ARM vs Intel x86

Would like to know what you think about ARM as a future competitor to Intel's x86, as I am considering getting one.

Nvidia recently announced new Tegra SOCs and the specifications are amazing on paper:

http://www.trustedreviews.com/mobil...a-announces-Tegra-for-smartphones-and-MIDs/p1

My main reasons for considering ARM as an alternative is because it ticks all the boxes for what I think ordinary people would want:

1. 1.4W power consumption while decoding 720p
2. Fanless and silent operation
3. Potential for hours if not DAYS of operation in a netbook format
4. Flash acceleration

The only problem is Microsoft Office and photo editing applications are not supported, otherwise it would tick all the things I would need to use my notebook for at a fraction of the price.

What do you guys think?

 

arm is a low power/low performance chip designed for embedded applications like cell phones and pocket PCs. That's why it's loads cheaper and potentially gives greater battery life. At one time, Intel did own ARM but sold it off not too long ago (to Marvel?).

Other than Windows CE/Windows Mobile (PocketPC), Microsoft operating systems do not run on ARM CPUs. If you get a netbook with anything other than an x86-capable CPU, you will be running some kind of linux. I believe that one or two of the newer netbooks are running Windows Mobile.

Windows Mobile is NOT 'Windows'. It's a similar user interface layered on top of a microkernel that runs on ARM processors and two or three other similar chips.

It's your money.

 

Yep. Previously known as the Intel XScale. Probably because Intel figured they were going to try and move into the mobile market with something like Atom (one of the things it was originally intended for). They probably didn't expect Atom to find a big presence in netbooks, which weren't widespread at the time.

If you're willing to do Linux, ARM should be fine. x86 does have more breating room when it comes to OSes and apps.

 

I don't think owning ARM is an accurate comment. ARM licenced their core to whomever wants it.

Intel originally acquired StrongARM (ARM licenced variant developed by DEC)from DEC as part of a lawsuit settlement. Xscale their version of the next generation ARM core(i believe 5th or 6th).

This was followed by Atom. Not sure how much they deviated from Xscale in Atom.

 

ARM typically doesn't license a core design either. I am sure theirs recommendations and guidelines but they license a specification and an instruction set not a core.

 

ARM processors are tailored to the embedded design market. You cannot run Windows (or any x86 apps) on them and there is no way to 'hack' it through virtualization (that I know of).

They're great little processors, but not designed for the consumer computing market.

 

Yep. My dad worked on the Marvell adoption of the Intel ARM processor division. Intel determined the processors to be relatively unprofitable, mainly because their costs were too high, but Marvell cut costs by several times after acquiring the Intel division, partly through a manufacturing partnership with TSMC. The processors are used in several Blackberrys, among other devices.

 

windows 7 is not compatible with ARM cpu's. microsoft dumped ARM.

 

Actually, there has been hints from the CEO of ARM about future support for Microsoft Windows. However, the quotes from the CEO does not indicate that it is Windows 7 specifically.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/01/arm-ceo-hints-at-possible-windows-7-support-for-arm-processors/

Another thing is that a ARM Cortex A8 apparantly has the same processing power as an Intel Atom, according to ARM's Director of Mobile Solutions, so presumably it could run Windows XP. Sadly, the Tegra currently uses the ARM 11 processor which is 3-4 times slower.

http://channel.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=18731&page=3

I think I will wait for the next generation Tegra, which should implement the upcoming ARM A9 which can be scaled up to four cores and hopefully manufactured using 32nm techology.

 

Could microsoft port windows to ARM cpus without a radical reprogramming of the whole OS?

 

I thought it was good how they got 98 or was it w95 booted on PPC, or emulated rather

Arm processors are capable, and can be overclocked quite deadly too.

 

As Microsoft Windows CE supports x86, MIPS, ARM and SuperH, I presume it is possible. Unfortunately, Microsoft has recently announced that Windows 7 will not be supporting ARM for netbooks.

http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSTRE5522HZ20090603

I think Microsoft made the wrong decision. Netbooks are extremely popular at this time and ARM (Nvidia Tegra) offers an extremely compelling product, which I have no doubt will be a success. By refusing support for ARM, another OS will take its place, essentially Microsoft is allowing a potential competitor to emerge, one that could threaten Microsoft itself. Combine this with the immence potential of the Tegra platform and I expect someone at Microsoft to get fired over this.

In a fight between two super powers, Intel and ARM, Microsoft should not be picking sides, as this just created an enemy.