News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops?. Parent comment

Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by fmajid on Friday January 10, 2020 @07:53PM (#22017195)
My iPad Pro is as fast on single-thread as all my Intel desktop machines, and 2/3 on multicore. In a non-thermally throttled enclosure, I would expect it to outperform.

https://browser.geekbench.com/user/122632

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by blattimwind on Saturday January 11, 2020 @06:36AM (#22019379)
> My iPad Pro is as fast on single-thread as all my Intel desktop machines, and 2/3 on multicore

in Geekbench. That particular benchmark has been critized for years for not being comparable across platforms.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by Macha on Friday January 10, 2020 @08:31PM (#22017401)
Right, but 1-2x perf is not nearly enough to naively emulate a system.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by ridiculous_fish on Friday January 10, 2020 @10:37PM (#22017950)
Rosetta was not a naive emulator. It was a dynamic, optimizing re-compiler.

There's two reasons to think that an ARM transition would be easier:

1. The endianness is the same. The PPC/Intel transition required processes to share memory while disagreeing on byte order.

2. Apple controls their ARM CPU designs. They can add whatever they like.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What is wrong with all those AArch64 desktops? by andrekandre on Saturday January 11, 2020 @05:15PM (#22022732)
right, and

3. rosetta only emulated the actual app binary; eventually it called in to native libs, so performance for the most part held up really well iirc (for apps, not sure about games)

[ Parent | on HN ]