Funny you should ask, I'm running a dual Core A5 ARM chip on this here iPad.
Additionally, I would love a Mac Mini running Lion Server on a super efficient and low power ARM chip.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Move from Intel to ARM Processors in Future Laptops?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Funny you should ask, I'm running a dual Core A5 ARM chip on this here iPad.
Additionally, I would love a Mac Mini running Lion Server on a super efficient and low power ARM chip.
I agree with a lot of what other people are saying. ARM designs will not be able to keep up with Intel. Intel has the performance advantage, and ARM has the power advantage right now. I see Intel moving into ARM's business before ARM can get into Intel's business.
A rumor that would be more realistic would be Apple converting the iPhone and iPad to Intel once Intel can get the power down on their chips.
A rumor that would be more realistic would be Apple converting the iPhone and iPad to Intel once Intel can get the power down on their chips.
There have been good reasons discussed for why this could happen. Mainly the future goals of ARM development, and the fusion of iOS and OSX.
I still can't see how ARM could keep up with Intel. I just got a new MacBook Pro, it's just the base model but it has a hell of a kick for 2.3GHz dual core. It seems to virtually create four cores (threads?). Intel always seems to be ahead of expectation with performance and efficiency. Apple has a lot of money, but can they really buy all the experience needed to compete with a company of this much history?
I still can't see how ARM could keep up with Intel. I just got a new MacBook Pro, it's just the base model but it has a hell of a kick for 2.3GHz dual core. It seems to virtually create four cores (threads?). Intel always seems to be ahead of expectation with performance and efficiency. Apple has a lot of money, but can they really buy all the experience needed to compete with a company of this much history?
This seems unlikely. The PPC to Intel switch was a result of Apple not being impressed by both IBM and Motorola's lack of interest in continuing the advances in the PowerPC architecture. Intel's current architecture and future planned architectures are still of great interest to apple and consumers. There isn't enough motivation (unless some huge new breakthrough in ARM tech is in the works.)
The PPC-Intel transition was confusing for many consumers and a pain for developers. I don't think Apple is likely to put us through it again.
The PPC-Intel transition was confusing for many consumers and a pain for developers. I don't think Apple is likely to put us through it again.
Kind of like Apple. And you would welcome a switch to AMD? That would be three steps backwards.
If this convergence were to happen i think it'd be more likely for iOS to take on intel processors, not the other way around.
It still wouldn't be worth the software fragmentation that would take place. Plus, Intel has continued to make their possessors more power efficient.
so many short sighted people in the thread. wow. if you don't think this is feasible, and importantly - sensible - you aren't thinking far enough. the future is ARM.
the whole "back to the mac" thing wasn't just for Lion. there will be a point where there is just one OSX, regardless of form factor. The only difference will be the UI layer.
the whole "back to the mac" thing wasn't just for Lion. there will be a point where there is just one OSX, regardless of form factor. The only difference will be the UI layer.
Why not move their iOS hardware to Intel now that Samsung seems to be losing their ability to respect their own customer's IP? Intel would have no motivation to co-opt Apple IP (Intel doesn't build products), and they have the most sophisticated fab technology on earth.
Ah, standby power you say?
Ah, standby power you say?
Windows 8 will work on ARM, as Microsoft has said.. current builds already do, apparently.
If ARM is indeed able to make high-performance CPUs, then a move like this would be one of the most significant ones in the computing history. Let's face it: the x86 architecture is a dead end. Its needlessly complicated and builds on obsolete tech. Internally, the modern x86 CPUs aren't even x86 anymore - they decompose, recompile and reorder the machine code as they execute it. The ARM assembly is more suited for modern computing as it is more efficient as the x86 code and allows better CPU pipeline utilization.
The real question is whether ARM is able to create a CPU which is powerful enough to compete with Intel's offerings. The x86 may be inefficient but the sophisticated design of Intel CPUs results in great performance. ARM must really step on it to attain these levels.
P.S. If something like this should happen, I am sure that ARM will include hardware emulation layer for x86 instructions, for compatibility with older software. Any anyway, what does it cost to recompile an application? Indeed: nothing (if the application is competently written, that is).
The real question is whether ARM is able to create a CPU which is powerful enough to compete with Intel's offerings. The x86 may be inefficient but the sophisticated design of Intel CPUs results in great performance. ARM must really step on it to attain these levels.
P.S. If something like this should happen, I am sure that ARM will include hardware emulation layer for x86 instructions, for compatibility with older software. Any anyway, what does it cost to recompile an application? Indeed: nothing (if the application is competently written, that is).
This story broke 5 minutes ago and I'm already over it... Who cares if Apple wants to use something they think is new and revolutionary? Your opinion isn't going to stop them. While you're over here thinking "I can't do bootcamp with ARM" Apple is thinking "Bootcamp will be obsolite when we get done here"
You must really love the stuff you write. You must also love the sound your voice makes when it talks. Since clearly what we write will have no impact whatsoever, why bother even having a forum? Hell, why even write a post like that?
Get that iPhone out of your ass, seriously.
What do you want, a gold star? A cookie?
Your app is prolly simple enough that you could do that. Consider more complex apps such as games and video-editing that require extensive use of the x86 architecture. That's the real problem.
And in all seriousness, that is the real issue. Switching from x86 to ARM RISC is a really big problem because the benefit of x86 is that so much work has been done on it, porting Windows apps and/or games is simply a software coding issue as opposed to hardware. Even if ARM had comparable processes to x86 to compensate to some degree, that's still another series of steps to go through.
And there's no real reason or benefit for them to switch to ARM. They have an incredibly solid partnership with Intel (they got Thunderbolt first, for Pete's sake), and what devices that could use ARM-like processors are already built in-house. If they really wanted a low-cost processor for laptops (again, no beneficial reason), they could just go for the AMD's Trinity platform with Fusion APUs. They already have Radeon GPUs in their entire lineup, don't see why they can't switch. Or even better, just build x86 chips in-house like they do with the A series.
This story reeks. I would sooner expect Apple to acquire AMD than I would for them to make yet another architecture switch.
Assuming this rumor is true who said that this would be instead of Intel on laptops? Maybe it's in addition to Intel?
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
People who still use assembly in their software are just sad. There is absolutely NO reason to use CPU-specific stuff, not anymore, as we have OpenCL and similar tech for performance-critical parallel computations.
The only field where hand-coded assembly makes sense are interpreters.
And this is precisely the reason why the inefficient and outdated architecture like x86 is still alive. If Apple has the courage to make the first step towards a better tech: I will applaud them.
You are joking, right? x86 CPU is a completely different pair of shoes from the ARM CPUs. Later can be designed easily. First ones are absolute monsters in terms of complexity. Intel has decades of design experience which all live in their current CPU line. Destroy all the information about Sandy Bridge designs from Intel servers, and it will take them at least 5 years to reconstruct it.
Depends on how much all software as to be rewritten.
So the desktops would use Intel and the laptops ARM?
Doesn't sound very convincing to me.
How much rewrite to the OS?
Sounds like a lot of trouble.
So the desktops would use Intel and the laptops ARM?
Doesn't sound very convincing to me.
How much rewrite to the OS?
Sounds like a lot of trouble.
- Status