8 ms·

Spoiler is in the conclusion: > Yes, it is absolutely key to build your app as ARM, not to rely on Windows ARM emulation.

• okanat 8mo ago
  Is this actually surprising? Once you use stuff like vectorization you want to get as much performance out of a system. If you're not natively compiling for a system, you won't get any performance. Using AVX2 and using an emulator have contradictory goals. Of course there can be a better emulator or actually matching hardware design (since both Apple and Microsoft actually exploit the similar register structure between ARM64 and x86_64). However, this means you have increased complexity and reduced reliability / predictability.
• vintagedave 8mo ago
  Author here - have to say, thanks for reading all the way to the end, you don't always see people do that ;) I put a spoiler at the top too, to avoid trying to make people read the whole thing. The real bit is that chart, which I think is quite an amazing result. You're right re building. We're a compiler vendor, so we have a natural interest in what people should be targeting. But even for us the results here were not what we expected ahead of time.
  • Aissen 8mo ago
    Having written an emulator, the conclusion was a bit less surprising. It's also probably not definitive, as it might depend on the specific hardware (and future emulator optimizations); you even say in your blog that the hardware you use is not the hardware Microsoft targeted.
• qingcharles 8mo ago
  Is Chrome for Windows compiled in ARM too or does it use the Windows under emulation? The reason I ask is that I believe Windows Chrome is (like many Windows binaries) compiled with lots of the advanced CPU features disabled (e.g. AVX512) because they're not available on older PCs. Is that true?