ARM based processors VS X86 based processors
I never thought a day would come when I would have to write this. Why then you may ask, am I doing it now. The main reason is that Intel is like a decade ahead of all other companies out there manufacturing chips. The other reason why I chose to write this article is due to the fact that we have a multitude of devices now running on ARM based processors with the RISC architecture compared to Intel’s high end processors which mainly use the CISC architecture. Lastly, rumors were flying around that Apple was considering using only ARM based processors on all their future devices, really?
ARM based devices have slowly found their way into our lives. To name just a few; the A5 chips used on the I-phone 4S and the I pad, the QUALCOMM or snapdragon processor in the Samsung Galaxy series among others. A brief comparison between the ARM processors and the X86 counterparts is outlined below
To get a better picture and a clear understanding of what I am talking about, it is good to give an example you can all relate to between an Intel processor and an ARM processor both being used in last year’s devices at the time of writing this article. Let’s compare the ARM5 processor being used by Apple and the Intel core i7. Well the results are out ant the two can simply not be likened at all, the A5 chip which has a 45nm and the sandy bridge 32nm cannot be put side to side. This is because the A5 chip can only be equated to a chip made by Intel almost 20yrs ago. This is the Pentium Pro line. Wow, we can both see the differences right? I mean try comparing the processing power of a Pentium Pro processor to that of a sandy bridge Intel core i7.
That being said though, we expect Intel to have a clear advantage over ARM based devices, the reality on the ground tells a different story. The thing with today’s market is that people don’t look at any one aspect of a device’s performance or appearance before purchasing it. Considering the raw numbers, we can see that 37 million I-Phones and 15 million I-Pads were sold by Apple in the last quarter of 2011this is a big difference compared to only 5.2 million Macs sold. It can be clearly seen that ARM based devices are outselling X86 based devices one to ten the main reason being that people are now at a higher rate than any other time buying mobile devices such as phones, PDA’s and tablets rather than mainstream laptops or high end machines for gaming. This leaves Intel with no choice but to come up with smaller more efficient processors to compete with the ARM based processors. I don’t know the main reason why Intel doesn’t already have them out yet because they have been around longer than their main competitors. I guess they were busy winning the speed race with AMD while other companies came up focusing on power management rather than sheer processing power.
Let’s now see what brings about the major differences in performance and size between these two different processors. ARM processors use the RISC architecture (Reduced Instruction Set Architecture) while X86 processors use the CISC design. The main difference between these two is that RISC as you probably might have guessed has shorter easier to decode instructions which are all of the same length thus greatly reducing the die size and also increasing the power efficiency of the processor as a whole. CISC systems on the other hand use single instructions that are of variable size making them a bit harder to decode as compared to the shorter better framed instructions being used in the ARM processors.
That being said though it should be noted that these two categories have greatly evolved over the years and we now have hybrid systems that have the advantage of being smaller in size and also execute instructions better than before.
Intel is known for its innovativeness and frankly, I hope to work with them some day. They have revolutionized the industry from year to year and sometime last year in May, they came up with the 3D tri-gate transistors. They claim these to be faster and somehow more efficient than their 2D counterparts. This 3D technology is what led to the production of the Ivy bridge processors that will feature this new technology. Ivy Bridge processors will be significantly smaller with the 22nm technology being used, will also feature the HD4000 GPU that is approximately 100% faster than the preceding Intel HD3000. Though this is a very major achievement, I should mention that the Ivy bridge processor will be just as fast as a similarly clocked sandy bridge processor but will consume much less power. The good news is that Ivy bridge is backward compatible to the Sandy bridge architecture and thus all those people out there with socket 1155 motherboards will have an option of upgrading their devices if they so wish. In 2013, Intel will then release the Haswell processors which will still be 22nm in size but have GPUs that are significantly faster than the Intel HD 4000. At the moment I can’t get my hands on the processing power info and whether they will be clocked at a higher frequency but they better be. Then in 2014, Intel will release the Broadwell processor (who comes up with these names?) that will go even a step further in reduction in the size. The Broadwell processors will be 14nm in size and I guess significantly faster than the preceding, also by then they should have figured out a way to make an integrated graphics card that should be able to compete with the likes of AMD’s and NVIDIA’s graphics cards though I highly doubt this is going to happen.
Anyway, only time will tell as we see what happens and have better devices on the market. At the moment though I can say ARM based devices are doing pretty well in the market and Intel has realized this and are trying to come up with smaller processors that are not only faster but very power efficient. I look forward to the day when my phone will be running on an Intel chip.
ARM based processors are only more efficient compared to their X86 counterparts due to the fact that they are usually clocked at a lower frequency thus at these low frequencies, they are made smaller and are at the same time more power efficient.
