163
Linux geeks cheer as Arm wrestles x86 • The Register (www.theregister.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
58 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Arm is not any better than x86 when it comes to instructions. There's a reason we stuck to x86 for a very long time. Arm is great because of its power efficiency.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Arm is better because there are more than three companies who can design and manufacture one.

    Edit: And only one of the three x86 manufacturers are worth a damn, and it ain't Intel.

    Edit2: On further checking, VIA sold its CPU design division (Centaur) to Intel in 2021. VIA now makes things like SBCs, some with Intel, some ARM. So there's only two x86 manufacturers around anymore.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Three? VIA?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, everyone forgets them. Mostly for good reasons.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    That power efficiency is a direct result of the instructions. Namely smaller chips due to the reduced instructions set, in contrast to x86's (legacy bearing) complex instruction set.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    All else being equal, a complex decoding pipeline does reduce the efficiency of a processor. It’s likely not the most important aspect, but eventually there will be a point where it does become an issue once larger efficiency problems are addressed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Well, not exactly. You have to remove instructions at some point. That’s what Intel’s x86-S is supposed to be. You lose some backwards compatibility but they’re chosen to have the least impact on most users.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes I understand that and agree, but the reason x86 dominated is because of those QoL instructions that x86 has. On arm you need to write more code to do the same thing x86 does, OTOH, if you don't need to write a complex application, that isn't a bad thing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You don't need to write more code. It's just that code compiles to more explicit/numerous machine instructions. A difference in architecture is only really relevant if you're writing assembly or something like it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •