For a laptop or secondary device I wouldn't even need that. It would just need to be relatively efficient, run few apps I'd use and not be in glued device that is together.
I’m all for open ISAs, but one of these can be licensed at reasonable rates and the other sued AMD for making the 64-but instruction set architecture that Intel should have made.
It's beyond my mind that x86(-64) survived to this day. It's so inefficient
Edit: to clarify: I know nearly nothing about processors, so maybe the architecture isn't really that inefficient. All I know is that after Apple switched to its own ARM-based chips, the programs could run faster using the same or less energy. Even with the compatibility later
This is one that way too many people forget about, to switch to something else, you'd need to emulate x86 for the software that hasn't or do without. Emulation causes overhead and performance reduction, and doing without seems fine on paper until you encounter software you want or more crucially need and can't use it because it hasn't been ported, isn't open-source, or can't be ported due to heavy use of x86 assembly.
22 Comments
Godort@lemm.ee · 33 pts · 1y
I'm fully ready to switch to RISCV when compatibility and performance match x86_64 and ARM
cm0002@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 1y
Ah, so in about 20 years then sad lol
Wildly_Utilize@infosec.pub · 13 pts · 1y
Match? That's unlikely to happen anytime soon (or at all)
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 1y
Don't forget about also having a matching open-source GPU unless you want shit performance for graphics too.
HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 1y
I dont even need it to match, just be usable.
Ziglin@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y
For a laptop or secondary device I wouldn't even need that. It would just need to be relatively efficient, run few apps I'd use and not be in glued device that is together.
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de · 21 pts · 1y
AMD?
AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 1y
AMD has done a bit of open source driver and software stuff, but their chips aren't any more open AFAIK.
unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 1y
Yeah thats what my understanding was as well.
resipsaloquitur@lemm.ee · 17 pts · 1y
I’m all for open ISAs, but one of these can be licensed at reasonable rates and the other sued AMD for making the 64-but instruction set architecture that Intel should have made.
PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de · 5 pts · 1y
help who's who? there's three mamufacturers in the meme and I'm woefully uninformed
resipsaloquitur@lemm.ee · 9 pts · 1y
Arm licenses ISAs and designs. It doesn’t manufacture anything.
PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 1y
sorry, right. I still don't know who sued AMD, I assume intel?
Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 1y
It was Intel. Stagnating CPU monopoly they are.
nawordar@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 1y
It's beyond my mind that x86(-64) survived to this day. It's so inefficient
Edit: to clarify: I know nearly nothing about processors, so maybe the architecture isn't really that inefficient. All I know is that after Apple switched to its own ARM-based chips, the programs could run faster using the same or less energy. Even with the compatibility later
JamesBoeing737MAX@sopuli.xyz · 13 pts · 1y
Well, legacy compatibility.
Draconic_NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 1y
This is one that way too many people forget about, to switch to something else, you'd need to emulate x86 for the software that hasn't or do without. Emulation causes overhead and performance reduction, and doing without seems fine on paper until you encounter software you want or more crucially need and can't use it because it hasn't been ported, isn't open-source, or can't be ported due to heavy use of x86 assembly.
easily3667@lemmus.org · 6 pts · 1y
zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 1y
Eh, the backend's pretty decoupled from the ISA, it's the frontend of these chips that's needlessly complicated.
udc@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 1y
How close are we to RISCV chips having comparable performance to consumer proprietary chips?
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 1y
Who's this bald guy
infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 1y
A straw man.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 1y
I liked him in the 2/sqrt(2) = sqrt(2) meme.