SoC: Back and forth!

[Thorgan]

^ Do we even need a community if we go x86? I mean, everyone knows how to use an x86 system, and all the software will already be available. Maybe not in a shape that runs well, but who cares?

Ahem, x86 doesn't mean "a full Windows 8.1 with preinstalled steam and McAfee".

Kernel issues, modules, compiling things, packaging, ... it's still the linux experience , wine is kind of broken on x86 too.

 

[slaeshjag]

I have never sought up an online community around linux, unless you count the pandora. I don't think I'm alone with that.

 

[wej]

But... but... but anandtech clearly shows that blahblah ... Lol ^^.

We all know that you hate Intel. That's okay, you can hate whatever you want, but can't you just stop spamming all threads when discussions about x86 or Intel come up? If you have any real arguments, go ahead and post them. It doesn't look like you do, though.

 

[Thorgan]

I want PCSX-ReArmed, DraStic, PPSSPP, Reicast, and a whole bunch of other ARM-optimized emulators and games to work day 1 when I open my PYRA.  The last thing I want to do is wait for these to be re-optimized for x86 in order to use on PYRA.  That would be suck.

I kind of want to install a debian on my old rusty atom powered netbook, then install the following packages and see how they run, just to have an idea :

https://wiki.debian.org/Emulator

I mean the next SoC will be a beast... the problem isn't the "re-optimization"... The problem is what SoC is available and who will build/port software for it?

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

I want PCSX-ReArmed, DraStic, PPSSPP, Reicast, and a whole bunch of other ARM-optimized emulators and games to work day 1 when I open my PYRA.  The last thing I want to do is wait for these to be re-optimized for x86 in order to use on PYRA.  That would be suck.

I kind of want to install a debian on my old rusty atom powered netbook, then install the following packages and see how they run, just to have an idea :

https://wiki.debian.org/Emulator

I mean the next SoC will be a beast... the problem isn't the "re-optimization"... The problem is what SoC is available and who will build/port software for it?

I was editing my post when you replied to it.  But anyhow, yes, the people issue is a big one.  I doubt  there's even x86 people willing to do the work.  With ARM, I know we have notaz, Exophase, ptitSeb, linuxbochs, and other members of this community who are always willing to help.

 

[SNESFAN]

I have to admit there is a certain allure to having a x86 handheld. The lack of community would suck, but the device wouldn't be nearly *as* dependent as it is now. The community being the gatekeeper for average users without programming knowledge might be in the back of some ARM supporters minds. (just a theory)

As long as there isn't any secure boot nonsense, you could install your own linux distro or windows (possibly even osx or x86 android *shutter*) and literally all the same software would just work as it does on your PC. The amount of skill required to install an OS from a thumb drive vs setting up a cross compiler and compiling your own (if that's the only requirement) and pray it works as designed. It's disproportional skill required for the average user.

For me, I have always wanted a mobile WoW handheld. With x86 that would be possible, along with mountains of other games, with ARM it will never be without source. As it stands now, there's a policy of "source or GTFO" when asking for ports. And in some rare cases a software with source is presented, but the port is not done due to lack of interest or it not being a simple translation. Magnatudes of more software would be available to the average user than what would need a customized ports for.

Given all that, I still prefer ARM, but only because I find that arch interesting. I have plenty of x86 devices, but none in handhelds. That in it's self makes it interesting. I would be fine with either, but prefer ARM as it stands now.

 

[EvilDragon]

I'm still a bit scared by the power consumption of the Intel... according to specs, it would be up to 6A@1V - which means means 6W (only for the core).

Add display, etc. around it, and it's quite a bit of power.

A TI OMAP5 developer mentioned to me, that one of the design guides they had for the OMAP5 was 2W maximum power usage.

Not sure if they really did that (we need to measure it), but 6W sounds like quite a bit, only for the core.

 

[Wrath Of Khan]

I think the best soc for the job should be chosen.

We should not choose the soc based on stuff like " I don't like x86 or I don't like snapdragon.

Let ed and nikolaus compare and weigh up all available socs.

Then later  they can make a thread and lay out all the pros and cons and voice their opinions on the matter.

 

[SNESFAN]

Do you have enough money to design and measure power loads and benchmark both chips?

I am still concerned that with either option using only 1x 4200mah battery won't be enough to give it a healthy battery life when under a reasonable load

I find that to be more important to me than the architecture which I would honestly be fine with either as they both have pros/cons

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

Is there a chance that 2 batteries would be used?

 

[fusion_power]

To Fusion_Power and all the other repeating those old stories of x86 being the power-hungry beasts: I has been mentioned here and elsewhere over and over again. Just check the facts before repeating that nonesense. It is always good verify manufacturer's claims and not believe everything, but it does not help at all to repeat false myths over and over again.

x86 was out of the race since the beginning imho. You know there must be reasons why basicly nobody uses x86 based CPUs in Smartphones/handhelds. ARM usage goes up and up, more and more devices use ARM based cpu's and like ED mentioned, there are still concerns about power consumption, along with compared poorer optimization of X86 programs.I personaly see no advantages to use an bloated desktop CPU into a small mobile device. It WILL consume more power than an comparable ARM SoC, no matter how much optimized the x86 is. Again, this discussion was actualy over I thought, besides the fact that so far there is no proof that an x86 chipset is even accessible for a small batch device like the Pyra yet, same for the price range.

 

[wej]

I'm still a bit scared by the power consumption of the Intel... according to specs, it would be up to 6A@1V - which means means 6W (only for the core).

Add display, etc. around it, and it's quite a bit of power.

A TI OMAP5 developer mentioned to me, that one of the design guides they had for the OMAP5 was 2W maximum power usage.

Not sure if they really did that (we need to measure it), but 6W sounds like quite a bit, only for the core.

Do not mix up maximum power draw, TDP and SDP. You can't compare those. The TDP as well as the SDP is well below 6 W (4 W TDP, 2 W SDP). So in terms of typical power consumption those plattforms are actually pretty close. Those TDP / SDP numbers are not some numbers made up for advertising, but for actually calculating the system's cooling requirements.

x86 was out of the race since the beginning imho. You know there must be reasons why basicly nobody uses x86 based CPUs in Smartphones/handhelds. ARM usage goes up and up, more and more devices use ARM based cpu's and like ED mentioned, there are still concerns about power consumption, along with compared poorer optimization of X86 programs. I personaly see no advantages to use an bloated desktop CPU into a small mobile device. It WILL consume more power than an comparable ARM SoC, no matter how much optimized the x86 is. Again, this discussion was actualy over I thought, besides the fact that so far there is no proof that an x86 chipset is even accessible for a small batch device like the Pyra yet, same for the price range.

I'm at a loss here. Is it really that hard to read?

 

[Thorgan]

For me, I have always wanted a mobile WoW handheld. With x86 that would be possible, along with mountains of other games, with ARM it will never be without source. 

x86 won't give us more games. Let me explain :


Atom is already struggling with games, you can barely play on low details on a stripped down Windows.


Here we are talking about an embedded device (the architecture will totally differs from a desktop or laptop PC, no choice)  which will not run Windows. It will be Linux. Period.


The only advantage given by x86 when using software compatibility layers is avoiding the cpu emulation part. Is that really worth it ?


People thinking that a underpowered desktop cpu trimmed down for mobility will handle games on top of a costly compatibility layer will be disappointed.


Someone should really explain the whole Wine thing (also Apkenv) in a detailled post, and it should be stickied like the "no source, not port" thread.

 

[Hồng Thất Công]

I'm no SoC expert, but why x86 are not being used for mobile devices out there?  I'm not talking tablet, I'm talking phones and stuff.

Thanks,

eumnehS

 

[Granitehead]

To Fusion_Power and all the other repeating those old stories of x86 being the power-hungry beasts: I has been mentioned here and elsewhere over and over again. Just check the facts before repeating that nonesense. It is always good verify manufacturer's claims and not believe everything, but it does not help at all to repeat false myths over and over again.

x86 was out of the race since the beginning imho. You know there must be reasons why basicly nobody uses x86 based CPUs in Smartphones/handhelds. ARM usage goes up and up, more and more devices use ARM based cpu's and like ED mentioned, there are still concerns about power consumption, along with compared poorer optimization of X86 programs.I personaly see no advantages to use an bloated desktop CPU into a small mobile device. It WILL consume more power than an comparable ARM SoC, no matter how much optimized the x86 is. Again, this discussion was actualy over I thought, besides the fact that so far there is no proof that an x86 chipset is even accessible for a small batch device like the Pyra yet, same for the price range.

You are wrong on most of the points in your post. At full load (!), those recent Intel (mobile!) chips use more or less the same amount of power as the Snapdragon/OMAP ones. Intel chips are (!) accessible, you can even buy them individually for $40 or so.

I think the best soc for the job should be chosen.

We should not choose the soc based on stuff like " I don't like x86 or I don't like snapdragon.

Let ed and nikolaus compare and weigh up all available socs.

Then later  they can make a thread and lay out all the pros and cons and voice their opinions on the matter.

That they should do.But there is no reason we can't try to collect information and make comparison tables too, to make sure they don't oversee any important aspects.

The "ARM software is generally more optimized and thus faster/less power hungry on equally powerful chips" argument should be verified, I wouldn't just take it for granted.

It also hasn't been explicitly mentioned that x86 would increase the amount of available desktop software a lot. On the other hand we lose Android apps, do we?

 

[Natsu]

I'm no SoC expert, but why x86 are not being used for mobile devices out there?  I'm not talking tablet, I'm talking phones and stuff.

Thanks,

eumnehS

Actually, they already have phones with Intel.

 

[ghostpatch]

@Fusion_Power

when you talk about optimised software for ARM you must be referring to Android.... -.-

There are x86 mobile devices. The latest Asus tablet isn't bad at all. Just because something doesn't take over the mobile market in two or so generation doesn't mean its bad!

^ Do we even need a community if we go x86? I mean, everyone knows how to use an x86 system, and all the software will already be available. Maybe not in a shape that runs well, but who cares?

sry, I don't understand that persistence for ARM. ARM definalty has more optimised software but on the other hand Inels x86 SoCs have nice open source drivers. It's not like you can't optimise stuff for x86 or reverse engineer the ARM GPUs and write open source drivers.

In the end I'm fine with eigther one.

 

[comradekingu]

Dont want lockdown uefi, nor play computer games on low.

Posting from x86_64 desktop

 

[fusion_power]

Well I guess then ED has to test every possible Chip and compare them under equal conditions if possible. Meaning the so far remaining 3 candidates OMAP5, Snapdragon and the x86 Intel thingy. Whatever is the best in terms of battery usage, performance, compatibility, accessibility, price and so on may be choosen. I'm not against x86 in general but again, there is a reason why mobile devices count mostly on ARM architecture and not x86.

If the devs are more happy with x86 then use this. But if programs there are so poorly optimized like they are often for PC (compare a typical multiplatform game between PC and its Console version) they better stay with ARM.

 

[Null]

brb