Microsoft already have a developer kit called Project Volterra for making Windows apps for ARM so they're definitely serious about making their own ARM chips.
i mean, arm has existed in the microsoft ecosystem for a long time. surface RT and windows phone are the consumer examples, but you could still buy versions of windows embedded for arm, mips, etc.
@@pigalex Yeah but would you considering how bad they were? Volterra's goal is to (hopefully) make Windows on ARM not suck like how it did the last few times.
They are not serious. The x86 to ARM emulation is hilariously bad. Rosetta on Apple M chips just works. ARM Microsoft Surface Pro laptops can't run 99% of x86 software. Most stuff just crashes.
Given the power consumption in MSFT Data centers (The majority of it runs on Intel cpus), I suspect this development would be more of a data centre centric move in the first few iterations of any architecture they come up with. Dispersing all the heat generated by large data centers can cost as much, if not more, than the energy used to power the servers. So a more power efficient cpu, that runs cooler, is an obvious target to aim for. Any savings made via power efficiency would, of course, be an internal profit used for greater expansion and capacity of it's existing data center estate. Just my 2 cents.
We're also at the physical limits of transistor size, without Moore's law to reliably increase performance we're going to have to see efficiency and performance gains from other methods (like switching to ARM, packaging improvements like what is already being done in Apple Silicon, and of course optimization of software itself... maybe rebuilding Windows from the ground up to run on ARM is the way forward no matter how painful it is).
Microsoft’s cloud predominantly runs Linux, not Windows. So yes, moving away from x86 there would be more feasible than trying to do it in the retail market.
if we're going for power efficiency, wouldn't it be easier to go for epyc? it doesn't need making architecture by yourself, polishing it with 2-3 iterations and rewriting whole code used on x86, at this point swapping intel to amd would be most cost effective in short run and then they could take their time and short term earnings to be put into designing i have no idea what cooling costs are in this case and how much relatively it would save them per month basis, but after x time it should be net positive "AMD EPYC offers up to four times greater performance per watt than Intel Xeon, meaning that users need substantially less electricity for operations, resulting in significantly lower operating costs (TCO)" ~exittechnologies 4x better efficiency almost means 4x less heat to get rid of for same workload, it's probably not that linear, but halving this cost would make a difference in a long run and probably before they can get working x64 systems
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 Except most of Azure's workload runs on x86, they've slowly begun introducing an Azure ARM platform but the vast majority of their customers run x86 code on Azure. The AAD and webhosting customers might shift over to ARM servers fairly easily, but all the customers running Linux/Windows workloads on Azure can't really be shifted over.
As a software developer for 40+ years, including CP/M and MS-DOS, I am ok with this as long as Microsoft also takes their development languages like C# and API's like dotNET along for the ride, so that I can simply re-target and recompile for their other processors or computer products. I have more than a decade invested into dotNET alone.
Microsoft has already modified windows heavily, now updates are easier to install and all system apps get updated through store, not from windows update. All these are probably part of bigger plan to keep software ready for major shift like cpu change, AI integration etc. This all started from 2019, to make windows easily manageable
Microsoft also has incentive to do so to build up their tooling for their cloud business. AWS and Google already make custom chips for a lot of processing and cloud workloads.
Yeah, I doubt M$ is trying to make Windows on ARM again, even they aren't that dumb. They are probably trying to compete with Graviton and Ampere Altra in Azure.
Without a translation layer like Roseta2 on macOS, to emulate x86 on ARM, or just straight adding x86 hardware translation in to the chip it will be a failure. Apple users are more or less used to apple ditching support after a couple of years for their software, on a Windows I just can run apps that run 20 years ago, mostly without bigger problems, and if they do hard cut off support to move to ARM it might bite them in the ass, because they make Windows users mad.
This is where I think Windows needs to be split. Distribut the OS in a 'light' configuration without all those legacy drivers and oddities. Then provide an optional service pack to add it all back in. The vast majority of Windows users dont need a driver for a 1997 dot matrix printer and it's incredibly moronic of Windows to still be including all that stuff in its mainline build.
y'know there's windows for arm cpus, right? and that it already has x86 and x64 bit emulation built in? that way for example some guys ported drivers and emulated uefi on phones like OnePlus 6t so you can install and flawlessly run Windows
@@Insky_ I should be more precise, Windows on ARM should have this emulation done good, on a level like in Roseta 2, because as far as I know, for now this emulation is terrible, and it is not important that this is a fault of the chip, or the system, it is just bad and have to be way better.
@@Rick-vm8bl idea maybe great, but hard to achieve it probably, maybe even harder than writing new windows from scratch and add some optional "legacy layer" on top. And we are talking about years of development and cost around 1-2B dollars, probably, to write a new OS from ground up.
@@slizgi86Apple benefits from doing making specific changes to the hardware that makes X86 emulation easier. It’s not efficient purely because of software so unless Microsoft also develops their own chips, windows on arm is not gonna have efficient X86 emulation.
Keep in mind that Amazons entire product line is based on a very narrow codebase and ARM licensing. Also keep in mind that many many user experiences (aka apps) are now Cloud and Web centric. Wintel was for desktop and server - ARM fits nicely into Internet appliances. Although one could argue x86 SOCs are decent - just higher priced. Back to servers - the big mama jamma out of Alibaba is 128 cores / 128 PCI lanes ARM based. Scales well with a lower power consumption. That matters in massive DCs.
To think that the surface lineup, which when it launched almost 10 years ago wasn't exactly seen as a good laptop system or tablet system- is now somehow still going successfully and being used as the center of windows for ARM
the reason why microsoft is doing is is because companies want to charge licencing fees to use those Machine Learning accelerators, and the prices are insane, look into how much Qualcomm's XR2 accelaterator license costs
@@SplitScreamOFFICIAL Thats not much, lol. Compare it to the cost of building that IP in-house; the number of employees earning six-digit salaries working year(s) on the project... that's nothing at these scales.
@@jrcowboy1099 it is when you're a game dev company that also wants to use those because Facebook can't distribute that license downstream, $100,000 is enough to make an indie company lives or dies
It's simple: the chip market went from "I have to buy chips that a few companies design and manufacture themselves" to "I can design my own chips and delegate their manufacture to a third party". Designing chips is complex, but nowhere near as complex as manufacturing them, so several companies (Apple, Nvidia, AMD, etc.) are taking advantage of the fact that a company called TSMC has the technology to manufacture the most advanced chips in the world, and the companies now only have to design the chips.
they don't want to burn themselves for the 3rd time with ARM on client devices. They want to optimize their datacenter-performance, that's the only place where they could really benefit from it without having to support hundreds of different hardware-configurations from other companies
Would be pretty strange if they decided to roll back at using x86 on the surface pros. So its a pretty safe bet that they still gonna launch this to consumers.
Microsoft’s cloud predominantly runs Linux, not Windows. So yes, moving away from x86 there would be more feasible than trying to do it in the retail market.
Honestly it sounds like the opposite now days with the competition between x86 and ARM, since it's hard to get all the developers to develope for your platform
I've been expecting Microsoft to bring out a full blown high performance RISC-V CPU, complete with a large Vector Processing Unit instead of fixed sized SSE / AVX SIMD.. This scales much better as you can have lots of simple cores and a separate VPU. Integrated Graphics bought off ARM for not a lot on top. They have put quite a bit of money into RISC-V as a concept. It makes more sense than going fully ARM, although starting off with ARM may be a quicker way to get their foot in the CPU market door.
This is why AMD and Intel are pushing major MESA support for Linux based devices and operating systems. Microsoft? All about control and a closed eco system.
And shoving ads in your face, on an operating system that you paid for... meanwhile their Word/Excel/PowerPoint are so full of bugs that nothing works.
Microsoft isn't making their own CPUs, because that would kill Windows and their relations with partners. They've already rallied behind Qualcomm Oryon which is supposed to rival M series chips.
Until Linux becomes more user friendly, I will stick with Microsoft's ever-closing ecosystem, just like Apple fans stick with theirs. Open source is fantastic, but if it isn't accessible, most consumers won't have the time or energy to get into it.
@@elise3455There's like 2M people using Linux on the Steam Deck fine enough. You mean stability, not easiness of use. Stuff like ZorinOS looks exactly like Windows. And everything just works.
Speaking not as an Employee, my own opinion: Absurd prices from the duopoly sucks when you have so many needs, so many projects and so much infrastructure. It's almost like maybe Microsoft has a lot of really smart engineers and maybe it's ok just to do it yourself
I think performance per watt is more important than sheer performance now. We've gotten to the point where pretty much any game can run and (sorry for the science guys) simulations will most likely always take long. We have good performance, time to make them efficient, too.
