• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

The Move Away From x86 To ARM Processors On The Desktop To Start Soon - Survey

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.94/day)
Likes
3,682
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
#26
It's performance won't be any different than current cpus. It will just do things differently, requiring everybody to port or recode their apps. Nothing scales 100% in the computer world.
 

qubit

Overclocked quantum bit
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
14,551 (3.97/day)
Likes
8,059
Location
Quantum Well UK
System Name Quantumville™
Processor Intel Core i7-2700K at stock (hits 5 gees+ easily)
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 16GB (4 x 4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz)
Video Card(s) Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme Edition
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 256GB | WD Green 4TB
Display(s) BenQ XL2720Z | Asus VG278HE (both 27", 144Hz, 3D Vision 2, 1080p)
Case Cooler Master HAF 922
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe
Power Supply Corsair HX 850W v1
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
#27
Just compare the data sheets - I did this years ago and they were very interesting. :) But just a few of the points I can remember off the top of my head are:

- All instructions are the same length, ie 32-bit (or 64-bit for the upcoming 64-bit version)
- Multiple registers to work with. The ARM2 I'm familiar with had 16, modern ARMs might have doubled that now
- Load/store architecture
- Pipelined from the very first version, so that instructions take effectively one clock cycle to complete. To clarify, the instuctions all took 3 clock cycles, but the short pipeline overlapped them so they took an effective single cycle, making the CPU very fast, as instructions per clock (IPC) was very good
- Two instructions to load/store multiple registers in one instruction. These instructions take several cycles, but each word of data takes one cycle
- All instructions are conditional. Makes If-Then decisions very fast, such as branching or deciding whether or not an ADD instruction should execute, say, according to a condition flag. The unexecuted instruction still takes a clock cycle
- No indirect addressing modes to complicate the instruction decode. All data processing is done between registers
- No internal microcode required, as the decode logic is relatively simple. Microcode slows down a processor significantly. Instructions are hard-wired instead, making them much faster to execute
- Flexible memory addressing modes enhance efficiency further, allowing one simple instruction to perform more complex tasks than they could otherwise
- This architecture lends itself well to superscalar processing (more than one instruction per clock cycle). PowerPC already did this years ago

The above are typical traits of the RISC design philosophy and you would expect them to appear in RISC processors in general, especially the fixed length instructions and load/store architecture.

Actually, that was rather more info than I thought I'd remember. :cool:

In what ways is it inefficient? How would you improve the x86 instruction set to make it more efficient?
x86 is more or less the opposite of what I described above. These are typical CISC designs and were intended to process the highest code density and most complex instructions possible, given the tiny amount of memory that computers had back in the late 70's.

- Variable length instructions from a single byte to something like 7 or 8 bytes
- Indirect addressing modes

The above two especially, make decode logic very complex and hard to streamline

- microcoded to deal with the above complexity. Slows down the processor significantly compared to a hard-wired design.
- Small number of registers (3 I think)

x64 improves on these, but it's still a CISC design. You can see how the RISC design is more efficient by two facts of all modern x86 processors:
- Modern x86 processors for the last decade or so have broken down the CISC instructions to RISC-like ones internally, to help speed them up. As Byte magazine (remember them?!) said of x86: CISC won by stealing RISCs clothes. And by win, they meant becoming the dominant architecture commercially, not technical merit. This was around 1990. You can bet your boots that Intel didn't want to lose their niche position as near-sole manufacturer of x86 processors, so put all its corporate might behind it to make sure it would succeed
- The SSE instruction set extension looks more like RISC. Again, I'm not familiar with the fine details, but is what I remember from an article I read about it some time ago

I'm sure there's other things, but this is all I can remember off the top of my head. Having come from an Acorn background, where ARM originated, I'm much more familiar with the technical details of the ARM than the x86.

It's performance won't be any different than current cpus. It will just do things differently, requiring everybody to port or recode their apps. Nothing scales 100% in the computer world.
Yeah, it will be better, see my answer to erocker above for why.

