Slashdot Mirror


AMD Gives ARM License a Miss, Will Stick To x86

CWmike writes "Advanced Micro Devices has shot down rumors that it is pursuing an ARM license, saying it will stick to developing chips for tablets around the x86 architecture. 'We've made a big bet on APUs, which are x86,' said John Taylor, a marketing director at AMD, referring to accelerated processing units. AMD has been criticized for a lethargic approach to entering the fast-growing tablet market, which is dominated by ARM."

12 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. Backwoods Compatible by Richard+Dick+Head · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm not buying a tablet until it can run MS-DOS and Lotus 1-2-3. Period.

    1. Re:Backwoods Compatible by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

      My tablet has to run Whoosh 2.0.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:Backwoods Compatible by NuShrike · · Score: 2
    3. Re:Backwoods Compatible by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 2

      My name is Moses. What's all this about tablets?

    4. Re:Backwoods Compatible by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 2

      All those desktop programs are design for desktop input, so I would expect that experience to suck in so many ways. Plus with Linux, why bother with x86? You can get full Linux pretty much anywhere; that's the beauty of open source.

      --
      SSC
    5. Re:Backwoods Compatible by gfody · · Score: 2

      what you're describing is basically netbooks/slates. bobcat and atom are just slow enough to be annoying. sure you can run windows on it, but it runs like shit and you get about 5 hours battery time. meanwhile arm chips are providing a snappy experience on a fraction of the power.

      --

      bite my glorious golden ass.
  2. And so the downward spiral continues by horza · · Score: 2

    The behemoths that once lay claim to be innovators are starting to drop. I buy AMD chips over Intel for my desktop, but my next tablet will be ARM. As the next generation are pretty much standardizing on Android for the OS (though Microsoft are working hard to make their OS ARM compatible), speed and battery life are going to be two key differentiators. ARM has the clear advantage here. Of course tablet sales are only a tiny drop in the sea of revenue for a company like AMD, but it does seem short-sighted none the less.

    Phillip.

    1. Re:And so the downward spiral continues by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Interesting

      (though Microsoft are working hard to make their OS ARM compatible)

      Yeah, let's ignore WinMo and WinCE that have already been ARM compatible for 15 years now.

    2. Re:And so the downward spiral continues by the_humeister · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why, if they were x86 Android tablets, why wouldn't they be able to run Android apps? The apps are running on top of Dalvik anyway so the processor underneath it all doesn't really matter.

  3. Not a Surprise by TheEyes · · Score: 3, Informative

    This should come as no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention to AMD. AMD has already bet on x86-64 scaling down to tablet form factors; that is, after all, the entire point of the Bobcat architecture. Later this year when Bobcat transitions to 28 nm we'll see if it pans out; even if it doesn't there's always the 20nm transition in late 2012, and that's sure to lower power requirements enough to make an x86 tablet viable.

    At the same time, it's obvious that there really isn't any room in the ARM SoC market for new entrants*. NVIDIA is already selling Tegra 2 SoCs for a cut-rate $25 a chip, and those are going into already too expensive Android tablets. The message is clear: the only way to make a profit with ARM chips is in volume, and there's no way a new entrant like AMD is going to ramp to significant volume to even cover production and R&D costs before their own Bobcat architecture has made the transition to 28-20nm and they're basically competing with themselves.

    *- Yes, I know AMD wouldn't be entirely a new entrant, as they had an ARM license as recently as a few years ago, which they subsequently sold off, but by this point they'd essentially be new entrants all over again

  4. Re:Trelane has died by roc97007 · · Score: 2

    ...so, instead of whining about it in a completely unrelated thread, why didn't you submit this as a news item?

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  5. Limited needs by sjbe · · Score: 2

    You see -- All of the software I need to run is open source, thus it runs on any architecture.

    Good for you. Seriously. Good for you. I'm not being the slightest bit sarcastic either. I wish that were the case for more people.

    Unfortunately that also tells us some things about what YOUR needs are not. Clearly you aren't a heavy duty CAD user, you aren't an accountant, odds are you aren't a graphics professional (Photoshop), you don't use MRP or ERP either and I could go on. I also very much doubt that all of the hardware you use is open source only. (While possible to do in theory, open source only hardware is very restricting.) Open source is great but there are some types of applications for which the closed source versions remain clearly superior and probably will for the foreseeable future. There is no open source 3D solid modeling software comparable to CATIA or ProE. Hell there isn't a 2D open source CAD package that even matches AutoCAD. There is no open source accounting software comparable even to QuickBooks much less some of the enterprise level accounting software. I use GIMP all the time but there is no open source replacement for Photoshop if you are a graphics professional. There are tons of additional examples. Open source simply isn't the best choice available right now for some software needs. I hope that changes but I'm not holding my breath.

    If your needs are fully satisfied by open source software, that is really terrific, but it doesn't describe a huge percentage of the rest of us. I literally could not do my job using only open source software. I use as much as I can but it simply does not exist for some of my needs. (predominantly manufacturing and accounting)