No. We need more performance. Arm has node advantage so just wait for meteorlake Intel core ultra laptops, it will show better efficiency than arm CPUs.
@@HDRPC You missed my "Current cpu performance is enough for most applications" point. I wasn't comparing cpus, either, Simply noting that they've become good enough to stop worrying about performance
@@HDRPC we really don't. Although faster is better, the current lineup is, at worst, acceptable for all applications you mentionned. 3d work isn't much of an issue for the lastest hardware, we aren't working with intel's pentium anymore. Addendum: watching videos and browsing aren't nearly as ressource-demanding as video editing
If they make it a success, I wouldn't be surprise that they would slow other CPUs (or even lock them out). Look at how persistent they are on their IE and EDGE
this is why i decided to daily drive linux mint since the start of this year. anti-competitive, depredatody, monopolistic behaviour. my mental health is so much better. Haven't had the need to touch windows since then.
@@GuyGamer1Bruh, why are you lying on the internet? Edge is based on Chromium browser. The AdBlock extension you are using is a Chrome extension. The moment Google disables manifest and prevents AdBlock from working, all Chromium Browsers will STOP working with the AdBlock unless the AdBlock devs find a different way. ALL of THEM. They all use Chromium FULL CODE, not just the engine.
if it doesnt work with x86 software to a good as or near good as standard im not interested at all, there is a reason i use windows and not a mac and im sure there are plenty of others in a similar situation.
Revival of Windows Mobile? They worked hard on touch interfaces, which would be found in Tablets and other more mobile devices. It doesn't make a ton of sense to invest so much into Touch if it's only for those enthusiasts with 2-in-1s. They do have a MSVC for ARM compiler, so *technically* everything would be ARM-compatible if you, well, re-compile it. The problem is ARM-specific code won't run on x86 computers, so a side must be picked regardless.
I would love to see someone build a hybrid chip design using the new open-source RISC V architecture you guys covered a while ago for the main processor, with some added ARM efficiency cores used for lower power and background tasks, eliminating X86 entirely. I also wouldn't mind seeing nvidia update and bring back their Tegra line of ARM based SoCs that had nvidia graphics cores in them. Imagine an ARM based laptop or chromebook with integrated nvidia 4060 mobile level graphics. I also wouldn't mind them selling such a Tegra SoC to TV manufacturers to use in place of a Mediatek chipset, basically putting an updated nvidia Shield inside the TV from the factory, preferably with Google TV or Android TV as the operating system.
efficiency comes mostly from the best available process and reasonable clocks, AMD is there and Intel isn't far off when undervolted and run with conservative power limits 7950X capped at 90W basically matches the M2 Ultra R23 score, for me that works pretty well, doesn't it? M2U probably does much better in memory intensive tasks, but that also comes with a huge cost
That is not true, in a CPU every transistor is using energy regardless if its being used or not. So a CISC CPU like x86 that needs 10 times more transistors to handle 10 times more commands will be using 10 times more energy than an RISC CPU like ARM regardless if 90% of those extra commands are almost never used any more.
@@hubertnnn This is objectively false with CMOS transistors, the only ones used since, what, the 70s? In fact, this is a huge reason why AMD's new GPUs are becoming more compelling. They even state they are doing exactly this in their announcement for their most recent GPUs. Essentially, this is what 'clock gating' means (oversimplified ofc).
@@jrcowboy1099 also how A2000 has the 3050 performance at less than half the power using the same archi, and 4000 Ada is probably around 4060Ti in terms of performance again with half the power the more you push clocks the more voltage you need and the more*more power you waste, for CPU that makes some sense due to poor scaling of many tasks, but GPU scales nearly linearly with "cores" count (up to some point, but 4090 still works well in that aspect) and lower clocks allow higher density = higher yield than the "regular big die"
I'm still amazed at how much intel was able to improve x86, I thought it was basically as good as it was going to get around nehalem. But, I stll think the fundamental limitations of x86 will lead to its demise eventually, and maybe this is the beginning of the end, or maybe intel will manage to stretch it out a little longer with this upcoming deprecation of old features like real and protected mode.
x86 at this point is no limitation to performance, the only advantage of arm is decoding complexity, but today's chips are so large and complex that decoding complexity is not a problem at all, intel is removing those old modes for increased security not performance.
@@odnx x86 ISA is CISC, but x86 CPUs have switched to RISC cores + CISC Decoders over a decade ago. CISC is easier to program for, at least in assembler, but RISC has better performance and efficiency.
Windows uses a Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) and provided 3rd party apps aren't coded to closely to the hardware then a move to ARM architecture shouldn't be much of a problem. As for x86 though, it carries a lot of historical baggage and really we should be taking advantage of the CPU architecture progress of the last 40 years and move to something new. But be warned that doing so won't be painless.
I liked the Zune. I had the old hard drive one which I broke then had a Zune Nano, and finally bought the ZuneHD right as they were being discontinued. I still have those last two. Sad to see it go.
I've been expecting Microsoft to bring out a full blown high performance RISC-V CPU, complete with a large Vector Processing Unit instead of fixed sized SSE / AVX SIMD.. This scales much better as you can have lots of simple cores and a separate VPU. Integrated Graphics bought off ARM for not a lot on top. They have put quite a bit of money into RISC-V as a concept. It makes more sense than going fully ARM, although starting off with ARM may be a quicker way to get their foot in the CPU market door.
Separate vector processing unit? Kinda sounds like an intel integrated gpu: a vector processing unit (in this case optimized/designed primarily, but not only for video) as part of the same package as the cpu. Hell, tey even share the same LLC.
@@playerguy2 .. Are Risc V adding an AI extension spec? I'll have to check, but I should think they are debating it at least. I don't think the VPU will replace integrated graphics but it would be nice to have VPU and GPU more closely integrated with a native instruction set for both.
@@PrivateSi I'm not followong RISC-V closely, but it'd expect one such extension exists or be in development. A separate VPU for hybrid parallel processing (vpu-cpu combo) and GPU designed for pure parallel compute (or for graphics support) would still make sense, but my main point is vector co-processors in some form exist in some form in a vast portion of consumer general purpose processors. Hell, one could argue hardware support for SIMD in modern processors (both ARM and x86_64) are handled by a sort of VPU tightly integrated into the processor core. Wikichip is a pretty good resource for low level uarch documentation.
@@playerguy2 .. SIMD is fixed length, VPUs work on variable length vectors so can better fit more data, and are not limited to some new standard to be released to increase their size. The actual hardware implementation varies but the instruction set is standardised. Forcing SIMD to work more like a VPU (ie. for stream processing) means breaking the data into SIMD sized chunks, dealing with memory alignment if optimising, with rolled out code and instruction pairing for max speed.. A VPU can do all that in the background. 1 simple set of instructions for all vector sizes is actually more CISC than the SIMD approach under the hood, but it does massively reduce the number of instructions needed to deal with vectors compared to SIMD ISAs.
This is great but I'm worried about backwards compatibility if the architecture changes, one of the awesome things about using Windows is the fact that you can use software and games from decades ago, I played a DOS game not too long ago for example.
When talking about 32b & 64b processors it actually applies to many functions/busses. The answer is complicated. * Instruction size or base unit; * size of integer datatype that can be processed by ALU per instruction; * Data widths to RAM. For current CPU's: **Some 64b CPU's already allow 64b CISC instructions to process larger numbers or SIMD just by using shorter operand codes added to the basic 64b instructions; **There is no urgent need for >64b of RAM address space; ** data buses can also be wider than 64b. Some modern can handle 512b of data in 1 instruction because they process several small values burried within the large larger, 80b FP, 128b values.
Don't forget trust issues. This is another non-technical obstacle Microsoft will need to clear. How easy will it be to get Linux running on it? Will it have baked in telemetry? These days it's not just the technical potential of making their own CPUs that a company has to contend with.
This seems like the response for the Chip Shortage of yesteryear. This timeline would make since. It happened, a year or 2 later they do something about it.
that would lead to LESS competition ... you cant have monopoly OS company make also the hardware, you would end up with closed ecosystem like Apple where in the end only option would be THEYR hardware ...
What i want is something like AMD already does. ARM cores on an X86-AMD64 APU But instead of a sub 1W single core(i think) ARM core just for OOMB like DASH, make a higher level ARM segment, say 6 A53 cores, that Windows and some store apps can run on at under 10w, shutting off the rest of the chip, until you need X86-AMD64 compatibility.
The problem with windows on ARM is not windows, it is EVERYTHING else. No business will switch to an ARM only chip, when many businesses are using softwares that are over 20 years old, from before we had AMD 64 bit. Businesses would be far more likely to switch if it had ARM+x86+AMD64
It won't. Windows Vista didn't do it, Windows 8 didn't do, Windows 11.... Somethings are too embedded to shift. The only win I see for Linux is the Steamdeck. Chromebooks failed.
