Skip OMAP4 and go directly to OMAP5?


WinCE/Mobile shipped in a great multitude of devices. Its time has long passed but it served its purpose. Maybe you think it was a joke but the industry didn't agree.


As for WP7, I didn't realize that worldwide failure was determined not by sales numbers but by some guy's anecdotal account of "I've never saw a WP7 user."
Again, the dictatorial mass selling doesn't means the product is good. I maintain WinCE is a technological joke.


I have another anecdotal account : "I see a lot of people with iphones and android phones"...

Wow, you seems to ignore wintel history : they made the market. They force users to buy their products, OS and office suite. Beeing a best seller, especially in a dictatorship form, doesn't means the product is better. In fact microsoft OS'se are probably the worst ever created.

It's a little difficult to argue with someone who claims Intel and MS forced people to buy their products and are a "dictatorship." The "wintel" relationship as you put it is no more than historically de facto, and MS's move to ARM should illustrate this (not to mention Intel's move from Windows on say, Moorestown)


And I didn't think we were comparing things, I just think that new version after version continuing to sell is indicative of market acceptance which is enough to say they're not just "crappy old products." And the market HAS had offerings of alternatives over and over again and they've continually failed to take off. You'd have to be really delusional to think that Linux has no user perception disadvantages compared to Windows.
It's indeed difficult to argue, because wintel dictatorship is an historical fact.


There's no market acceptance. The rules are cheated. And it's a mass market, shy alternatives stands no chance. Apple succeeded because they're not shy.


User's perception may vary if they have choice. Another anecdotal account : almost every people i helped to switch to Linux prefers Linux (Ubuntu or solid-configured Slackware).

AMD made the nowadays PC. If Intel were alone, your next PC will be a P4.
ARM kicks butts, whether it is 32, 64 or 128 ^^, but we will see soon.

Yeah, right, it's AMD's CPUs - which as of now are vastly inferior in the high end - which has forced Intel to innovate so we should be thanking AMD and not Intel. And yet even though AMD has not been competitive since Core 2 came out we still saw Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, we'll still see Ivy Bridge, we'll still see node shrinks every ~2 years well ahead of everyone else in the industry.. but yeah, you keep believing that AMD is the only reason Intel left P4. Here's a thought - if Intel stops making better processors they can't sell the end user better processors.


It's really amazing that anyone can be so arbitrarily supportive of AMD and so arbitrarily against Intel when both companies are making x86 processors.
Sandy bridge heh... bugged. Such an innovation since pentium float bug... Oh and they decided to resume the shipping. Greed...


AMD doesn't allied to microsoft to cheat end-users. Plus their ATI open source move is nice. Why should not i support them ?


I never wrote AMD is the only reason Intel left P4. Where did you read i say that ?

Again, we'll see soon.
I guess? So how do you want to do this, in a year when AMD hasn't picked up an ARM arch license I can say "I told you so"?
AMD usually makes clever choices. I tell you.

Err, wrong statement : PC sales are doing well. As consumer are forced to buy w7 with a PC... w7 sales are good B)
Doing a complex OS doesn't means doing a good OS. I don't care about a so-called complex OS.


And think about this : porting windows to another architecture... Okay, in ten years, maybe... But in ten years, nobody will remember microsoft, as for DEC now.

Ah, more of this "consumers are forced to buy Windows" argument. This isn't 10 years ago - mind you, the argument wasn't great then either. If you want to blame someone blame OEMs, but if you really want to blame someone blame consumers for not buying the non-Windows PCs that are put on the market. Nonetheless, you can't say Windows 7 isn't doing better than Vista - which is a perfect example of what happens if you release a Windows that doesn't do well. OEMs don't even upgrade to it. Believe it or not, the market DOES have to have a justifiable reason to move to new software.


So you think it'll take 10 years for MS to release their next version of Windows? Wow, you really are delusional. Then again, it'd help if you had any supporting argument for a thing you said, as opposed to saying things almost entirely arbitrarily.
"consumers are forced to buy Windows" is more than an simple argument, it's a fact.


Oh no, i won't blame victims over tyrans.


