VMWare CEO: Intel's x86 filled with Junk silicon

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: senseamp
If I get 2 hrs on an x-86 device and 6 hrs on an ARM one

The battery life has almost nothing to do with the processor.
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=12223

The Silverthorne CPU - the beating heart of the Centrino Atom - consumes a maximum of 2.4W at a 1.8GHz clock-speed but still retains the Core 2-derived Intel Merom's instruction set.
.....
The 990g sub-notebook packs in a hyperthreaded Silverthorne 1.6GHz processor that runs off a 533MHz front-side bus - note the two cores in Device Manager. Hooking up to the Poulsbo chipset and outputting video by the GMA 500 IGP, the entire unit consumes around 15W.

CPU only consumes 16% of the power. The other 84% is taken by the monitor, hard drive, ram, and video.

That has almost nothing at all to do with handhelds though. There is no mechanical drive, the screen is much smaller, graphics will be more energy efficient etc.
Sure the CPU will be lower power and slower as well, but it will be combined with a more efficient chipset etc.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: senseamp
If I get 2 hrs on an x-86 device and 6 hrs on an ARM one

The battery life has almost nothing to do with the processor.
http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=12223

The Silverthorne CPU - the beating heart of the Centrino Atom - consumes a maximum of 2.4W at a 1.8GHz clock-speed but still retains the Core 2-derived Intel Merom's instruction set.
.....
The 990g sub-notebook packs in a hyperthreaded Silverthorne 1.6GHz processor that runs off a 533MHz front-side bus - note the two cores in Device Manager. Hooking up to the Poulsbo chipset and outputting video by the GMA 500 IGP, the entire unit consumes around 15W.

CPU only consumes 16% of the power. The other 84% is taken by the monitor, hard drive, ram, and video.

Sure, the whole Wintel hardware/software stack sucks up power. 15W is way too much for what is a mobile internet device with very basic graphics and IOs.
Most of the ARM devices are designed from ground up for mobility, while x-86 devices are designed to run Windows first and foremost, with mobility as secondary goal, hence all the RAM, HD, etc overhead.
It's like comparing Prius to a Camry Hybrid. One is designed from ground up to be energy efficient, the other is a modification of existing design to make it as energy efficient as possible.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: ShawnD1

Originally posted by: Modelworks
For power efficiency the embedded world kills anything x86. I can set this ARM board to only draw current in the pico amps range when idle.

But what is your definition of idle? In the world of desktop computers, processors are never idle unless the computer is in S3. If you're using Windows Vista, go into Resource Monitor and look at the disk activity. Even if you're not telling the computer to do anything, it's still shuffling files around, screwing with the memory, updating the clock, indexing files, defragging files, running malware in the background, MSN checking if I'm still connected to the internet, UPS software getting updates from the UPS, the screen updates every time the cursor blinks in this text box, and other random tasks.

Idle as in waiting for something to do. Whether that is someone moving the mouse, updating the screen or waiting for data to write to the drive. The advantage ARM has over x86 in this area is the transition time from lower power usage to full out usage is next to zero. ARM can perform a task then in a split second return to low power which is like putting the pc in S3 in x86 but still having the ability for the processor to respond to events like mouse movement when need. x86 can't do that repeatedly several time a minute without effecting performance.
Even Atom struggles with going in and out of power states.


Right now Intel and ARM are two different markets, even with Atom. If I was a programmer I would pray for ARM to become the standard , it is just much easier to work with than x86, but right now that isn't a reality as ARM is not fast enough to compete directly with x86.

A good board for hobbyist interest in ARM is here:
http://beagleboard.org/hardware

Look at its capabilities and the size and cost of the board. Nothing in the x86 world comes close.

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
A good board for hobbyist interest in ARM is here:
http://beagleboard.org/hardware

Look at its capabilities and the size and cost of the board. Nothing in the x86 world comes close.

What kind of OS can you run on that? Is it possible to make that into something like a media player by hooking it up to some power source?

 

[drizek]

You can run a full linux distribution like Debian or Ubuntu on ARM with virtually every app you can think of.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: drizek
You can run a full linux distribution like Debian or Ubuntu on ARM with virtually every app you can think of.

it cant run crysis!