Actually, Linux owns a huge swath of the server environments. It has never been able to break into desktop because Windows was agnostic on the hardware. If Windows try to mimic Apple everyone will either migrate to Apple, why not go with the company that knows how to do the walled garden best, or Linux because it will be the last multiplatform left. I will never understand why Microsoft, a company that once owned around 97% or the desktop market, decided to follow Apple, a company that owns less than 10% of the same market. Maybe the Balmer and the new CEO just hate success with the end user.
Intel core ultra, meteorlake chips are coming and will slow efficiency and battery better than any arm SoC laptops. Arm has node advantage as of now but soon everything will change after Meteorlake launch in September 2023.
I don't think they are too worried about losing the Surface Pro and Surface line of laptops. Lenovo, Dell, and HP laptops are far better at revenue generating. Especially on the enterprise level.
1. Windows NT was built for non-x86 architectures from the start. NT 4.0 was available on four different architectures, XP on three (x86, x86_64, and Itanium). 2. The modern-day Windows 11 on ARM has emulation for x86 software, and so does macOS. Unlike macOS, Windows prides itself on backwards compatibility, and a lot of people and businesses depend on ancient software that solves a problem and is good enough. Apple regularly kills off older apps (most recently, they axed 32-bit apps a year before introducing Apple SIlicon). Microsoft knows this and will not leave old software behind.
With how impressive Apple's latest architecture is I wonder if ARM will be the future in general. Even if it is, Microsoft transitioning Windows to ARM might be a difficult proposition for end users given that most Windows programs are still made with x86 in mind.
Unless you can game on ARM it's doomed to stay niche/mobile. Just like Linux. Doesn't matter if it's better. We don't want to do 2 things well, we want to do all 200 things, even if they're not efficient and safe. They're still cheap enough to be worth it since there's so many.
@@estiennetaylor1260 ARM is not a mobile, it's a simpler architecture by design doesn't process complex instructions, and believe it or not most apps and games don't require the complex instructions of x86 and can run just fine on ARM, only server stuffs and some very niche subjects require the complexity of x86... I mean take a look at ARM apps and games on Apple silicon, they run just fine, even Microsoft was among the firsts to release a native ARM port of their entire Office apps, then Adobe followed then games engines from Unity to Unreal then all kinds of software are being ported and runs without issues, proving you don't need the complexity of x86...
I think yall are wrong about the microsoft sq series. Am writing this on a surface pro X (sq1) and its great. Basically everything from microsoft runs natively and even emulated software just works. You just install any exe and it WILL work if you got enough power. (for anyone thinking about one, i bought used and i FULLY Reccomend going for it if you want a universal machine, from note taking through light gaming or photo editing. Also its so goddamm thin and LIGHT! btw linus, if your reading this, take a look at it again, its WAAYYYY better than it was on release, it was just ahead of its time.
They look nice, but build quality is not that great, their failure rate is far too high. If yours hasn't had any issues I'm happy for you, but unfortunately they have built up quite a bad reputation after years and years of failures. Also while x86 software does run on it, plenty of software can't as it isn't fully compatible. Basic software (Chrome browser and whatsapp for desktop or something like that) will work, anything more complex usually crashes. Performance is abysmal, it's good performance compared to a tablet, bad performance compared to a laptop and terrible performance compared to x86 desktops. Glad they're working out for you, but at the same time there's a good reason they have a bad reputation...
@@someguy4915 You are wrong. Chrome and whatsapp works great (am using firefox They have a bad rep, because of early reviews while the software wasnt finnished yet. They also arent built bad, maybe some first batch or something, but mine is built great!
While Microsoft is all about backwards compatibility and their own chips will definitely feature an x86 translation layer, I think the goal here is to get as many big software developers as possible to provide ARM versions of their programs. If a company as gigantic as Microsoft is asking for it, possibly even funding it, they can't really decline the request.
@@hammerth1421 I don't really care for modern stuff. People want to sell their expensive software, so, of course, they will make it accessible for the standard version of Windows. I am concerned about older programs. I'm not that old, but I have cherished software, some dating back to the '90s, and I'm not willing to give it up for a little more battery efficiency. To this day, Windows software isn't perfectly translatable for Mac and Linux. I don't believe that Microsoft is much more capable of creating a sufficient translation layer.
@@hammerth1421 Lol, tell that to their previous (3 or 4?) ARM attempts... Tell that to Windows Mobile... Windows RT.... Tell that to Silverlight where Microsoft paid various developers to pick Silverlight over Flash... Microsoft is in no position to move the entire market, or even a small part of it, over to ARM, won't work (again).
100% all about azure and not consumer based stuff. The performance per watt is a huge thing for cloud providers. Current amazon AWS arm cores are the sweet spot at perf per dollar for cloud customers
Thought struck me when Intel was mentioned - Microsoft could develop an ARM based solution and then have it made at Intel Fab where it would have the Microsoft chip and several x86 cores added per Intel's recent papers - that would get you a best of both worlds to work with - just a thought...
So then you need to compile each program twice, once for x86 and once for ARM?... Or use emulation which completely defeats ARM energy savings making it as power hungry as x86 while much slower... Also, imagine the headaches for programmers as certain coding tricks that work great for x86 do not work on ARM and the other way around... You'll get users asking 'why does this program work great, unless its raining outside?' As the program is 'randomly' shifted from the x86 cores to the ARM cores by the CPU to save power...
@@someguy4915 Well, that's the whole point of the hybrid approach. x86 apps will run on x86 cores, arm apps will run on arm cores. And over time cpus could have more arm cores and less x86, until they reach single x86 core for compatibility. Though I am not sure if it will be possible to mix architectures like that.
This is why Windows-on-ARM is a nonstarter: because porting proprietary software is so difficult and expensive. Linux can run on two dozen major processor architectures (including both ARM and RISC-V), and offer full self-hosted development and deployment stacks on all of them, but Windows cannot.
@@hubertnnn I can't imagine that being really possible unless the architecture defaults to x86 and has an option to 'run on ARM'. Which while a few developers will support that and target their compilers to ARM, most won't. Basically that would be an ARM 'co-processor' and those have existed for decades already, almost nobody buys them. As long as x86 has compatibility for software, most developers won't shift to ARM, especially if Microsoft only does a 'half' push towards it by putting a few ARM cores besides x86 CPUs. Because for the next 10 to 20 years, most Windows computers either won't have ARM cores or their performance will vary wildly, making it a terribly complex landscape for developers to burn their hands on. The only way for ARM to replace x86 is if ARM manages to run x86 code faster than x86 can run it, which is not really possible. DEC Alpha did manage to do that, but in a time where x86 CPUs were almost primitively simple while DEC Alpha was insanely complex and expensive. By the time ARM cores are that fast, they usually consume more energy compared to x86, defeating their entire point. And even then you end up with ARM CPUs emulating x86, until eventually more and more software is re-compiled for ARM. Basically ARM won't be taking over x86 anytime soon (if ever), it has been said ARM will take over since just after DEC Alpha when they sort of stumbled into creating ARM, nearly 30 years ago and so far the gap between ARM and x86 has only increased in favor of x86.
The whole advantage (for the consumers) of the x86 is the fact it is tied to the IBM PC architecture. ARM don't have such "restrictions" and could easily turn into the same horrible thing that is android, where you're forced to use the vendor version of the OS and all the unremovable garbage that comes with it. Imagine having hardware locked mcafee anti virus.
Well, with a bit of fancy softwares and some good luck you can install every Android version you like on your phone. Deleting pre-installed apps is quite easy, you only need a PC, internet and a cable to connect your phone to the PC 😁
@@lucadominguez4659 This depends on your phone model. Yes, I may be typing this to you from GrapheneOS, but I specifically bought a phone with an unlocked bootloader so that I could install it. If your phone doesn't have an unlocked bootloader, you can't install other Android roms, and many brands of phones do not have unlocked bootloaders. (It may still technically be possible to install other operating systems, even with a locked bootloader, but by that point we're likely talking hardware modding your phone. Most people, even technical ones, aren't going to do that.)
Amd is light year ahead from Microsoft on the APU and cpu space... If windows 12 will be arm, it's going to be bad, because! That's why we like windows compatibility. Or allow windows to run on their chips, and everyone's
The argument that m1 chip is more battery efficient than their x86 counterparts needs to be looked at better. We are getting 5nm x86 chips on laptop soon. If their battery life is similar to apple then I don't think that argument holds water. Plus X86 is going to become more efficient once they get rid of 16 and 32 bit instructions.
pretty sure the lattest amd apus are already as efficient as apple's and as soon as they also move to a unified memory architecture for bigger apus then there will be no advantage for apple except the node they're in
Microsoft will push for its own chips, then all the market players will push for linux operating system which will be customizable for the use cases for each organization, that's just my prediction.
