4 ms·

I presume a lot of the perf gains of hypervisors are using Intel vt-x to hardware accelerate. The other issue with ARM is that there are several dozen chip var

I presume a lot of the perf gains of hypervisors are using Intel vt-x to hardware accelerate. The other issue with ARM is that there are several dozen chip varieties whereas x86 only has Intel and AMD. This could hopefully accelerate mini-CPU companies springing up with their own ARM64 chips producing their own hardware running Windows ARM64. Google is rumored to be designing their own CPUs for future high-powered Chromebooks and Pixel phones. Qualcomm has an ARM64 chip powering the Microsoft Surface ProX but it’s nowhere near the performance levels of M1. Microsoft is starting to experiment with CPUs with the Pluton chip, maybe they will design an “M1” flagship chip going forward for their own Surface product line.

ineedasername 6y ago
This could hopefully accelerate mini-CPU companies springing up with their own ARM64 chips producing their own hardware running Windows ARM64 I hadn't even thought of that. There's real potential to break open the market on general computing/desktop/laptop chips here. I can see how that might get complicated from an OS support standpoint, but it could also instill a remarkable amount of innovation-driven competition. It probably already has, with board-room meetings (and more importantly some long lunches with engineers hashing things out) realizing the M1 is the one to beat. And since it's Apple, and Apple will probably remain niche & not license their tech to others, the first to market with even an 80% M1 solution will be in good shape. Honestly I'm most impressed by the GPU side of the M1. Rough equivalence to a dedicated 1050 Ti is crazy. That's in the respectable-low-end gaming side of things: I'm on a weird Intel-AMD hybrid chipset (hades canyon) that puts me between a 1050 and 1060 and I'm running AC:Valhalla on moderate settings ~45fps. It seems like Rosetta can achieve something around 70% performance, so less demanding new games and most older games should be playable for anyone who just wants to play and doesn't mind a steady 30fps and modest textures & AA. I think some Wine variant (CrossOver?) is already working to make native Windows games playable under Rosetta as well. It wouldn't happen overnight, but the prospect of making AAA games playable on a $700 off the shelf mini of $1000 mac book would spur on the big game engine makers to port their tools over to make M1 a build target. Sure if you're tech savvy and shop around and don't mind at least a few hours of integration hell you can build yourself a very budget low-end gaming pc for ~$500 by forgoing a dedicate GPU and relying on the Vega 11 in Ryzan 5 3400G and that's without an OS and a much larger footprint. (Though if Steam gets their act together and offers a cloud-streaming option where I don't have to repurchase my games ::ahem, Stadia:: I'd forgo gaming hardware and stick to a strong Ryzen CPU w/ solid APU for non-gaming tasks.)

ineedasername 6y ago

This could hopefully accelerate mini-CPU companies springing up with their own ARM64 chips producing their own hardware running Windows ARM64 I hadn't even thought of that. There's real potential to break open the market on general computing/desktop/laptop chips here. I can see how that might get complicated from an OS support standpoint, but it could also instill a remarkable amount of innovation-driven competition. It probably already has, with board-room meetings (and more importantly some long lunches with engineers hashing things out) realizing the M1 is the one to beat. And since it's Apple, and Apple will probably remain niche & not license their tech to others, the first to market with even an 80% M1 solution will be in good shape. Honestly I'm most impressed by the GPU side of the M1. Rough equivalence to a dedicated 1050 Ti is crazy. That's in the respectable-low-end gaming side of things: I'm on a weird Intel-AMD hybrid chipset (hades canyon) that puts me between a 1050 and 1060 and I'm running AC:Valhalla on moderate settings ~45fps. It seems like Rosetta can achieve something around 70% performance, so less demanding new games and most older games should be playable for anyone who just wants to play and doesn't mind a steady 30fps and modest textures & AA. I think some Wine variant (CrossOver?) is already working to make native Windows games playable under Rosetta as well. It wouldn't happen overnight, but the prospect of making AAA games playable on a $700 off the shelf mini of $1000 mac book would spur on the big game engine makers to port their tools over to make M1 a build target. Sure if you're tech savvy and shop around and don't mind at least a few hours of integration hell you can build yourself a very budget low-end gaming pc for ~$500 by forgoing a dedicate GPU and relying on the Vega 11 in Ryzan 5 3400G and that's without an OS and a much larger footprint. (Though if Steam gets their act together and offers a cloud-streaming option where I don't have to repurchase my games ::ahem, Stadia:: I'd forgo gaming hardware and stick to a strong Ryzen CPU w/ solid APU for non-gaming tasks.)