I do understand that this CPU has been designed for different performance envelope.
The ATOM just interprets x86 machine code into its RISCy real code
So, yes, Atom interprets x86 in hardware. From the hearsay I read here and elsewhere, this x86 -> native RISC has some overhead. I was asking if Intel might achieve further gains by exposing an optimised ISA that didn't require x86 interpretation.
Of course you'd lose Windows compatibility but that mightn't be a concern for MID devices running Linux and other cross-platform kernels such as Darwin (read Mac Pico-ITX/ reborn 'iBook' as netbook)
I'm no hardware guy, so am probably talking nonsense but just an idea.:)
X3100 is old technology; I have a 4500MHD on my 12" notebook. I haven't tested out the performance much but it's supposed to support Blu-ray and 1080P. I haven't seen it in a netbook yet though.
I keep reading how the x86 instruction set is a limiting factor on efficiency when compared to others such as ARM and MIPS. Though x86 chips are capable of being cranked at higher Hz to compensate.
Though Intel didn't have spectacular success with 'Itanic', might they now consider designing an ISA specifically for low power?
Attracting a big enough market would be the issue, given the Wintel hegemony. But if Linux netbooks find a niche, perhaps Apple could be persuaded to port to this new 'Proton' CPU for "OS X Netbook Edition"? With intel's backing they wouldn't face the same fabrication problems as they had with PowerPC.
[Insert obligatory beowulf cluster comment].
Sorry, if I struck a raw nerve. Anyhow, Wikipedia would beg to differ:
Three nations have not officially adopted the International System of Units as their primary or sole system of measurement: Liberia, Myanmar and the United States.
I know it's hard to keep things straight, but Canadians are neither Brits, nor Yanks.
Yes, I'm fully aware of Canada's existence as an independent nation.
That, and we've already adopted SI.
Canada? Again no surprise. I was assuming the article summary was assuming a US audience - the original article lists both units. According to wikipedia, the USA is one of 3 backward states not to have adopted SI as their primary or sole system of measurement.
Down here we never refer to pounds except in old cookbooks and when quoting birth weights to grandparents.
Fine, I am not a normal user; for the purposes of this discussion I will put myself in shoes of non-technical people. I still think your original comment was setting the bar far too low in terms of hardware requirements.
You do realise that Windows XP qualifies as "lean OS" these days, don't you?
In the sense that it was developed with 9 year old hardware in mind. There's always the tradeoff between 'bloat' and 'progress'. But XP is also a legacy OS whose life-cycle is only being extended for netbooks because the hardware doesn't meet the minimum requirements for Microsoft's current offering. (Notwithstanding the prevailing cynicism that Vista is a 'downgrade' of XP). The recommended specs for Windows 7 include 1GB RAM, 128 MB graphics and 16GB storage. Moving forward, a netbook should strive to run Windows 7 with room to spare, anything other than that is consigning it to a niche other than form-factor. Price currently dictates the limited specs but I would hope that's not always the case. The choice of OS should not be compromised by one's ability to run a standard environment on that machine.
Even for Windows XP, 512Meg is sufficient, not comfortable, but sufficient for mundane tasks.
This is my point, a "lean OS" as you describe it is not comfortable in 512Meg. Usual XP setups with that amount of RAM would normally page much of the kernel on disk (not suitable for SSD). Coupled with an integrated graphics chipset's used of "shared memory", the actual RAM for user-space applications is drastically reduced.
See? This is your bias. You do not want to maintain multiple environments.
I'm sceptical that a 'normal user' does given:
We were talking about home-computing and the typical office clerk.
The typical office clerk doesn't want to mess around with a non-standard LXDE environment. The typical office clerk uses Windows, which as you admit does not run comfortably in the specs you quoted.
I will give you that the EEE, I own, is limited but it was the first generation of netbooks. The screen resolution is too low and the storage space is low on my model. This has been largely fixed in new models. New netbooks come with 1024x600 screens (and larger), and hard disk in the 100Gig++ range.
My point in the post is that the specifications of a netbook are more than enough for most people. Think something like the EEE Box [wikipedia.org] with a decent screen and a nice keyboard. For an office worker, that's already overkill, for a home user too. The netbooks themselves are limited by their size, not by their power.
Now, we're talking but you've shifted the goal posts. Your original argument was:
I hate to be the "640KByte is enough for everyone" guy, but a 1GHz machine with 512Meg RAM and a lean operating system is indeed enough for most uses.
