Moore's Law Is Becoming Irrelevant, Says ARM's Boss

holy_calamity writes "PCs will inevitably shift over to ARM-based chips because efficiency now matters more than gains in raw performance, the CEO of chip designer ARM tells MIT Technology Review. He also says the increasing adoption of ARM-based suppliers is good for innovation (and for prices) because it spurs a competitive environment. 'There’s been a lot more innovation in the world of mobile phones over the last 15-20 years than there has been in the world of PCs.'"

Comments

Duh

[Anonymous Coward]

CEO of a company that makes more efficient CPUs than the competition says the future is in efficient CPUs. News at 11.

Re:Duh

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Since 80386. :-) I wonder what would have happened had Archimedes actually succeeded in the market. In those days, it was faster, cheaper, more energy-efficient than the 80386 PCs. Perhaps a better performance differential than just those 3x (?) would have helped. Or perhaps not.

Re:Duh

[Noughmad]

According to this old benchmark by Phoronix (which was even linked by Slashdot), the i7 is more power-efficient than the ARM Cortex A9 in PandaBoard. The i7 got 85 Mop/s per Watt, while the ARM managed only 38.

The advantage of low-power processors like ARM's is low power consumption when idle, which admittedly is where most computers (and tablets, phones, etc) spend most of their time.

Not built for speed?!?

[ackthpt]

But every newer version of operating systems has more bloat than ever. There must be some corollary to Moore's Law which states successive Operating Systems will still require higher performance, but users will now become accustomed to slower response times.

We could call it the Blort Law.

Re:Not built for speed?!?

[GrumpySteen]

Wirth's Law:
Software is getting slower more rapidly than hardware is getting faster.

Re:Not built for speed?!?

[atlasdropperofworlds]

Let's look at a couple of real examples: Win 7 has fewer features, a smaller memory footprint, and ran faster than Vista, but offered stronger security. Win8 is faster (or at least the same speed) and has a smaller memory footprint than Win7, and has further upgraded security features. I'm not feeling where you're coming from.

Title is rubbish

[YodasEvilTwin]

The guy says nothing of the sort, it's just the title of the article. All he says is that efficiency is becoming more and more important, and that ARM offers such efficiency. (He *also* says that ARM can offer performance as well.)

Re:Title is rubbish

[Hatta]

Smaller transistors can be operated with less current, so Moore's law remains as relevant as ever.

Re:Title is rubbish

[geekoid]

What?
twice the transistors, half the price. That is what Moore's law boils down to, according to his paper. Read it.

And yes, it's not relevant for a number of reasons.
As a real world example:
In 06 you could get a 3 GHz computer. If Moore's law still impacted speed, we would be able to get a 24GHz chip right now.

Re:Title is rubbish

[Nkwe]

In 06 you could get a 3 GHz computer. If Moore's law still impacted speed, we would be able to get a 24GHz chip right now.

i7-3960X is 6 cores at 3.3 - 3.9 GHz each. That isn't all that far from 24 GHz.

Re:Title is rubbish

[Anonymous Coward]

>i7-3960X is 6 cores at 3.3 - 3.9 GHz each. That isn't all that far from 24 GHz.

I feel a great disturbance in Slashdot, as if millions of CS majors cried out something rather uncomplimentary about your ignorance.

Efficiency!

[CajunArson]

" efficiency now matters more than gains in raw performance"

Sure, so why don't you start off by telling us why an Exynos Cortex A-15 chip running a web benchmark is using about 8 watts of power, with the display turned off so only SoC power is being measured, while Intel has already demoed a full-blown Haswell running Unigine Heaven at... 8 watts.

So when the miraculous Cortex A-15 uses the same amount of power as the supposedly "bloated" x86 Haswell, while Haswell is running a benchmark that is massively more intensive than a web-browser test, who is really making the most "efficient" platform?

Exynos Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/samsung-chromebook-xe303-review-testing-arms-cortex-a15/7
Haswell Demo Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKvVdhkgAxg

Re:Efficiency!

[dgatwood]

That's a false comparison, though. If users mostly ran benchmarks 24x7, that would be a good test of efficiency. The reality, however, is that CPUs mostly sit idle, so to compute average efficiency, you have to factor that in.

Granted, a faster CPU that can reach an idle state sooner can be more efficient than a slower CPU that runs at full bore for a longer period of time, but only if the idle wattage is fairly similar.

Re:Efficiency!

[CajunArson]

Haswell is a (probably) ~1.6 Billion transistor chip that obviously costs more than a SoC that is really designed for tablets. Interesting then that a ~1.6 Billion transistor chip that includes similar functionality to the SoC uses about the same amount of power as that tablet SoC while including vastly more performance.

If you want cheap, Atoms are already out now that are quite cost competitive with ARM chips, and 22nm Atoms will be out next year.

Oh and as for "release dates" the Exynos has just barely begun to reach the market and Haswell will be out and about at around the same time that most Cortex A-15s really come into the market as well. Considering I've had to listen to "A15 will kill Intel!!!!" for over 2 years as if they were already coming out of faucets like water, I'm not too worried about part availability.

So here we are in the ARM vs. Intel Evolution:
2008: ARM is superior, Intel can NEVER scale its power consumption down below 100 watts!!

2009-2010: ARM is still superior! Atom sucks at performance and uses 10 WHOLE WATTS, thats more than 10X ARM! The Cortex A9 will annihilate Intel!

2011: ARM performance dominance is just around the corner! Ignore those useless benchmarks of Cortex A9 vs. Atom! So what if Atom has higher performance, IT SUCKS DOWN MORE POWER AND POWER CONSUMPTION IS ALL THAT MATTERS!

2012: Medfield sucks! Who cares if it gets better battery life than a dual-core 28nm Krait when put into Motorala Razers with the exact same! See, we have benchmarks where the higher-clocked Krait gets 10% better performance (in some benchmarks while losing in others that we ignore)! WHO CARES THAT ATOM IS MORE POWER EFFICIENT THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS MORE PERFORMANCE!
INTEL IS STILL OVERPRICED EVEN THOUGH THE RAZER I AND RAZER M HAVE THE SAME PRICE!

2013: Uh... at least ARMs are cheap when you intentionally compare chips desiged for cellphones to Intel's desktop chips and pretend that Atom doesn't exist. ARM WILL DESTROY INTEL!

Re:Efficiency!

[CajunArson]

Funny you should hate on Medfield when a Razer I with Medfield has better battery life than a krait Razer M with the exact same screen and battery. But it looks like you never let facts get in the way of your koolaid.

Hate the "Post-PC" era

[Anonymous Coward]

As a geek I love a powerful general purpose machine that can do all the things an ebook reader/music player/web browser can do AND a whole lot more like play 3d games, run a math or science simulation, allow you to record and edit video, memory and processor intensive image editing. To me a tablet is little more than a crippled PC with the keyboard removed (fantastic, why did I learn to type at 90wpm again??), and a smudge screen interface (hate viewing photos through finger marks!!!). It's really awesome that we have dumbed down our computers to the point of mediocrity. Even finding a decent e-book reading or music playing app - the things these pieces of shit are touted at making easier - is a nightmare. So many book readers don't even let you zoom on images. And browsing the web without flash support is like trying to surf with one leg. I don't mind that there are dumbed down idiot boxes for those who like to post pictures of food on Facebook, but I really resent the impact on general purpose computing.

Makes no sense!

[Anonymous Coward]

Moore's law just predicts transistor density - it says absolutely nothing about computational power. Increases in transistor density can make electronics more efficient per watt, but this still is aligned with Moore's law.

The title is stupid, and the actual article says almost nothing like it.

Gate's Law

[Citizen of Earth]

It's called Gate's Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.

Power

[rossdee]

Sure efficiency matters, but only in portable devices. Desktops or other computers connected to the mains don't have a problem.

Hey its winter already, a watt used by your CPU is a watt less that has to be used by your radiant or convective heater.

Re:Power

[Chewbacon]

Efficiency matters to people who have many desktops around the home or office. Datacenters are focusing on efficient servers. Yeah, it does. Just because you're plugged into the wall doesn't mean that energy is infinite.

Re:Power

[xlsior]

Hey its winter already, a watt used by your CPU is a watt less that has to be used by your radiant or convective heater.

Except in the summer every watt used by your CPU requires your air conditioner to use more energy to counteract it.

Here come the ARM zombies

[AcidPenguin9873]

Sigh. It seems there is a new, hip, propaganda trend on Slashdot: pro-ARM articles are posted, and a bunch of ARM zombies come out saying how anything ARM makes will (magically) be lower-power or more power-efficient than anything x86.

So I'll start a tradition of posting this same response every time (originally posted by me here):

"ARM isn't magic; there is nothing in the ARM ISA that makes it inherently lower power than x86. Yes, I'm counting all the decode hardware and microcode that x86 chips need to support legacy ISA. There just isn't much power burned there compared to modern cache sizes, execution resources, and queue/buffer depths which all high-performance cores need regardless of ISA. If you have an x86 processor that targets A9 performance levels, it will burn A9 power (or less if Intel makes it, given Intel's manufacturing advantage). If you have a ARM processor that targets Sandy Bridge performance levels, it will burn Sandy Bridge (or more) power."

Re:Here come the ARM zombies

[ArcadeMan]

Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrmmsssss!!

Not So Sure About That

[medv4380]

Efficiency only really matters when supply is limited. On a cell phone or any portable system power is limited, and improvement in power efficiency will extend battery life. ARM is a good option when it comes to things like a tablet, but when you start to do everything an Intel styles chip can do they start to get more tricky. Sure ARM probably has a lower floor so it's minimum power usage is a lot lower, but when you start having it do everything in the same time span as an x86_64 does then it starts to look too similar to actually matter. Unless using an ARM processor can save me well over 500 bucks a year on my power bill I don't see their efficiency as actually that much of an advantage.

a moped is like a Harley

[epine]

To me a PC is really just a smartphone in another form factor.

I think we need some expert analysis on this one.

All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true within itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

The PC is used to create content. A smartphone is used to consume content. The PC functions autonomously (in a pinch). The smartphone is permanently welded to its cloud-nipple. The PC brings you smart ideas in shabby attire. The smartphone brings you shabby ideas in smart attire. The PC discourages walled gardens. A smartphone never leaves home without one.

Wake me up when my smartphone comes with a holographic projector capable of conjuring up 40" of viewing pleasure at a comfortable focal plane, and either a haptic keyboard (gravitational hologram?) or a brainstem feed a million times better than Swype.

Next we'll declare that mopeds and Harleys are the same form factor because there are more Asians than balding fat men. Clearly a modped is more like a Harley than a smartphone is like a PC.

Re:Sure...

[Helix666]

Of course! Naturally, one *merely* needs a sufficiently clever compiler...