NVIDIA reveals Fermi's successor: Kepler at 28nm in 2011, Maxwell in 2013

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,361
136
First of all, Llanos CPU performance will be close to Phenom II X4.

Secondly, Llanos GPU performance will be close to HD5570 and not 5670.

Thirdly, for a high end gaming machine is better to go with Sandybridge or Bulldozer in order to keep from having a CPU bottleneck.
 

Martimus

Diamond Member
Apr 24, 2007
4,488
153
106
I just read the last two pages here, expecting new news on Kepler or Maxwell. For some reason I didn't see a single thing written about Kepler or Maxwell at all.

If you want to talk about something completely different, it would probably be better to just let this thread die and talk about your topic in the appropriate thread so that you don't confuse us slow minded individuals that expect to read a thread about the topic the title implies it is about.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Ill get this back on track. What do people think about Microsofts announcement Windows 8 will run on ARM and project denver's first iteration rumored to be Maxwell? I think there is a real possibility Nvidia could back door AMD and Intel and ship PC's based on their own platform running ARM based Windows 8. Especially laptops.
 

eric.kjellen

Member
Oct 4, 2010
30
0
0
Ill get this back on track. What do people think about Microsofts announcement Windows 8 will run on ARM and project denver's first iteration rumored to be Maxwell? I think there is a real possibility Nvidia could back door AMD and Intel and ship PC's based on their own platform running ARM based Windows 8. Especially laptops.
Who would want Windows running on ARM?
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
59
91
Ill get this back on track. What do people think about Microsofts announcement Windows 8 will run on ARM and project denver's first iteration rumored to be Maxwell? I think there is a real possibility Nvidia could back door AMD and Intel and ship PC's based on their own platform running ARM based Windows 8. Especially laptops.

Windows 8 may run on ARM, and Maxwell may have ARM inside and be able to boot/run Windows 8, but I'm curious what applications the end-user would actually be using? Web browser and Java-apps?

Windows has supported a variety of architectures in the past and it hasn't helped a single architecture other than x86. I understand the hype over ARM and Windows 8, it's sexy and cool to talk about the potential of something new (when has that never been the case) but I don't see how the hype this time around is any different than the hype in the past. What is different this time?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Windows 8 may run on ARM, and Maxwell may have ARM inside and be able to boot/run Windows 8, but I'm curious what applications the end-user would actually be using? Web browser and Java-apps?

Windows has supported a variety of architectures in the past and it hasn't helped a single architecture other than x86. I understand the hype over ARM and Windows 8, it's sexy and cool to talk about the potential of something new (when has that never been the case) but I don't see how the hype this time around is any different than the hype in the past. What is different this time?

ARM is a low cost high volume product compared to PowerPC, Alpha, and Itanium. Those chips were targetted at niche markets that would never threaten x86. I am assuming given the expectation tablets will become more mainstream and useful in the business world. Office and productivity applications will be ported to ARM. I am thinking of a future where a person's cell phone\tablet is their computer. They have a dock that plugs it into monitors, keyboard, and mouse.
 

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
ARM is a low cost high volume product compared to PowerPC, Alpha, and Itanium. Those chips were targetted at niche markets that would never threaten x86. I am assuming given the expectation tablets will become more mainstream and useful in the business world. Office and productivity applications will be ported to ARM. I am thinking of a future where a person's cell phone\tablet is their computer. They have a dock that plugs it into monitors, keyboard, and mouse.

Awesome! I can jump back 15 years in terms of performance and features in my software. :confused:
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Awesome! I can jump back 15 years in terms of performance and features in my software. :confused:

Have to wait and see how Windows 8 performs before making any conclusions. Why do you assume an ARM based windows 8 box would run like a 486?
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
Have to wait and see how Windows 8 performs before making any conclusions. Why do you assume an ARM based windows 8 box would run like a 486?

And I am sure by 2013, Intel will have a dual core (22nm or 16nm) CPU out that run at @ 2Ghz+ that will use less than 15W that will be very cheap. And if that CPU is based on IB core, expect it to be faster than a similar ARM solution for most mainstream Windows apps. Not to mention much more compatability.

2012 & 2013 will be very exciting times for low power gadgets. But ARM will not be the only player in town. ;)
 

WelshBloke

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
31,408
9,300
136
ARM is a low cost high volume product compared to PowerPC, Alpha, and Itanium. Those chips were targetted at niche markets that would never threaten x86. I am assuming given the expectation tablets will become more mainstream and useful in the business world. Office and productivity applications will be ported to ARM. I am thinking of a future where a person's cell phone\tablet is their computer. They have a dock that plugs it into monitors, keyboard, and mouse.

I always thought we'd go the route of having a central powerful hub at home and everything else being some sort of thin client. That way you get all your data to hand where ever you are and the sort of compute power that mobile devices can only dream about. Of course for this to work we need to get our mobile networks in order.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
5,959
2,285
136
Windows 8 may run on ARM, and Maxwell may have ARM inside and be able to boot/run Windows 8, but I'm curious what applications the end-user would actually be using? Web browser and Java-apps?

Windows has supported a variety of architectures in the past and it hasn't helped a single architecture other than x86. I understand the hype over ARM and Windows 8, it's sexy and cool to talk about the potential of something new (when has that never been the case) but I don't see how the hype this time around is any different than the hype in the past. What is different this time?

You'll have to look at it from a user perspective. And by that, I mean Joe Computer. He doesn't know what the heck a x86 CPU is. He doesn't know what an ARM CPU is. It's why Apple has been so successful with their iPhone and the iTunes tie-in. So the question is, what does the average Joe use their computers for? The answer is likely to be web browsing, instant messaging, watching some movies and light gaming.

I actually think Windows 8 on ARM will be successful. First, Windows 8 likely has been developed with mobile and tablet computers in mind as well as desktops. That's probably the largest difference between Win8 and previous iterations of Windows. So it'll likely have a light footprint and have an OS that can be pre-configured for normal desktop/laptop computing as well as a cut down interface for tablet computing similar to how XBox Media Center is a simplified interface. Obviously a change in UI will require software changes to applications in order to support the tablet UI. So Win8 should run fine on ARM devices and Win8 should not be as power hungry.

As for ARM based devices, they're still kind of a niche but they are fast becoming ubiquitous in mobile devices from gaming handhelds like those from Sony and Nintendo to cell phones and tablet computers. ARM is moving from being a niche computer architecture to being a major major platform if it hasn't already. That's the main difference with ARM and other architectures like Itanium. ARM is looking like the de facto mobile CPU used in almost every consumer mobile device while architectures like Itanium were always going to be used in niche markets only.

So the platform availability should be there with ARM CPU's. And ARM CPU's will get more and more powerful, if still only a fraction of the power of x86 CPU's from AMD and Intel. The main thing is ARM CPU's will be powerful enough for the average computer user's needs. This makes MS's announcement of a Win8 that is x86 and ARM compatible a natural one. MS wants users to remain in their Windows and Office monopolies. They would still be able to run their normal Windows applications on the new ARM Win8 (maybe with a software update) and still browse the web, check email, watch a movie, etc. Heck, if you're a business person and you need to interface with Office on a regular basis, an ARM tablet with great battery life and running Windows makes more sense than iOS or Android. Especially looking at how slick Office for Windows Phone 7 looks compared to the 3rd party apps on Android and iOS.

I've been saying for a long while that Tegra was very important to nVidia's growth and future nVidia GPU's look like they'll be incorporating more general computing instructions. There will probably be a further merging of ARM CPU's and nVidia's traditional GPU's in the future. The low end x86 GPU market is going to be effectively dead for nVidia but they still have the high end x86 GPU and they also look like they want to be a force in the ARM CPU business.
 
Last edited:

gorobei

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2007
3,770
1,212
136
I always thought we'd go the route of having a central powerful hub at home and everything else being some sort of thin client. That way you get all your data to hand where ever you are and the sort of compute power that mobile devices can only dream about. Of course for this to work we need to get our mobile networks in order.

i've spent some time thinking about this, and came up with something similar.

For the consumer market only:
imagine an ipod nano(6th gen, the square clip-on thingy) device with non volatile ram(next gen memristor) say 1Tb, lowpower quad core, and wireless connectivity all the size of a silver dollar. This would store all your media(music, pics, movie), contacts, os preferences and settings, your applications, bookmarks, and mailclient/texts. The thing would function as a mini file serve/pda/cell/gps that sits in your pocket, or on your wrist like a watch, or on a chain around your neck.

It would broadcast the display buffer to an interface of your choice: jawbone type hands-free if all you want is phone; small tablet if you like hand helds, notebook size thin client if you want mobile productivity, etc. The interface would be essentially dumb, no permanent storage, it just receives the display buffer and takes user interface inputs(keypress, finger swipe, stylus tap). The interface would be more or less disposable, such that if it is lost or stolen, all the important stuff (your data) would still be in your pocket.

This personal token pc, would sync and backup to your home hub. The home hub would be a personal server that handled update-downloads, media stream, torrents, mail serve, smart home and appliances, and render/encode/cpu farm. If you only need basic services you pop in a cpu with standard low power core + 4 general purpose heavy duty cores. If you work or game, you get a cpu with default low power + 32 cores (or more as required). Everything in your house would be a thin display that went through your pocket token and relayed to your hub. Your workstation would read the apps on the token and run it on the hub cores. The games stored on your token would play on your 50" display and run on the same hub cores. When you went to your friends house, you could play your games on his hub cores.

The idea is to eliminate all the redundant cpus, storage drives, duplicate aps, os. Everything stays in one device and it can connect to other procs when it needs more computing horsepower. No more downloading the same windows update 3 times if you have a 2 desktops and a laptop. No more buying multiple copies of the OS.
 

eric.kjellen

Member
Oct 4, 2010
30
0
0
You'll have to look at it from a user perspective. And by that, I mean Joe Computer. He doesn't know what the heck a x86 CPU is. He doesn't know what an ARM CPU is. It's why Apple has been so successful with their iPhone and the iTunes tie-in. So the question is, what does the average Joe use their computers for? The answer is likely to be web browsing, instant messaging, watching some movies and light gaming.
He will know that x86 processors are many times faster than ARM. I think on forums such as this the amount that people understand about computers is severely underestimated. People aren't so dumb that they don't realize that the CPUs in their phones have different capabilites than the ones in their PCs and are made for different purposes (and owning a processor of one type in one device doesn't preclude owning the other), nor will ARM ever approach the performance of x86 processors (at least not without sacrifing its actual advantage, energy efficiency). That's not even mentioning the huge backlog of x86 applications that would not run on ARM processors, which I believe is a bigger concern than pure performance. There's simply not even one reason to justify the huge task of migrating from x86 to ARM in the PC market but for some reason people are all over the idea.

I honestly have no real idea why Microsoft is planning to release Windows 8 for ARM but I am 100% sure it is no threat to x86. Remember that Windows NT used to be available for Alpha (and even more recently on Itanium) even though x86 was and remained dominant. They are probably simply trying to broaden the hardware base on which Windows will run and maybe it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the perceived rise of smartphones and tablets, which however in no way threatens the PC (in fact both markets are rapidly growing in parallell).

As for Nvidia all that has really been revealed is that they are planning to embed general-purpose ARM processors in their (high-end) GPGPUs beginning with the Maxwell architecture in 2013 and that they would want to release a stand-alone CPU to challenge Intel and AMD seems to be something that some people have taken out of thin air.
 
Last edited:

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
I always thought we'd go the route of having a central powerful hub at home and everything else being some sort of thin client. That way you get all your data to hand where ever you are and the sort of compute power that mobile devices can only dream about. Of course for this to work we need to get our mobile networks in order.

Exactly what is happening now. Just need broadband speeds to get fast. Already companies like onlive are starting it up. It's pretty bad now due to slow network speeds but that will change soon.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
You'll have to look at it from a user perspective. And by that, I mean Joe Computer. He doesn't know what the heck a x86 CPU is. He doesn't know what an ARM CPU is. It's why Apple has been so successful with their iPhone and the iTunes tie-in. So the question is, what does the average Joe use their computers for? The answer is likely to be web browsing, instant messaging, watching some movies and light gaming.

I actually think Windows 8 on ARM will be successful. First, Windows 8 likely has been developed with mobile and tablet computers in mind as well as desktops. That's probably the largest difference between Win8 and previous iterations of Windows. So it'll likely have a light footprint and have an OS that can be pre-configured for normal desktop/laptop computing as well as a cut down interface for tablet computing similar to how XBox Media Center is a simplified interface. Obviously a change in UI will require software changes to applications in order to support the tablet UI. So Win8 should run fine on ARM devices and Win8 should not be as power hungry.

As for ARM based devices, they're still kind of a niche but they are fast becoming ubiquitous in mobile devices from gaming handhelds like those from Sony and Nintendo to cell phones and tablet computers. ARM is moving from being a niche computer architecture to being a major major platform if it hasn't already. That's the main difference with ARM and other architectures like Itanium. ARM is looking like the de facto mobile CPU used in almost every consumer mobile device while architectures like Itanium were always going to be used in niche markets only.

So the platform availability should be there with ARM CPU's. And ARM CPU's will get more and more powerful, if still only a fraction of the power of x86 CPU's from AMD and Intel. The main thing is ARM CPU's will be powerful enough for the average computer user's needs. This makes MS's announcement of a Win8 that is x86 and ARM compatible a natural one. MS wants users to remain in their Windows and Office monopolies. They would still be able to run their normal Windows applications on the new ARM Win8 (maybe with a software update) and still browse the web, check email, watch a movie, etc. Heck, if you're a business person and you need to interface with Office on a regular basis, an ARM tablet with great battery life and running Windows makes more sense than iOS or Android. Especially looking at how slick Office for Windows Phone 7 looks compared to the 3rd party apps on Android and iOS.

I've been saying for a long while that Tegra was very important to nVidia's growth and future nVidia GPU's look like they'll be incorporating more general computing instructions. There will probably be a further merging of ARM CPU's and nVidia's traditional GPU's in the future. The low end x86 GPU market is going to be effectively dead for nVidia but they still have the high end x86 GPU and they also look like they want to be a force in the ARM CPU business.

Its a great concept and no doubt ARM based devices will be take a huge chunk out of x86. But I don't trust MS with anything anymore. They promise a lot and never deliver.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
i've spent some time thinking about this, and came up with something similar.

For the consumer market only:
imagine an ipod nano(6th gen, the square clip-on thingy) device with non volatile ram(next gen memristor) say 1Tb, lowpower quad core, and wireless connectivity all the size of a silver dollar. This would store all your media(music, pics, movie), contacts, os preferences and settings, your applications, bookmarks, and mailclient/texts. The thing would function as a mini file serve/pda/cell/gps that sits in your pocket, or on your wrist like a watch, or on a chain around your neck.

It would broadcast the display buffer to an interface of your choice: jawbone type hands-free if all you want is phone; small tablet if you like hand helds, notebook size thin client if you want mobile productivity, etc. The interface would be essentially dumb, no permanent storage, it just receives the display buffer and takes user interface inputs(keypress, finger swipe, stylus tap). The interface would be more or less disposable, such that if it is lost or stolen, all the important stuff (your data) would still be in your pocket.

This personal token pc, would sync and backup to your home hub. The home hub would be a personal server that handled update-downloads, media stream, torrents, mail serve, smart home and appliances, and render/encode/cpu farm. If you only need basic services you pop in a cpu with standard low power core + 4 general purpose heavy duty cores. If you work or game, you get a cpu with default low power + 32 cores (or more as required). Everything in your house would be a thin display that went through your pocket token and relayed to your hub. Your workstation would read the apps on the token and run it on the hub cores. The games stored on your token would play on your 50" display and run on the same hub cores. When you went to your friends house, you could play your games on his hub cores.

The idea is to eliminate all the redundant cpus, storage drives, duplicate aps, os. Everything stays in one device and it can connect to other procs when it needs more computing horsepower. No more downloading the same windows update 3 times if you have a 2 desktops and a laptop. No more buying multiple copies of the OS.

This would be absolutely great.
 

Wreckage

Banned
Jul 1, 2005
5,529
0
0
I just read the last two pages here, expecting new news on Kepler or Maxwell. For some reason I didn't see a single thing written about Kepler or Maxwell at all.

If you want to talk about something completely different, it would probably be better to just let this thread die and talk about your topic in the appropriate thread so that you don't confuse us slow minded individuals that expect to read a thread about the topic the title implies it is about.

The latest news I have heard is that NVIDIA is on track to release Kepler by the 4th quarter at 28nm.