And you freely admitted that a consumer, lean OS such as XP did not run comfortably with those specs. Realistically, non-technical people find solace in Windows, despite the evangelism from free software advocates. You yourself even wiped Xandros off the machine and replaced it with a leaner distribution.
These people will want to setup wireless via a GUI.
Works for me using gnome, though I have plain intel wifi with GPL drivers and not some unsupported chipset that requires dropping to a command line or editing a text file.
At the moment there's a tennis tournament on in my town starring Rafa and Serena. A world class city? Hardly, the above ground 'train' system breaks down because the tracks are too hot.:(
It wasn't until I went to a modern European city with an underground metro that I realised just how backward we truly were.
I even installed Eclipse for fun and kicks. While it wasn't that fast, it was doable and after configuring the interface minimally, it was ever halfway usable. Granted, I wouldn't want to use it over 8 hours.
I hate to be the "640KByte is enough for everyone" guy, but a 1GHz machine with 512Meg RAM and a lean operating system is indeed enough for most uses.
'halfway usable'??? Get back to me when these Eee machines can substitute for an '8 hour' machine, without running some 'lean' OS. RAM is cheap these days.
I could perhaps tolerate a cramped netbook computer for when I was in transit if it meant being able to plug in an external keyboard and 1080p screen when I was at a desk. I don't play games or use intensive graphics software but that Eclipse you speak of routinely takes up > 1GB by itself. yet, IIRC, the specs on these netbooks were limited to 1GB by the chipset.
One of those 64bit dual core atoms with 2GB might suffice but that's still 2 generations away before they hit that price point. Until then, I'll stick with my Core 2 Duo 12" machine, which incidentally cost less than $US1K but means I don't have to maintain multiple environments
You yourself mention a primary desktop machine, which being 6 years old is still gruntier than your portable - why have two machines? QED, these netbooks aren't powerful enough yet.
Having a bios that consumes even as little as two seconds of that time doesn't make sense. Sure, but if writing a BIOS in in C/C++ which may add, say, 5-10% to that time, is it discernible?
I'd favour higher level abstractions, CPU independence and maintainability over theoretical performance gains.
Hint: Use a profiler to diagnose where the actual bottlenecks lie. It could be algorithmic rather than language-dependent, in which case performance will suck in any language.:)
Slashdot Mirror
"I think the GP was agreeing with your point"?
The day after he brought you news about Intel creating the Playstation 4 GPU discussed here comes more industry shaking news, original article here.
Wow, that's two pretty big news scoops on back to back days for Charlie with both making Slashdot's homepage at the same time!
Awesome, maybe copper thieves will now stop stealing essential infrastructure.
At least where I live, watering one's lawn is illegal. Legislation also works. :)
That's interesting, I seem to remember Iran asked that same question. Yet "The West" didn't believe them.
It's Free! As part of the government's stimulus package, they're installed free up to $AU1.6K
As for the materials, use wool.
Quit complaining and just contribute some cash to ReactOS.
You must have air conditioning. :)
There was hail one Christmas Day in Victoria, does that count? :)
So, yes, Atom interprets x86 in hardware. From the hearsay I read here and elsewhere, this x86 -> native RISC has some overhead. I was asking if Intel might achieve further gains by exposing an optimised ISA that didn't require x86 interpretation.
Of course you'd lose Windows compatibility but that mightn't be a concern for MID devices running Linux and other cross-platform kernels such as Darwin (read Mac Pico-ITX/ reborn 'iBook' as netbook)
I'm no hardware guy, so am probably talking nonsense but just an idea. :)
X3100 is old technology; I have a 4500MHD on my 12" notebook. I haven't tested out the performance much but it's supposed to support Blu-ray and 1080P. I haven't seen it in a netbook yet though.
I keep reading how the x86 instruction set is a limiting factor on efficiency when compared to others such as ARM and MIPS. Though x86 chips are capable of being cranked at higher Hz to compensate.
Though Intel didn't have spectacular success with 'Itanic', might they now consider designing an ISA specifically for low power?
Attracting a big enough market would be the issue, given the Wintel hegemony. But if Linux netbooks find a niche, perhaps Apple could be persuaded to port to this new 'Proton' CPU for "OS X Netbook Edition"? With intel's backing they wouldn't face the same fabrication problems as they had with PowerPC.
[Insert obligatory beowulf cluster comment].
Sorry, if I struck a raw nerve. Anyhow, Wikipedia would beg to differ:
Three nations have not officially adopted the International System of Units as their primary or sole system of measurement: Liberia, Myanmar and the United States.