The thing, in my opinion, that has been the *most* impressive about Apple's M1 and M2 chips, is the Rosetta 2 software that lets you run Intel-based Mac software on their Apple Silicon chips. That has been nearly flawless, and has been a key component of the success of Apple's custom silicon. Microsoft's "Rosetta 2" equivalent will make or break their custom silicon for the average consumer. If it seamlessly runs existing x86-based apps, people will have no problems buying Microsoft's custom-silicon devices. In the "Windows on ARM" arena, btw, I've been running Windows 11 Pro ARM-edition in Parallels Desktop on my M2 Pro MacBook Pro for about 4 months now, with no issues whatsoever -- but, I haven't been stressing it badly, either. It's not like I'm playing AAA games on it or anything (I have an x86 desktop PC for that). I just use it for Microsoft SQL Server Studio on my Mac's Win 11 installation, because that particular piece of software simply won't run on a Mac. But it has been 100% flawless for that task, so, maybe there's hope for Windows on ARM.
I imagine it's more than just apple that they are scared of google also did the same thing with the pixel devices and have done just as well as apple in terms of success with them
What if you make a arm based window and just add 1 x86 core that you can stop or start as needed for compatibility ? Like settings, battery life, enable x86 support. Can you have a system that throws a program to a core like that ?
AMD needs to bring out a ARM competitor to Qualcomm, Apple and Nvidia. Now that AMD owns Xilinx they can release there own ARM based soc with with Xilinix’s wireless chips, this will give Qualcomm competition in the mobile market.
I wish more gaming laptops have desktop cpus like the origin pc eon-17x since it has the Intel i9-11900k desktop cpu. The apple m1 and apple m2 is manufactured by tsmc like the tensor on the pixel devices are manufactured by samsung. Samsung and huawei manufacturers there own in house processors. I wish the new exynos processors were like the samsung galaxy note 5 since all samsung galaxy note 5 was using the exynos processors. The samsung galaxy note 5 was the last note series of phones that was using micro usb before samsung switched to usb c starting with the samsung galaxy note 7.
NO! Windows 12's gonna fail to because Microsoft is forcing these inconvenient innovations on us with them. Even if Windows 12 did fix all of 11's issues, Windows 12 in and of itself would stand in the way of consumers anyway. Might as well switch to Linux Mint since now it's totally usable now that version 20.3 has basically fixed everything related to an operating system, can't quite say the same for 19 though. And it's only getting better, not to mention it's the future proof way to keep Steam since they removed Windows 7/8 support and it's only a matter of time before they remove 10.
Windows (NT), in competition with IBM's OS/2, used to be able to run on different CPU architectures, back when 'different CPU architectures' was still a thing. Took them a few decades to go full circle...
I think Intel's new x86-S is really onto something... a simpler, newer instruction set that gets rid of the backwards compatibility and allows for growth.
Are they going to be called MicroChips? if not i don't want one
Fr
@@ElderlyDragonfr
Fr fr
I will only accept it to be called MACROHARD
Microhard... Um, actually better not. 😄
It took Apple 10+ years to get to the M1. Their first release was the A4, which was OK but nothing special relative to the competition.
@@CallousCoderI spy an eggcorn.
@@CallousCoder*intents
Sorry this was bugging me a lot.
@@dcd3lt4 Ah Thanks learned something new again! Makes sense. Always good or learn new things in a foreign language.
@@CallousCoderintents not intense.
@@CallousCoderwho designed M1? Why doesn't ARM sell M1 to other companies if they designed it?
Microsoft already have a developer kit called Project Volterra for making Windows apps for ARM so they're definitely serious about making their own ARM chips.
i mean, arm has existed in the microsoft ecosystem for a long time. surface RT and windows phone are the consumer examples, but you could still buy versions of windows embedded for arm, mips, etc.
@@pigalex Yeah but would you considering how bad they were? Volterra's goal is to (hopefully) make Windows on ARM not suck like how it did the last few times.
They are not serious. The x86 to ARM emulation is hilariously bad. Rosetta on Apple M chips just works. ARM Microsoft Surface Pro laptops can't run 99% of x86 software. Most stuff just crashes.
@@thisnowthen "It just works" - T̶o̶d̶d̶ ̶H̶o̶w̶a̶r̶d̶ ̶T̶i̶m̶ ̶C̶o̶o̶k̶ ̶ Tim Apple
@@thisnowthenmaybe idk, developers should make native apps instead? That sounds like an idea.
Given the power consumption in MSFT Data centers (The majority of it runs on Intel cpus), I suspect this development would be more of a data centre centric move in the first few iterations of any architecture they come up with. Dispersing all the heat generated by large data centers can cost as much, if not more, than the energy used to power the servers. So a more power efficient cpu, that runs cooler, is an obvious target to aim for. Any savings made via power efficiency would, of course, be an internal profit used for greater expansion and capacity of it's existing data center estate. Just my 2 cents.
Absolutely. Start with Azure, or maybe Xbox. No 3rd party software compatibility issues.
We're also at the physical limits of transistor size, without Moore's law to reliably increase performance we're going to have to see efficiency and performance gains from other methods (like switching to ARM, packaging improvements like what is already being done in Apple Silicon, and of course optimization of software itself... maybe rebuilding Windows from the ground up to run on ARM is the way forward no matter how painful it is).
Microsoft’s cloud predominantly runs Linux, not Windows. So yes, moving away from x86 there would be more feasible than trying to do it in the retail market.
if we're going for power efficiency, wouldn't it be easier to go for epyc? it doesn't need making architecture by yourself, polishing it with 2-3 iterations and rewriting whole code used on x86, at this point swapping intel to amd would be most cost effective in short run and then they could take their time and short term earnings to be put into designing
i have no idea what cooling costs are in this case and how much relatively it would save them per month basis, but after x time it should be net positive
"AMD EPYC offers up to four times greater performance per watt than Intel Xeon, meaning that users need substantially less electricity for operations, resulting in significantly lower operating costs (TCO)" ~exittechnologies
4x better efficiency almost means 4x less heat to get rid of for same workload, it's probably not that linear, but halving this cost would make a difference in a long run and probably before they can get working x64 systems
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 Except most of Azure's workload runs on x86, they've slowly begun introducing an Azure ARM platform but the vast majority of their customers run x86 code on Azure.
The AAD and webhosting customers might shift over to ARM servers fairly easily, but all the customers running Linux/Windows workloads on Azure can't really be shifted over.
As a software developer for 40+ years, including CP/M and MS-DOS, I am ok with this as long as Microsoft also takes their development languages like C# and API's like dotNET along for the ride, so that I can simply re-target and recompile for their other processors or computer products. I have more than a decade invested into dotNET alone.
Its Microsoft. Lets be honest, we all know it is going to be a mess
.net is a framework not an API? It can be used to build APIs
Sounds like a great way to commoditize user information at a hardware level.
Ya FUCK no.
Damn it
Microsoft is The Spyware Corporation®
Wait till you find out everyone does it already 😂
?
Microsoft has already modified windows heavily, now updates are easier to install and all system apps get updated through store, not from windows update.
All these are probably part of bigger plan to keep software ready for major shift like cpu change, AI integration etc.
This all started from 2019, to make windows easily manageable
Microsoft also made an attempt to make a RISC CPU in the 90's. It was mentioned by one of their VP's in an interview about past projects.
How long did that project last?
Bill Gates: “I think we should make our own RISC CPU.”
(Ten seconds later...)
BIll Gates: “...Nah.”
@@shvrdavid What “RISC support” was that? You’re not talking about that laughable Windows-on-ARM, are you?
Linus: Microsoft Is Making Its Own CPUs
Computers: oh boy, reboots at the binary level
Microsoft also has incentive to do so to build up their tooling for their cloud business. AWS and Google already make custom chips for a lot of processing and cloud workloads.
Yeah, I doubt M$ is trying to make Windows on ARM again, even they aren't that dumb.
They are probably trying to compete with Graviton and Ampere Altra in Azure.
Without a translation layer like Roseta2 on macOS, to emulate x86 on ARM, or just straight adding x86 hardware translation in to the chip it will be a failure. Apple users are more or less used to apple ditching support after a couple of years for their software, on a Windows I just can run apps that run 20 years ago, mostly without bigger problems, and if they do hard cut off support to move to ARM it might bite them in the ass, because they make Windows users mad.
