4 ms·

> what's the incentive for a chip manufacturer to put out a better ARM chip (eg comparable to the Apple M1)? Intel & AMD’s consumer and/or server market share.

by MBCook 4y ago

> what's the incentive for a chip manufacturer to put out a better ARM chip (eg comparable to the Apple M1)? Intel & AMD’s consumer and/or server market share. I can’t imagine going back to an Intel after an M1. The battery life is better. It’s dead silent. It doesn’t get warm. It’s like a totally different kind of object. I know PC people (those who want Windows) aren’t interested in an M1 Mac. That’s fine. But I see PC laptop reviews with 4 or 6 or maybe 8 hours of battery life. They get hot but the fan isn’t “too loud”. And I know the performance isn’t the same. And I just wish reviewers would call it out. They’re not on the same level. I’m sure fanboys would complain about the comparison in every review, but why shouldn’t Windows users have something much better? It’s been proven possible. Hold AMD/Intel/Qualcomm to the fire more. If Qualcomm could get a chip with reasonable performance at a reasonable price that just doesn’t get hot and waste all its battery playing space heater, I bet they could really get a hold on the laptop market.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
eric-hu 4y ago
Proving your point, Amazon designed graviton, an ARM processor for their data centers.
- MBCook 4y ago
  Data centers know power/heat is everything. I’m not surprised they’re leading the way. But as a consumer you’re stuck. You should have a machine with the performance of any normal/good laptop with way better thermals and battery life. I’m not sure what the Uber-high end laptop would look like but surely it would do better than today. The scale needs adjusting. What counts as “too hot”, “too short battery life”, “minimum performance.” It all should have changed. But it didn’t. The industry acts like Macs are magic and therefor incomparable. “Of course that Boeing goes faster, it’s a jet engine plane. You can’t compare that to our cars.” They’re both computers. It can be done. So why are Intel/AMD/Qualcomm getting off the hook to such a degree? I just don’t understand it. It’s almost like Stockholm Syndrome or something. “Intel is nice to us, who are we to complain?”
  - itsoktocry 4y ago
    >The industry acts like Macs are magic and therefor incomparable. The cheapest M1 is $1300 in Canada. MacBook Pros are well over $2000. These prices are far beyond the budget of the majority of computer users. They are also beyond the requirements. >Of course that Boeing goes faster, it’s a jet engine plane. You can’t compare that to our cars. No, it's like comparing a BMW to a Honda. You spend a lot less money and then are surprised it doesn't perform as well?
    - MBCook 4y ago
      I’m only trying to talk about just the chips. Yes, the MBA is more expensive than most people would want to pay. But it’s also not comparable to those laptops. It has a very high quality Retina display, the all-metal unibody construction, and Apple’s infamous profit margins. There is no reason to think putting a similarly efficient processor in an otherwise standard PC laptop would raise the price much. Heck, Intel loves there margins too. I don’t think the chip is too expensive. It’s all the other choices Apple makes that push the price up so much.

by MBCook 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

eric-hu 4y ago

Proving your point, Amazon designed graviton, an ARM processor for their data centers.

MBCook 4y ago
Data centers know power/heat is everything. I’m not surprised they’re leading the way. But as a consumer you’re stuck. You should have a machine with the performance of any normal/good laptop with way better thermals and battery life. I’m not sure what the Uber-high end laptop would look like but surely it would do better than today. The scale needs adjusting. What counts as “too hot”, “too short battery life”, “minimum performance.” It all should have changed. But it didn’t. The industry acts like Macs are magic and therefor incomparable. “Of course that Boeing goes faster, it’s a jet engine plane. You can’t compare that to our cars.” They’re both computers. It can be done. So why are Intel/AMD/Qualcomm getting off the hook to such a degree? I just don’t understand it. It’s almost like Stockholm Syndrome or something. “Intel is nice to us, who are we to complain?”
- itsoktocry 4y ago
  >The industry acts like Macs are magic and therefor incomparable. The cheapest M1 is $1300 in Canada. MacBook Pros are well over $2000. These prices are far beyond the budget of the majority of computer users. They are also beyond the requirements. >Of course that Boeing goes faster, it’s a jet engine plane. You can’t compare that to our cars. No, it's like comparing a BMW to a Honda. You spend a lot less money and then are surprised it doesn't perform as well?
  - MBCook 4y ago
    I’m only trying to talk about just the chips. Yes, the MBA is more expensive than most people would want to pay. But it’s also not comparable to those laptops. It has a very high quality Retina display, the all-metal unibody construction, and Apple’s infamous profit margins. There is no reason to think putting a similarly efficient processor in an otherwise standard PC laptop would raise the price much. Heck, Intel loves there margins too. I don’t think the chip is too expensive. It’s all the other choices Apple makes that push the price up so much.