ARM Processors?

[artreid]

What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series processor?
I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

 

[Gordon]

What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series processor?
I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

Google is your friend.......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture

 

[Paul]

What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series
processor? I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

And you can find amusing stories about them.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/05/apple-could-adopt-arm-for-laptops-but-why-would-it.ars

They're not intended to compete head to head, because
they're in an entirely different part of the ecosystem,
for computing devices running from battery. If they
attempt to beef up the ARM design, power consumption will
suffer.

It remains to be seen, how these two camps will be
able to compete in the future. The fact that Windows 8
will run on ARM and x86, means there will be opportunities
for both parties. And one could start to shred the advantage
of the other. The problem with this though, is a Windows 8
computing device with ARM, likely won't have an instruction
translator to convert ten year old x86 apps to ARM. Which
would make the platform even more interesting, if it did
provide that. (Your old copy of Word, won't run on your
new Windows 8 ARM box. You have to buy an ARM version of
Office, if it will even exist.)

Apple has done that sort of thing (instruction translation),
but Microsoft isn't likely to. It's not their style. If you've
ever worked on translated platforms, they're not that pleasant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_(software)

Paul

 

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series
processor? I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

The most common type of processor in the world by a long way.

You may think all your PCs have Intel or AMD so surely they are the most
popular processors but you forget that you mobile phone, you old mobile
phone that's sitting unused in a draw somewhere, your set-top boxes for your
TV, your router, your cable modem, your DVD player, your iPad etc. mostly
all have ARM processors of various types.

 

[Yousuf Khan]

What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series
processor? I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

ARM processors are the type of processors used in the vast majority of
smartphones in the world, as well as the vast majority of Ipad-type
tablets. They are not compatible with Intel or AMD's processors which
are known as x86 processors, collectively. They are also geared towards
low-power consumption, but not towards high performance. In the next
iteration of Windows, Windows 8, it is supposed to have support for ARM
processors too, besides the x86 processors already supported. You'll
find that they can't run existing Windows programs.

Yousuf Khan

 

[artreid]

Thanks to all who responded.

So I guess ARM is not the next major computer processor I should be looking
to upgrade to any time soon.

"artreid" wrote in message
What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series processor?
I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

 

[Wolf K]

Thanks to all who responded.

So I guess ARM is not the next major computer processor I should be
looking to upgrade to any time soon.

in message
What exactly is an AM processor?

How are they different/better-worst than say, the Intel I-series processor?
I am seeing these on eBay with a speeds of 416Mhz?

AIUI, ARM chips are "reduced instructions set chips" (RISCs), ie, they
have a small set of instructions, which are used for micro-programs that
perform the functions included on-board in the x86 and similar "large
instruction set" chips. This means that they consume less power than a
full-fledged, multi-function, instruction-rich CPU, which do a lot of
the grunt-work (eg, floating point arithmetic) that used to be done by
programs. Graphics chips do this, too: in the Olden olden days, an
astonishing amount of video processing was done by the program. Remember
"sprites", which were primitive graphic objects that you could program
to a number of fun things on the C-64?

More importantly AIUI, RISCs can be customised for a given OS and even
suite of programs. Theoretically, they could be programmed to mimic any
other CPU you'd like, and/or to include fundamental OS functions, too.
That's what makes them handy for phones. I'm pretty sure that the ARM
Windows-8 machines will run a suite of MS software. The chips will be
customised to make it possible. The trade-off is processor time, since
RISCs do in software what other processors do in hardware. Of course, if
there were more task-specific chips (analogous to graphics chips), the
RISCs would be preferred for general computing. Eg, I can imagine a
data-manipulation chip that would do all the basic data-base
manipulations in hardware. (NB: The concept described in the preceding
sentence is hereby copyright, and may not be exploited without paying me
royalties. Patent applications will be filed in due course, and this
post will be used to prove priority, so stay out of it! Heh heh.)

The ARM chips aren't the first or even only RISCs. I recall a great deal
of discussion about the advantages of RISC over instruction-rich chips.
The PowerPC chips used by Apple up to the G4 PowerBooks are an example.
AFAIK, these chips are still used.

HTH
Wolf K.

 

[Andy Burns]

AIUI, ARM chips are "reduced instructions set chips" (RISCs), ie, they
have a small set of instructions, which are used for micro-programs that
perform the functions included on-board in the x86 and similar "large
instruction set" chips.
The ARM chips aren't the first or even only RISCs.

That's right, but the distinction is very blurred now, Intel chips since
the Pentium Pro have operated in a RISC fashion internally, implementing
the CISC x86 instruction set externally.

 

[Wolf K]

That's right, but the distinction is very blurred now, Intel chips since
the Pentium Pro have operated in a RISC fashion internally, implementing
the CISC x86 instruction set externally.

Interesting, thanks.

Wolf K.

