Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 5th Nov 2012 23:40 UTC
Permalink for comment 541160
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-03-08
anyway, it would be great if someone make deep analyze of using ARM instead of intel ivy bridge.
looking from side, all premises that it could be done are there:
1. Apple control third party developers through AppStore
2. Apple control developing tools (language, framework, compiler...)
3. Apple investing heavy in GPGPU & multiprocessing (OpenCL/GDC...)
my question is:
how much faster could professional application* run on ARM + GPGPU chips (vs intel chips) if you optimize everything (metal, compilers, frameworks)?
*FinalCut, Logic, Aperture, Adobe Suit, Cubase, Cinema 4D...?
Is Apple in position to do this:
- potentially leap frog x86 in terms of performances optimizing everything I already mention (metal, compilers, frameworks...)?
I don't understand: even if Apple could get that much of a performance boost by using GPGPU on ARM, couldn't they also get the very same perf boost with GPGPU on x86?
Unless I'm missing something, GPGPU does not sound like a major area of differentiation between x86 and ARM, since GPUs must work similarly on both architectures (there's only so many ways to compute a matrix product in silicon).
Edited 2012-11-06 18:16 UTC