This is where I think Windows needs to be split. Distribut the OS in a 'light' configuration without all those legacy drivers and oddities. Then provide an optional service pack to add it all back in. The vast majority of Windows users dont need a driver for a 1997 dot matrix printer and it's incredibly moronic of Windows to still be including all that stuff in its mainline build.
y'know there's windows for arm cpus, right? and that it already has x86 and x64 bit emulation built in? that way for example some guys ported drivers and emulated uefi on phones like OnePlus 6t so you can install and flawlessly run Windows
@@Insky_ I should be more precise, Windows on ARM should have this emulation done good, on a level like in Roseta 2, because as far as I know, for now this emulation is terrible, and it is not important that this is a fault of the chip, or the system, it is just bad and have to be way better.
@@Rick-vm8bl idea maybe great, but hard to achieve it probably, maybe even harder than writing new windows from scratch and add some optional "legacy layer" on top. And we are talking about years of development and cost around 1-2B dollars, probably, to write a new OS from ground up.
@@slizgi86Apple benefits from doing making specific changes to the hardware that makes X86 emulation easier. It’s not efficient purely because of software so unless Microsoft also develops their own chips, windows on arm is not gonna have efficient X86 emulation.
I really hope we see broader adoption of Windows for ARM apps to better support Windows for ARM virtualizing on M1/M2 Macs
Keep in mind that Amazons entire product line is based on a very narrow codebase and ARM licensing. Also keep in mind that many many user experiences (aka apps) are now Cloud and Web centric. Wintel was for desktop and server - ARM fits nicely into Internet appliances. Although one could argue x86 SOCs are decent - just higher priced. Back to servers - the big mama jamma out of Alibaba is 128 cores / 128 PCI lanes ARM based. Scales well with a lower power consumption. That matters in massive DCs.
To think that the surface lineup, which when it launched almost 10 years ago wasn't exactly seen as a good laptop system or tablet system- is now somehow still going successfully and being used as the center of windows for ARM
the reason why microsoft is doing is is because companies want to charge licencing fees to use those Machine Learning accelerators, and the prices are insane, look into how much Qualcomm's XR2 accelaterator license costs
How much?
@@Maku98_ the exact number is NDA but the licensing fee Is in the 6 digits for Qualcomm's XR2
@@SplitScreamOFFICIAL😵
@@SplitScreamOFFICIAL Thats not much, lol. Compare it to the cost of building that IP in-house; the number of employees earning six-digit salaries working year(s) on the project... that's nothing at these scales.
@@jrcowboy1099 it is when you're a game dev company that also wants to use those because Facebook can't distribute that license downstream, $100,000 is enough to make an indie company lives or dies
The SQ1 was based on Qualcomm CPU cores.
Still one Microsoft was willing to put their name to but they should've waited for Armv9 & Oryon to become available
@@_____alypticarm v9 is prob the reason why they trying a in-house this time.(and propulsed by qualcomm increasing prices)
I got a Zune in Xmas 2006 when I was 17. Thing was damn impressive for an ipod competitor.
"Redmond, start your photocopiers". Apple in WWDC 2004
everybody is making their own everything: cpu, gpu, ram, . . . what did I miss?
And Nvidia has made cpus
Chip shortages, making it so that you have 100% control over your own supply
It's simple: the chip market went from "I have to buy chips that a few companies design and manufacture themselves" to "I can design my own chips and delegate their manufacture to a third party". Designing chips is complex, but nowhere near as complex as manufacturing them, so several companies (Apple, Nvidia, AMD, etc.) are taking advantage of the fact that a company called TSMC has the technology to manufacture the most advanced chips in the world, and the companies now only have to design the chips.
Good luck making programs for every single one of them
Everybody want vertical integration.
they don't want to burn themselves for the 3rd time with ARM on client devices. They want to optimize their datacenter-performance, that's the only place where they could really benefit from it without having to support hundreds of different hardware-configurations from other companies
Would be pretty strange if they decided to roll back at using x86 on the surface pros.
So its a pretty safe bet that they still gonna launch this to consumers.
Microsoft’s cloud predominantly runs Linux, not Windows. So yes, moving away from x86 there would be more feasible than trying to do it in the retail market.
"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware." - Alan Kay
Honestly it sounds like the opposite now days with the competition between x86 and ARM, since it's hard to get all the developers to develope for your platform
easier said than done, we aren't made of fucking money
@@genericscottishchannel1603 Our moms are Made Of Money
@@GirlOnAQuest sure thing buddy
I've been expecting Microsoft to bring out a full blown high performance RISC-V CPU, complete with a large Vector Processing Unit instead of fixed sized SSE / AVX SIMD.. This scales much better as you can have lots of simple cores and a separate VPU. Integrated Graphics bought off ARM for not a lot on top. They have put quite a bit of money into RISC-V as a concept. It makes more sense than going fully ARM, although starting off with ARM may be a quicker way to get their foot in the CPU market door.
This is why AMD and Intel are pushing major MESA support for Linux based devices and operating systems. Microsoft? All about control and a closed eco system.
And shoving ads in your face, on an operating system that you paid for... meanwhile their Word/Excel/PowerPoint are so full of bugs that nothing works.
Microsoft isn't making their own CPUs, because that would kill Windows and their relations with partners. They've already rallied behind Qualcomm Oryon which is supposed to rival M series chips.
Until Linux becomes more user friendly, I will stick with Microsoft's ever-closing ecosystem, just like Apple fans stick with theirs.
Open source is fantastic, but if it isn't accessible, most consumers won't have the time or energy to get into it.
@@elise3455There's like 2M people using Linux on the Steam Deck fine enough. You mean stability, not easiness of use. Stuff like ZorinOS looks exactly like Windows. And everything just works.
@@thisnowthen you're a clown
Imagine all the built in malware-esk they will bake into that chip.
NAH MICOSOF PUT EGDE ON MAH CPU
@@godzilla995 There will be finally real hardware accelerated html5
you mean the microsoft pluton that is inside your amd5 chip alread?
Great you can get a CPU that forces all windows updates and demands that you use Edge over everything else.
nah they gon put a filter if detects is running chorme an shuddown
I mean edge is basically the best browser out there
@@codname125 it's not about the browser it's about how they force it on us
@@godzilla995 fair enough
Windows 11 on ARM is a massive improvement, among other things because of ARM64-EC ABI, which gives massive gains when running x64 software on ARM.
Speaking not as an Employee, my own opinion: Absurd prices from the duopoly sucks when you have so many needs, so many projects and so much infrastructure.
It's almost like maybe Microsoft has a lot of really smart engineers and maybe it's ok just to do it yourself
Win12 is going to rely on AI-based features? Eh, I'm not all that thrilled about the possibility of my OS judging me based on my browser history. 😅
Browsing history: likely a good reason for AI to go rogue and attempt to exterminate humanity 😬
I think performance per watt is more important than sheer performance now. We've gotten to the point where pretty much any game can run and (sorry for the science guys) simulations will most likely always take long. We have good performance, time to make them efficient, too.
No. We need more performance. Arm has node advantage so just wait for meteorlake Intel core ultra laptops, it will show better efficiency than arm CPUs.
@@HDRPC You missed my "Current cpu performance is enough for most applications" point. I wasn't comparing cpus, either, Simply noting that they've become good enough to stop worrying about performance
@@Louis_Marcotte most application is not like watching video, video editing, browsing.
We need faster cpu, gpu and ram for
3d work, gaming, etc.
@@HDRPC we really don't. Although faster is better, the current lineup is, at worst, acceptable for all applications you mentionned. 3d work isn't much of an issue for the lastest hardware, we aren't working with intel's pentium anymore.
Addendum: watching videos and browsing aren't nearly as ressource-demanding as video editing
@@Louis_Marcotteyou may not but many others do want more power and performance.
Now coming with hardware based telemetry!!!
Companies want to go to a 100% proprietary model, having less 3rd party competitior parts in a device gives them more power over the device.
If they make it a success, I wouldn't be surprise that they would slow other CPUs (or even lock them out). Look at how persistent they are on their IE and EDGE
bruh imagine
this is why i decided to daily drive linux mint since the start of this year.
anti-competitive, depredatody, monopolistic behaviour.
my mental health is so much better. Haven't had the need to touch windows since then.
Edge let's me use uBlock. Chrome doesn't. Fat W for Edge.
@@Splarkszter how does moving to linux addect your mental health 🤣🤣😂😂
@@GuyGamer1Bruh, why are you lying on the internet? Edge is based on Chromium browser. The AdBlock extension you are using is a Chrome extension. The moment Google disables manifest and prevents AdBlock from working, all Chromium Browsers will STOP working with the AdBlock unless the AdBlock devs find a different way. ALL of THEM. They all use Chromium FULL CODE, not just the engine.
if it doesnt work with x86 software to a good as or near good as standard im not interested at all, there is a reason i use windows and not a mac and im sure there are plenty of others in a similar situation.