 

[Brian Gregory [UK]]

AIUI, ARM chips are "reduced instructions set chips" (RISCs), ie, they
have a small set of instructions, which are used for micro-programs that
perform the functions included on-board in the x86 and similar "large
instruction set" chips. This means that they consume less power than a
full-fledged, multi-function, instruction-rich CPU, which do a lot of the
grunt-work (eg, floating point arithmetic) that used to be done by
programs. Graphics chips do this, too: in the Olden olden days, an
astonishing amount of video processing was done by the program. Remember
"sprites", which were primitive graphic objects that you could program to
a number of fun things on the C-64?

More importantly AIUI, RISCs can be customised for a given OS and even
suite of programs. Theoretically, they could be programmed to mimic any
other CPU you'd like, and/or to include fundamental OS functions, too.

There may be RISC type processors that can be customised but ARM can only be
customised in the same sense that ANY processor can, i.e. by writing an
emulator in ARM code.

That's what makes them handy for phones.

All that makes them handy for phones is that they provide a good processing
power to electrical power ratio and are readily available at a reasonable
cost. Many chips are available that have the ARM processor and the other
functions needed in phones all on the same chip.

I'm pretty sure that the ARM Windows-8 machines will run a suite of MS
software. The chips will be customised to make it possible.

MS have said that, at least at this stage, apart from the special Windows 8
Metro mode the software will need to be specially made for Windows on ARM.

It seems unlikely that an ARM chip could ever be effective at running x86
code that was written to run on a modern high speed x86 processor.

Maybe unmodified Windows applications that are largely in a pseudo-code that
runs on an emulator like java programs (and I believe .NET is similar) could
be made to run well on ARM with maybe only a small part of the code running
on an x86 emulator with the p-code emulator being written in ARM code. But
MS aren't going to do this, or not yet anyway.

The trade-off is processor time, since RISCs do in software what other
processors do in hardware. Of course, if there were more task-specific
chips (analogous to graphics chips), the RISCs would be preferred for
general computing. Eg, I can imagine a data-manipulation chip that would
do all the basic data-base manipulations in hardware. (NB: The concept
described in the preceding sentence is hereby copyright, and may not be
exploited without paying me royalties. Patent applications will be filed
in due course, and this post will be used to prove priority, so stay out
of it! Heh heh.)

The processor is very rarely the bottleneck when processing databases.

 

[Wolf K]

There may be RISC type processors that can be customised but ARM can only be
customised in the same sense that ANY processor can, i.e. by writing an
emulator in ARM code.

I think I implied that in my later comment that a RISC chip does in
software what other chips do in hardware.

HTH
Wolf K.

 

[Wolf K]

The processor is very rarely the bottleneck when processing databases.

True enough. It was just a notion to illustrate my point, which is that
far too much grunt work is still being done by the programs instead of
by the hardware.

There are a few signs that reality is (slowly) catching up with
potential. Recall that a few chip-generations ago, you could have said
with equal validity that it's not the processor that's the bottle neck
in graphics processing, but the creation of the data to be processed for
display. In graphics, it's the massive amounts of visual data that must
be dealt with at high speeds that's the problem. The demands of gamers
and CGI artists have driven graphics processing. Without gamers' demands
for ever higher frame rates and more photo realism, we wouldn't have
graphics cards, and without graphics cards, fast image creation and
processing wouldn't be possible for ordinary folk like me. ;-)

Is there analogous pressure for data processing? Maybe. I do know that
more and more professionals (eg, doctors) and their clients want the
easiest and fastest possible exchange, linkage and presentation of
relevant client data, in real time if necessary. AFAICT, the demand is
being met more by brute force (eg, ever more powerful processors) than
by more efficient processing, some of which could surely be converted
into hardware. I also know that a major bottleneck is creating "portals"
so that different database programs can exchange data. Since the data to
be exchanged is essentially the same (eg, a client's personal and
medical data), this is bizarre IMO.

Just a thought or two,
Wolf K.

 

[occam]

The ARM chips aren't the first or even only RISCs. I recall a great deal
of discussion about the advantages of RISC over instruction-rich chips.

The Turing machine is the first 'reduced instruction set computer'.
Can't get more reduced than that! When you patent your task specific
chip (TSC) can you also patent a Turing machine chip (TMC) and remember
my cut in the royalties.

 

[Wolf K]

The Turing machine is the first 'reduced instruction set computer'.
Can't get more reduced than that! When you patent your task specific
chip (TSC) can you also patent a Turing machine chip (TMC) and remember
my cut in the royalties.

LOL!

Wolf K.

 

[Gene Wirchenko]

The Turing machine is the first 'reduced instruction set computer'.
Can't get more reduced than that! When you patent your task specific
chip (TSC) can you also patent a Turing machine chip (TMC) and remember
my cut in the royalties.

Why not make your money off selling the tapes? If you do not
want to, then I call dibs on selling them.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko