Computex ARM Netbook Frenzy

Second half of 2010 looks very promising for the netbook market. And with all the new multi-core ARM Cortex-A9 SoCs and Intel's new Atoms we'll finally be able to compare the two platforms with the same OS: Google Chrome OS (I know there are other OSs that run on x86 and ARM, but nothing nearly this big).

[...] Google Chrome OS is an open source, lightweight operating system that will initially be targeted at netbooks. Later this year we will open-source its code, and netbooks running Google Chrome OS will be available for consumers in the second half of 2010. Because we're already talking to partners about the project, and we'll soon be working with the open source community, we wanted to share our vision now so everyone understands what we are trying to achieve.

Speed, simplicity and security are the key aspects of Google Chrome OS. We're designing the OS to be fast and lightweight, to start up and get you onto the web in a few seconds. The user interface is minimal to stay out of your way, and most of the user experience takes place on the web. And as we did for the Google Chrome browser, we are going back to the basics and completely redesigning the underlying security architecture of the OS so that users don't have to deal with viruses, malware and security updates. It should just work.

Google Chrome OS will run on both x86 as well as ARM chips and we are working with multiple OEMs to bring a number of netbooks to market next year. The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. For application developers, the web is the platform. All web-based applications will automatically work and new applications can be written using your favorite web technologies. And of course, these apps will run not only on Google Chrome OS, but on any standards-based browser on Windows, Mac and Linux thereby giving developers the largest user base of any platform. [...]
Click to expand...
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
 
Well if we wanted to argue about being pushed backwards as opposed forwards in terms of technological advance, Windows Vista and Microsoft would be a prime candidate for criticism. But I guess we got to have our pretty interfaces and loads of useless features at the cost of lots of computing power right? I remember watching that video of an original Macintosh beating an Athlon x2 + 2 GB RAM based computer booting into Windows XP. Sure, it's the old Mac OS, but as far as productivity goes, we really haven't made much advance in that area, though thank god for GPU acceleration for the OS desktop. I remember waiting on the HP my family had in 1996 to load a program after clicking on the icon, then of course it could hang up as you're messing with whatever in the window. Man Windows 95 just loved to blue screen lol.
 
Mike11 said:
Second half of 2010 looks very promising for the netbook market. And with all the new multi-core ARM Cortex-A9 SoCs and Intel's new Atoms we'll finally be able to compare the two platforms with the same OS: Google Chrome OS (I know there are other OSs that run on x86 and ARM, but nothing nearly this big).


http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
Click to expand...

I'm more concerned about the performance though. Google Chrome runs well on a fast x86 desktop PC, but I don't know how it runs on an Atom netbook or even ARM based netbook. Some ARM based devices don't have very good performance even running native applications, so I'm skeptical about its Javascript performance.

Also some similar concepts are already in some devices. For example, iPhone (and iPod Touch)'s Safari supports the so-called "WebApp" which is basically Javascript with some extra functions supporting multi-touch, motion sensor, etc. so you can run a web based "application" on iPhone or iPod touch. Of course, it lacks offline function and that's probably a major selling point of Google Chrome OS.
 
Just to share a few of my investigations.

Freescale's i.MX515 is the first ARM- or ARM-Cortex-A8-based processor to directly target the sizzling market for netbooks. While ceding some software compatibility, netbooks based on i.MX515 should offer longer battery life, says Freescale. Performance may also lag a bit behind Atom-based systems, as Freescale is claiming 2100 Dhrystone MIPS (DMIPS) for a 1GHz netbook. Intel's top netbook chip, the N270, usually turns in about 4000 DMIPS, when clocked at 1.6GHz.
Click to expand...

http://www.windowsfordevices.com/news/NS6893221642.html

Anyway 2100 x 1,5 x 2 = 6300 Probably better realworld performance due to OoOE.

Given that it seems like Atom already can do some basic audio production/editing/recording, this at 200$ and all the hellosmartbooks site fatures plus officce/net and gaming/multimedia and we got a winner.

If we get a cheap touchscreen version it will be my choice, I really hope it will not disapoint.

A 3-4 core version would be a blast.
 
is Google Chrome OS a classic linux distro with GNU and X11? a lightweight OS is an interesting proposition but I'm not fond of yet another platform : unix-like, windows, google android and chrome OS, that's too much choice.
 