The rest of the last 2 pages belongs in a Project Denver thread.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
16,094
8,109
136
I honestly have no real idea why Microsoft is planning to release Windows 8 for ARM but I am 100% sure it is no threat to x86. Remember that Windows NT used to be available for Alpha (and even more recently on Itanium) even though x86 was and remained dominant. They are probably simply trying to broaden the hardware base on which Windows will run and maybe it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the perceived rise of smartphones and tablets, which however in no way threatens the PC (in fact both markets are rapidly growing in parallell).


Like it or not, MS has to compete in the tablet world. The IPAD alone now accounts for 7% of new 'PC' sales. That's a huge rise in a very short amount a time. There is a paradigm shift in progress; and the computing world we have become accustom to over the past couple of decades will not be the same one we will have in the next two decades.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
5,959
2,285
136
He will know that x86 processors are many times faster than ARM. I think on forums such as this the amount that people understand about computers is severely underestimated. People aren't so dumb that they don't realize that the CPUs in their phones have different capabilites than the ones in their PCs and are made for different purposes (and owning a processor of one type in one device doesn't preclude owning the other), nor will ARM ever approach the performance of x86 processors (at least not without sacrifing its actual advantage, energy efficiency). That's not even mentioning the huge backlog of x86 applications that would not run on ARM processors, which I believe is a bigger concern than pure performance. There's simply not even one reason to justify the huge task of migrating from x86 to ARM in the PC market but for some reason people are all over the idea.

I honestly have no real idea why Microsoft is planning to release Windows 8 for ARM but I am 100% sure it is no threat to x86. Remember that Windows NT used to be available for Alpha (and even more recently on Itanium) even though x86 was and remained dominant. They are probably simply trying to broaden the hardware base on which Windows will run and maybe it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the perceived rise of smartphones and tablets, which however in no way threatens the PC (in fact both markets are rapidly growing in parallell).

As for Nvidia all that has really been revealed is that they are planning to embed general-purpose ARM processors in their (high-end) GPGPUs beginning with the Maxwell architecture in 2013 and that they would want to release a stand-alone CPU to challenge Intel and AMD seems to be something that some people have taken out of thin air.

Joe Computer does not care about speed. Joe Computer does very little on a computer that can't be done by today's netbooks. It's why the netbooks have been selling very well. The needs of the average computer user is to browse the web, some office productivity (and we're talking about MS Word and not Excel number crunching), email, and some light gaming. This is well within the power of ARM CPU's today and with much better battery life than anything x86 CPU's can provide today or in the very near future.

It's not that I think people are incapable of realizing that their desktop and laptop CPU's are more powerful than the ones in their phones and tablet devices. It's just that the extra power is wasted considering their needs. Again, because of the light needs of the average user. If you feel otherwise, then list some of the power hungry uses that the average computer user might run into that won't be answered by an ARM processor coupled with a powerful GPU like those made by nVidia. Which is exactly what Tegra is.

And I wouldn't make these "100% sure" statements. ARM has a very real chance of weakening x86's dominance considering the rise of ARM based devices. Granted these devices are still relatively underpowered compared to x86 CPU's today and likely will be for the far foreseeable future. However, as I've listed the likely uses of most computer users, the ARM CPU is powerful enough for the majority of the tasks of the average computer user.

If you need an example of what Microsoft is afraid of, look no further than Motorola's Atrix which runs on Android. Think further and imagine tablet devices running Android (or iOS) on power friendly ARM CPU's that can also dock to a keyboard and other devices much like the Atrix.
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
59
91
The latest news I have heard is that NVIDIA is on track to release Kepler by the 4th quarter at 28nm.

The rest of the last 2 pages belongs in a Project Denver thread.

Speculation on what all might be included in Maxwell is appropriate to include in a thread discussing Maxwell.
 

eric.kjellen

Member
Oct 4, 2010
30
0
0
This has veered hugely off-topic but here it goes.

