ARM Profit Craters

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

You buy a fixed SoC from Qualcomm, Samsung, STM etc. You dont customize anything. And even Samsung buys its majority of SoCs from other companies. We got 3 Samsung devices here with ARM chips in them. TV and 2 phones. And none of them contain a Samsung SoC.

Now ask yourself why. And then you know why Apple, Samsung and others would ditch ARM in a heartbeat if there was something better.



So MS simply nerfed their APU to hell because it wasnt related to price?



When your supplier also makes devices and spy on your technology before release. Then it can only go wrong. Apple signed a 3 year contract with TSMC. Meaning Samsung essentially is out for good.

The SoC's are NOT fixed.
Qualcomm/Samsung etc was free to design them to their hearts desire.

MS needed something which WORKS in a console, cheaper, but does not work, is no good to them. If they need semi-customization, then they MUST have it. Otherwise the console would NOT work properly e.g. Customization to copy protect games, etc etc.

When you suppliers also makes devices and spy on your technology before release. Then it can only go wrong. Apple signed a 3 year contract with TSMC. Meaning Samsung essentially is out for good.

How is the above agreeing with what you originally said, that Samsung dumped Apple ?

 

[Arachnotronic]

The SoC's are NOT fixed.
Qualcomm/Samsung etc was free to design them to their hearts desire.

From the phone/tablet vendor perspective, it is fixed. Qualcomm designs its chip and it is built at TSMC and sold to a device vendor. How is this any different from Intel designing a chip, building its own chip, and then selling it to a device vendor?

 

[ShintaiDK]

The SoC's are NOT fixed.
Qualcomm/Samsung etc was free to design them to their hearts desire.

So when Samsung buys SoC from for example Qualcomm or STM. What can they customize?

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

So when Samsung buys SoC from for example Qualcomm or STM. What can they customize?

BUT it already has been customized.

I can print anything on my printer(s) at home. It is FULLY customizable (what I print out).

BUT if I post the printout to you, it is NOT customizable, as it would have been already printed out.

Customization, occurs, BEFORE production, AFTER production, it is fixed.

Intel, usually only supply things AFTER production, and they are usually NOT customizable.

But, Arm, supply licences, which allow anyone, including you or me (after winning a large lottery to pay for the IC manufacture, lol) to customize it BEFORE production.
If we sell our chips, AFTER production, they are no longer customizable. But that is besides the point, they WERE customizable, by us, or anyone else on the planet (within reason).

 

[ShintaiDK]

BUT it already has been customized.

I can print anything on my printer(s) at home. It is FULLY customizable (what I print out).

BUT if I post the printout to you, it is NOT customizable, as it would have been already printed out.

Customization, occurs, BEFORE production, AFTER production, it is fixed.

Intel, usually only supply things AFTER production, and they are usually NOT customizable.

But, Arm, supply licences, which allow anyone, including you or me (after winning a large lottery to pay for the IC manufacture, lol) to customize it BEFORE production.
If we sell our chips, AFTER production, they are no longer customizable. But that is besides the point, they WERE customizable, by us, or anyone else on the planet (within reason).

You make no sense. The product is fixed. Be it Qualcomm, STM, Intel or whoever that supplies it.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

You make no sense. The product is fixed. Be it Qualcomm, STM, Intel or whoever that supplies it.

Who fixes it ?

Is it Arm who fixes it ?

If no, then it IS customizable, by the final chip manufacturer.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Who fixes it ?

Is it Arm who fixes it ?

If no, then it IS customizable, by the final chip manufacturer.

But the customer still cant choose. It makes zero difference if your supplier is named Qualcomm, STM or Intel. You got the exact same options as a customer. And that is to buy whatever fixed product they have.

ARM is completely irrelevant. Else we could start talking about patents too.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

ARM is completely irrelevant. Else we could start talking about patents too.

So the design (Arm) which holds something like 85% of the smaller device markets is completely irrelevant ?

Which business School is it that you went to, exactly ?

 

[ShintaiDK]

So the design (Arm) which holds something like 85% of the smaller device markets is completely irrelevant ?

Which business School is it that you went to, exactly ?