I tried taking an article about this but it was kinda over my head but I know there is 32 bit processors and 64 bit processors but why not 128 bit?
I feel like silicon will become a rare resourse in the near future. And that a silcon mining buisness would be very profitable
Silicon comes from sand. Are you saying the resources needed to make silicon will become scarce?
Revival of Windows Mobile?
They worked hard on touch interfaces, which would be found in Tablets and other more mobile devices. It doesn't make a ton of sense to invest so much into Touch if it's only for those enthusiasts with 2-in-1s.
They do have a MSVC for ARM compiler, so *technically* everything would be ARM-compatible if you, well, re-compile it. The problem is ARM-specific code won't run on x86 computers, so a side must be picked regardless.
I find it far more likely they're looking to develop custom silicon for data center processors and co-processors for consumer products.
I would love to see someone build a hybrid chip design using the new open-source RISC V architecture you guys covered a while ago for the main processor, with some added ARM efficiency cores used for lower power and background tasks, eliminating X86 entirely. I also wouldn't mind seeing nvidia update and bring back their Tegra line of ARM based SoCs that had nvidia graphics cores in them. Imagine an ARM based laptop or chromebook with integrated nvidia 4060 mobile level graphics. I also wouldn't mind them selling such a Tegra SoC to TV manufacturers to use in place of a Mediatek chipset, basically putting an updated nvidia Shield inside the TV from the factory, preferably with Google TV or Android TV as the operating system.
efficiency comes mostly from the best available process and reasonable clocks, AMD is there and Intel isn't far off when undervolted and run with conservative power limits
7950X capped at 90W basically matches the M2 Ultra R23 score, for me that works pretty well, doesn't it?
M2U probably does much better in memory intensive tasks, but that also comes with a huge cost
That is not true, in a CPU every transistor is using energy regardless if its being used or not.
So a CISC CPU like x86 that needs 10 times more transistors to handle 10 times more commands will be using 10 times more energy than an RISC CPU like ARM regardless if 90% of those extra commands are almost never used any more.
@@hubertnnn This is objectively false with CMOS transistors, the only ones used since, what, the 70s? In fact, this is a huge reason why AMD's new GPUs are becoming more compelling. They even state they are doing exactly this in their announcement for their most recent GPUs. Essentially, this is what 'clock gating' means (oversimplified ofc).
@@jrcowboy1099 also how A2000 has the 3050 performance at less than half the power using the same archi, and 4000 Ada is probably around 4060Ti in terms of performance again with half the power
the more you push clocks the more voltage you need and the more*more power you waste, for CPU that makes some sense due to poor scaling of many tasks, but GPU scales nearly linearly with "cores" count (up to some point, but 4090 still works well in that aspect)
and lower clocks allow higher density = higher yield than the "regular big die"
Don't forget about Qualcomm's Oryon ARM CPU...in october '23
I'm still amazed at how much intel was able to improve x86, I thought it was basically as good as it was going to get around nehalem. But, I stll think the fundamental limitations of x86 will lead to its demise eventually, and maybe this is the beginning of the end, or maybe intel will manage to stretch it out a little longer with this upcoming deprecation of old features like real and protected mode.
x86 at this point is no limitation to performance, the only advantage of arm is decoding complexity, but today's chips are so large and complex that decoding complexity is not a problem at all, intel is removing those old modes for increased security not performance.
@@odnx x86 ISA is CISC, but x86 CPUs have switched to RISC cores + CISC Decoders over a decade ago. CISC is easier to program for, at least in assembler, but RISC has better performance and efficiency.
Finally *inhales copium*
once risk v got more performant im leaving x86
@@SuppenDfg Sure, but a run-time decoder likely won't produce as efficient code as a good compiler would.
Windows uses a Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) and provided 3rd party apps aren't coded to closely to the hardware then a move to ARM architecture shouldn't be much of a problem.
As for x86 though, it carries a lot of historical baggage and really we should be taking advantage of the CPU architecture progress of the last 40 years and move to something new. But be warned that doing so won't be painless.
Microsoft MicroChips are truly one of the delicious chips of all time. ✊
Microsoft microhards
Microsoft making is Microware. They should call it the Zune Processing Unit.
I hope they do solely so I and others can run Linux on it. It’d be the ultimate petty slap.
Yeah no they'll be devastated by you buying their product xD
@@someguy4915 I’m well aware they won’t care. But it’s just a hilarious concept.
I liked the Zune. I had the old hard drive one which I broke then had a Zune Nano, and finally bought the ZuneHD right as they were being discontinued. I still have those last two. Sad to see it go.
I've been expecting Microsoft to bring out a full blown high performance RISC-V CPU, complete with a large Vector Processing Unit instead of fixed sized SSE / AVX SIMD.. This scales much better as you can have lots of simple cores and a separate VPU. Integrated Graphics bought off ARM for not a lot on top. They have put quite a bit of money into RISC-V as a concept. It makes more sense than going fully ARM, although starting off with ARM may be a quicker way to get their foot in the CPU market door.
Windows-on-RISC-V is never going to happen. They already have their hands full trying to manage the trainwreck that is Windows-on-ARM as it is.
Separate vector processing unit? Kinda sounds like an intel integrated gpu: a vector processing unit (in this case optimized/designed primarily, but not only for video) as part of the same package as the cpu. Hell, tey even share the same LLC.
@@playerguy2 .. Are Risc V adding an AI extension spec? I'll have to check, but I should think they are debating it at least. I don't think the VPU will replace integrated graphics but it would be nice to have VPU and GPU more closely integrated with a native instruction set for both.
@@PrivateSi I'm not followong RISC-V closely, but it'd expect one such extension exists or be in development.
A separate VPU for hybrid parallel processing (vpu-cpu combo) and GPU designed for pure parallel compute (or for graphics support) would still make sense, but my main point is vector co-processors in some form exist in some form in a vast portion of consumer general purpose processors.
Hell, one could argue hardware support for SIMD in modern processors (both ARM and x86_64) are handled by a sort of VPU tightly integrated into the processor core.
Wikichip is a pretty good resource for low level uarch documentation.
@@playerguy2 .. SIMD is fixed length, VPUs work on variable length vectors so can better fit more data, and are not limited to some new standard to be released to increase their size. The actual hardware implementation varies but the instruction set is standardised. Forcing SIMD to work more like a VPU (ie. for stream processing) means breaking the data into SIMD sized chunks, dealing with memory alignment if optimising, with rolled out code and instruction pairing for max speed.. A VPU can do all that in the background. 1 simple set of instructions for all vector sizes is actually more CISC than the SIMD approach under the hood, but it does massively reduce the number of instructions needed to deal with vectors compared to SIMD ISAs.
Msft did include a decent x86 emulation layer on windows 11 arm builds. They just need to optimize it further to make it work well.
This is great but I'm worried about backwards compatibility if the architecture changes, one of the awesome things about using Windows is the fact that you can use software and games from decades ago, I played a DOS game not too long ago for example.
If the PC can't run DOOM then it's not a real PC.
@@CyanRooper fridges runs Doom be like ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
@@flameshana9 "Maybe I am a m̶o̶n̶s̶t̶e̶r̶ PC" - the fridge, probably
A friend of mine wanted to run a game from Windows 98 days. The easiest way to do it was to install PCem
on a Linux Mint installation and boot a Windows 98 virtual disk image. Video, sound, everything worked.
Video topic idea, we’ve been on 64 bit computing for a while now.
Will we ever transition to 128 bit computing?
When talking about 32b & 64b processors it actually applies to many functions/busses. The answer is complicated.
* Instruction size or base unit;
* size of integer datatype that can be processed by ALU per instruction;
* Data widths to RAM.
For current CPU's:
**Some 64b CPU's already allow 64b CISC instructions to process larger numbers or SIMD just by using shorter operand codes added to the basic 64b instructions;
**There is no urgent need for >64b of RAM address space;
** data buses can also be wider than 64b.
Some modern can handle 512b of data in 1 instruction because they process several small values burried within the large larger, 80b FP, 128b values.
I wonder how many spyware cores they'll have?
86
@@CyanRooper So they are planning only 90 core cpus?
@@hubertnnn Yesn't
I thought only 32 cores???
Microsoft can try making a linux distro with windows software support for arm.
They didn't turn into a trillion dollar companies by being absolute morons.
Dumb idea
Don't forget trust issues. This is another non-technical obstacle Microsoft will need to clear. How easy will it be to get Linux running on it? Will it have baked in telemetry? These days it's not just the technical potential of making their own CPUs that a company has to contend with.