Like it or not, MS has to compete in the tablet world. The IPAD alone now accounts for 7% of new 'PC' sales. That's a huge rise in a very short amount a time. There is a paradigm shift in progress; and the computing world we have become accustom to over the past couple of decades will not be the same one we will have in the next two decades.
I don't deny that the iPad is a successful product, but you'll be hard pressed to find someone who actually replaced his laptop (with a real keyboard) with one for performing actual tasks. It's a prestige side product for rich people who like gadgets. It is also not the ARM architecure that I am attacking but the ludicrous (and old) idea that people would want to throw out the performance and flexibility of, to some extent, desktops but above all laptops and exchange them for smartphones and tablets, and for traditional computers ARM is simply not competitive and was never made to be.

akugami said:
Joe Computer does not care about speed. Joe Computer does very little on a computer that can't be done by today's netbooks. It's why the netbooks have been selling very well. The needs of the average computer user is to browse the web, some office productivity (and we're talking about MS Word and not Excel number crunching), email, and some light gaming. This is well within the power of ARM CPU's today and with much better battery life than anything x86 CPU's can provide today or in the very near future.

It's not that I think people are incapable of realizing that their desktop and laptop CPU's are more powerful than the ones in their phones and tablet devices. It's just that the extra power is wasted considering their needs. Again, because of the light needs of the average user. If you feel otherwise, then list some of the power hungry uses that the average computer user might run into that won't be answered by an ARM processor coupled with a powerful GPU like those made by nVidia. Which is exactly what Tegra is.

And I wouldn't make these "100% sure" statements. ARM has a very real chance of weakening x86's dominance considering the rise of ARM based devices. Granted these devices are still relatively underpowered compared to x86 CPU's today and likely will be for the far foreseeable future. However, as I've listed the likely uses of most computer users, the ARM CPU is powerful enough for the majority of the tasks of the average computer user.

If you need an example of what Microsoft is afraid of, look no further than Motorola's Atrix which runs on Android. Think further and imagine tablet devices running Android (or iOS) on power friendly ARM CPU's that can also dock to a keyboard and other devices much like the Atrix.
Unless you could make perfect, high-performance x86 to ARM code translation you would have to throw out and remake every driver, every game, every program, every small piece of free software (and even if it could be made I don't see the point because, as I stated, it would completely ruin everything that is good and unique about the ARM platform). I still don't know where the 'Joe Computer' rig is that actually and literally only has an operating system and an office suite installed, to be honest I don't think even one of those exists outside of CES showcases. There's usually WinZip installed that was maybe just downloaded for a one-time use, Messenger and some games for the kids and maybe even pirated Photoshop. People (including me) aren't OK with hunting down non-Wintel equivalents to those applications of which there are literally millions once they are needed and that's really the No. 1 reason why Windows is still dominant. Microsoft might be releasing Windows 8 for ARM but they cannot possibly be expecting to move their entire existing code base, and that of many others, there.

And the $1000 question: Why would users go through what can only be described as migration hell when they can simply buy both an inexpensive x86 laptop, that's fast and compatible with an enormous amount of hardware and software, and an ARM smartphone and/or tablet just like they do now? You have turned the issue on its head, it's really you who have to justify why we should throw out x86 and you would have to do that to people who as you said don't know anything about just how refined ARM is compared to vile and monstrous Wintel x86.

There have always been architectures that people have claimed to be superior to x86 (and they may well have been in some ways) but their displacing x86 as the dominant PC architecture is simply not going to happen.
 
Last edited:

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
16,094
8,109
136
Sorry about going off topic, sometimes I just go with the flow forgetting what thread I'm in.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
5,959
2,285
136
Unless you could make perfect, high-performance x86 to ARM code translation you would have to throw out and remake every driver, every game, every program, every small piece of free software (and even if it could be made I don't see the point because, as I stated, it would completely ruin everything that is good and unique about the ARM platform).

Unless you use virtualization techniques. Strangely enough MS has virtualization software for running Windows. Furthermore, you can create fat binary applications that will run natively in either version of Windows. So it's not going to be as complicated as you make it out to be. It might a totally different direction as I'm not up to date on all the virtualization and techniques to run code across different platforms but it's almost guaranteed to not be as complicated as you make it out to be. The main issue will be having to create a touch friendly interface as well as a "normal" version that is keyboard and mouse centric.

I still don't know where the 'Joe Computer' rig is that actually and literally only has an operating system and an office suite installed, to be honest I don't think even one of those exists outside of CES showcases. There's usually WinZip installed that was maybe just downloaded for a one-time use, Messenger and some games for the kids and maybe even pirated Photoshop. People (including me) aren't OK with hunting down non-Wintel equivalents to those applications of which there are literally millions once they are needed and that's really the No. 1 reason why Windows is still dominant. Microsoft might be releasing Windows 8 for ARM but they cannot possibly be expecting to move their entire existing code base, and that of many others, there.
Wow. Way to take things too literally. I'm presenting a general usage situation and the common tasks that the average computer user will be using his computer for. Of course it's going to contain more than just an office productivity suite and a web browser. That's just common sense. And aside from Photoshop and Winzip, none of the other situations you list are actually that processor intensive. In the case of Photoshop, it's overkill for the average user. There are plenty of lighter weight and less processor intensive image editors that will do what most users need. As for Winzip (or other file compression software), the average computer user doesn't care if it takes another 20 seconds to decompress a file.

And the $1000 question: Why would users go through what can only be described as migration hell when they can simply buy both an inexpensive x86 laptop, that's fast and compatible with an enormous amount of hardware and software, and an ARM smartphone and/or tablet just like they do now? You have turned the issue on its head, it's really you who have to justify why we should throw out x86 and you would have to do that to people who as you said don't know anything about just how refined ARM is compared to vile and monstrous Wintel x86.
This was a discussion about future GPU's from nVidia. There are reports about nVidia incorporating an ARM core in their future GPU's and of course there is the Tegra line of chips from nVidia. I put in why moving towards ARM makes sense for nVidia and I also put in my opinion on why MS is moving towards ARM. How is that turning the issue on it's head. I merely said that with the growing sphere of ARM based devices it makes sense why MS is hedging its bet by making Windows8 for both x86 and ARM.

Where have I said we should throw out x86? Please quote me where I make such allegations. Now you're just making stuff up. What I have said is that ARM has a chance of being an alternative to x86 CPU's. What I have said is that ARM has a great chance to becoming another major player in general (mostly mobile) computing devices.

And why would we pay for a laptop and then buy a tablet or smartphone if a smartphone alone will be sufficiently powerful for most users needs? Wouldn't it be friendlier on the pockets by buying only a smartphone/tablet vs buying a laptop and smartphone/tablet?

There have always been architectures that people have claimed to be superior to x86 (and they may well have been in some ways) but their displacing x86 as the dominant PC architecture is simply not going to happen.
Except I'm not claiming ARM is better than x86 in any area except power efficiency. I am claiming that it's adequately powerful enough for common tasks that most computer users do on their computers. Again, you're making blanket statements about what will or won't happen. I'm not saying ARM displacing x86 is guaranteed or likely but I am saying that it has the best shot to do so. If someone(s) at MS doesn't think that also, they wouldn't be making Windows 8 for both x86 as well as ARM.



ARM CPU's are going to be more powerful (as is x86 CPU's) but due to the power efficient nature of ARM CPU's they're more suited. My argument is that ARM CPU's are sufficiently powerful for what the average computer will use their computers for. That's my opinion. I've stated some common tasks that most use their computers for and quite frankly, it's not that processor intensive. It's you who are refuting my claims but you're not providing cases where an ARM CPU wouldn't be sufficient for the average computer users. You did list a couple of scenarios but again, the app you listed (Photoshop) is overkill for what people need. Not to mention that most people can't afford it. As for things like Winzip, I highly doubt someone is going rage about another 20 seconds to decompress a file. Yes I know the 20 seconds is arbitrary and the actual times depend on the size of the file being decompressed. Furthermore, the use of GPU acceleration for video and possibly file decompression will further decrease CPU bottlenecks.

When talking about the vast library of Windows software, many legacy software will likely require an update anyways. There is precedence for such moves like when Apple moved from 68k based CPU's to PPC's and again from PPC's to x86. If the migration is done smartly and with good planning, end users will not be affected to any large degree though that is extremely difficult. It's almost guaranteed there will still be hiccups and issues. Heck, forget moving from one computing architecture to another, there are issues with legacy code not working properly from one version of Windows to another. Windows is on a whole different scale as far as size compared to MacOS but it's not exactly unprecedented to use virtualization or fat binary code to ease transitions from one computing architecture to another.

The bottom line is that nVidia moving to ARM is making more and more sense. They have a serious chance here to become much larger than they were ever going to be as a tech company who specializes in graphics chips.
 
Last edited: