Intel doesn’t think that Arm CPUs will make a dent in the laptop market

arstechnica.com Intel doesn’t think that Arm CPUs will make a dent in the laptop market

"They've been relegated to pretty insignificant roles in the PC business."

Intel doesn’t think that Arm CPUs will make a dent in the laptop market::"They've been relegated to pretty insignificant roles in the PC business."

130

You're viewing a single thread.

130 comments

Of course intel would be the last company to admit x86 is dying. It just doesn't make sense to keep doubling down on it anymore, Apple has proven ARM is more power efficient and in many cases more powerful than x86. I wanted to buy a new laptop this year but it makes no sense to do so considering Windows ARM machines are right around the corner and will triple battery life and increase performance.
- Intel is a licensed ARM manufacturer. They’re just doing PR but are capable of playing both sides.
- This seems to be doggedly persistent rumor. Apple's M chips are better due to better engineering and vertical integration.
  
  There is no inherent benefit to the underlying isa
  
  Is it me or is this even worse news for Intel?
  
  The new guys have better engineering that the guys they have been doing it since the dawn of the semiconductor age.
  
  Pack it in.
  
  ARM has a more efficient instruction set, uses less power, and generates less heat while matching performance. Not really a rumor.
  
  Source?
  
  Here's mine
  
  It's down to the engineering. Saying ARM has a more efficient instruction set is like saying C has more efficient syntax than python. Especially these days with pipelining 'n stuff, it all becomes very similar under the hood.
  
  Source?
  
  Here's mine
  
  That article may be out of date though. From the article:
  
  What limits computer performance today is predictability, and the two big ones are instruction/branch predictability, and data locality.
  
  This is true, and it points out one of the ways Intel has made their architecture so competitive, Intel has bet very heavily on branch prediction and they've done a lot of optimisation around it.
  
  But more recently branch prediction has proven to be quite problematic in terms of security. Branch prediction was the root of the problem that led to the meltdown and spectre vulnerabilities. And the only real mitigation for this problem was to completely redesign how branch prediction was done, and significantly reducing the performance gains.
  
  So yeah to sum up, one of the big differences between ARM and intel's X86 architecture is branch prediction, except branch prediction just got nerfed big time.
- CPU aside, it's best to wait for thunderbolt 5 to mature. Might finally be able to go to using one device for travel and an eGPU for gaming.
  
  Did you have issues with tb and an egpu? Beside some minor issues, my laptop with tb3 and an egpu works actually good.
  
  I mean that's fine. I'm just saying that x86 chips are still faster. If you want a beefy laptop, especially a work device that only needs to be slightly portable eg drag it to conference rooms and back to your desk, there is little current reason to go with ARM. I'm not saying they won't catch up but folks in here seem to be thinking that ARM is currently faster.
- What arm chips are faster than ryzen or Intel chips?
  
  M2 Max chips are close to the high end i9, but the M series cpus are mobile chips. They're designed for laptops. If competition is a bit harder then no doubt desktop-focused ARM CPUs will match their performance soon.
  
  AFAIK they're large chips though, and larger generally is more performance but also much more expensive to manufacture.
  
  Apple Silicon
  
  Which apple chips are faster than AMD or Intel's best. M2? Because it's not faster. More efficient sure. Not faster.
  
  One sec, gonna stick an 1650 Watt PSU in my backpack.
  
  Please. You can get 12 and 13 series chips running at 400w.
  
  But at those power consumptions series 12/13 aren’t significantly better than an M2…
  
  Obviously this is an exaggeration but the point is the M1/M2 outperform i9s on battery power and honestly that’s the future of computing.
  
  https://techjourneyman.com/blog/apple-m2-pro-m2-max-vs-intel-core-i9-13th-gen/
  
  It’s often faster. Usecases vary and for a lot of workflows, there’s nothing as fast as Apple Silicon at the consumer level.
  
  Basically few to non-existent cases where M2 is faster than either Intel or AMD's best. On power consumption however it's a total win for Apple. But performance... No. Not in any way.
  
  Article is about laptop cpus.
  
  M2 is the budget entry chip. M2 Pro/Max is a big jump up.
  
  there's basically nothing out there for laptops that comes close to the M2 Pro.
  
  the only benefit Intel/AMD have right now is access to external and better graphics chips made by companies that aren't Intel.
  
  desktops / servers are a different matter, but again, the article is talking about laptops.
  
  there's basically nothing out there for laptops that comes close to the M2 Pro
  
  The Intel Core i9-13980HX laptop CPU is between 20% and 100% faster than the M2 Max on nearly every benchmark.

You've viewed 130 comments.