this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
103 points (74.2% liked)

Technology

58315 readers
4477 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

2024 might be the breakout year for efficient ARM chips in desktop and laptop PCs.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 59 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (5 children)

This entire article just to hype up Qualcomm releasing a new CPU? I havent seen any evidence to suggest that this new Qualcomm CPU won't be trash like all the other ones.

ARM on PC isn't happening any time soon. They're not more efficient than x86 CPUs at all.

Here's a speed comparison between Qualcomm and AMD's best cpus from last year. Same TDP.

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-qualcomm_snapdragon_microsoft_sq3-vs-amd_ryzen_7_7840u

Here's Jim Keller, the father of both AMD Ryzen and the Apple M1, saying that ARM is not necessarily more efficient than x86:

https://chipsandcheese.com/2021/07/13/arm-or-x86-isa-doesnt-matter/

The only reason why Apple was able to make a successful ARM CPU was because they control the entire OS and the entire supply chain, and they have super expensive exclusivity contracts with TSMC. (because they literally make 50% of all phones in the world)

AMD's x86 CPUs are actually faster and more efficient than Apple's ARM CPUs on the same 5nm process node, but Apple is consistently 2 years ahead when it comes to silicon manufacturing, because of their TSMC deals.

Qualcomm doesn't have any of that, and there is no way their CPUs are going to be so much better than AMD's that people are going to be willing to put up with ISA incompatibilities. Windows on ARM has been a flop.

At least servers are more reasonable to see ARM chips, because all the software is open-source and all the major cloud vendors are making their own CPUs.

Nothing against ARM, or alternative ISAs in general, people just don't understand that x86 vs ARM is not about power efficiency at all, it's about supply chains and software compatibility.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The only reason why Apple was able to make a successful ARM CPU was because they control the entire OS and the entire supply chain

One has to assume similar efforts are being undertaken with Qualcomm, Intel, Google, Microsoft, etc.

I don't think anyone thinks slapping an ARM processor in a Windows laptop is going to suddenly make them more efficient.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I don't think anyone thinks slapping an ARM processor in a Windows laptop is going to suddenly make them more efficient.

I say most think exactly that.

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Here's a speed comparison between Qualcomm and AMD's best cpus from last year. Same TDP.

Amd's chip runs on 28 watts and is built on 4nm, qc's runs on 7 watts and is built on 5nm. They are not equivalent.

AMD's x86 CPUs are actually faster and more efficient than Apple's ARM CPUs on the same 5nm process node, but Apple is consistently 2 years ahead when it comes to silicon manufacturing, because of their TSMC deals.

Comparing amd 7840u pro (4 nm, 28W) with apple m2 pro 10 core (5 nm, 28W), amd is 7% faster in single core and 10% faster in multi core. It's unclear how it would be if they were on the same node. Feels they'd be the same

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think the QC chip is 28 watts too. They use the same chassis as the Intel chip.

That is a good point that AMD's node is technically slightly newer, even though they are both 5nm class. TSMC's N4P is claimed to be up to 5% faster or 10% more power efficient than N5P. So, fair enough, they're about even.

https://www.techradar.com/news/the-future-of-leading-edge-chips-according-to-tsmc-5nm-4nm-3nm-and-beyond

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/tsmc-announces-n4p-process-a-refined-n4-chip-node

[–] Lojcs@lemm.ee 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I think chassis choice is just to keep it consistent. Sq3 is apparently based on 8cx gen3 which runs on 7 watts. The site you linked says sq3 has 4 medium and 4 small cores, but judging by how they run at the same frequencies as 8cx's 4 large and 4 medium cores and the benchmark scores of the two chips being pretty much the same, I think it's safe to say they're the same chip. At the very least if sq3 pulled 4x the power to produce the same result Microsoft would just use the 8cx gen3

[–] corbin@infosec.pub 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The SQ3 was a custom design only for Surface tablets, I’m not sure it’s representative of Qualcomm’s future generally-available hardware. Early benchmarks on the Snapdragon Elite are much more promising but TDP and other important details are still missing.

You’re definitely right that software vertical integration is the missing piece. We’re starting to see a little bit of that in the PC ecosystem (e.g. windows using the AI core on newer CPUs/SoCs for live camera and mic effects) but more needs to happen there.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 2 points 8 months ago

That's true. I haven't looked that closely at QC's most recent chips, just pointing out that they're usually slower/hotter/more-expensive

It's good to see competition, but people should manage their expectations. They're gonna have to be a lot faster/efficient than the AMD 7840u in order to make running ARM worth it on PC.

It'll be a fight, and in 2025 they'll have to compete with Zen 5, too.

[–] mryessir@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago

My X13s with Linux, at 250 nits brightness while browsing via WLAN and playing music from the browser via bluetooth uses 5-8W in total.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 8 months ago

You shouldn't trust TDP numbers. They're most useful to get a ballpark idea of what size cooler you'll need for a given chip (and even then, Nactua has their own rating system for matching coolers to chips). AMD, in particular, reinvents their TDP formula regularly and plays with the numbers to get the output they want for comparison purposes.

Anyway, I'd be fine if ARM ends up being only on par with x86. It's still a way out of the insanity of the x86 architecture and opens up so many more companies who can make chips.

[–] blazera@kbin.social 41 points 8 months ago (12 children)

It says it a few times about x86 being decades old...but so is ARM? I dont know whats supposed to be game changing about it.

[–] frezik@midwest.social -1 points 8 months ago

X86 has an incredible amount of cruft built up to support backwards compatibility all the way back to the 8086. ARM isn't free of cruft, but it's nowhere on the same level. Most of that isn't directly visible to customers, though.

What is visible is that more than three companies can license and manufacture them. The x86 market has one company that owns it, another who licenses it but also owns the 64 bit extensions, and a third one who technically exists but is barely worth talking about. It's also incredibly difficult to optimize, and the people who know how already work for one of main two companies (arguably only one at this point). Even if you could legally license it as a fourth player, you couldn't get people who could design an x86 core that's worth a damn.

Conversely, ARM cores are designed by CS students all the time. That's the real advantage to end users: far more companies who can produce designs. If one of them fails the way Intel has of late, we're not stuck with just one other possibility.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 39 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

This is a Qualcomm marketing piece.

And no, the most exciting 2024 tech won't be a CPU with similar or lower performance to other comparable CPUs on the market, with the added benefit of less software compatibility.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

Can't wait. I recently bought a firewall that gets noticeably warm on idle, even with a little case that has a heat sink. We need more energy efficient PCs.

[–] geekworking@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

One of the hurdles to ARM is that you need to recompile and maintain a separate version of every piece of software for the different processors.

This is a much easier task for a tightly controlled ecosystem like Mac than the tons of different suppliers Windows ecosystem. You can do some sort of emulation to run non-native stuff, but at the cost of the optimization that you were hoping to gain.

Another OS variation also adds a big cost/burden to enterprise customers where they need to manage patches, security, etc.

I would expect to see more inroads in non-corporate areas following Apple success, but not any sort of explosion.

[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

micrsoft has spent the last few years rebuilding their shit to work on ARM. no idea how far theyve come, but you will absolutely see windows on arm for the enterprise.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Apple has the benefit of having done architecture transitions a few times already. Microsoft has been trying to get everyone out of the "Program Files (x86)" directory for over decade.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] qjkxbmwvz@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 8 months ago

On the other hand, a completely open ecosystem works well too


ARM for Linux feels exactly like ARM on x86/64 in my experience. Granted this is for headless stuff on an (RPi and Orange Pi, both ARM, both running Debian), but really the only difference is the bootloader situation.

