intel is very, very good at refining, tweaking, and trying again and again.

When Intel moved to a tick-tock model and got their heads out of the MHz race and into the performance/watt race, AMD was done for.

Do people really think tiny little ARM Holdings is really going to stop Intel when they've got cash, fabs, and the best CPU architects, circuit designers, and fab engineers in the world? Then go buy ARM stock.

Anyway, this speculation is pretty moot unless you're a shareholder of any of these companies. I honestly don't care if Intel or ARM rules the world for any other reason besides that I just want my money on the right one.

 

[senseamp]

ARM is going to keep outgrowing Intel, but it's already priced into the stock. ARMH is trading at 73 times earnings like a growth stock, while INTC is trading at 11 times, like a stagnant company.

 

[zsdersw]

ARM is going to keep outgrowing Intel, but it's already priced into the stock. ARMH is trading at 73 times earnings like a growth stock, while INTC is trading at 11 times, like a stagnant company.

Assumption is the mother of all f***-ups.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Tick-tock -- that's how Intel's going to crush ARM. Intel is very, very good at refining, tweaking, and trying again and again.

You mean like the Itanium? Nope that was a flop despite revisions.

You must mean like the Intel GPU division then? Nope, that was another flop that preformed so poorly despite revisions that the only reason Intel is even IN the low-power game is by giving into every demand PowerVR has had.

Intel has shown a great ability at exactly one thing- making fast x86 CPUs. Making power-efficient x86 CPUs is closer to that than making GPUs, but lets not pretend Intel is the King Midas of the tech world.

Do people really think tiny little ARM Holdings is really going to stop Intel when they've got cash, fabs, and the best CPU architects, circuit designers, and fab engineers in the world? Then go buy ARM stock.

It is not ARM vs Intel. It is Intel vs TI, Samsung, Qualcomm, and Nvidia.

The reason ARM wins, and I think it will, is because these makers combined have a lot more mobile experience than Intel.

 

[MrX8503]

You mean like the Itanium? Nope that was a flop despite revisions.

I think he means the tick tock cadence starting with Conroe all the way up to Ivy Bridge.

ARM is going to keep outgrowing Intel, but it's already priced into the stock. ARMH is trading at 73 times earnings like a growth stock, while INTC is trading at 11 times, like a stagnant company.

Probably due to the fact that the smartphone industry still has a lot of room to grow, whereas the desktop pc industry has been stagnant for a while. ARM is a lot smaller than Intel.