Version: 2008

Comments on: Intel has ARM in its crosshairs

Chip giant isn't content dominating the PC and server markets. It wants to make gains in mobile phones, where competition is stiffer.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (18 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
ARM HQ
by dpapas September 26, 2007 7:26 AM PDT
is in Cambridge, not London.
Reply to this comment
You're right
by Tom Krazit September 26, 2007 9:02 AM PDT
Thanks, we'll fix that.
Intel's ARM Competition
by john oehrle September 26, 2007 9:37 AM PDT
You write:"Intel's definitely the challenger, not the favorite, when handicapping the looming showdown between the two companies. "
WHAT 2 COMPANIES?
Reply to this comment
Intel and ARM
by aka_tripleB September 26, 2007 10:48 AM PDT
I know that ARM isn't specifically mentioned in the sentence, but that's what the entire article is about.
View reply
Intel has shown it has the resources and patients to never fail
by onlyauser September 26, 2007 10:51 AM PDT
Sure, Intel, like all companies have had 'product related' set backs, however, Intel never utimately fails.

The are patient as a monk and persistant as a four year old after candy.

The world is Intel's oyster. I would never underestimate Intel.
Reply to this comment
Intel never fails???
by t3st3r` September 27, 2007 5:37 PM PDT
Pentium IV has been a major failure, they reverted back to Pentium III, improved it and now this old reworked thingie called brand new Core2.

They produced XSCale.But it has been used in big PDAs only.Since Intel has MHz mania.They unable to stop on clocking their MHz up higher abd higher, so their CPUs are power hog when it comes to question to run several days marathon from 3.6V 900mAh battery while doing something useful.It is not enough to squeeze power consumed my Pentium M by factor 5 or 10, it will eat mobile device battery too fast anyway.
View reply
test
by mwohl September 26, 2007 10:57 AM PDT
test
Reply to this comment
browser comparison seems unfair
by frankly0 September 26, 2007 11:30 AM PDT
A very important reason that the browsers and web pages are different on PCs from those on mobile phones is that the pages that must be displayed are vastly different in size, and must be differently laid out because the input mechanisms for links and buttons are so very different.

That difference is not going to go away just because X86 software can be used on a mobile phone. You'd just get unusable web pages for the phone.

And, of course, the buginess of the mobile browsers mainly derives from the fact that they have seen relatively little use and so relatively little developer eyeballs.
Reply to this comment
I agree
by Tom Krazit September 26, 2007 12:08 PM PDT
It's like comparing the performance of Itanium to the Core 2 Duo. Sure, Itanium's the highest performing chip in Intel's arsenal, but it's not going to work very well in a PC.

But Intel's argument is that experienced x86 developers will be able to create better mobile browsers than ARM developers, who right now have to work with a multitude of operating systems and core technologies. Intel has to make some sort of promise that way, because they won't have competitive products out until next year.

And this software argument is where Intel will have to deliver, because they're trying to displace an instruction set that's already well accepted in this area. Not only will they have to match the power/performance of ARM chips, they'll have to give hardware makers and application developers a real reason to walk away from the investments they've already made in ARM.
View reply
Let's decent comparison.Look at n800 :)
by t3st3r` September 27, 2007 5:40 PM PDT
Linux is cross platform.As well as Firefox engine.So, actually you can browse even ajax and flash sites on ARM-based device.Ha-ha, just some incompetent words in this article.Article is worth nothing.
Browsers...
by t3st3r` September 27, 2007 5:32 PM PDT
n800 does uses Ti OMAP and provides decent browsing experience.
- Browser is Opera 8.5 built for ARM.
- Flash 9 is here, built for ARM as well
- There is beta of MicroB browser, who runs Gecko 1.9, this is engine of FireFox 3.0...

And yes, web browsing experience can be great.Yes, on ARM CPU.So if Intel unable to do something working with ARM set they're trying to deal with ancient x86 stuff which is over 20 years old.Actually, ARM is much more efficient when it comes to performance vs consumed power ratio.Intel was NEVER able to acheive good power consumption on their CPUs and nobody needs devices sucking all their battery within couple of hours.For example Ti OMAP performs quite tricky power saving techniques.Years ahead things Intel can offer.
Reply to this comment
by Thomas, David June 11, 2008 11:36 AM PDT
Comments about browsers being a factor to x86 development are lacking in context with our current capabilities. You must take into account what Apple has done, Android is doing, and multitouch in general. The reasons for creating a browser based upon limited viewing area are diminishing quickly to no reason at all.
Reply to this comment
by bapcha June 25, 2009 1:48 PM PDT
ARM'S Cores are synthesized using RTL and Synopsys. Intel's cores use Domino Logic that needs to be carefully designed transistor by transistor. If Intel is Patek-Phillippe, ARM is Swatch.

Bapcha
I know what I am talking about.
Reply to this comment
(18 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

advertisement