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: drizek
You can run a full linux distribution like Debian or Ubuntu on ARM with virtually every app you can think of.

So you CAN turn it into a media PC? Do you have to program your own drivers or something complicated like that? I'd like to pick one up just to play with it but only if I can actually get it working without too much hassle.

 

[SickBeast]

People crap all over x86, yet companies like Apple have switched over to it from other architectures like PowerPC because x86 offered better performance. Go figure.

 

[drizek]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: drizek
You can run a full linux distribution like Debian or Ubuntu on ARM with virtually every app you can think of.

So you CAN turn it into a media PC? Do you have to program your own drivers or something complicated like that? I'd like to pick one up just to play with it but only if I can actually get it working without too much hassle.

Linux is pretty easy to use. I would recommend downloading the x86 version of Ubuntu now and trying it out in virtualbox so you get a feel for it before getting an arm device. It should be able to play any format VLC can play, so it can be quite capable. Getting flash on it will take some work, if it is even possible at all. Silverlight is pretty much impossible(no netflix) for now, although they are developing an open source version called moonlight.

 

[amenx]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
all that "junk" rapes its competition in everything you throw at it.

So how does one call it junk when it seems to work perfectly well?

Usually AMD owners love to throw Intel is trash bits to make them feel a little better about their hardware.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Intel is going to continue pushing products loaded with "junk" silicon and continue getting away with it due to superior process technology. Simple as that. Who cares if it has extra transistors sucking up power at idle? They can make transistors smaller than any of their competitors and operate them at voltages that are low enough that the "junk" silicon ceases to be much of a liability, especially when you compare the CPU's power draw compared to the rest of the device's components.

The intrinsic advantage of pushing chips for mobile devices, ultraportable laptops/netbooks, etc. that fully supports x86-64 is that people will get a device that is similar to what they have (or had) on their desktop, rather than a niche product targeted at a limited set of applications. Yes, you can run Linux on an ARM device, but can you run teh wind0ze?

Besides, Transmeta proved some time ago that x86 chips need not be filled with junk silicon or be power hogs relative to other players in the field. Nvidia may have something of their own to say about x86 entering the mobile/ultraportable field.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
People crap all over x86, yet companies like Apple have switched over to it from other architectures like PowerPC because x86 offered better performance. Go figure.

And yet that same Apple who switched to x86 in their desktops has so far stuck with ARM for their mobile phone products.

The point of the article is that x86 is full of junk, so trying to shoehorn it into the mobile space is a bit silly because it will waste power.

Paul attacked Intel's pitch of "x86 inside mobile device"

Yes x86 is dominant in the desktop arena, where it doesn't need to care so much about every milliwatt of power, but that doesn't help in mobile devices.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
And yet that same Apple who switched to x86 in their desktops has so far stuck with ARM for their mobile phone products.

Only because there isn't an x86 chip that exists to fill the smartphone role... yet. Intel's own roadmaps are pretty clear on the matter, they expect to be able to produce a suitable Atom in 2011. At which point if everything goes to plan, Intel is going to smack everyone else upside their heads with their superior fabrication technology.

The internal workings of modern x86 CPUs are nothing like the instruction set. Once you can fit enough transistors on to a chip of any given size such that the size of the x86 decoders become reasonable, you can make an x86 chip at that size. (the decoding hardware is for the most part a fixed size; it becomes a smaller and smaller piece of the CPU over time, which means the "penalty" for having it is always decreasing)

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Sure, the whole Wintel hardware/software stack sucks up power. 15W is way too much for what is a mobile internet device with very basic graphics and IOs.
Most of the ARM devices are designed from ground up for mobility, while x-86 devices are designed to run Windows first and foremost, with mobility as secondary goal, hence all the RAM, HD, etc overhead.
It's like comparing Prius to a Camry Hybrid. One is designed from ground up to be energy efficient, the other is a modification of existing design to make it as energy efficient as possible.

I wouldn't dismiss it too quick. I have a Atom MID, Viliv S5 which has a 22.9WHr battery and the battery lasts 4 hours at worst case situation and 5 hours watching videos and still have 20% charge left(which I believe to be the REAL low as draining Li-Ion to 0% can kill the battery).

