Technology

37730 readers

449 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Los@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

124

Intel doesn’t think that Arm CPUs will make a dent in the laptop market (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 year ago by ijeff@lemdro.id to c/technology@beehaw.org

109 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This isn't all that different from having a coprocessor. I don't think it's very useful to have an ARM or x86 coprocessor though because the major benefit to ARM is lower power consumption... Adding in a whole coprocessor is just going to increase power consumption.

Things like Rosetta are probably the better way.

Or maybe we see Java/the JVM make a comeback. This is the exact sort of world Java was built for. It just turned out that right around the time Java was taking off, everyone basically went for Windows and x86 chips... Which became the defacto standard.

Granted, at this point, folks would probably be going for more WASM (in browser or not) than JVM.

[–] thingsiplay@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But Java and WASM doesn't solve the compatibility issue on ARM. Games and other programs for x86 are still something people want to execute on ARM machines. That's why compatibility layers and emulators are build for. And having a dedicated CPU would help with that. And if you do not use the x86 "extension", then you won't pay for power consumption. And if you aren't interested into x86, then you simply don't buy a dual architecture motherboard.

I'm not looking this from the perspective of laptops or handhelds BTW, but from the perspective of desktop PC. Overall I think its not practical to have them both on a single motherboard. But you know, the industry is full of non practical ideas. So it's not unimaginable this could be reality someday. Maybe just for a small audience.

[–] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 1 points 1 year ago

I'm not looking this from the perspective of laptops or handhelds BTW, but from the perspective of desktop PC.

I guess, I don't see ARM taking off on the desktop anytime soon. Everything is still going to be released with x86 binaries for the foreseeable future.

And having a dedicated CPU would help with that. And if you do not use the x86 "extension", then you won't pay for power consumption. And if you aren't interested into x86, then you simply don't buy a dual architecture motherboard.

You'd still have power draw, just not as much. Maybe for desktop it could be worth it, but I'd say a good emulator/translator would be a better option for most people.

Rosetta from what I understand can do ahead of time translation which should get you pretty close to a usable piece of software for the vast vast vast majority of software. The exception would be things like games of course