Can you buy an ARM SoC from ARM? The answer is no.

You buy from another company that makes it. And when you buy from one of those companies you dont have any options besides of the shelf components. So from the customers view it doesnt matter who is the supplier. You got the same options with them all, in short none. You pick what they have in the model lists.

I have a sense you only wish to drag this into one direction...

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

From the phone/tablet vendor perspective, it is fixed. Qualcomm designs its chip and it is built at TSMC and sold to a device vendor. How is this any different from Intel designing a chip, building its own chip, and then selling it to a device vendor?

BUT you DON'T have to buy what they are selling.

You can go straight to Arm, modify (customize) it, and get it manufactured, at your favourite chip manufacturing plant (or make it yourself, if you so wish, and can afford it) and then do what you like with your customized chips.

You CAN'T do the above with Intel, they won't give you the cpu design plans, I think.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

Can you buy an ARM SoC from ARM? The answer is no.

You buy from another company that makes it. And when you buy from one of those companies you dont have any options besides of the shelf components. So from the customers view it doesnt matter who is the supplier. You got the same options with them all.

No.

I could buy Arm licences today, customize them, send the plans off to an IC manufacturing plant of my choice, and sell (or whatever I want to do with them) my customized processor chips.

 

[ShintaiDK]

BUT you DON'T have to buy what they are selling.

You can go straight to Arm, modify (customize) it, and get it manufactured, at your favourite chip manufacturing plant (or make it yourself, if you so wish, and can afford it) and then do what you like with your customized chips.

You CAN'T do the above with Intel, they won't give you the cpu design plans, I think.

I think you forget how much IP is elsewhere. Qualcomm for example gets money from about everyone with its modem patents.

 

[Arachnotronic]

BUT you DON'T have to buy what they are selling.

You can go straight to Arm, modify (customize) it, and get it manufactured, at your favourite chip manufacturing plant (or make it yourself, if you so wish, and can afford it) and then do what you like with your customized chips.

You CAN'T do the above with Intel, they won't give you the cpu design plans, I think.

Qualcomm won't give you CPU design plans either...what's your point?

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

I think you forget how much IP is elsewhere. Qualcomm for example gets money from about everyone with its modem patents.

But we are discussing whether Arm chips are customizable or not, compared to Intel.
Yes, there may be other license/patent fees/issues as regards intellectual property of the customized chips, but that is NOT what we were just discussing.

 

[Arachnotronic]

No.

I could buy Arm licences today, customize them, send the plans off to an IC manufacturing plant of my choice, and sell (or whatever I want to do with them) my customized processor chips.

Yes, so, Intel is just another player that sells SoCs. What's your point?

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

Qualcomm won't give you CPU design plans either...what's your point?

Arm gave Qualcomm the CPU plans.

Did/will Intel give Qualcomm the CPU plans ?

Who wants the CPU plans from Qualcomm ?, it's Arm who give/supply the CPU plans (before customization by manufacturers).

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

Yes, so, Intel is just another player that sells SoCs. What's your point?

OEMs ideally want (in some cases) to use their own SoC (customized) designs, such as Apple wanting a customized Arm processor for their Ipad series.

Intel may well sell SoC, but it is NOT customizable by Apple (or whoever wants to customize it).

 

[Arachnotronic]

OEMs ideally want (in some cases) to use their own SoC (customized) designs, such as Apple wanting a customized Arm processor for their Ipad series.

Intel may well sell SoC, but it is NOT customizable by Apple (or whoever wants to customize it).

What OEMs customize their own SoCs and deploy them in any real volume? Apple and maaayyybeee Samsung, but Samsung uses chips from Marvell, Intel, Broadcom, and Qualcomm where it makes sense.

Even Samsung uses Qualcomm's chips that it buys right off the shelf for its highest volume flagship devices.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Arm gave Qualcomm the CPU plans.

Did/will Intel give Qualcomm the CPU plans ?

Who wants the CPU plans from Qualcomm ?, it's Arm who give/supply the CPU plans (before customization by manufacturers).

Jesus...okay, so first off, no. Qualcomm designed its own CPU core as well as SoC that is compatible w/ the ARM instruction set. This is what AMD does with X86...Intel does NOT give AMD CPU plans!