The apps portability is part of that mountain to climb to gain acceptance and which I have discussed before. However, I'm making the point here about the raw performance of the ARM processor with turbocharging applied.
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.94/day)
Likes
3,682
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
#28
That's all irrelevant with modern compilers, unless you are coding in assembly.
 

FordGT90Concept

"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
20,920 (6.24/day)
Likes
10,021
Location
IA, USA
System Name BY-2015
Processor Intel Core i7-6700K (4 x 4.00 GHz) w/ HT and Turbo on
Motherboard MSI Z170A GAMING M7
Cooling Scythe Kotetsu
Memory 2 x Kingston HyperX DDR4-2133 8 GiB
Video Card(s) PowerColor PCS+ 390 8 GiB DVI + HDMI
Storage Crucial MX300 275 GB, Seagate 6 TB 7200 RPM
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster T240 24" LCD (1920x1200 HDMI) + Samsung SyncMaster 906BW 19" LCD (1440x900 DVI)
Case Coolermaster HAF 932 w/ USB 3.0 5.25" bay
Audio Device(s) Realtek Onboard, Micca OriGen+
Power Supply Enermax Platimax 850w
Mouse SteelSeries Sensei RAW
Keyboard Tesoro Excalibur
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Faster than the tortoise; slower than the hare.
#29
Without all those issues being addressed, I'd agree. Yet, there's interest, so one has to ask why that's so.
Tablet computers. ARM offers huge advantages to power requirements and legacy software support isn't a concern. ARM in a desktop computer is kind of like Windows trying to break into the cellphone market. I can see it now:

Customer: That computer costs $200 less. I want that one!
Sales Rep: If you get that one, virtually all the programs you use now won't work. I can't recommend it.
Customer: Oh, okay...

ARM desktops might be offered but all except the most knowledgable will be inclined to buy them. I can't see them taking up much more than 15% of the marketshare if you exclude tablets.


I apparently can't emphasis this enough: everything Microsoft + ARM has to do with tablet computers and desktop/tablets (all-in-one computers). It has nothing to do with mainstream desktops.


That's all irrelevant with modern compilers, unless you are coding in assembly.
Microsoft has moved to the .NET platform and the soonest possible support for ARM is likely in Visual Studio 2012--.NET Framework 5.0. All applications made for 4.0 and down will not be compatible without getting Visual Studio 2012 and recompiling. The same dilemma faces virtually all other applications/code but with even more complexities (dealing with the lack of x86 instructions).

Most developers aren't going to recompile simply because they are not invested in ARM nor its success. Instead, ARM based computers are going to be focused on productivity software, email, internet, and cloud computing. These are not systems you're going to run developer software on, CAD programs, games, or anything more than basic, basic stuff.


Bottom line: ARM poses very, very little threat to x86 on mainstream desktop computers looking at least 10 years into the future.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
497 (0.15/day)
Likes
117
Location
Hampshire, UK
System Name If you name your systems, get a girlfriend...
Processor i7 4770k
Motherboard Asus Maximus VI Formula
Cooling Custom waterloop around Black Ice GTX 360
Memory 16GB DDR3
Video Card(s) R9 290
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 1TB
Case HAF 932
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair HX750
Software Windows 10 x64
#30
That's all irrelevant with modern compilers, unless you are coding in assembly.
I think Qubit's logic still holds, even with modern compilers.
You'll simply get more CPU "muscle" per watt, per transistor, per die area, per $ in general.

Cheers,
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Messages
520 (0.18/day)
Likes
161
System Name SKY OC
Processor i3-6100 4.6GHz
Motherboard Z170 FATAL1TY K4/D3
Cooling TPC-612
Memory Trident X 2400CL9
Video Card(s) HD 7850 CFX
Storage Vector 150
Case HAF XB
Power Supply Capstone 550M
#32
It's not that ARM is going to take over PCs, it's that tablets and smartphones are making PCs (desktops and laptops) less important for general use.

