Re:Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for ...
by sitkack on Monday June 22, 2020 @07:06PM
(#23607980)
Faster cpus become more power-efficient cpus because they can race to sleep. So you really do want to pay more for that cpu, but not for the compute performance but for the battery life.
Re:Apple announces it will switch to its own processors for ...
by AnthonyMouse on Monday June 22, 2020 @09:05PM
(#23608871)
That's assuming the faster CPUs use the same amount of power. It's possible for a slower CPU to have better performance per watt. This is often exactly what happens when you limit clock speed -- performance goes down, performance per watt goes up.
Modern x86_64 processors don't actually natively execute x86 instructions, they translate them into the instructions the hardware actually uses. The percentage of the die required to do that translation is small and immaterial.
> Intel tried to compete in mobile for a long time and failed even with a better manufacturing process.
Intel didn't understand the market.
I recently bought a new phone. On paper it's twice as fast as my old phone. I imagine that's true but I can't tell any difference. Everything was sufficiently fast before and it still is. I never use my phone to do anything that needs an actually-fast CPU. I have no reason to pay additional money for a faster phone CPU. But I do notice how often I have to charge the battery.
These are not atypical purchasing criteria for mobile devices, but that's not the market Intel was chasing with their designs and pricing, so they failed. It's not because they couldn't make an x86 CPU for that market, it's because they didn't want to, because it's a lower margin commodity market.