Comment on Intel doesn’t think that Arm CPUs will make a dent in the laptop market

• PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Honestly, we just need some sort of compatibility layer. Direct porting isn’t completely required yet.

  source

  • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    So, like Rosetta? 🙄

    source
• Patch@feddit.uk ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  You don’t really need the majority of the market to have moved before things start to get tricky for Intel. They’re a very much non-diversified company; the entire house is bet on x86. They’ve only just started dabbling in discrete GPUs, despite having made integrated GPU SOCs for years. Other than a bit of contract fabbing, almost every penny they make is from x86.

  If ARM starts to make inroads into the laptop/desktop space and RISC-V starts to take a chunk of the server market, the bottom could fall out of Intel’s business model fast.

  source

  • MaxVoltage@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    if i overclock a 486 into the 10ghz range it will be stronger and warmer

    source
  • captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    They make a shit ton of Wi-Fi modems.

    source
• Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I think it’s safe to say Apple has proved that wrong three times.
  When they switched from Motorola to Power, then from Power to Intel, and latest from Intel to Arm.
  If necessary software will be quickly modified, or it will run well enough on compatibility layers.

  source

  • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Apples advantage is that it controls the whole stack from silicon to App Store. That’s a problem for all sorts of reasons, but here they can use that power to implement the shift in a way that minimally impact the users.

    Keep in mind that M1 it’s not just an ARM CPU. It’s an ARM CPU that has specially designed features that to make Intel compatibility fast. Rosetta 2 is a marvel of technology, but it would run like crap on anything that does not have Intel memory model emulation in hardware.

    If you are in a position where

    1. Old binaries have to keep running indefinitely (ie the entire windows market) and
    2. You have to buy regular ARM chips from a regular supplier without special x86 emulation support features

    things are looking quite a bit less rosy for you.

    source

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      from silicon to App Store.

      Not ther case from Motorola to Power or Power to X86. Very similar software infrastructure to what PC’s have, with lots and lots of 3rd party software vendors.

      source
• onlinepersona@programming.dev ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I’m not sure about that. If for example the EU says “for the environment, you may not use chips that use X watts/Ghz” or something, x86 might be out of the game pretty quickly. Also, becoming market leader doesn’t mean old hardware, it’s the new hardware. I bet by 2030, the majority of chipsets sold will be either ARM or RISC-V. AMD did make an ARM rival with the 7840U, but with their entry in to ARM in 2025, it’s not preposterous to believe the ARM ecosystem will pick up steam.

  Also, recompiling opensource stuff for ARM is probably not going to be a huge issue. clang and gcc already support ARM as a compilation target, and unless there’s x86 specific code in python or ruby interpreters, UI frameworks like Qt and GTK, they should be able to be compiled without much issue. If proprietary code can’t keep up or won’t keep up, the most likely outcome will be x86 emulators or the dumping of money into QEMU or stuff like Rosetta for windows.

  Anyway, I’m talking out of my ass here as I don’t write C/C++ and don’t have to deal with cross-compilation, nor do I have any experience in hardware. It’s all just a feeling.

  source