Yes, I'm fully aware of Canada's existence as an independent nation.
Canada? Again no surprise. I was assuming the article summary was assuming a US audience - the original article lists both units. According to wikipedia, the USA is one of 3 backward states not to have adopted SI as their primary or sole system of measurement.
Down here we never refer to pounds except in old cookbooks and when quoting birth weights to grandparents.
I said that was the inside temperature. Outside was more in the range of 42-47 degrees C.
Yes I know you were making a quaint pun at anachronistic units but c'mon, it's the 21st century.
Isn't it time the Brits adopted the euro ?
And the Yanks SI ?
In any case, that's approx 3923 euro for 5.4kg worth of laptop.
Fine, I am not a normal user; for the purposes of this discussion I will put myself in shoes of non-technical people. I still think your original comment was setting the bar far too low in terms of hardware requirements.
In the sense that it was developed with 9 year old hardware in mind. There's always the tradeoff between 'bloat' and 'progress'. But XP is also a legacy OS whose life-cycle is only being extended for netbooks because the hardware doesn't meet the minimum requirements for Microsoft's current offering. (Notwithstanding the prevailing cynicism that Vista is a 'downgrade' of XP). The recommended specs for Windows 7 include 1GB RAM, 128 MB graphics and 16GB storage. Moving forward, a netbook should strive to run Windows 7 with room to spare, anything other than that is consigning it to a niche other than form-factor. Price currently dictates the limited specs but I would hope that's not always the case. The choice of OS should not be compromised by one's ability to run a standard environment on that machine.
This is my point, a "lean OS" as you describe it is not comfortable in 512Meg. Usual XP setups with that amount of RAM would normally page much of the kernel on disk (not suitable for SSD). Coupled with an integrated graphics chipset's used of "shared memory", the actual RAM for user-space applications is drastically reduced.
I'm sceptical that a 'normal user' does given:
The typical office clerk doesn't want to mess around with a non-standard LXDE environment. The typical office clerk uses Windows, which as you admit does not run comfortably in the specs you quoted.
Now, we're talking but you've shifted the goal posts. Your original argument was:
And you freely admitted that a consumer, lean OS such as XP did not run comfortably with those specs. Realistically, non-technical people find solace in Windows, despite the evangelism from free software advocates. You yourself even wiped Xandros off the machine and replaced it with a leaner distribution.
Paranoid, much? :)
Works for me using gnome, though I have plain intel wifi with GPL drivers and not some unsupported chipset that requires dropping to a command line or editing a text file.
The southern hemisphere says hi! We're still in the middle of an intense heatwave where the temperature inside is 304.5K.
Less civilized? :)
I thought Starbucks did have wifi?
Amen, brother.
At the moment there's a tennis tournament on in my town starring Rafa and Serena. A world class city? Hardly, the above ground 'train' system breaks down because the tracks are too hot. :(
It wasn't until I went to a modern European city with an underground metro that I realised just how backward we truly were.
I hate to be the "640KByte is enough for everyone" guy, but a 1GHz machine with 512Meg RAM and a lean operating system is indeed enough for most uses.
'halfway usable'??? Get back to me when these Eee machines can substitute for an '8 hour' machine, without running some 'lean' OS. RAM is cheap these days.
I could perhaps tolerate a cramped netbook computer for when I was in transit if it meant being able to plug in an external keyboard and 1080p screen when I was at a desk. I don't play games or use intensive graphics software but that Eclipse you speak of routinely takes up > 1GB by itself. yet, IIRC, the specs on these netbooks were limited to 1GB by the chipset.
One of those 64bit dual core atoms with 2GB might suffice but that's still 2 generations away before they hit that price point. Until then, I'll stick with my Core 2 Duo 12" machine, which incidentally cost less than $US1K but means I don't have to maintain multiple environments
You yourself mention a primary desktop machine, which being 6 years old is still gruntier than your portable - why have two machines? QED, these netbooks aren't powerful enough yet.
Exactly my point!
This may be true today but is why Mozilla is donating $100K to Ogg, so that firefox will play it automagically.
(Tough luck if Evelyn uses IE!)
Having a bios that consumes even as little as two seconds of that time doesn't make sense. :)
Sure, but if writing a BIOS in in C/C++ which may add, say, 5-10% to that time, is it discernible?
I'd favour higher level abstractions, CPU independence and maintainability over theoretical performance gains.
Hint: Use a profiler to diagnose where the actual bottlenecks lie. It could be algorithmic rather than language-dependent, in which case performance will suck in any language.