Ailuros said:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/10/22/arms-3228nm-chips-take-the-center-stage.aspx

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2009/10/21/arm-announces-cortex-a5-for-the-next-15-billion-cellphones-and-mids.aspx
Click to expand...
I'm honestly surprised that ARM is making so much noise about the A5 as a "MID" product. It's a nice improvement over the ARM9 and ARM11, don't get me wrong: 20% higher perf with a significantly smaller area than the ARM11 is impressive. But the A9 is already just that little box in the corner of the chip in Tegra's case; the cost advantage of an A5 would be small relative to the performance penalty.

It's a great chip for lower-end products and guarantees them that they'll get many new licenses instead of people just reusing ARM11 everywhere, but I think ARM is getting carried away in their marketing. A size comparison with an Atom is laughable given its performance level. Their only true competitor against Atom, and an extremely strong one at that, is the Cortex-A9. That dual-core 2GHz Osprey is certainly very very impressive IMO, and proves that it'd be a great chip on 40G (rather than just 40LP).

The only way for ARM to penetrate desktops though, rather than just netbooks, is for Google's Chrome OS to be a great success. Windows 7.5/8, even if it was ported to ARM, would be useless without any application; so unless ARM figures out a way to accelerate x86->ARM transcoding (ala that Chinese CPU?), that is never going to happen, period. I'm quite optimistic about Chrome OS (and I guess Ubuntu might carve itself a small niche too) so we'll see; I'm pretty sure it won't be a fast thing though. BTW, MIPS is also hoping that Android/Chrome will help them penetrate new markets, although I'm a skeptical of them managing to do it in practice.

As for 32/28nm: remember ARM isn't just a processor IP vendor: they also sell physical IP. It's in that context that they are making those test chips; it's interesting data, but I wouldn't make too much of it. Also despite all the hype, for a given performance level it's still pretty frequent for leakage to go down. AFAIK, the basic problem is that it's not going down as fast as die area and is preventing real-world clock frequency increases.

EDIT: And of course that Cortex-A9/GeForce exclusion is bullshit, as usual. Don't bother reading more than the presentation slides :p
 
roninja said:
Friendly British collaboration perhaps?
Click to expand...

I don't think so; ARM was pretty pissed with IMG when the latter decided to sell its IP on its own. Now that ARM has its own graphics IP from their ex-Falanx graphics department, they'd be pretty dumb IMO if they wouldn't push primarily the inhouse IP.
 
Ailuros said:
I don't think so; ARM was pretty pissed with IMG when the latter decided to sell its IP on its own. Now that ARM has its own graphics IP from their ex-Falanx graphics department, they'd be pretty dumb IMO if they wouldn't push primarily the inhouse IP.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree but it seems interesting that IMG were re-invited to ARM devcon this year.
 
Imgtec are still a significant supplier/partner within the ecosystem of ARM development regardless that ARM now considers them a major rival. Imgtec wouldn't ever be barred from attendance.
 
ARM smartbooks are coming, despite intel's kicking and screaming. if a few enthusiast like the pandora team can produce a fully-functional consumer-targeted ARM handheld (despite all turmoil the project's been through), and all the embedded heavyweights (TI, freescale, qualcomm, marvell) have full production lines centered on the architecture (actually have had for some time now), then i don't see the worry for ARM. and you don't need a myriad of OEMs - it takes one to show the viability of the platform, and the rest will follow. intel are desperately trying to persuade the world only they know how to build 'personal computer' chipsets - well, the PC is not what it used to be in the '90s (hint: it's become mobile, and sits in your pocket). and if anything, i have doubt intel know how to build the 'personal computer' of today (despite them trying really hard to smile for the cameras).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
ID@Xbox Summer Game Fest Demos [2021 June 15-21]
Replies
7
Views
2K
AzBat
A
Shortbread
Next-Generation NVMe SSD and I/O Technology [PC, PS5, XBSX|S]
105 106 107
Replies
2K
Views
218K
Karamazov
K
S
Windows 10 on ARM.
2 3
Replies
48
Views
60K
Laurent06
L
L
Next-gen launch strategising *Spawn
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
13K
Sigfried1977
S
BRiT
Game Studio CCP scales back VR development
Replies
2
Views
2K
Silent_Buddha
S
Back
Top