Alberto (git.delete@this.git.it) on August 17, 2018 9:13 am wrote:
> Andrei Frumusanu (andrei.delete@this.anandtech.com) on August 17, 2018 7:30 am wrote:
> > Alberto (git.delete@this.git.it) on August 17, 2018 1:52 am wrote:
> > > Adrian (a.delete@this.acm.org) on August 16, 2018 11:56 pm wrote:
> > > > AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com) on August 16, 2018 9:32 am wrote:
> > > > > https://www.arm.com/company/news/2018/08/accelerating-mobile-and-laptop-performance
> > > > >
> > > ARM always was misleading.
> > > If you look at power draw of many very recent phone SOCs under load,
> > > the power consumption go in the 11/15w range toasting your phone.
> > >
> >
> > This is complete garbage talk. All recent Arm CPU based SoCs are 1.5-2.5W
> >
> > https://images.anandtech.com/doci/12520/speceff1.png
>
> This is absolutely wrong, the average figure under load is 5-7 W in phones and 9-12W in tablets. Yes
> there is the screen to consider but under a cpu load test this is nearly irrelevant.
>
> You can find tons of power tests on Notebookcheck site, for boh phones and tablets
>

Alberto, rather than getting so upset, ask yourself some realistic questions:
"Why has ARM never announced something like this before?
And why did they choose to now announce something like this?"

As usual Americans, especially Wintel users, think the world revolves around them, and that this announcement is relevant to them. This has NOTHING TO DO with Wintel. If MS wants to keep pushing Windows on ARM, ARM won't stop them, but they don't care. This is about enabling computing for everyone who is NOT on Wintel; it's about enabling ruggedized cheap (really cheap) laptops for India, and rural China, and Africa.
The comparison to Intel performance is to allow the Chinese vendors (and anyone else who wants to plan non-ISA-dependent boxes for the 2019..2021 timeframe) to calibrate their expectations and plan accordingly.
Do you sell a NAS? A Microtik style box? An Asterix box? Maybe it's time to reconsider either using ARM64 (start experimenting with the SW) or thinking what you could do if you had much more CPU.

As for why they are doing this, that's as obvious as why they are announcing it. Apple has shown what is possible if you're willing to pay a slightly higher area and energy cost. ARM has always concentrated on absolutely minimalist area and energy requirements, and that served them well. But there is clearly a huge pool of potential customers (ie all those flagship phone vendors) who would be quite willing to pay a lot more for a core that was a lot closer to Apple. So time to augment the business plan. And once you have a core that kicks ass, why limit yourself to selling it only in phones?

None of this has to do with who "REALLY" has lower power at a particular performance target, Intel or ARM. It has to do with informing people that ARM will be targeting a new space, as opposed to their current target spaces. THAT is what matters, everything else is decoration.
You're like a guy reading that Apple has announced it will make cars, and your comment is that they used the wrong font in the ad; totally missing the significance of the announcement.