CISC was a principle in the 1980s when chips were so small that instruction set differences meant architectural differences. Some will claim it's because they are RISC whereas Intel is CISC. Instead of ARM replacing x86, Apple may be attempting to provide both as options, possibly an ARM CPU for cheaper systems and an x86 for more expensive and more powerful systems.Įvery news story, every single one, is going to repeat the claim that ARM chips are more power efficient than Intel's x86 chips. Google's Chromebooks come in either x86 or ARM versions. Amazon's AWS cloud servers come in either x86 or ARM versions. Microsoft's "Surface Pro" laptops come in either x86 or ARM versions. Other companies have chosen to adopt both x86 and ARM, rather than one or the other. If Apple transitions away from x86, they'll still be competing against x86-based computers. Intel's x86 is competitive on both speed and power efficiency. They had no choice but to move to a new processor. Each transition happened because the processor they were using was failing to keep up with technological change. However, this history is almost certainly the wrong way to look at the situation. They moved to IBM's PowerPC in 1994, then to Intel's x86 in 2005. Their original Macintoshes in 1984 used Motorola 68000 microprocessors. I thought I'd write up some perspectives on this. The latest rumor is that Apple is going to announce Macintoshes based on ARM processors at their developer conference.
0 kommentar(er)