Vista and seven, won't you see the marketing ? Longhorn-beta was seven. Longhorn-vista was bloated to force consumers to buy new PC. The market actors were happy. End user were f****d.


Money is the _most justifiable reason_ for market.


You deformed what i said, _again_. I said windows ARM is vaporware (ok, we all though Duke Nukem forever was a vaporware...).

Linux supports ARM since a very long time : it's a no match. I don't need to argue/autopilot.
Oh, being "20 years ahead" means supporting ARM. Right. Newsflash: Windows has been on other platforms aside from x86. It isn't actually that hard to port it. I don't know why you think it is. It isn't there now because the market demand wasn't there, and even now MS is taking a big gamble that it WILL be there because right now it isn't. Interesting that this makes it 20 years behind, here I thought it'd only take 10 years for MS to port Windows..
You deformed what i said, _again_. Being "20 years ahead" means Linux supports ARM since a long time, not Linux is 20 years ahead just by supporting it.


Windows on other platforms... Never saw one (in ~20 years), but i presume it's another anecdotal account. BTW, no more WinCE please. Itanium ? Oh, another wintel platform ^^


If it's "not that hard" to port, so where windows ARM is ? They missed the train. Not by marketing strategy mistake. They can't port it "that easy".


Linux is technically far more advanced than windows. So a simple arch port is easier than closing the technological gape.

Where the heck did you read i hate kinect ?
*chortle*


Probably the part where you insulted it for no reason.


Next you'll be asking where I hear you hate MS in general, right? ;)
So quote me... You deformed what i said, _again_.


Microsoft products and manners sucks, so why should i defend them ?

Almost everyone knows WP7 is a failure but you... Even microsoft knows it...
Uh huh.


Me: 1.5 million people bought it in 6 weeks, IMO that makes it not a failure.


You: NUH UH EVERYONE KNOWS IT IS, EVEN MICROSOFT LOL
Numbers...


I know _0_ people owning it. I saw _0_ people owning it.

Again, where did you read i judge a merit on stock activity ?


Microsoft is sinking : "Got the facts" B)

Well gee, I figured that you brought up Gates and Ballmer selling stocks in an attempt to show stock performance as an indicator of company health. No idea what I was thinking there, I must be crazy.


I'll work on getting the facts, you work on presenting some to me.
I feel wasting my time showing you facts you deny, deforming what i said too many times.


Have better things to do.
 
It's indeed difficult to argue, because wintel dictatorship is an historical fact.
There's no market acceptance. The rules are cheated. And it's a mass market, shy alternatives stands no chance. Apple succeeded because they're not shy.


User's perception may vary if they have choice. Another anecdotal account : almost every people i helped to switch to Linux prefers Linux (Ubuntu or solid-configured Slackware).
My experience is it's mostly a issue of curiosity verse fear. People don't like to feel stupid so sometimes they prefer to be stupid instead. That said I agree with Techsnap, an OS reviewer, that Linux has some issues verse Windows. Automated library handling and OSS API still has a lot of room for improvement. Granted AMD is helping to fund OpenCL and thus improving the situation and CodeWeavers are doing an amazing job given they have to dance around things.

Sandy bridge heh... bugged. Such an innovation since pentium float bug... Oh and they decided to resume the shipping. Greed...
They're wha? *Checks news sites.* Are they insane? First the bullshit that the chipset only had 2 SATA 6Gb/s and now they're just going to shove it through anyway?

The messed up part is people are actually clamoring to buy these things. But then you have people like Exophase who think 20% OC via the Turbo trick and 10-15% improvement via a SMT implementation of questionable worth is due to "architectural advantage" and "better IPC" despite IPC not exactly being anything to fuss about with Core 2 when actually looked at. But then Exophase doesn't recognize the dramatic power savings associated with SOI HKMG. They also got all the DEC Alpha IP in 2001, not that they've been quick to use it. Heck DEC Alpha was 64-bit way back and Intel only got there in 2004 with DEC IP and still had to license AMD IP to do it despite having the DEC Alpha IP well before AMD64 came out.


