Comment Re: X86 CPUs (Score 1) 329
Whatever, you Troll
Whatever, you Troll
Which of course doesn't prevent any "plain" ARM instructions from running exactly as intended.
I answered your question before you asked it. Congratulations on still not getting it. You still have no clue about anything, I see.
Yes, most Open Source projects are abandoned. You understood my point.
So find a different Benchmark, troll. And no, not "photo editing". Gee, another thing you have no clue about.
And which one is that?
The one you have no clue about. What a surprise.
https://developer.apple.com/do...
"Apple platforms diverge from the standard 64-bit ARM architecture in a few specific ways. Apart from these small differences, iOS, tvOS, and macOS adhere to the rest of the 64-bit ARM specification. For information about the ARM64 specification, including the Procedure Call Standard for the ARM 64-bit Architecture (AArch64), go to https://developer.arm.com./"
https://www.techradar.com/comp...
Fun fact: you don't have to ask Apple to run Windows on Apple Silicon Macs, you have to ask Microsoft. Did you try asking Microsoft to run Linux on Macs?
Long story short: looks like it's a fully compatible superset of the standard 64-bit ARM instruction set.
That is actually not too different from modern PCs with Secure Boot.
One maintainer? That's more than most open-source projects.
You are confusing the Slashdot summary (that is supposed to be written by the user itself) with the actual reporting.
The summary seems to combine the following from the article "[...] which beats every mobile processor from AMD, Intel and Qualcomm" and "This means it is faster than every other x86 processor in our database."
In theory, their database could be quite old and contain x86 CPUs by other vendors. Anyway, even some old Intel Core 2 would likely beat x86 chips not from either Intel or AMD. But again, that's on the summary.
And they will still ask you for a tip.
Far ahead is overstating things.
It's the main reason Intel is in trouble.
The fact remains the process/price is an area where Intel can be compete over time, x86-64 vs ARM is not. Even if TSMC currently has the lead, their fabs are heavily booked. A second manufacturing source for Apple could be useful.
Sure. But there is no evidence that giving them money will help them catch up, given Intel have been trying to catch up for years, burning their own money in the process.
But even if they could, we'd only be at the point where Apple invested in TSMC, when they had a process but needed money for production capacity.
"My sense of purpose is gone! I have no idea who I AM!" "Oh, my God... You've.. You've turned him into a DEMOCRAT!" -- Doonesbury