Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel on Mobile Phones/Tablets

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Intel on Mobile Phones/Tablets

    I am evaluating buy INTC, but like everyone else, I'm waiting for their revenues to take a hit because they don't sell into the mobile space. I'm also mindful that Windows 8 will run ARM.

    Has anything changed in the last half year that gives Intel a glimmer of hope in mobile phones or tablets?
    I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
    Tags: None
  • #2
    No.
    Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
    Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
    We've got both kinds

    Comment

    • #3
      Oops. Meant to put this in the technology subforum.
      I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

      Comment

      • #4
        x86 just isn't going to be able to compete with ARM in the mobile formfactor. By virtue of the technology.

        x86's only redeeming feature is backwards compatibility. The mobile sector was never x86, so it's pointless.
        "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
        Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

        Comment

        • #5
          And is it possible that Intel will recognize this and put out something without x86?

          I'm guessing that desktops will be able to use ARM in a generation or two just fine...
          I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by Asher View Post
            x86 just isn't going to be able to compete with ARM in the mobile formfactor. By virtue of the technology.

            x86's only redeeming feature is backwards compatibility. The mobile sector was never x86, so it's pointless.
            x86 is still faster than pretty much every RISC architecture out there. My systems professor (who formerly worked on chips at Intel) explained that modern Intel chips actually run a RISC architecture and use a system to interface x86 with a RISC instruction set. Then because Intel can spend ****loads on R&D they still run faster than the RISC competition.

            However, they use a lot more power. That can't be fixed.
            If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
            ){ :|:& };:

            Comment

            • #7
              Originally posted by DanS View Post
              And is it possible that Intel will recognize this and put out something without x86?

              I'm guessing that desktops will be able to use ARM in a generation or two just fine...
              If they wanted to do that, they would have done that many years ago. Possibly even more than a decade ago. Even if Win8 is on ARM, the programs it runs won't be. They'll all be x86.
              If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
              ){ :|:& };:

              Comment

              • #8
                I thought that Intel had been on tablets for many years, if you catch my drift
                Speaking of Erith:

                "It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                  x86 is still faster than pretty much every RISC architecture out there.
                  x86 is not inherently faster or slower than any other instruction set.

                  You are conflating instruction sets with actual CPU architecture.

                  My systems professor (who formerly worked on chips at Intel) explained that modern Intel chips actually run a RISC architecture and use a system to interface x86 with a RISC instruction set.
                  Yes, which is why Atom can't compete with ARM. The logic to decode x86 to micro-ops (RISC instructions) takes up valuable transistors and chews up power. In desktops, it's negligible but for cell phones/tablets, it's a difference maker.
                  "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                  Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                    If they wanted to do that, they would have done that many years ago. Possibly even more than a decade ago. Even if Win8 is on ARM, the programs it runs won't be. They'll all be x86.
                    Depends which programs you're referring to. Very few apps are written in x86.

                    We're porting our app to ARM for Windows 8. It's pretty simple once you ditch x86-specific libs like MFC (which people should move away from anyway). We've supported both PowerPC & x86 before, ARM & x86 isn't that big of a deal. Especially if you make intelligent architecture decisions that doesn't bind you to a platform. Since we run on Mac, Windows, and Linux (and formerly PowerPC chips also), it's pretty simple for us.
                    "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                    Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      What is Intel Medfield? I've seen a few references to it lately but couldn't be arsed to look it up. I only remember it now because the topic was Intel and mobile devices. I mean I know it's an Intel processor supposedly for mobile devices but is it a totally new archetecture or is it just the same old stuff in a new wrapping?
                      Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        It's just their Atom (x86) based system on a chip for smartphones.
                        "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                        Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Asher View Post
                          x86 is not inherently faster or slower than any other instruction set.

                          You are conflating instruction sets with actual CPU architecture.
                          No, the x86 instruction set is inherently slower than a RISC set for electrical reasons. That's why everyone switched to RISC. Note: RISC was a discovery involving "useless" theoretical CS
                          Yes, which is why Atom can't compete with ARM. The logic to decode x86 to micro-ops (RISC instructions) takes up valuable transistors and chews up power. In desktops, it's negligible but for cell phones/tablets, it's a difference maker.
                          Yes.
                          If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                          ){ :|:& };:

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Asher View Post
                            Depends which programs you're referring to. Very few apps are written in x86.

                            We're porting our app to ARM for Windows 8. It's pretty simple once you ditch x86-specific libs like MFC (which people should move away from anyway). We've supported both PowerPC & x86 before, ARM & x86 isn't that big of a deal. Especially if you make intelligent architecture decisions that doesn't bind you to a platform. Since we run on Mac, Windows, and Linux (and formerly PowerPC chips also), it's pretty simple for us.
                            There's a lot of software that you can't just cross-compile. And people aren't necessarily going to want to buy new copies of software. You distribute binaries, not source code, and the binaries are x86. Why do you think so few things are x64, despite it having been out for years?
                            If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                            ){ :|:& };:

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                              No, the x86 instruction set is inherently slower than a RISC set for electrical reasons. That's why everyone switched to RISC. Note: RISC was a discovery involving "useless" theoretical CS
                              No and no.

                              Modern chips are not completely RISC nor CISC. They've converged, one leans more one way than the other. Neither is "inherently slower" for electrical reasons - that comment is actually patently absurd.

                              Further, to say RISC was a "discovery" involving theoretical CS is just nonsensical. RISC came from an IBM research project that was very much grounded in practical engineering.
                              "The issue is there are still many people out there that use religion as a crutch for bigotry and hate. Like Ben."
                              Ben Kenobi: "That means I'm doing something right. "

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X