Comments on: Can Intel Thrive in a Post x86 World?

By: With ARM Rate Hike, Will Smartphone Prices Follow? – GigaOM

With ARM Rate Hike, Will Smartphone Prices Follow? – GigaOM — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:56:42 +0000

[...] a battleground in the chip industry (GigaOM Pro, sub. required), pitting ARM against Intel — which has owned the PC space — among others. With this move, the war is clearly not [...]

By: Has Intel Reached the Limits of x86? – GigaOM

Has Intel Reached the Limits of x86? – GigaOM — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 01:01:36 +0000

[...] Larrabee decision drives home worries that as the compute jobs fragment, we’re moving into a post-x86 world. If that’s true, should Intel also expand beyond x86 to ensure its growth, or should it make [...]

By: Intel Buys Wind River To Put a Computer In Every Toaster

Intel Buys Wind River To Put a Computer In Every Toaster — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 15:10:16 +0000

[...] a serious threat. This deal is an aggressive move by Intel to ensure that it doesn’t have to contemplate a world where its x86 chips are no longer dominant. [...]

By: SiCortex Co-Founder on Intel and Shutting Down

SiCortex Co-Founder on Intel and Shutting Down — Fri, 29 May 2009 19:11:39 +0000

[...] When I write about corporate data centers and consumer PCs, I dub anything that isn’t an x86 chip as a specialty chip for computing. Reilly rightly pointed out that, by categorizing chips this way I basically acknowledged only Intel (and to a lesser extent, AMD and Via Technology), which helps create a monoculture for chips. Intel’s all for this monoculture, by the way — that’s why it’s building an x86 GPU and an x86 chip for cell phones. What he didn’t point out was how that argument also involves a pretty narrow definition of computing. Since I write about netbooks with ARM-based chips, using DSPs to build things like a low-power supercomputer at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, and computers taking advantage of GPUs or architectures like IBM’s Cell for parallel computing jobs, I should really know better. [...]

By: The Cloud Makes Computers Truly Cheap and Truly Personal

The Cloud Makes Computers Truly Cheap and Truly Personal — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 21:41:32 +0000

[...] On the silicon side, if software is no longer tied to the underlying chip architecture, OEMs have greater flexibility around using chips from companies such as Texas Instruments, Qualcomm and Nvidia that use the ARM architcture rather than Intel’s x86 architecture. As an EETimes article points out, if you can run your applications in the cloud, then the underlying hardware becomes less relevant. This holds true on the client side and in the server world as well, which means we may see the x86 architecture and Intel’s tremendous power begin to erode. [...]

By: Don

Don — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:31:59 +0000

I, find this argument humorous no matter were I find it. Be it in the news or on a tech or gaming site, The computer is dead it is being replaced by ( pick one, gaming console, mobile device or some type of apple). The big box may one day go away but not soon, people enjoy being able customizing that box, be it for show or go (faster). This is the same argument just about different things, TV will kill Radio, Cable will kill TV, Internet will kill Cable. But just looking back, I still use all of them. And don’t for see any of them going away soon.

By: mcz

mcz — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:24:07 +0000

>The question I have is whether the applications that have been developed over time for x86 translate to the platforms that ARM is strong in

Of course you can compile all apps for a different platform. You can run some linux distribution with all apps on ARM easily if it is all opensource and thus the binary code can be generated

By: Speedlinking o futuro - Leituras Obrigatórias | sixhat pirate parts

Speedlinking o futuro - Leituras Obrigatórias | sixhat pirate parts — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:00:47 +0000

[...] A ‘post-x86 world’? Preposterous! em resposta a Can Intel Thrive in a Post x86 World? [...]

By: Is a Post-x86 World “Preposterous”?

Is a Post-x86 World “Preposterous”? — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:06:58 +0000

[...] at CNET, Peter N. Glaskowsky, a technology analyst for The Envisioneering Group, is calling my post, Can Intel Thrive In a Post x86 World?, “preposterous.” He argues that Intel can thrive, and that my idea that we are entering [...]

