Is computer evolution slower then ever?

[Mrs Beanbag]

tbh i just think it's kinda amusing that Apple are now moving over to a newer version of the CPU originally invented for the Acorn Archimedes.

[fxgogo]

I feel you re launchers. I try buy all my games from GOG. At least I know I can run them from downloaded binaries un-encumbered. Just what do I do with my 200 odd Steam games…..and all those free Epic games. Damnit, I am just going to have to live with it aren’t?

[Galahad/FLT]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

tbh i just think it's kinda amusing that Apple are now moving over to a newer version of the CPU originally invented for the Acorn Archimedes.

If the Amiga had continued under Commodore, ARM would likely have been a contender.

[rothers]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

tbh i just think it's kinda amusing that Apple are now moving over to a newer version of the CPU originally invented for the Acorn Archimedes.

Well seeing as Apple was one of the investors in ARM back in the 1980s it makes sense?

They have been in to ARM/RISC chips and doing/making strange machines with them ever since.

The new set of 'M' ARM based chips are looking to be off the charts powerful, like game changing/intel killing astonishing.

We're talking 1985 Amiga1000 levels of game changing, but remember back then how no one really noticed for years? Well, maybe it's happening again... I'd love some of you to take a look at what they are doing because you'll like it.

[Foebane]

Look, Rothers, I don't care how often Apple claims to push the envelope, IT'S STILL SHIT.

[phx]

Originally Posted by rothers

I'd love some of you to take a look at what they are doing because you'll like it.

I would love to use that new CPU for servers in my company, to replace x86 machines. But there has to be a Linux or BSD for it. Apple's Big Sur (...veillance) OS is really no option.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by rothers

'M' ARM based chips are looking to be off the charts powerful, like game changing/intel killing astonishing.

anything that can kill Intel gets my vote

[DJ Mike]

I think the technology is evolving much as it ever did. However, in the 80s and 90s our imagination went way beyond what the technology could do - i.e. we were squeezing every last cycle out of the tech to achieve something.

Nowadays, computing power is over-abundant - so the limit has flipped to being somewhat our imagination, but also (especially) the cost/time needed to produce slick, modern content.

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

anything that can kill Intel gets my vote

Oh, the sheer IRONY.

Apple switched to Intel in the first place because Motorola PowerPC was deemed too slow in the end, and now they're jumping to a supposed new faster tech?

Why can't these stupid companies just stick with existing tech and improve the fixed speeds as much as they can? OPTIMIZATION IS THE KEY, PEOPLE!!!

[Mrs Beanbag]

well imho Motorola made a mistake by ditching 68k in favour of PowerPC in the first place, while Intel just stayed the course, but, what's done is done.. i still hate Intel though

[meynaf]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Apple switched to Intel in the first place because Motorola PowerPC was deemed too slow in the end, and now they're jumping to a supposed new faster tech?

Why can't these stupid companies just stick with existing tech and improve the fixed speeds as much as they can? OPTIMIZATION IS THE KEY, PEOPLE!!!

Except that ARM isn't faster than Intel, even if they badly want everyone to believe otherwise (and somehow succeeded).
The reason behind this move is that they wanted to remove the dependency to Intel and so they do their own cpus.

[Mrs Beanbag]

yeah i don't think it's faster yet, certainly not at the top end.. maybe more power efficient at the bottom end, i don't know..

[Dunny]

Originally Posted by meynaf

Except that ARM isn't faster than Intel, even if they badly want everyone to believe otherwise (and somehow succeeded).
The reason behind this move is that they wanted to remove the dependency to Intel and so they do their own cpus.

This. We're currently moving our x86 Mac code to M1 and we're not seeing any performance gains, not even in the hand-tuned asm we use. It's comparable to a very fast Core i7 or a Core i9, but no faster.

And let's not forget that MacOS is an absolute travesty to develop for. This is not 1985/A1000 all over again. At all.

[grond]

Originally Posted by Dunny

This. We're currently moving our x86 Mac code to M1 and we're not seeing any performance gains, not even in the hand-tuned asm we use. It's comparable to a very fast Core i7 or a Core i9, but no faster.

How are wattages of the M1 and the core i7/i9?

[rothers]

Originally Posted by grond

How are wattages of the M1 and the core i7/i9?

You can lead a horse to water....

I was going to post a lot more about why the M1 is the start of something not seen since the A1000 but what's the point... But yes, the power use of the M1 is difficult to believe, go look at some youtube Intel vs. M1 comparison videos.

Those of you who are interested, take a look at this recent article written by people who don't have their heads in the sand or some 30 year old agenda

https://www.t3.com/news/the-macbook-...e-it-otherwise

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by grond

How are wattages of the M1 and the core i7/i9?

Who cares? Especially when the chip still has major issues like these:

USB power delivery bricking
After its release, some users who charged M1 devices through USB-C hubs reported bricking their device.[21] The devices that are reported to cause this issue were third party USB-C hubs and non-Thunderbolt docks (excluding Apple's own dongle).[21] Apple handled this issue by replacing the logic board and by telling its customers to not charge through those hubs.[citation needed] macOS Big Sur 11.2.2 includes a fix to prevent 2019 or later MacBook Pro models and 2020 or later MacBook Air models from being damaged by certain third-party USB-C hubs and docks.[22][23]

Hardware errata
The M1 chip has errata given the name "M1RACLES". Two sandboxed applications can exchange data without the system's knowledge by using an unintentionally writable processor register as a covert channel, violating the security model and constituting a minor vulnerability.[24]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_M1

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Who cares? Especially when the chip still has major issues like these:

well i care, actually. these kinds of issues, while extremely bad from a user point of view, will be fixed before too long, and have nothing to do with the ISA.

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

well i care, actually. these kinds of issues, while extremely bad from a user point of view, will be fixed before too long, and have nothing to do with the ISA.

I'm surprised people still feel the need to use ANYTHING Apple these days? Is it some cult thing? Does it need to be quashed(?)

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by Foebane

I'm surprised people still feel the need to use ANYTHING Apple these days? Is it some cult thing? Does it need to be quashed(?)

i don't feel the need to use anything Apple, i have no love for the company. That doesn't mean a new non-x86 CPU with the performance of an i7 at a fraction of the power usage isn't an exciting technical development. This technology will trickle down.. we could all be using ARM-based laptops and even desktops in a few years, and i say bring it on. I never buy the fastest available CPU anyway, i always try to build my PCs small, low power and quiet.

[trydowave]

Originally Posted by Galahad/FLT

It's part of the reason why I haven't gone out and bought a PS5 to replace the still working PS4.

I'm not seeing the leaps that other Playstation generations had.

"Compare this video, look how the shadows are sharper on the PS5 versus the PS4"...... er, i'm going to need a little more than that before I go spunk money on a new console when the old one is still providing a decent show of things!!!

All we can expect at the moment is slightly longer draw distances, maybe slightly higher resolution and more detail, but certainly so far, i've not seen any game on PS5 that makes me think "its going to look shit on PS4!"

i agree. the changes are there but they arent mind blowing. i still have a 360 under my tv next to the ps4. played halo 4 the other day. looks surprisingly comparable graphic wise for a console that came out sixteen years ago!