> either because they don't need THAT many cores, or because they value the more sophisticated instructions (like encryption acceleration, etc.) The parallela

> either because they don't need THAT many cores, or because they value the more sophisticated instructions (like encryption acceleration, etc.) The parallela was much more complex, had its own bus architecture which required an FPGA to glue the chip to the Arm cores in the FPGA SoC which ran Linux. Compare that to a simple x86 or Arm system where the tooling and software is mature and you don't have to do any extra fancy work. Just write a program and execute it. Same thing that killed the IBM/Sony Cell processor. Neat idea, PITA to program.