3 ms·
This is an argument for 'ARM chips are a viable CPU option in consumer laptops/desktops', but not for the title's original claim.
by 666lumberjack 8y ago
This is an argument for 'ARM chips are a viable CPU option in consumer laptops/desktops', but not for the title's original claim.
- benj111 8y agoI think its a very interesting analogy actually, even if OT. The Bugatti has higher performance but for 90% of people isn't the better car. How long before Intel paint themselves into a corner by going for performance to justify their prices, when everyone just needs a bog standard ARM?
- dsr_ 8y agoThe title's original claim is reasonably supported in the article. I'm pointing out that even if ARM development mysteriously stops making gains against x86 development, it's entirely reasonable to think that Apple might announce that the next revision of OS X has an ARM version that runs on their new 16 hour Macbook Air and their new 14 hour Macbook.
- 666lumberjack 8y agoI confess, I hadn't finished reading the original article when I posted my previous comment so I was operating under the assumption that ARM single-core performance was significantly further from parity than it apparently is. My original objection was that an external GPU can't shield you from lag and unresponsiveness in normal, everyday (ie. not designed to take advantage of GPU compute) software, but if the single core performance delta between an A12 and a reasonably recent desktop i7 is genuinely only 20% then that's not an issue.