Discussion Forums > Technology
$32 million Crowd Funding for Android/Ubuntu phone
Saras:
--- Quote from: kitamesume on July 30, 2013, 09:43:52 AM ---
--- Quote from: Saras on July 30, 2013, 09:38:41 AM ---Yes, then why the fuck are you talking about it? And why does it matter?
If they intend to run an x86 platform, for the desktop software compability, it's going to be an x86 chip. No questions, no comparisons. It's the only option. It won't matter that it's not yet on par with next gen android. Because its the only fucking option. And it's going to be chosen because of the software and not the capabilities.
If they run an ARM system, the comparison won't matter either. We can discuss which ARM would be likely, but that's it. There is no reason to compare intel atoms performance whatsofucking ever.
--- End quote ---
thats not the case here, ubuntu can run on either platform, which means ARM is an option.
--- End quote ---
Ubuntu, yes. Software, no. It's not really a desktop computer if you only have apps available to you, now is it? Or are you going to imply that the whole debian repository can run equally well on a RISC architecture.
kitamesume:
a translator can be used, how else do you think apps that were meant to be used for ARM instruction sets could be ran on a desktop with an emulator?
the same thing can be done in reverse - http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1262609
Saras:
Yes.
Which makes the whole point of going ARM moot. Unless you can prove that ARM emulating x86 is faster than x86 running x86. To which, yet again, the comparison between ARM and x86 is pointless. Because it's current gen ARM emulating x86 vs x86 that's the important question.
The fact that it can be done, doesn't mean that it's a good idea to do it.
kitamesume:
the emulation has risen to a target goal of 80% of ARM's capability, in which case ARM would perform on-par with baytrail-T but still consume less power.
that is against baytrail-T, theres still the chance of merrifield being used, which then concludes to ARM being superior.
pricepoint of chips themselves should conclude comparison, based from previous releases ARM tends to be a cheaper choice, this would be irrelevant though.
edit: a question though, of what software are you even planning to run? i doubt a handset level of processor performance would be enough for typical desktop usage.
i'll keep those softwares in mind on the next time i assess the possibilities.
Saras:
--- Quote from: kitamesume on July 30, 2013, 09:57:09 AM ---the emulation has risen to a target goal of 80% of ARM's capability, in which case ARM would perform on-par with baytrail-T but still consume less power.
that is against baytrail-T, theres still the chance of merrifield being used, which then concludes to ARM being superior.
pricepoint of chips themselves should conclude comparison, based from previous releases ARM tends to be a cheaper choice, this would be irrelevant though.
--- End quote ---
Of course ARM is cheaper. It doesn't require anywhere near the amount of transistors that x86 requires.
You're also going from a reduced instruction set to a complex one. You're not going to do the same operation in the same amount of cycles. And I sure as fuck ain't going to believe that it's at 80%. Not when the two architectures are that fucking different one from another.
Desktop implies desktop work. If it can't run Libra Office how it's run on a desktop, it's useless. It will also have to be powerfull enough to run a few systems in wine.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version