Linked by David Adams on Thu 30th Sep 2010 20:39 UTC, submitted by fran
Hardware, Embedded Systems "Arm plans to add multithreading capabilities to future architectures as it tries to boost the performance of its processors, a company representative said on Tuesday. The company is looking to include multithreading capabilities depending on application requirements in different segments, said Kumaran Siva, segment marketing manager at Arm, at the Linley Tech Processor conference in San Jose, California"
Thread beginning with comment 443344
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
64-bit
by DigitalAxis on Fri 1st Oct 2010 01:44 UTC
DigitalAxis
Member since:
2005-08-28

Ok, how about 64-bit? Seriously, these ARM chips are getting as complex and powerful as desktop processors.

Reply Score: 3

RE: 64-bit
by miserj on Fri 1st Oct 2010 02:08 in reply to "64-bit"
miserj Member since:
2006-05-15

Seriously, these ARM chips are getting as complex and powerful as desktop processors.


And that has me drooling.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: 64-bit - Maybe drooling too early?
by BlueofRainbow on Sun 3rd Oct 2010 02:54 in reply to "RE: 64-bit"
BlueofRainbow Member since:
2009-01-06

These are only plans - whether actual silicon with the features being considered does come from a fabrication plant is a story still to be written.

64-bit wide registers would ease implementation of certain algorigthms. A first step implementation would not necessarily require 64-bit addressing. However, every processor with an addressing width smaller than the width of its general purpose registers either failed in the marketplace or introduced ackward addressing features which complicated coding later on.

Multithreading on a processor with multiple register sets - like the ARM - will likely look to a programmer quite different than on a single register set architecture like the X86.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: 64-bit
by WereCatf on Fri 1st Oct 2010 04:20 in reply to "64-bit"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Ok, how about 64-bit? Seriously, these ARM chips are getting as complex and powerful as desktop processors.

And how is that a negative thing, then? ARM was designed with low power consumption as the main point and good performance as an after-though. whereas x86 was designed for good performance and low power consumption was an after-thought. Low power consumption is beginning to matter as we are starting to run low on organic energy sources like f.ex. oil, and as such ARM has a good strategic advantage compared to x86.

Performance-wise.. well, as stated several times before, a common home-user doesn't need all that power they have even now; common tasks like surfing the web, watching porn, office work etc. don't require all that much CPU. Even gaming usually strains graphics hardware and storage media more than CPU. So, a slight performance-drop CPU-wise in exchange for less power consumed is actually quite ideal in most cases.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: 64-bit
by steve_s on Fri 1st Oct 2010 09:17 in reply to "RE: 64-bit"
steve_s Member since:
2006-01-16

ARM was designed with low power consumption as the main point and good performance as an after-though. whereas x86 was designed for good performance and low power consumption was an after-thought.


As it goes, the original ARM chip to make it into a commercial product, the ARM2 (running at 8MHz), was designed with performance as the main consideration, especially low I/O latency and fast interrupt handling, not power consumption. The competition at the time was the 80386 running at 16MHz. Technically the 386 scored a slightly higher MIPS count, but since chips need to talk to memory and devices to do real work ARM2 machines would be quicker at most tasks.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: 64-bit
by gnufreex on Fri 1st Oct 2010 14:41 in reply to "RE: 64-bit"
gnufreex Member since:
2010-05-06

x86 was designed for good performance and low power consumption was an after-thought.


x86 is designed for backwards compatibility. No after-thoughts, of even thoughts. Just backward compatibility with 30 year old chips.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: 64-bit
by deathshadow on Fri 1st Oct 2010 07:14 in reply to "64-bit"
deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

Given that the biggest RAM in most ARM implementations is a whole whopping 512 megs, what exactly is 64 bit supposed to deliver apart from making the code BIGGER from rounding up data sizes?

Edited 2010-10-01 07:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: 64-bit
by Neolander on Fri 1st Oct 2010 07:22 in reply to "RE: 64-bit"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, if ARM targets the server market, it must address bigger RAM quantities. Latest ARM processors can access 1TB of memory using "LPAE"

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: 64-bit
by Panajev on Fri 1st Oct 2010 08:28 in reply to "RE: 64-bit"
Panajev Member since:
2008-01-09

1.) ARM wants a piece of the "physicalization" pie, they want a piece of the low power servers market and for that they need a bigger address range.

2.) 64 bits does not necessarily mean 64 bits addresses. They can provide, for next-next generation smartphones and tablets, single cycle 64 bits integer processing while also having server optimized variants with 64 bits addressing. The execution back-end would be shared by both implementations.

Reply Parent Score: 3