How tf wood it have temeletetry is cpu dawg
@@godzilla995 sth sth mgmt engine?
@@michac3796 🤓
It won't be possible to run Linux on them. Thats the *POINT* 😈💀
@@Flynn217something bruh just use othr CPU idot
This seems like the response for the Chip Shortage of yesteryear. This timeline would make since. It happened, a year or 2 later they do something about it.
This will be interesting
maybe they could use use risc-v and sidestep arm licensing issues
MicroSilicon? 😁
I am all for more competition, it's great news for consumers, maybe we'll get processors that are cheaper than a black market kidney.
that would lead to LESS competition ... you cant have monopoly OS company make also the hardware, you would end up with closed ecosystem like Apple where in the end only option would be THEYR hardware ...
What i want is something like AMD already does.
ARM cores on an X86-AMD64 APU
But instead of a sub 1W single core(i think) ARM core just for OOMB like DASH, make a higher level ARM segment, say 6 A53 cores, that Windows and some store apps can run on at under 10w, shutting off the rest of the chip, until you need X86-AMD64 compatibility.
The problem with windows on ARM is not windows, it is EVERYTHING else.
No business will switch to an ARM only chip, when many businesses are using softwares that are over 20 years old, from before we had AMD 64 bit.
Businesses would be far more likely to switch if it had ARM+x86+AMD64
hope this makes linux grow big enough to become a real threat to windows.
Steve ballmer former ceo had a clear opinion, he called linux the most severe disease you ever can think. 🤕😢😪😟
It won't. Windows Vista didn't do it, Windows 8 didn't do, Windows 11.... Somethings are too embedded to shift. The only win I see for Linux is the Steamdeck. Chromebooks failed.
lmao
@jondonnelly4831 Microsoft is a united state backed operating system, linux has no single powerful country.
Actually, Linux owns a huge swath of the server environments. It has never been able to break into desktop because Windows was agnostic on the hardware. If Windows try to mimic Apple everyone will either migrate to Apple, why not go with the company that knows how to do the walled garden best, or Linux because it will be the last multiplatform left. I will never understand why Microsoft, a company that once owned around 97% or the desktop market, decided to follow Apple, a company that owns less than 10% of the same market. Maybe the Balmer and the new CEO just hate success with the end user.
not sure this is a good thing.
it could be a recipe for platform compatibility hell.
Wow I never knew these companies will decide to make their own CPU's I thought Intel and ryzen will be the best choice of them!
Not really. That's why Apple made their M chips. Intel and AMD can be a pain at times
Only so that they can shove even more ads in your face on a chip-level. Oh, and track everything you do and send it directly to Microsoft.
Gonna be great to see how Intel's marketing team will react
Intel core ultra, meteorlake chips are coming and will slow efficiency and battery better than any arm SoC laptops.
Arm has node advantage as of now but soon everything will change after Meteorlake launch in September 2023.
I don't think they are too worried about losing the Surface Pro and Surface line of laptops. Lenovo, Dell, and HP laptops are far better at revenue generating. Especially on the enterprise level.
1. Windows NT was built for non-x86 architectures from the start. NT 4.0 was available on four different architectures, XP on three (x86, x86_64, and Itanium).
2. The modern-day Windows 11 on ARM has emulation for x86 software, and so does macOS. Unlike macOS, Windows prides itself on backwards compatibility, and a lot of people and businesses depend on ancient software that solves a problem and is good enough. Apple regularly kills off older apps (most recently, they axed 32-bit apps a year before introducing Apple SIlicon). Microsoft knows this and will not leave old software behind.
Windows NT on non-x86 architectures was a failure practically from the start.
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 always great to see your narrow perspective in every comment section on a technical video
@@hye181 I was there, I saw it all happen.
Oh my gosh, imagine the poor cooling on the thing.
They couldn't even get Xbox 360 cooling correct.
I'm a bit torn as I definitely believe arm would make for a better laptop but legacy support is so damn important
jus put 2 cpsu n ther arm and x87 jusy swicjh betwen 4 legcy bro 😅 s so sinple
With how impressive Apple's latest architecture is I wonder if ARM will be the future in general. Even if it is, Microsoft transitioning Windows to ARM might be a difficult proposition for end users given that most Windows programs are still made with x86 in mind.
arm is nothing more than a mobile chip architecture that tries to compete with the big boys.
Unless you can game on ARM it's doomed to stay niche/mobile. Just like Linux. Doesn't matter if it's better. We don't want to do 2 things well, we want to do all 200 things, even if they're not efficient and safe. They're still cheap enough to be worth it since there's so many.
@@flameshana9 That's a fair point. Whatever happens next I still don't see x86 going away anytime soon.
@@estiennetaylor1260 ARM is not a mobile, it's a simpler architecture by design doesn't process complex instructions, and believe it or not most apps and games don't require the complex instructions of x86 and can run just fine on ARM, only server stuffs and some very niche subjects require the complexity of x86... I mean take a look at ARM apps and games on Apple silicon, they run just fine, even Microsoft was among the firsts to release a native ARM port of their entire Office apps, then Adobe followed then games engines from Unity to Unreal then all kinds of software are being ported and runs without issues, proving you don't need the complexity of x86...
Every time you ask users why they stick with Windows instead of using Linux, it comes down to games.
Is nobody doing serious work on Windows any more?
I think yall are wrong about the microsoft sq series. Am writing this on a surface pro X (sq1) and its great. Basically everything from microsoft runs natively and even emulated software just works. You just install any exe and it WILL work if you got enough power.
(for anyone thinking about one, i bought used and i FULLY Reccomend going for it if you want a universal machine, from note taking through light gaming or photo editing. Also its so goddamm thin and LIGHT!
btw linus, if your reading this, take a look at it again, its WAAYYYY better than it was on release, it was just ahead of its time.
They look nice, but build quality is not that great, their failure rate is far too high. If yours hasn't had any issues I'm happy for you, but unfortunately they have built up quite a bad reputation after years and years of failures.
Also while x86 software does run on it, plenty of software can't as it isn't fully compatible. Basic software (Chrome browser and whatsapp for desktop or something like that) will work, anything more complex usually crashes. Performance is abysmal, it's good performance compared to a tablet, bad performance compared to a laptop and terrible performance compared to x86 desktops.
Glad they're working out for you, but at the same time there's a good reason they have a bad reputation...
@@someguy4915 You are wrong. Chrome and whatsapp works great (am using firefox
They have a bad rep, because of early reviews while the software wasnt finnished yet.
They also arent built bad, maybe some first batch or something, but mine is built great!
@@hugoslav843how much did you buy it used?
Microsoft is likely losing money on every ARM device it sells.
I will never buy a PC/Laptop with a CPU that isn't truly compatible with x86 programs.
While Microsoft is all about backwards compatibility and their own chips will definitely feature an x86 translation layer, I think the goal here is to get as many big software developers as possible to provide ARM versions of their programs. If a company as gigantic as Microsoft is asking for it, possibly even funding it, they can't really decline the request.
@@hammerth1421
I don't really care for modern stuff. People want to sell their expensive software, so, of course, they will make it accessible for the standard version of Windows.
I am concerned about older programs. I'm not that old, but I have cherished software, some dating back to the '90s, and I'm not willing to give it up for a little more battery efficiency.
To this day, Windows software isn't perfectly translatable for Mac and Linux. I don't believe that Microsoft is much more capable of creating a sufficient translation layer.
@@hammerth1421 Lol, tell that to their previous (3 or 4?) ARM attempts... Tell that to Windows Mobile... Windows RT.... Tell that to Silverlight where Microsoft paid various developers to pick Silverlight over Flash... Microsoft is in no position to move the entire market, or even a small part of it, over to ARM, won't work (again).
100% all about azure and not consumer based stuff. The performance per watt is a huge thing for cloud providers. Current amazon AWS arm cores are the sweet spot at perf per dollar for cloud customers
Thought struck me when Intel was mentioned - Microsoft could develop an ARM based solution and then have it made at Intel Fab where it would have the Microsoft chip and several x86 cores added per Intel's recent papers - that would get you a best of both worlds to work with - just a thought...
So then you need to compile each program twice, once for x86 and once for ARM?... Or use emulation which completely defeats ARM energy savings making it as power hungry as x86 while much slower...
Also, imagine the headaches for programmers as certain coding tricks that work great for x86 do not work on ARM and the other way around... You'll get users asking 'why does this program work great, unless its raining outside?' As the program is 'randomly' shifted from the x86 cores to the ARM cores by the CPU to save power...
@@someguy4915 Well, that's the whole point of the hybrid approach.
x86 apps will run on x86 cores, arm apps will run on arm cores.