Reviews have indicated the C-50 will play Crysis smoothly, presumably at netbook res with things at low but still. Plus there is the little issue the full featured 128-bit Bulldozer which replace the 64-bit Sledgehammer that has managed to soldier on through multicore so well, will come out in April and that'd kind of undercut them among the posers while Stars should do just fine in -book space given they both have the fruits of cleaning up all the scheduler stuff, depopulating the clock circuit, implementing Turbo, switching to pure 32nm SOI HKMG, and the fact Intel's SMT implementation actually gets turned off by many people. Microsoft supposedly is actually going to go out of its way to support 128-bit with Windows 8, which Intel won't have until Haswell materializes. There's also the issue Microsoft is not waiting for Intel with taking advantage of GPGPU acceleration. So I guess I can't say I'm surprised.


In case someone doesn't know what I'm talking about by a personal supercomputer, this is an example. Incidentally with an AMD processor coupled to nVidia GPGPUs. How mixing a AMD Fusion processor with a nVidia discrete GPGPU works is incidentally an interesting question I hope AMD has addressed.

AMD usually makes clever choices. I tell you.
They've certainly been pushing for ARM on 28nm SOI through the now distended company they run. I think their moves regarding that are brilliant personally. ARM's nature means consolidation isn't advantageous and given they're aiming for what amounts to personal supercomputing instead of holding the user back to force them to buy a i3 ultraportable really have no issue with the ARM market like Atom does. The tablet version of C-50 is down to 5 watts which should make things more interesting.

My perspective is x86 has an advantage in that ultimately it's a standard the industry has accepted and the performance hit of it isn't crippling. If DEC had been run a little more intelligently and responded to the interest of Macintosh instead of repeating IBM's mistake of ignoring personal computer maybe things would be different, but it didn't happen.

"consumers are forced to buy Windows" is more than an simple argument, it's a fact.
Unless you go through, or are, a system assembler I agree. Go ahead and try to find the fruit of Canonical's "partnering" with Dell and even if you can find it you're actually going to find yourself paying more in terms of hardware/$ then to have Windows preinstalled despite Ubuntu having no license fee. If that doesn't give someone pause about such things I'm not sure what does.

Personally I love delta-rpms or the power of Slackware more then "well they have more packages" so I don't really see the value in Ubuntu over PCLinuxOS, OpenSuse, or Mandriva free for those coming from Windows or just don't want to fuss with it.

Vista and seven, won't you see the marketing ? Longhorn-beta was seven. Longhorn-vista was bloated to force consumers to buy new PC. The market actors were happy. End user were f****d.
I can't comment intelligently about Longhorn in testing but I do know every machine I've seen run XP ran it like a dog, and yet Microsoft also released a version of it called "Windows Essentials" for businesses not ready to upgrade, that actually runs just fine... So I can sort of buy that. On proper hardware Vista is zippy though with my main issue with it being multicore support wasn't really there yet. Security isn't the bad either considering the PWN2OWN results associated with it.

[/\]


Back on topic given OMAP5 is sampling this year, unless the Pandora devs want to do OMAP4 for batch 2 I suspect they'll go for OMAP5 or something even newer when they eventually overhaul things.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey asshole, if you have something to say to me try actually making posts in response to me.


Oh wait, that might involve actually addressing the things I say instead of piling up more FUD.


What a waste of time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
is this thread going anywhere positive? reading up on two, make that three, nerds duking it out about tech specs really isnt much fun
 
Hey asshole, if you have something to say to me try actually making posts in response to me.

Oh wait, that might involve actually addressing the things I say instead of piling up more FUD.
You were given more then fair hearing to make a point, you utterly failed to by any reasonable definition and thus there is nothing to address.

is this thread going anywhere positive? reading up on two, make that three, nerds duking it out about tech specs really isnt much fun
Sorry about that. Next time I won't feed the troll.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, whatever. If you think I'm not worth arguing with then there's no need to continuing to argue with me, only while talking to someone else right in front of me. Every post you've made in this forum contains a flame to me. I've tried to play nice and reasonable but some people are just determined to be jerks no matter what. I hope you choke on your ego, prick.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MWeston, do you think that there will be any realistic chance of having a AMOLED screen in the Pandora 2? That screen you linked us to seems nice, but how would the power consumption look on something like that?


