As soon as the author talks about how x86 is a vastly technically inferior architecture to ARM, you can immediately tell that that they don't know what they are talking about.
As soon as the author talks about how x86 is a vastly technically inferior architecture to ARM, you can immediately tell that that they don't know what they are talking about.
What does x86-64 do better than ARM except enabling legacy binaries to run unchanged? Genuine question, as a pretty much complete novice/layman on the topic.
What does x86-64 do better than ARM except enabling legacy binaries to run unchanged?
Genuine question, as a pretty much complete novice/layman on the topic.
They did say "on mobile devices" in that blurb, which is a pretty reasonable take. Especially for about the first decade of smartphones. And now with decades of refinement, ARM is starting to...
They did say "on mobile devices" in that blurb, which is a pretty reasonable take. Especially for about the first decade of smartphones.
And now with decades of refinement, ARM is starting to reach x86 levels of performance, to the point it can reasonably emulate x86 with minimal performance hits.
Understatement of the century right there. AMD's marketshare was in the single-digits....under 5% if you look at the most-profitable server market. Their marketshare is exploding by any reasonable...
Notably, since 2019, AMD has somewhat increased its market share of x86 processors against Intel after over a decade of decline, indicating that even in its core business area Intel is facing serious competition
Understatement of the century right there. AMD's marketshare was in the single-digits....under 5% if you look at the most-profitable server market. Their marketshare is exploding by any reasonable metric, because the system lifecycle of servers sits around 3 years minimum and upwards of 10.
it lost the vast majority of the market to Nvidia, who pioneered the technology
Well, no, that would be NEC, Hitachi, IBM, and Sharp. Nvidia came to dominate the market in part through (IMO) dirty tactics.
As soon as the author talks about how x86 is a vastly technically inferior architecture to ARM, you can immediately tell that that they don't know what they are talking about.
What does x86-64 do better than ARM except enabling legacy binaries to run unchanged?
Genuine question, as a pretty much complete novice/layman on the topic.
They did say "on mobile devices" in that blurb, which is a pretty reasonable take. Especially for about the first decade of smartphones.
And now with decades of refinement, ARM is starting to reach x86 levels of performance, to the point it can reasonably emulate x86 with minimal performance hits.
Understatement of the century right there. AMD's marketshare was in the single-digits....under 5% if you look at the most-profitable server market. Their marketshare is exploding by any reasonable metric, because the system lifecycle of servers sits around 3 years minimum and upwards of 10.
Well, no, that would be NEC, Hitachi, IBM, and Sharp. Nvidia came to dominate the market in part through (IMO) dirty tactics.