Presumably Edrick didn't mean address space (well current Intel CPUs use what? 48bit? so not completely 64bit either) but register size for some computation.what do you need 128 bit for? I mean maybe sometime a lot later than now, but 32 bit lasted for what... 25, 30 years? And its still not totally outdated yet? Give 64 bit some time
Presumably Edrick didn't mean address space (well current Intel CPUs use what? 48bit? so not completely 64bit either) but register size for some computation.
Meh, Give me 128-bit Intel and AMD CPUs
I means you can crunch 2 64 bit numbers at a time, I think the FPU on SB does that.
Too late, id wager.
Haswell looks too promising.
Assuming intel doesn't fumble up - a Haswell based ULV /SoC chips look like a scary competition for any tablet or low usage Device.
It's an interesting war going on next few years.
too late for what? Competition where?
Keep in mind that haswell still is one order of magnitude (10X ) more power hungry than ARM. You can have 5 ARM CPUs and still consume half the power of Haswell at a lower price point.
Different CPUs for different markets.
Does ARM now include cache and co in their power numbers? If not, well you can certainly add quite a lot to the 2w numbers..Haswell mobile SKU's = 10w(The design goals atleast).
Cortex A9 Dual core = 2w.
Haswell mobile SKU's = 10w(The design goals atleast).
Cortex A9 Dual core = 2w.
You do that math.
So, no you can't.
At the same time, future ARM Mobile SKU's will most likely draw more than 1w per core, so the gap dies even further as ARM tries for performance.
And this is a Laptop variant not a DIRECT Haswell Embedded system design.
Intel looks more than ready to catch up the TDP of ARM chips, rather than ARM beginning to try hit low end x86 chips on their performance.
10W is still an order of magnitude (10 times) greater than 2W.
10W is still an order of magnitude (10 times) greater than 2W.
x86 will NEVER EVER be as power efficient as ARM. ARM and X86 are both RISC, but X86 adds decode logic to accept CISC instructions.
I've always wondered how people can think that arm architecture is an immediate threat to x86. Now I know! They have broken math centers in their brains!
Haswell mobile SKU's = 10w(The design goals atleast).
Cortex A9 Dual core = 2w.
You do that math.
So, no you can't.
At the same time, future ARM Mobile SKU's will most likely draw more than 1w per core, so the gap dies even further as ARM tries for performance.
And this is a Laptop variant not a DIRECT Haswell Embedded system design.
Get your facts straight.
x86 is still alive only due to a very sad problem: Legacy compatibility.
Completely incorrect. x86 is alive today because neither ARM nor any other platform has been used in any significant way to create the content we all consume with a myriad of devices (smartphones, tablets, etc.)
There will always be a need for devices that excel at creating content... and that demands a suitable nexus between processing power and cost, which isn't met by anything other than x86.
My math may be rusty, but I thought 20W would be 10X greater than 2W.
And you know this because? As soon as ARM starts adding 64-bit extensions and other instructions/cache in an attempt to increase performance, their power figures will increase.
Also, if you are going to start making statements like that, then I can make a statement like this: ARM will NEVER EVER be as powerful as x86.