- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmit.online
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.”
ARM just makes sense for portable devices for obvious reasons, x86 isn’t dying though. For the average person who needs a laptop to do some professional-managerial work ARM is perfect.
What are those reasons that you think are so obvious? I have no idea what you could be referring to 😅
ARM is more efficient and as a “system on chip” reduces the need for as many other components on the boards, phones for example. Unless you’re doing heavy cpu or gpu intensive tasks there’s a bunch of upsides and no downsides to ARM.
That’s my impression as well. I’m confused about the “just”. There’s many non-portable devices that don’t have too heavy workloads and that I’d think would benefit from better energy efficiency.
Oh yeah the article is about the laptop market, but of course all sort of non-portable devices run on non-x86 platform. I’d even say x86 is the minority unless you reduce it to just desktop workstations.
Arm tends to be a lot more power efficient, so you can get better battery life on portable devices.
Not only that but also reducing the number of chips that need to be powered helps with efficiency.
And lower power consumption and heat production on all devices, so I don’t get the “just”
There is also a sizable market for laptops that do not do much more than log onto a remote desktop. Especially with remote working, that has becomes the perfect middle ground between security, cost, and ease of use. A cheap ARM processor would work perfectly for those machines.
I’m a sysadmin and would much rather have a light arm machine to remote in from than a standard Intel laptop.