And over time cpus could have more arm cores and less x86,
until they reach single x86 core for compatibility.
Though I am not sure if it will be possible to mix architectures like that.
This is why Windows-on-ARM is a nonstarter: because porting proprietary software is so difficult and expensive. Linux can run on two dozen major processor architectures (including both ARM and RISC-V), and offer full self-hosted development and deployment stacks on all of them, but Windows cannot.
@@hubertnnn I can't imagine that being really possible unless the architecture defaults to x86 and has an option to 'run on ARM'.
Which while a few developers will support that and target their compilers to ARM, most won't.
Basically that would be an ARM 'co-processor' and those have existed for decades already, almost nobody buys them.
As long as x86 has compatibility for software, most developers won't shift to ARM, especially if Microsoft only does a 'half' push towards it by putting a few ARM cores besides x86 CPUs.
Because for the next 10 to 20 years, most Windows computers either won't have ARM cores or their performance will vary wildly, making it a terribly complex landscape for developers to burn their hands on.
The only way for ARM to replace x86 is if ARM manages to run x86 code faster than x86 can run it, which is not really possible. DEC Alpha did manage to do that, but in a time where x86 CPUs were almost primitively simple while DEC Alpha was insanely complex and expensive.
By the time ARM cores are that fast, they usually consume more energy compared to x86, defeating their entire point.
And even then you end up with ARM CPUs emulating x86, until eventually more and more software is re-compiled for ARM.
Basically ARM won't be taking over x86 anytime soon (if ever), it has been said ARM will take over since just after DEC Alpha when they sort of stumbled into creating ARM, nearly 30 years ago and so far the gap between ARM and x86 has only increased in favor of x86.
Zune Chips based on Arm 😅 for non ARM software 😅
If Microsoft can come out with an ARM processors and have it optimized like Apple then I would get it.
dont forget about backdoors.
After over a decade of trying and multiple versions, Windows-on-ARM is still struggling to take off.
They could improve current things with making a better Windows...
The whole advantage (for the consumers) of the x86 is the fact it is tied to the IBM PC architecture. ARM don't have such "restrictions" and could easily turn into the same horrible thing that is android, where you're forced to use the vendor version of the OS and all the unremovable garbage that comes with it.
Imagine having hardware locked mcafee anti virus.
Well, with a bit of fancy softwares and some good luck you can install every Android version you like on your phone. Deleting pre-installed apps is quite easy, you only need a PC, internet and a cable to connect your phone to the PC 😁
@@lucadominguez4659 that's so wrong. wth are you smoking?
@@GBR9794 dude, is not my fault if you didn't search the topic. Never heard of Lineage OS?
@@lucadominguez4659 This depends on your phone model. Yes, I may be typing this to you from GrapheneOS, but I specifically bought a phone with an unlocked bootloader so that I could install it. If your phone doesn't have an unlocked bootloader, you can't install other Android roms, and many brands of phones do not have unlocked bootloaders.
(It may still technically be possible to install other operating systems, even with a locked bootloader, but by that point we're likely talking hardware modding your phone. Most people, even technical ones, aren't going to do that.)
@@lucadominguez4659 I don't have to, because DalenPS who replied you debunked your statement.
Amd is light year ahead from Microsoft on the APU and cpu space... If windows 12 will be arm, it's going to be bad, because! That's why we like windows compatibility. Or allow windows to run on their chips, and everyone's
The argument that m1 chip is more battery efficient than their x86 counterparts needs to be looked at better. We are getting 5nm x86 chips on laptop soon. If their battery life is similar to apple then I don't think that argument holds water. Plus X86 is going to become more efficient once they get rid of 16 and 32 bit instructions.
pretty sure the lattest amd apus are already as efficient as apple's and as soon as they also move to a unified memory architecture for bigger apus then there will be no advantage for apple except the node they're in
"soon" i have been using this with apple for 3 years?
@@marianocalzada6472 And? Nobody cares.
"Windows 12"
And here I am on Windows 10... Feels like yesterday I was forced off Windows 7. Might be time to bit the bullet and try out Linux again.
RIP Intel?
F
Analog cpu no worry of speed even tetrahz. Break power suply into 10 time clock then 1 master clock and 9 time line 3 for each x, y, z
Microsoft will push for its own chips, then all the market players will push for linux operating system which will be customizable for the use cases for each organization, that's just my prediction.
Makes me just want to switch to Linux at this point. Microsoft's chip is probably going to be locked-down and non-repairable honestly
yayyy, say hello to even more vendor lock-in on PCs!
If Microsoft designed there own CPUs could that put intel or amd out of business as they could just put there operating system on the chip
The OS goes on the NAND, not the CPU/ SoC.
Their and system on chip (SOC)
At that point might be anti-competitive or considered possibly a Monopoly??
@@paulct91 OP is incorrect. This won't stop custom OS installations.
It would most likely be exclusive to Surface. I don't think Microsoft even has the capacity to supply every OEM that uses Intel/AMD.
The thing, in my opinion, that has been the *most* impressive about Apple's M1 and M2 chips, is the Rosetta 2 software that lets you run Intel-based Mac software on their Apple Silicon chips. That has been nearly flawless, and has been a key component of the success of Apple's custom silicon. Microsoft's "Rosetta 2" equivalent will make or break their custom silicon for the average consumer. If it seamlessly runs existing x86-based apps, people will have no problems buying Microsoft's custom-silicon devices.
In the "Windows on ARM" arena, btw, I've been running Windows 11 Pro ARM-edition in Parallels Desktop on my M2 Pro MacBook Pro for about 4 months now, with no issues whatsoever -- but, I haven't been stressing it badly, either. It's not like I'm playing AAA games on it or anything (I have an x86 desktop PC for that). I just use it for Microsoft SQL Server Studio on my Mac's Win 11 installation, because that particular piece of software simply won't run on a Mac. But it has been 100% flawless for that task, so, maybe there's hope for Windows on ARM.
Make a soy face in your thumbnail, get downvoted, reported, unsubscribed and blocked.
I imagine it's more than just apple that they are scared of google also did the same thing with the pixel devices and have done just as well as apple in terms of success with them
What if you make a arm based window and just add 1 x86 core that you can stop or start as needed for compatibility ?
Like settings, battery life, enable x86 support. Can you have a system that throws a program to a core like that ?
The Zune was actually better than the Ipod at least feature wise. (Coming from a Ipod user)
AMD needs to bring out a ARM competitor to Qualcomm, Apple and Nvidia. Now that AMD owns Xilinx they can release there own ARM based soc with with Xilinix’s wireless chips, this will give Qualcomm competition in the mobile market.
The camera on this video is feeling lackluster. Almost like it was out of focus? Or the video was up scaled from 1080p.
I wish more gaming laptops have desktop cpus like the origin pc eon-17x since it has the Intel i9-11900k desktop cpu. The apple m1 and apple m2 is manufactured by tsmc like the tensor on the pixel devices are manufactured by samsung. Samsung and huawei manufacturers there own in house processors. I wish the new exynos processors were like the samsung galaxy note 5 since all samsung galaxy note 5 was using the exynos processors. The samsung galaxy note 5 was the last note series of phones that was using micro usb before samsung switched to usb c starting with the samsung galaxy note 7.
I am looking forward to running linux on my new microsoft arm laptop.
NO! Windows 12's gonna fail to because Microsoft is forcing these inconvenient innovations on us with them. Even if Windows 12 did fix all of 11's issues, Windows 12 in and of itself would stand in the way of consumers anyway. Might as well switch to Linux Mint since now it's totally usable now that version 20.3 has basically fixed everything related to an operating system, can't quite say the same for 19 though. And it's only getting better, not to mention it's the future proof way to keep Steam since they removed Windows 7/8 support and it's only a matter of time before they remove 10.
@0:52 I LMAO repeatedly with this joke featuring this pic. I made a screencap, gave Linus credit, and posted it on FB!!
What next, intel and amd making their own OS?
Turbo velocity boost lake OS
Xtrem x os x xtrem x OS
Windows (NT), in competition with IBM's OS/2, used to be able to run on different CPU architectures, back when 'different CPU architectures' was still a thing. Took them a few decades to go full circle...
you need to log into your Microsoft account to continue I'M JUST TRYING TO UPDATE THE BIOS WHYYYYYYYY?!?!?
I'd love to see a return of Windows Mobile phones ❤But I could keep dreaming, I guess...
I haven't had issues running windows software on windows arm in parallels on my m1 pro macbook. So I think windows could be ready for it.
I think Intel's new x86-S is really onto something... a simpler, newer instruction set that gets rid of the backwards compatibility and allows for growth.