You can surf the web, watch videos, and even do some office productivity on these ARM powered devices. I'm still blown away by my wife's Le Pan tablet. Just 5 years ago I never would have imagined such a powerful device was possible, and only $200. It's so thin and light, and it's practically all screen (and a 10" screen too). It has about the same horsepower as one of my first windows XP desktops from ~2001. I wish I had one of them when I was a field service technician.

Tegra 3 looks like it is narrowing the performance gap even more.
 

qubit

Overclocked quantum bit
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
14,551 (3.97/day)
Likes
8,059
Location
Quantum Well UK
System Name Quantumville™
Processor Intel Core i7-2700K at stock (hits 5 gees+ easily)
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 16GB (4 x 4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz)
Video Card(s) Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme Edition
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 256GB | WD Green 4TB
Display(s) BenQ XL2720Z | Asus VG278HE (both 27", 144Hz, 3D Vision 2, 1080p)
Case Cooler Master HAF 922
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe
Power Supply Corsair HX 850W v1
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
#33
That's all irrelevant with modern compilers, unless you are coding in assembly.
Rubbish. A compiler cannot get more out of an architecture than it has. If one is superior, that one will win. In this case ARM is superior, as I've explained in detail above.

Tablet computers. ARM offers huge advantages to power requirements and legacy software support isn't a concern. ARM in a desktop computer is kind of like Windows trying to break into the cellphone market. I can see it now:

Customer: That computer costs $200 less. I want that one!
Sales Rep: If you get that one, virtually all the programs you use now won't work. I can't recommend it.
Customer: Oh, okay...

ARM desktops might be offered but all except the most knowledgable will be inclined to buy them. I can't see them taking up much more than 15% of the marketshare if you exclude tablets.


I apparently can't emphasis this enough: everything Microsoft + ARM has to do with tablet computers and desktop/tablets (all-in-one computers). It has nothing to do with mainstream desktops.
Your scenario of the customer in the shop is very apt. It is indeed one of the major hurdles that ARM has to overcome, as I've mentioned in various posts now. Along with the physical development of a supercharged ARM and other improvements, such as an industry standards compliant chipset, it's why I reckon it'll take 5-10 years to seriously challenge x86. Perhaps it never will, who knows? In the end, none of can predict the future, so all we can do is to make educated guesses with the information we have now.

Oh and I like your golden rule of programming to never assume. How true and just how many times did I get caught out by it! :laugh:

I remember doing some ARM assembly programming on my Acorn Archimedes around 1990. It was a little snippet of code, who's function was to calculate something, I forget what. Anyway, It reliably produced the correct result on my 2MB RAM Archimedes (yes, that's 2 megabytes, hehe) but on my friend's 4MB Archimedes, it would spew out random junk. Took me hours to figure it out and in the end it turned out that I'd not referenced some memory properly with the pointers in the assembler. A real obvious, embarrassing facepalm moment when I realized what I'd done. Somehow the code just happened to work with a 2 meg machine, but of course fell over on the 4 meg one, because the page size was twice as big. I felt like such a muppet at the end of it, lol, but I was able to fix it. Yeah, never assume. ;)
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
9,950 (2.25/day)
Likes
2,309
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
#34
I posted performance comparisons that equaled the playing field as much as they could to compare with Intel and AMD.

In 8/10 tests the X86 blew away the ARM at IPC, and at any sort of advanced app it crapped on its plate while the ARM sat and ate it.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/5/19/the-coming-war-arm-versus-x86.aspx

A AMD at the same speed was 2-3 times faster than the ARM processor.
 

qubit

Overclocked quantum bit
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
14,551 (3.97/day)
Likes
8,059
Location
Quantum Well UK
System Name Quantumville™
Processor Intel Core i7-2700K at stock (hits 5 gees+ easily)
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 16GB (4 x 4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz)
Video Card(s) Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme Edition
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 256GB | WD Green 4TB
Display(s) BenQ XL2720Z | Asus VG278HE (both 27", 144Hz, 3D Vision 2, 1080p)
Case Cooler Master HAF 922
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe
Power Supply Corsair HX 850W v1
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
#35
I posted performance comparisons that equaled the playing field as much as they could to compare with Intel and AMD.

In 8/10 tests the X86 blew away the ARM at IPC, and at any sort of advanced app it crapped on its plate while the ARM sat and ate it.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/5/19/the-coming-war-arm-versus-x86.aspx

A AMD at the same speed was 2-3 times faster than the ARM processor.
Are you Van Smith, then? I see that article is quite old and compares the Cortex-A8. The Cortex-A15 is around twice as quick or more. Of course, it should be compared to the latest Atoms, too.

That Atom consumes way more power though. It's all in the optimisation, as I said. I don't see why people get so defensive, about it. Put the same mojo in both architectures and the inherently leaner, more efficient one will win, which is ARM.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
9,950 (2.25/day)
Likes
2,309
System Name MoFo 2
Processor AMD PhenomII 1100T @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard Asus Crosshair IV
Cooling Swiftec 655 pump, Apogee GT,, MCR360mm Rad, 1/2 loop.
Memory 8GB DDR3-2133 @ 1900 8.9.9.24 1T
Video Card(s) HD7970 1250/1750
Storage Agility 3 SSD 6TB RAID 0 on RAID Card
Display(s) 46" 1080P Toshiba LCD
Case Rosewill R6A34-BK modded (thanks to MKmods)
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Power Supply 750W PC Power & Cooling modded (thanks to MKmods)
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
#36
Leaner more efficient like X86 won over Motorola?


No, the golden rule is the one with more gold make the rule.


ARM is great for my cellphone, it is great for a tablet. But to compare it to a full featured CPU with a GPU built in is simply insanity.


They said the same about how Linux was going to come rip MS a new asshole and all the laptops with free Linux versions would make the world realize how bad microsoft was and how free they could be........bla bla bla, the same recycled crap hippes said.



People will buy whatever is cheapest and works for them, or what they get advertised the most of. Thats why people even buy Ipads, Iphones, and other gadgets that really do nothing for them.
 

qubit

Overclocked quantum bit
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
14,551 (3.97/day)
Likes
8,059
Location
Quantum Well UK
System Name Quantumville™
Processor Intel Core i7-2700K at stock (hits 5 gees+ easily)
Motherboard Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 16GB (4 x 4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz)
Video Card(s) Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme Edition
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 256GB | WD Green 4TB
Display(s) BenQ XL2720Z | Asus VG278HE (both 27", 144Hz, 3D Vision 2, 1080p)
Case Cooler Master HAF 922
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe
Power Supply Corsair HX 850W v1
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
#37
I hate to say it, but I agree with your whole post. It's definitely often not technical merit that wins the day, but dollars and marketing hype, which is a very bg shame. You hit the nail on the head with this bit:

People will buy whatever is cheapest and works for them, or what they get advertised the most of. Thats why people even buy Ipads, Iphones, and other gadgets that really do nothing for them.
However, my points in the last few posts are purely about the technical merits of the two architectures. Whether ARM is eventually successful in the desktop space truly "remains to be seen".
 

Wile E

Power User
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
24,318 (5.94/day)
Likes
3,682
System Name The ClusterF**k
Processor 980X @ 4Ghz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 BIOS F12
Cooling MCR-320, DDC-1 pump w/Bitspower res top (1/2" fittings), Koolance CPU-360
Memory 3x2GB Mushkin Redlines 1600Mhz 6-8-6-24 1T
Video Card(s) Evga GTX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB, 2xSeagate 320GB RAID0; 2xSeagate 3TB; 2xSamsung 2TB; Samsung 1.5TB
Display(s) HP LP2475w 24" 1920x1200 IPS
Case Technofront Bench Station
Audio Device(s) Auzentech X-Fi Forte into Onkyo SR606 and Polk TSi200's + RM6750
Power Supply ENERMAX Galaxy EVO EGX1250EWT 1250W
Software Win7 Ultimate N x64, OSX 10.8.4
#38
I just don't think that ARM scaled to a full blown desktop chip would be faster than what x86 offerings there are.

Nothing I see suggests that, not even in the material you posted. If they could take on x86 cpus in the desktop market, they would.