Also, do you mean to tell us that the Pandora 2 won't simply broadcast its video output directly into our minds??
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase (and other chip aficionado's), to change the subject a little. I read an article on Engadget claiming Intel was planing on taking the Atom processor into new low voltage designs and having them in phones. Since what I think I have read in this thread is that x86 is dying and Arm is taking over. What is your opinion of moving x86 into the lower power user space and trying to push to equalize it with Arm chips in terms of battery life. Is it even possible for them to do this without seriously lagging behind in performance? Are they just trying to keep their chip's alive longer by fooling people? Or could they really eventually make them powerful enough and battery friendly enough to make it viable?


I'm not much on CPU architecture knowledge, but when I read Intel thought they could compete with ARM by making Atoms more power friendly, it just seemed like a dying gasp attempt to make x86 stay the dominant architecture. In a perfect world it would be nicer to have desktops and portables be the same architecture for compatibility right? So if x86 is really the past is it likely that ARM could eventually be the way to go for all processing? (Sorry that's another question in itself) Just curious if things will ever swing one way or the other or if anyone sees that as the proper future of things.


It just seems to me eventually consumers will demand everything work on everything. So just curious how you guys who know so much more about these things see it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
other chip aficionado's), to change the subject a little. I read an article on Engadget claiming Intel was planing on taking the Atom processor into new low voltage designs and having them in phones. Since what I think I have read in this thread is that x86 is dying and Arm is taking over. What is your opinion of moving x86 into the lower power user space and trying to push to equalize it with Arm chips in terms of battery life. Is it even possible for them to do this without seriously lagging behind in performance? Are they just trying to keep their chip's alive longer by fooling people? Or could they really eventually make them powerful enough and battery friendly enough to make it viable?
You have a _lot_ of factors in play here.

Earlier in the discussion I made the mistake of thinking Intel had shifted to SOI instead they've been trying to compensate with other technologies like stressed silicon and were first with high-k metal gates which doesn't change the connotation of what I went with as a result. Silicon-on-Insulator is more expensive then bulk silicon, but it has significant benefits. ARM did a test in 2009 with the 45nm process to test this and found a 40% reduction in power consumption and the ability to make a 7% circuit area reduction. IBM, AMD, Toshiba and otherwise for the most part have stuck with Soitek's Silicon on Insulator technology while Intel has snubbed it. These 28nm ARM parts should also benefit from high-k metal gate technology if fabbed at Global Foundries, as they've put in the effort specifically for that. High-k metal gate technology has helped give Intel an edge in recent years, but by the end of they year everyone will have access to it. The Global Foundries project roadmap from here on, if followed, will not give Intel as much room as they would prefer and with the TSMC will be providing the majority of production for ARM processors.


As far as rating performance between ARM and x86 processors with numbers instead of appeals, nVidia's new Kal-el with four A9 processors tested out on their synthetic benchmark of choice slightly edges out a Core 2 Duo. I'm was unable to find if Coremark takes full advantage of 64-bit verse 32-bit, but if that is the case this reflects well on the ARM Cortex A9 as it is ARM's first, still 32-bit, attempt at making a dual-issue out of order processor cores like those currently offered by Intel and AMD in a 64-bit flavor. Coremark is however noted as a small benchmark that doesn't reveal issues with L2 and greater cache or memory access.


Intel's bet basically boils down to they can get power usage down enough to be acceptable for the device/application, and that then the momentum of x86 software will take over winning them the market. As usual for Intel they love to overconsolidate things. This is why their approach to SMT is half assed, from my perspective. For their application SMT involves making their consolidated scheduler even more complicated and harder to debug, so they can fix the problem of the scheduler missing because it's not adequately debugged. It has nothing to do with handling and retiring more threads then they would if the scheduler was perfect. I personally really don't like the fact it reports to the OS as if the "extra threads" are cores, and hence just asking to cause problems.


AMD's bet is based around something that's been progressively developing in various realms that drive computing technology development, known as General-Purpose GPU technology. This is in addition to the long standing practice of AMD involving having independent FP and integer schedulers thus allowing greater flexibility and easier debugging/refinement/modification. This in turn will be augmented with the new dynamic Turbo Bulldozer will use that, within stability limits, allows all power to be used for a task regardless of how many cores it prefers and take advantage of a previously unexploited 30-40% overhead.


They've also continued with both ATI and AMD products their emphasis on max throughput. GPGPU technology handles FP and integer operations across what by current x86 or ARM concepts is an insane number of processors via Stream Computing, with flexibility increasing as the hardware and software developers have continued to go back and forth with refining the overall technology. Prior to this maturing Sun Microsystems RISC design effectively championed this approach while being a little too proprietary, unlike GPGPU will be. In effect their intent is for everyone to have a personal supercomputer, and to drive supercomputing to the exoFLOP range. Despite what Exophase may think about AMD's server share waning into oblivion while waving the Intel flag, the reality is a Dell product with Opterons was awarded the Server of the Year and Opterons were rewarded as the best for max throughput with highly parallel loads in the server sphere.


Both will benefit dramatically in FP performance from the AVX extension to be introduced in Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer respectively. The AMD implementation with Bulldozer currently appears to be the most refined.


nVidia is going hardcore on ARM now, see the linked Kal-el artile, but their current offering do not appear to have any emphasis on GPGPU technology yet, like those of AMD. Their GPGPU CUDA cores are four way hyperthreaded like Intel's to correct misses, so if you think that is a wonderful technology they could easily do it to ARM processors. Texas Instruments and Qualcomm will undoubtedly at the very least do their best to keep up.


Technologically ARMH (ARM Holdings) have the advantage of being able to start out with a clean sheet of paper and thus avoiding the need all the logic circuits translating old instructions from a time when just how one makes a effect CPU was being figured out, and newer extensions, to the instructions of a fundamentally different internal processing core and then retranslated on the other side. These translators have traditionally had to run constantly and use quite a bit of power as a result. There are currently some tricks to try to make things more power efficient by stuttering this ala the current Race-to-Execute strategy favored for throttling processor cores. ARMH also has the benefit of using a reduced instruction set verse the x86 processors and being subject to a hardware version of Linus' Law given how their licensing setup works.


The problem for ARMH is that the processor penalty for translating instruction sets in software ala qemu works both ways, and mobile devices are intrinsically different from more traditional client or server computer applications. While in a purely FOSS universe that would not be an issue, as things stand inertia is against ARMH products in these spheres. Yet it must also be noted that world governments have increasingly been breaking away from the Computer giants because they don't care for that degree of foreign control over their computer systems. Hence Linux is displacing Windows strongly in use by world governments not out of any performance issue on way or the other, but one of local verse foreign control. ARMH designs undoubtedly will appeal to the same interests.


Windows 8 based on patent filings will be based on a Hypervisor and there is talk of some interesting tricks around that which would improve backward compatibility dramatically and let it run Linux apps natively. So overall the best conclusion seems to be to quote a recent game trailer "It is a time of rapid technological advancement" and to leave it at that as far as anything definitive.


The next years will involve a lot of competition between the various approaches. Personally my money is on AMD for client and server space as their approach has the highest flexibility offering all the advantages of consolidated and Stream processing approaches with what has become the industry standard ISA. That Anandtech's die size estimate for nVidia's Kal-el is 80mm^2 @40nm versus AMD's Zacate at 75mm^2@40nm, both from TSMC, and that fab price is associated with die area tends to point towards things also not being as good for ARMH as those hoping to invade Client and Server space would prefer. Versus Intel the ability to play games well trumps Super Pi performance any day, and Fusion dominates in that easily particularly in terms of the -book market. Other then a 5-watt C-50 setup running a tablet for demonstration purposes and their manufacturing arm, Global Foundries, is set to turn out the latest and greatest ARM processors it's unclear what the actual plan is for tablets and smart phones beyond they want back in after selling the division that had been doing that to Qualcomm.


Investmentwise I wouldn't buy ARMH stock at this point as their stock price is probably best described as hyperinflated. Their [stock] price/earnings is around 100 and the company isn't really staged to explode in the short term, which to me indicates an excess of speculators and hangers on versus likely real growth.

Yeah, whatever. If you think I'm not worth arguing with then there's no need to continuing to argue with me, only while talking to someone else right in front of me. Every post you've made in this forum contains a flame to me. I've tried to play nice and reasonable but some people are just determined to be jerks no matter what.
Wow, people sure are anti-MS and anti-x86 for mysterious reasons.
If I really wanted to I could keep going with the abject lack of civility or reasonableness, or just point out your habit of warping and railroading what people say was enough to get Linux-SWAT up in arms over it, but as you say in your needlessly vulgar way "some people are determined to be jerks no matter what."

I'm not sure how pointing out the failures of your argumentation is flaming, which seems rather non-conducive to any form of debate if it was the case. I was under the impression that involved things like calling people "asshole" and "jerks" in a vicious manner. Much like you were doing while being "nice and reasonable" particularly towards Linux-SWAT, who by that spin on the metric one assumes you have a crush on.


And then there's FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) apparently now means pointing out real acknowledged by manufacturer defects that were severe enough to cause them to pull the product from the market and remain unresolved. They also apparently now don't mean trying to create fear towards the viability of purchasing that which is not Intel. Or trying to allude to uncertainty regarding performance of that which is not Intel. Or to strongly express doubt regarding that which is not Intel. Or culminating all of that Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt in campaign that's pure pro-Intel.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MWeston, do you think that there will be any realistic chance of having a AMOLED screen in the Pandora 2? That screen you linked us to seems nice, but how would the power consumption look on something like that?
I may be wrong, but what I remember about OLED is that it had quite a short lifespan.


Not sure under what circumstances, though.


Also, it might have changed recently.


Yes, I know that was very helpful :p
 
wall-o-text
write-wall-of-text-get-no-answer.jpg
 
As far as rating performance between ARM and x86 processors with numbers instead of appeals, nVidia's new Kal-el with four A9 processors tested out on their synthetic benchmark of choice slightly edges out a Core 2 Duo. I'm was unable to find if Coremark takes full advantage of 64-bit verse 32-bit, but if that is the case this reflects well on the ARM Cortex A9 as it is ARM's first, still 32-bit, attempt at making a dual-issue out of order processor cores like those currently offered by Intel and AMD in a 64-bit flavor. Coremark is however noted as a small benchmark that doesn't reveal issues with L2 and greater cache or memory access.

lolz


http://redirectingat.com/?id=2403X580120&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ilsistemista.net%2Findex.php%2Fhardware-analysis%2F10-published-kal-el-performance-is-nvidia-soc-truly-faster-than-a-core2-.html&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fhothardware.com%2Fcs%2Fforums%2Ft%2F53857.aspx


You have to really hate Intel to not immediately notice how much nVidia was cheating on those slides.


As for your other stuff: I no longer give a shit, you can enjoy fucking yourself. ;)
 
That was civil.


Windows and x86 are not going away in 10 years. People are not going to throw away their games and companies are not going to throw away their apps, or run to buy new versions in that timespan and, AFAIK, emulation of x86 is damn slow. Not many people live in pre-OSX Appleland.


Just think of how many MS shops there are. "No one ever got fired for choosing Microsoft" is a very real mantra.


If push comes to shove, Windows is easily ported since they bought NT, and has run on Itanium and Alpha's before. .NET will make a lot of apps easily portable.


Not that I like MS, but they ARE masters of pretty good.


As for WP7, it's a loss leader, like the Xbox, and it's a threat as long as they have money.


Also, ARM has nothing for powerful servers. When SAP and Oracle run on ARM Linux, I'll agree with you.
 
Lot's of data removed to shorten my post
While I appreciate you took the time to respond, I'm afraid a lot of that information was far above my level of knowledge and therefore I could not actually tell if an answer was actually given to any question I asked and you quoted before your response. So I officially withdraw my questions as I was just curious what the consensus was and I'll just save it for another less technical thread discussion, another day. Thanks anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top