Intel and arm both are leaders in their own space. But competition comes when one try to enter in others space. I guess its good forthe whole electronics indusstry if both continue doing good business.
@Rick: GOOD article! On the power requirements for Avoton, how does it compare to equivalent ARM processor/s at the same clock frequency?
Regarding "dense forest of passives", this is something that can be addressed by the motherboard designers. Obviously we don't have the info on routing congestion in the vicinity of Avoton chip. Otherwise many of the passives could have been embedded which adds some cost penalty.
There's no doubt that Intel can beat ARM when using performance per Watt as a metric. However traditionally ARM beats Intel on cost. So in devices where best performance is not the goal (smartphones, tablets e.t.c) ARM won and will continue to win because of its lower cost.
It will be interesting to see who wins on the server front. Performance is obviously more crucial in servers....But the cost metric is also just as important.
Actually, performance per watt is probably more important to a degree to the server market than cost. Keep in mind that power is an ongoing expense while you only pay once for the chip - at least until Intel and the other chip companies can figure out a way to lease them...
Also, the CPU chip cost is only one component of the cost for a server, both in terms of dollars and watts. Do we know how different a server board BOM cost is between ARM and x86? Likewise, is the only significant power usage difference between those server boards the CPU itself?
January 2016 Cartoon Caption ContestBob's punishment for missing his deadline was to be tied to his chair tantalizingly close to a disconnected cable, with one hand superglued to his desk and another to his chin, while the pages from his wall calendar were slowly torn away.122 comments