When one takes an Intel processor, clocks it at the same frequency as the ARM based processor then the two went head to head, the Intel processor will win on all the levels be it power management, speed, performance or overall efficiency. Find us on Google+
ARM based devices have slowly found their way into our lives. To name just a few; the A5 chips used on the I-phone 4S and the I pad, the QUALCOMM or snapdragon processor in the Samsung Galaxy series among others. A brief comparison between the ARM processors and the X86 counterparts is outlined below
To get a better picture and a clear understanding of what I am talking about, it is good to give an example you can all relate to between an Intel processor and an ARM processor both being used in last year’s devices at the time of writing this article. Let’s compare the ARM5 processor being used by Apple and the Intel core i7. Well the results are out ant the two can simply not be likened at all, the A5 chip which has a 45nm and the sandy bridge 32nm cannot be put side to side. This is because the A5 chip can only be equated to a chip made by Intel almost 20yrs ago. This is the Pentium Pro line. Wow, we can both see the differences right? I mean try comparing the processing power of a Pentium Pro processor to that of a sandy bridge Intel core i7.
That being said though, we expect Intel to have a clear advantage over ARM based devices, the reality on the ground tells a different story. The thing with today’s market is that people don’t look at any one aspect of a device’s performance or appearance before purchasing it. Considering the raw numbers, we can see that 37 million I-Phones and 15 million I-Pads were sold by Apple in the last quarter of 2011this is a big difference compared to only 5.2 million Macs sold. It can be clearly seen that ARM based devices are outselling X86 based devices one to ten the main reason being that people are now at a higher rate than any other time buying mobile devices such as phones, PDA’s and tablets rather than mainstream laptops or high end machines for gaming. This leaves Intel with no choice but to come up with smaller more efficient processors to compete with the ARM based processors. I don’t know the main reason why Intel doesn’t already have them out yet because they have been around longer than their main competitors. I guess they were busy winning the speed race with AMD while other companies came up focusing on power management rather than sheer processing power.
Let’s now see what brings about the major differences in performance and size between these two different processors. ARM processors use the RISC architecture (Reduced Instruction Set Architecture) while X86 processors use the CISC design. The main difference between these two is that RISC as you probably might have guessed has shorter easier to decode instructions which are all of the same length thus greatly reducing the die size and also increasing the power efficiency of the processor as a whole. CISC systems on the other hand use single instructions that are of variable size making them a bit harder to decode as compared to the shorter better framed instructions being used in the ARM processors.
That being said though it should be noted that these two categories have greatly evolved over the years and we now have hybrid systems that have the advantage of being smaller in size and also execute instructions better than before.
Intel is known for its innovativeness and frankly, I hope to work with them some day. They have revolutionized the industry from year to year and sometime last year in May, they came up with the 3D tri-gate transistors. They claim these to be faster and somehow more efficient than their 2D counterparts. This 3D technology is what led to the production of the Ivy bridge processors that will feature this new technology. Ivy Bridge processors will be significantly smaller with the 22nm technology being used, will also feature the HD4000 GPU that is approximately 100% faster than the preceding Intel HD3000. Though this is a very major achievement, I should mention that the Ivy bridge processor will be just as fast as a similarly clocked sandy bridge processor but will consume much less power. The good news is that Ivy bridge is backward compatible to the Sandy bridge architecture and thus all those people out there with socket 1155 motherboards will have an option of upgrading their devices if they so wish. In 2013, Intel will then release the Haswell processors which will still be 22nm in size but have GPUs that are significantly faster than the Intel HD 4000. At the moment I can’t get my hands on the processing power info and whether they will be clocked at a higher frequency but they better be. Then in 2014, Intel will release the Broadwell processor (who comes up with these names?) that will go even a step further in reduction in the size. The Broadwell processors will be 14nm in size and I guess significantly faster than the preceding, also by then they should have figured out a way to make an integrated graphics card that should be able to compete with the likes of AMD’s and NVIDIA’s graphics cards though I highly doubt this is going to happen.
Anyway, only time will tell as we see what happens and have better devices on the market. At the moment though I can say ARM based devices are doing pretty well in the market and Intel has realized this and are trying to come up with smaller processors that are not only faster but very power efficient. I look forward to the day when my phone will be running on an Intel chip.
ARM based processors are only more efficient compared to their X86 counterparts due to the fact that they are usually clocked at a lower frequency thus at these low frequencies, they are made smaller and are at the same time more power efficient.
When one takes an Intel processor, clocks it at the same frequency as the ARM based processor then the two went head to head, the Intel processor will win on all the levels be it power management, speed, performance or overall efficiency. Find us on Google+
Comments