By: Frank Miller

Frank Miller — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:49:31 +0000

I’ve argued (against you ;) ) that the existing software base is the real driver for x86. The question I have is whether the applications that have been developed over time for x86 translate to the platforms that ARM is strong in. I obviously don’t know the answer, but I suspect the answer is yes and no. Some will and some won’t. Some apps just need more screen real estate, some just aren’t useful when you’re on the go. But there are lots that will. It can certainly be said that the argument for software momentum preserving x86 is less compelling in the mobile realm (and I’m referring to platforms smaller than netbooks here).

I guess my opinion here is that it depends a lot on Intel. The Atom is a very nice device and certainly much less power hungry than anything else they’ve done, but its not a real competitor to ARM on these platforms. The netbook is about a small a platform as you can get to with Atoms practically, and it just so happens that there are lots of x86 that run well on that form factor. That’s why I think its taken over so quickly from the initial Linux implementations.

If Intel wants x86 in phones or MIDs, it will have to do an implementation that is on par with what ARM does. What does that mean? First, it means they need an x86 that uses probably another order of magnitude less power per instruction than the Atom does. They also need to do real integration. The ARM devices that are winning now are those that have builtin memory and storage controllers, Ethernet, USB, IR, and yes, graphics. If there was a chip on the market that was x86 like the TI OMAP, ARM and Texas Instruments would need to be very afraid…

By: Bill Kircos

Bill Kircos — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:19:37 +0000

I work for Intel (Stacey, you know how to reach many of us). Interesting post and debate. But, is anyone following the growth rates of laptops? Netbooks? Embedded computers? Are phones become more like small computers or visa versa? Look at the prices of PCs, laptops and chips the past 25 years. Don’t those price drops and Moore’s Law address, um, “commodity concerns?” As for WiMAX: LTE still needs to get things working, and ask investors to spend a ton of $$$ to get into the market while $$$ is being spent on 3G. But worse (!) case, even if WiMAX didn’t make it in a part of the world, LTE has moved up their schedule ~4 years already…that alone is a win-win for everyone. But – look at spectrum, not just press clips.

By: majortom1981

majortom1981 — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:54:54 +0000

Yes they wil lthrive. You need something to feed the gpu’s.Also intels xscale cpus are still fast even if they are not made any more .

The touch pro has a VERY slow qualcom processor in it. Even though its rated at 52mhz5 (around there) . IF intel can do better marketing for its products they will do pretty good.

Just look at the netbook craze . Intels atom processor is at the heart of most of them.

By: Patrick Moorhead

Patrick Moorhead — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:21:56 +0000

I will just provide links, with no commentary.

Business Week: “Is Your PC a Graphics Wimp?” http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2007/tc2007081_108723.htm?chan=search

InformationWeek: “Intel Cites Graphics Problems In Centrino 2 Delay”
http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/processors/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=208400736

Notebooks.com: “AMD vs. Intel Integrated Graphics Video”
http://www.notebooks.com/2008/08/20/amd-vs-intel-integrated-graphics-demo-video/
The Inquirer: “Intel’s G965 embedded graphics stink – official”

By: Stacey Higginbotham

Stacey Higginbotham — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:10:22 +0000

Tony, you’re right. It is Intel vs. the Arm licensees, especially Qualcomm, Nvidia’s Tegra and Texas Instruments. As for the commodity market point, that’s true, but Intel seems to be making a few different moves that are more customer-friendly like bringing out a video-playing version of Atom more quickly and its deal with TSMC.

By: Jesse Kopelman

Jesse Kopelman — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:57:05 +0000

Larrabee is probably the key. If it is successful, then x86 has a shot at remaining relevant in the greater market. If it fails, so goes the x86-everywhere strategy.

By: Tony

Tony — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:58:49 +0000

I’m skeptical. For one, Intel has never succeeded in a commodity market (they get out — see DRAM and communications). And that it what we’re looking at.

So it’s not Intel vs ARM, it’s Intel versus Qualcomm, TI, Freescale, Samsung, etc — all chip makers used to living on much smaller margins. For mobile devices, battery life will always be important, and this is likely to continue to be a big edge for ARM for the foreseeable future.

In the phone & internet tablet market, software compatibility won’t be important — since desktop software (and boot times) don’t work well on a smaller, tablet format. If it did, WinCE would’ve been a success (along with tablet PCs, too). But, as the iPhone shows, new approaches work much better.

On the graphics side, I’m skeptical of Larrabee. Intel has never made a competitive GPU, and I’m skeptical that Larrabee will change that.