[–] Hypx@kbin.social 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This is just a repeat of the same old pro-RISC myths from decades ago. There is very little performance difference between x86 and any RISC based CPU, at least when pertaining to the ISA itself. Apple merely has the advantage of having far more resources available for CPU development than their competitors.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Modern x86 is a CISC outer layer around a RISC inner core. It didn't hang on this long by ignoring RISC, but by assimilating it. RISC really did change everything, but not by the way everyone thought.

[–] bamboo@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It would be fascinating to see Qualcomm, NVIDIA, AMD, Mediatek, and possibly others all competing to build the best ARM SoCs for windows devices, especially after so many years of Intel stagnating and Apple eating their lunch with their ARM SoCs.

[–] akrot@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

competing to build the best ARM SoCs for windows devices

You mean desktop, and not Windows? Because if anything Windows is becoming a botnet device. I hope linux support is OOB.

[–] bamboo@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago

Windows arm devices boot with UEFI, so standard ARM UEFI images should work, just like on x86. I would bet drivers should be alright too, since these ARM SoCs will likely be similar to ones used in Linux SBCs and Android devices.

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago

Wake me up when risc-v has performance parity and more software

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

2024 might be the year I win a million dollars.

[–] Something_Complex@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I will tell you how to win 2 million if you give me 1

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 8 months ago

Does anyone else worry that the rise of personal computers using super custom SOCs is going to have negative effects on our abilities to build our own machines?

[–] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

"The most exciting tech isn't the thing that currently exists and is being improved and integrated daily, it's this other thing we don't even know for sure will maybe happen."

[–] corbin@infosec.pub 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Right, it’s less exciting now because it’s already here. I’m not expecting radically improved GPT models or whatever in 2024, probably just more iteration. The most exciting stuff there might be local AI tech becoming more usable, like we’ve seen with stable diffusion.

[–] sir_reginald@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

I'm just expecting performance optimisations, especially for local LLMs. Right now there are models as good as GPT-4 (Goliath 120B), but they require 2 RTX 4090 to run.

The models that require less powerful equipment are not as good, of course.

But hopefully, given enough time, good enough models will be able to run with mid end hardware.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 0 points 8 months ago (6 children)

"Forget about the possibility that we may finally have developed machines that think, that comprehend the world in a way similar to how humans do and can communicate with us on our level. This new chip design might end up with comparable capabilities to the existing chip design!"

Yeah, there was no need to try to hype this up as the biggest thing ever.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Floshie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 months ago

Omg the porting of games would be awfull

[–] smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Ah yes, let's welcome one device - one operating system myth to the desktops, with people choosing hardware because of software feauture that could be installable. Welcome the expiration date on computers called "years of software support" and welcome overall unfriendlyness for alternative systems.

Performance and efficency is one side of the coin. But let me remind you that Qualcomm (among with Google) is the reason we cannot have lifetime updates for our phones, ROMs build needs to be specific for each model and making a phone with anything but Android is nearly impossible.

I'll take ARM over x86, but I'll take AMD/Intel over Qualcomm thousand times more.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

AI is currently limited in application (and legislation). I think when we start seeing it in things like document ecosystems like Google Workspace or Microsoft Office, or in operating systems like Windows 12 and Android, that's when we'll start seeing what it's really capable of.

Also open-source applications that aren't necessarily limited by laws or corporate optics.

Thinks like creating helper bots that aid in troubleshooting or "assistants" that can draft/send emails, create calendar events, answer questions based on emails, etc.

But yeah in it's current state it is mostly just a glorified search engine.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 8 months ago

ow yea 2024 will definitely be the year where AI gets integrated into all those products.

[–] melroy@kbin.melroy.org 0 points 8 months ago

I really hope so... Those x86 architecture chips are killing me.

[–] chemicalwonka@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 8 months ago

But one detail that we cannot forget is that with the increase in ARM architecture in PCs and laptops we will probably see an increase in fully locked hardware. We don't need the expansion of the ARM architecture for PCs if it doesn't come with hardware and software freedom

load more comments
view more: next ›