The point is, ARM is necessary only for two reasons:

1. Weaker SoC players such as MediaTek who don't want to/can't justify investing in designing their own CPU cores

2. Software ecosystem. You can't have a million instruction sets around successfully.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

What OEMs customize their own SoCs and deploy them in any real volume? Apple and maaayyybeee Samsung, but Samsung uses chips from Marvell, Intel, Broadcom, and Qualcomm where it makes sense.

Even Samsung uses Qualcomm's chips that it buys right off the shelf for its highest volume flagship devices.

I don't know, the size and extent of the customization market.

What I DO know, is that Arm, give users of their Arm licences, the option to customize, as one of the benefits of Arm chips.

 

[SOFTengCOMPelec]

Jesus...okay, so first off, no. Qualcomm designed its own CPU core as well as SoC that is compatible w/ the ARM instruction set. This is what AMD does with X86...Intel does NOT give AMD CPU plans!

The point is, ARM is necessary only for two reasons:

1. Weaker SoC players such as MediaTek who don't want to/can't justify investing in designing their own CPU cores

2. Software ecosystem. You can't have a million instruction sets around successfully.

Yes, there are a number of factors, which have helped Arm succeed in the market place. But I think there are a lot more than the above two reasons, why.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Until Intel has something that could be considered a better alternative to ARM based offerings from multiple companies I dont quite see intel being any threat at all. Not to mention the complications it would bring on the operating system + software compatibility. How does one take into account the ecosystem thats been established for a very long time? Almost everything is molded around ARM, so whatever intel releases to "take over" the market would have to be compelling in every single category especially price since the market is 500% cut throat on price alone.

With regards to customization, I dont see whats so hard to understand about ARM based SoC having the upper hand here. Companies if wanting to can license the IP, design/modify what ever they see fit and then produce them at their own fabs or companies who fab the ICs for them. With Intel, your stuck with their product cycle and everything built onto the chip is up for Intel to decide.

Ive still yet to see Intel pose any threat outside their home turf. They've failed miserably in entering the consumer graphics market twice given their resources, and seeing somewhat of success in the HPC market which is somewhat arguable given how power hungry their KNC is. They've yet to do anything in the ever growing hand-held/tablet market.

Id say Intel would be alot more successful in the fabbing business than what they are attempting to do (and have been for years now).

 

[Imouto]

My mistake.

It may be appropriate for a mod to lock/delete this thread.

Like about everything you post. Get it already.


There's a sticky, you should have definitely seen it and read it by now. Vacation time.

Administrator Idontcare

 

[Arachnotronic]

Like about everything you post. Get it already.

That's very kind of you. I appreciate the warm fuzzy vibe you're sending my way. Keep the personal attacks coming

 

[StrangerGuy]

Until Intel has something that could be considered a better alternative to ARM based offerings from multiple companies I dont quite see intel being any threat at all. Not to mention the complications it would bring on the operating system + software compatibility. How does one take into account the ecosystem thats been established for a very long time? Almost everything is molded around ARM, so whatever intel releases to "take over" the market would have to be compelling in every single category especially price since the market is 500% cut throat on price alone.

With regards to customization, I dont see whats so hard to understand about ARM based SoC having the upper hand here. Companies if wanting to can license the IP, design/modify what ever they see fit and then produce them at their own fabs or companies who fab the ICs for them. With Intel, your stuck with their product cycle and everything built onto the chip is up for Intel to decide.

Ive still yet to see Intel pose any threat outside their home turf. They've failed miserably in entering the consumer graphics market twice given their resources, and seeing somewhat of success in the HPC market which is somewhat arguable given how power hungry their KNC is. They've yet to do anything in the ever growing hand-held/tablet market.

Id say Intel would be alot more successful in the fabbing business than what they are attempting to do (and have been for years now).

The ISA with regards to Android is a non issue actually, the real showstopper is over at the business side of things where Intel hits a brickwall at every corner and the most consumers simply doesn't care about SoCs. The foundry business is a no-go either, even Apple isn't that stupid to bet their fate on a foundry with conflicting interests.