By: Aaron Spink (aaronspink.delete@this.notearthlink.net), August 28, 2014 12:04 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
juanrga (nospam.delete@this.juanrga.com) on August 27, 2014 4:35 pm wrote:
> Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on August 27, 2014 1:34 pm wrote:
> > I like a good fact-free fight about how x86 [sux|roolz] as much as anyone, but how about
> > we turn aside from that for a few minutes to consider one particular set of datapoints?
> >
> > To recap:
> > The argument made (enthusiastically by juanrga, more moderately by others) is that the
> > ARM-64 server CPUs which we should see from various vendors will do well because they
> > will offer a compelling performance/power advantage over their x64 competitors.
>
> My arguments are very similar to others [Microprocessor Report: "THUNDER X RATTLES SERVER
> MARKET, Cavium Develops 48-Core ARM Processor to Challenge Xeon" (2014, June 9)]:
>
And neither your nor MPR's arguments are based on the slightest bit of any credible data. There is a great quote about paper and computer architectures but I can't track it down atm.
> Maynard Handley (name99.delete@this.name99.org) on August 27, 2014 1:34 pm wrote:
> > I like a good fact-free fight about how x86 [sux|roolz] as much as anyone, but how about
> > we turn aside from that for a few minutes to consider one particular set of datapoints?
> >
> > To recap:
> > The argument made (enthusiastically by juanrga, more moderately by others) is that the
> > ARM-64 server CPUs which we should see from various vendors will do well because they
> > will offer a compelling performance/power advantage over their x64 competitors.
>
> My arguments are very similar to others [Microprocessor Report: "THUNDER X RATTLES SERVER
> MARKET, Cavium Develops 48-Core ARM Processor to Challenge Xeon" (2014, June 9)]:
>
And neither your nor MPR's arguments are based on the slightest bit of any credible data. There is a great quote about paper and computer architectures but I can't track it down atm.