That means the entire thing uses 3.7W to 4.7W.

With Moorestown which will lower platform idle power by 50x(allowing for phone usage so you don't have to turn off to save battery), its going to shut lots of people up.

Part of the reason "Junk Silicon" is there and "Idle power" is so high is because the target market wants everything to be ready at fingertips. If everything is made to be idle and have to be woken up before it works, probably lots of regular PC tasks are going to be frustrating. And its not really the CPU's fault that the Windows power management sucks(remember the Anandtech article showing the Macbook has more battery life on OSX than XP/Vista?).

(Currently the Viliv S5 can last 10 hours with the mode that can be called "Standby" on phones. Moorestown will extend that to several days)

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: thilan29

Originally posted by: Modelworks
A good board for hobbyist interest in ARM is here:
http://beagleboard.org/hardware

Look at its capabilities and the size and cost of the board. Nothing in the x86 world comes close.

What kind of OS can you run on that? Is it possible to make that into something like a media player by hooking it up to some power source?

It can run linux, RTOS, WinCE.
It can already play media like mp3 and play 720P video. The problem is it is intended for people who want to program it. Everything that is needed to program it is out there, but I would recommend knowing how to program before purchasing. It is not a buy, plug in, and install linux device.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Lonyo
And yet that same Apple who switched to x86 in their desktops has so far stuck with ARM for their mobile phone products.

Only because there isn't an x86 chip that exists to fill the smartphone role... yet. Intel's own roadmaps are pretty clear on the matter, they expect to be able to produce a suitable Atom in 2011. At which point if everything goes to plan, Intel is going to smack everyone else upside their heads with their superior fabrication technology.

I doubt it. By the time Intel releases their mobile Atom , ARM will have their next generation micros on the market, actually slated fro Q1 2010. The strength of ARM is that they are not the ones that make the final processor. They license the technology then anyone can add or implement what they need. They don't lock it down like Intel does with x86.

Compare how friendly ARM is about licensing vs intel.
http://www.arm.com/products/licensing/

Really a different approach.

Originally posted by: ViRGE
The internal workings of modern x86 CPUs are nothing like the instruction set. Once you can fit enough transistors on to a chip of any given size such that the size of the x86 decoders become reasonable, you can make an x86 chip at that size. (the decoding hardware is for the most part a fixed size; it becomes a smaller and smaller piece of the CPU over time, which means the "penalty" for having it is always decreasing)

ARM has the upper hand when it comes to programming. It has more registers and many operations can be performed for free using zero cpu time.

Another big difference between Intel CPU and embedded microprocessors is the requirement for extra chips to be used. With x86 you have a processor with FPU if needed. On something like the OMAP 3530 which has an ARM core in that same processor package you have:


430-MHz TMS320C64x+? DSP Core
POWERVR SGX Graphics Accelerator running OPenGLES
General Purpose Memory Controller
Camera Image Signal Processor
HD video output processor for 2 LCD displays
2- serial ports
USB 2.0 support
SD/MMC card support
SDRAM


This is all in one chip about the size of a postage stamp. It does not need support chips, no northbridge or memory interface chips, nor does it need chips for sound or video. That is where the embedded market excels. In desktops you need a video card, sound chipset, usb chipsets, etc. In the embedded world you can get a single processor that does it all in one.


With something like ARM I can put a single chip in my device and have everything covered.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000

Originally posted by: senseamp

Sure, the whole Wintel hardware/software stack sucks up power. 15W is way too much for what is a mobile internet device with very basic graphics and IOs.
Most of the ARM devices are designed from ground up for mobility, while x-86 devices are designed to run Windows first and foremost, with mobility as secondary goal, hence all the RAM, HD, etc overhead.
It's like comparing Prius to a Camry Hybrid. One is designed from ground up to be energy efficient, the other is a modification of existing design to make it as energy efficient as possible.

I wouldn't dismiss it too quick. I have a Atom MID, Viliv S5 which has a 22.9WHr battery and the battery lasts 4 hours at worst case situation and 5 hours watching videos and still have 20% charge left(which I believe to be the REAL low as draining Li-Ion to 0% can kill the battery).

That means the entire thing uses 3.7W to 4.7W.

With Moorestown which will lower platform idle power by 50x(allowing for phone usage so you don't have to turn off to save battery), its going to shut lots of people up.

Part of the reason "Junk Silicon" is there and "Idle power" is so high is because the target market wants everything to be ready at fingertips. If everything is made to be idle and have to be woken up before it works, probably lots of regular PC tasks are going to be frustrating. And its not really the CPU's fault that the Windows power management sucks(remember the Anandtech article showing the Macbook has more battery life on OSX than XP/Vista?).

(Currently the Viliv S5 can last 10 hours with the mode that can be called "Standby" on phones. Moorestown will extend that to several days)

The problem is that Atom devices are size of Apple Newton, which is not really a hand held format, and has the same problem. It wasn't until Palm sized devices came out, that PDAs took off. Let's assume you can get power envelope down to make a true hand held form factor device. Would you want to run desktop Windows on such a device? No, it would be unusable. And if you aren't running Windows, there goes the main reason for having an x86 device in the first place. I mean I watch Intel videos of Atom devices, and I can't help but laugh at them. The guy takes out some big bulky hot device and pretends like it's an i-phone competitor. Then he pretends like it's a Windows notebook. Reality is that you are getting a crappy phone experience because it's too big and a crappy Windows notebook experience because it's too small. The two segments have completely different demands, and these devices that try to split the middle are going to have a tough climb uphill.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: senseamp

The problem is that Atom devices are size of Apple Newton, which is not really a hand held format, and has the same problem. It wasn't until Palm sized devices came out, that PDAs took off. Let's assume you can get power envelope down to make a true hand held form factor device. Would you want to run desktop Windows on such a device? No, it would be unusable. And if you aren't running Windows, there goes the main reason for having an x86 device in the first place. I mean I watch Intel videos of Atom devices, and I can't help but laugh at them. The guy takes out some big bulky hot device and pretends like it's an i-phone competitor. Then he pretends like it's a Windows notebook. Reality is that you are getting a crappy phone experience because it's too big and a crappy Windows notebook experience because it's too small. The two segments have completely different demands, and these devices that try to split the middle are going to have a tough climb uphill.

Let's wait a few years shall we? The current biggest problem for Atom nowadays is that its still not fully SoC. Moorestown will get much closer to that, and the successor Medfield will have CPU/Northbridge/Southbridge all integrated.

And Intel seemed to be not focusing on Windows, but a Linux variant called Mobilin/Mobilin 2. Sure, they still need a lot of ways to go for UI, but I'm not doubting the technical side's potential. There was a post at RWT which compared datasheets and concluded that the CPU-core wide current usage for Cortex ARM and Atom was similar.

If its a regular phone size device with Windows I wouldn't want it either. But they might just have a compelling advantage if they can do similar in power/size while still maintaining that x86 flexibility.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
[The current biggest problem for Atom nowadays is that its still not fully SoC. Moorestown will get much closer to that, and the successor Medfield will have CPU/Northbridge/Southbridge all integrated.

The problem with waiting is that while Intel is playing catchup in that market, the competition is not going to be standing still. So by the time they get to Medfield, who knows what companies like ARM will have available. ARM is running at much slower clock speeds than Intel chips right now. Can you imagine the performance of ARM running at the same clock as Atom ?

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
For starters, lets not be gullible here people, ask yourself why VMware is spending money (salary/travel/expenses) so some guy from VMware can trash and bash an ISA (he talks ISA - x86 - but bases his statements on unspecified architecture - "all those gates" - so be wary right there) that has little to do with the specifics of their own revenue and business model...

There is a reason you are being given this "free" advice regarding VMware's opinion on the validity of Intel's "threat" to ARM's marketspace.

My advice - stop watching the commercials, and this is all this is (an advertising campaign), and step above it so you can pay attention to the money trail as that is what speaks to the underlying motivation.

I think this post got lost in the subsequent discussion.

So, what are the details of the "money trail" between VMware and ARM?

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

The problem with waiting is that while Intel is playing catchup in that market, the competition is not going to be standing still. So by the time they get to Medfield, who knows what companies like ARM will have available. ARM is running at much slower clock speeds than Intel chips right now. Can you imagine the performance of ARM running at the same clock as Atom ?

Yea, ARM will still be slower.

According to this data I have, Atom 1.1GHz in a single-threaded, speccpu integer portion of the benchmark, is 50% faster than Cortex A8.

According to ARM and Intel datasheets, the current usage of Atom Z500 at 800MHz and ARM at similar speed has only single-digit differences in power.

With Moorestown, performance is going up, while power is going down(a lot).

The competition isn't standing still, yes but the fact is the ARM competitors don't have much to improve since most of the power reduction tricks like SoCs are exhausted, while Intel is yet to get to SoC.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Zap

Originally posted by: Idontcare
For starters, lets not be gullible here people, ask yourself why VMware is spending money (salary/travel/expenses) so some guy from VMware can trash and bash an ISA (he talks ISA - x86 - but bases his statements on unspecified architecture - "all those gates" - so be wary right there) that has little to do with the specifics of their own revenue and business model...

There is a reason you are being given this "free" advice regarding VMware's opinion on the validity of Intel's "threat" to ARM's marketspace.

My advice - stop watching the commercials, and this is all this is (an advertising campaign), and step above it so you can pay attention to the money trail as that is what speaks to the underlying motivation.

I think this post got lost in the subsequent discussion.

So, what are the details of the "money trail" between VMware and ARM?

So, it's no surprise that VMware has decided to follow the industry's gaze; last month, it snapped up TRANGO Virtual Processors, a small company that makes lightweight hypervisors that run on a variety of ARM and MIPS processors.

At a higher level of business structure, EMC Corp owns some 80 or 90% of VMware, so how and where business interests are "aligned" in that organization's myriad of M&A's is anyone's guess, but to be sure they aren't taking pop-shots at Intel without business reason.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000


According to this data I have, Atom 1.1GHz in a single-threaded, speccpu integer portion of the benchmark, is 50% faster than Cortex A8.

According to ARM and Intel datasheets, the current usage of Atom Z500 at 800MHz and ARM at similar speed has only single-digit differences in power.

With Moorestown, performance is going up, while power is going down(a lot).

The competition isn't standing still, yes but the fact is the ARM competitors don't have much to improve since most of the power reduction tricks like SoCs are exhausted, while Intel is yet to get to SoC.

The new ARM chips are multicore and include a dsp that can process HD video + interfaces + memory and still use less power than the Atom cpu alone. Add in support chips + memory + video and the Atom has a long way to go. The Atom cpu will have to run on lower power itself before it could compare, just making it a SoC design will not solve that problem.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: amenxUsually AMD owners love to throw Intel is trash bits to make them feel a little better about their hardware.

That makes no sense what so ever. Intel makes x86 processors. AMD makes x86 processors. Now why would AMD users trash all x86 architectures when the processors they prefer are x86 processors? The only reason why VMWare even mentioned Intel is that Intel created and owns the rights to x86 and they are the dominant player in that market.

Not all AMD processor owners are blind and rabid fanboys. Many of us bought AMD processors because they were the right price vs performance in our budget and nothing more. If we had endless supplies of cash, then we would have bought the i7 instead and called it a day. Phenom II x4 owners have nothing to be ashamed of when it comes to performance of these processors especially when comparing single graphics card gaming benchmarks to the i7 920 and a lot of multimedia applications are very close in performance.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

The new ARM chips are multicore and include a dsp that can process HD video + interfaces + memory and still use less power than the Atom cpu alone. Add in support chips + memory + video and the Atom has a long way to go. The Atom cpu will have to run on lower power itself before it could compare, just making it a SoC design will not solve that problem.

Straight from the horse's mouth, Cortex A8 is claimed to use <0.59mW/MHz without cache memory. At 800MHz, that is <472mW. Since its less than, lets assume 450mW.

Atom Z500 at 800MHz is at 0.6W, or 600mW. The difference is that Intel includes everything including L2 cache unlike ARM.

CPU-wise, they are very comparable. Second generation Moorestown will probably be using more architectural tweaks and their specialized low power process to bring that down.

Before Atom, people didn't even think about x86 in the phone place. Now there are two sides, one supporting the theory Atom will get there, one that doesn't.

What will it be with Moorestown?