6 ms·
Unfortunately it doesn't come with support for what really matters: 64-bit ARM. Support for Intel's 64-bit chips is irrelevant.
by higherpurpose 12y ago
Unfortunately it doesn't come with support for what really matters: 64-bit ARM. Support for Intel's 64-bit chips is irrelevant.
- ossreality 12y agoBecause it came months ago?
- suyash 12y agoIt's not irrelevant, think TV's, Gaming consoles etc are much better off with Intel processor than Arm.
- higherpurpose 12y agoAre you talking about micro-consoles? Why would they be better with Atom over something like Tegra K1? (which the first Android TV box is said to have anyway). Intel has given up on TV's a long time ago - around the time it forced Logitech to launch the first Google TV for $300 because Atom was like $90 a piece, as a component (probably making for about 50 percent of its BOM).
- ac29 12y agoSure, the Atom vs K1 comparison isn't necessarily in favor of Intel, but the comment you are replying to didn't mention Atom. I would argue that gaming consoles (micro or not) do make more sense with a X86 processor than what is available in ARM space currently. Think Intel i5 or AMD's APUs though, not Atom.
- Narishma 12y agoConsoles make no sense with Intel chips, just for cost reasons.
- rbanffy 12y agoWhile there is a huge benefit in running as much computation as possible out of the CPU and on more specialized chips, the two leading high end consoles use x86 CPUs to run a fairly large part of the overall processing. ARM is no magic and its price advantage came mostly from being simple and good enough at a time even the lowest end x86 would be overkill. Today there are some very low power x86 solutions that can compete with ARM solutions in both price and processing/watt.
- Narishma 12y agoI was talking specifically about chips made by Intel, not x86.
- izacus 12y agoUhm... Android L will certanly support 64-bit ARM and the support is in the new SDK and NDK. This is just an emulator image so you can test compatibility with 64-bit targets.
- higherpurpose 12y agoSo why are they making a big deal about Intel's chips then. Where is the ARMv8 ISA support?
- izacus 12y agoMost likely coming with the new hardware at L release.
- Zigurd 12y agoWho's got 64 bit ARM in a handset other than Apple? x86 is the way to get to 64 bit hardware fastest.
- krzyk 12y agoWhy 64bit is needed in phones right now? Is there a memory limit similar to he one on PCs where 32bit can support up to 4GB RAM? If so then I think there aren't many phones that have 3GB, not to mention 4GB.
- cpeterso 12y ago64-bit address space significantly improves ASLR protection.
- rbanffy 12y agoIt's fair to say ASLR is about 4 billion times better with a 64 bit processor.
- frankchn 12y agoARMv8 has more registers in addition to 64-bit address space support, so almost all applications should benefit from the minimization of register spilling.
- higherpurpose 12y agoSamsung already has a 64-bit ARM chip in Note 4. But because Google seems to be dragging its feet on adding 64-bit ARM support, it only works in 32-bit mode for now. HTC has also just launched not one, but two, 64-bit devices: Desire 510 and Desire 820, with Snapdragon 410 and 615 - both based on Cortex A53 (ARMv8). So the question is, why is Google so slow with 64-bit ARM support, when 64-bit ARM Android devices are already shipping?